Boycott Paradox interactive games!

[Tacticus101]

other people who do not want the AI to develop provinces that would buy the other features if they could or would buy everything if they could turn that one off

This would potentially make more money for PI and make more players happier.

This was the point. So again, I was responding to someone else in the context of how they play not how I play and suggesting a solution to satisfy both types of players.

Ok, so moving on from any side arguments and I don't think it matters whether it is your opinion or you are speaking for someone else.

Do you see the points I made? Do you agree with them? Would you like to provide a counter argument?

Turning off development because it makes a world conquest achievement easier should not be encouraged, things like that are bad and certainly should not be Ironman compatible. It also does not apply only to DLC, it would also have to apply to patches, making balancing the game impossible, multiplayer faintly ridiculous and the game pointless. There is a reason no one gives you the option for that in their games, it creates a nightmare for developers. Also, as you point out, it would require increasing the cost of everything, meaning that those of us (i think probably the majority) who actually want a complete game experience have to pay twice as much in order to buy the DLC. Picking and choosing the individual features of a DLC you want, except for the distinction between cosmetics and features, should not be allowed under any circumstances, if you want to turn off or change features then go play a mod or adjust the defines yourself.

 

[Ultrix Prime]

Ok, so moving on from any side arguments and I don't think it matters whether it is your opinion or you are speaking for someone else.

Do you see the points I made? Do you agree with them? Would you like to provide a counter argument?

No, I don't particularly agree with your points.

1) "Turning off development because it makes a world conquest achievement easier should not be encouraged"
I find nothing rational in this statement. Players should be encouraged to give their money to PI such that PI hires more staff and continues to improve the game. Players like the one above that I watch, already turn CS off. Development encourages some players not to buy the DLC. Given that DLCs are what pay for the development of new features. By having development tied to everything else, people that don't want the feature thus do not buy or use the DLC. That is rather the opposite of the optimal outcome for PI and the game.

2) "it would also have to apply to patches, making balancing the game impossible"
I see this as a completely made up argument having nothing from PI to indicate it is true. An *idea* expressed on their forums is one they can say "yes/no/maybe" to on their own. I do not believe you or I can define possibility or impossibility for them and find it rather specious to attempt doing so.

3) "multiplayer faintly ridiculous and the game pointless"
This makes no sense in my experience either. If anything, there should be more functionality for multiplayer which is optional and specific to multiplayer and having development or not is, imo, hardly relevant to being able to play multiplayer. People played with development before and with or without it now.

4) "There is a reason no one gives you the option for that in their games, it creates a nightmare for developers"
I'm a developer and I disagree. Whether it would be too hard for PI to pull off would be a question for them. It can and has been done elsewhere. Particularly things like cosmetics (unit packs) and having configurable music should be pretty straight forward and certainly not of "nightmare" proportions.

5) "Also, as you point out, it would require increasing the cost of everything"
No I did not. Again, quit putting words in my mouth. I suggested what *could* be done as in the sum of the parts is more expensive than bought as a whole. This is a very old retail pricing approach predating video games and computers as well for that matter. This does not mean *has* to work that way. Could and must are different terms and I said could.

6) "meaning that those of us (i think probably the majority) who actually want a complete game experience have to pay twice as much in order to buy the DLC"
It doesn't mean any such thing. There is no reason someone couldn't simply buy an entire DLC or buy the parts separately in such a model. Further, it would be just as effective for a fairly large number of players to allow turning development off but keeping the rest of the CS features, imo. But again, that would be a dev thing to answer. Certainly, pricing on software wherein more options exist as well as bundled options has the flexibility to charge less for a bundle than buying the features individually.

7) "Picking and choosing the individual features of a DLC you want, except for the distinction between cosmetics and features, should not be allowed under any circumstance"
As above, none of what you wrote supported this conclusion imo, and I have stated why. We can agree to disagree.

"if you want to turn off or change features then go play a mod or adjust the defines yourself."

More of the "you" "you" "you" stuff.

I'm not going to comment on someone telling other people what they can go do. Rather, having answered your questions I'm now going to update the ignore list.

 

[k-59]

You can build buildings without Common Sense. The difference between the patch and the expansion is that you can build 1 (one) more building per 500 so monarch points you spend. You could also very easily mod the game to give yourself 12 building slots in every province. Calling this 'advertisement' shows that you have absolutely no idea as to the meaning of the words you're using.

Pro tip: anybody who write s "BY LAW" doesn't know what they are talking about.

 

[Had a dad]

Pro tip: anybody who write s "BY LAW" doesn't know what they are talking about.

is that the same as a bylaw?

Edit...

OMG you really have only 506 non OT posts!

 

[illapa]

OP. Your spelling leads me to assume that you are either an uncouth barbarian from the middle of nowhere, a caveman, or a really really really sloppy and disorganized 18 year old. I only assume you're that old because your account is fairly old. If it wasn't for your account being so old I'd say you were 12. It's hard to take posts seriously when you don't even bother to proofread.
I mean damn you have devs actually responding and many people reading are you not even embarrassed that you would fail basic middle school spelling with these posts?!?!?!

 

[gdj]

OP. Your spelling leads me to assume that you are either an uncouth barbarian from the middle of nowhere, a caveman, or a really really really sloppy and disorganized 18 year old. I only assume you're that old because your account is fairly old. If it wasn't for your account being so old I'd say you were 12. It's hard to take posts seriously when you don't even bother to proofread.
I mean damn you have devs actually responding and many people reading are you not even embarrassed that you would fail basic middle school spelling with these posts?!?!?!

Honestly, i find your post shameful at best.

You might consider that
a) not everyone has English as his primary language and
b) not everyone has the luxury of a high quality education
before you call someone "caveman" or "barbarian".

 

[Lord_P]

OP. Your spelling leads me to assume that you are either an uncouth barbarian from the middle of nowhere, a caveman, or a really really really sloppy and disorganized 18 year old. I only assume you're that old because your account is fairly old. If it wasn't for your account being so old I'd say you were 12. It's hard to take posts seriously when you don't even bother to proofread.
I mean damn you have devs actually responding and many people reading are you not even embarrassed that you would fail basic middle school spelling with these posts?!?!?!

You do realize not everyone is from an English-speaking country, right? I mean, I think the OP's arguments are ridiculous but your post is just insulting.

Sincerely
A Finnish person

 

[kitemasaki]

This thread is long overdue for a lock. It has been far off topic for a while and while the OP's arguments are paper thin, the personal attacks on him and on others is over the top.

Just because a Dev decides to chip into the fray (which he should have ignored this shallow post anyhow), doesn't mean it should be exempt from moderation that would have occurred on another thread filled with toxic spit.

 

[Kapitalisti]

You do realize not everyone is from an English-speaking country, right? I mean, I think the OP's arguments are ridiculous but your post is just insulting.

Sincerely
A Finnish person

What I find funny is that he makes simple spelling errors that even the this here forum underlines with red.