Ahaa, I see. So, using this logic, (for example) Iceland and Norway are American countries because they have Access to Atlantic Sea
Can we take a moment to appreciate Paradox Interactive?
- Thread starter FiddleSticks96
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Ahaa, I see. So, using this logic, (for example) Iceland and Norway are American countries because they have Access to Atlantic Sea
I was saddened to lose my wormhole-based FTL, but ultimately the game was vastly improved for it and I have to applaud Paradox for being willing to make such a bold decision which they correctly assessed would improve the game's long-term viability, even if it angered part of the player-base. It's one of the reasons I love Paradox and why they're the only studio from which I'll confidently pre-order.
That said, even if I disagree with them, I can understand the feeling of some that because the updates they lost the game they paid for.
Honestly, my only concern is if in 10+ years Paradox falls to the dark side and becomes like EA and Blizzard, and then uses updates to drastically make the games I've purchased less fun for the sake of short-term monetization. Their updates system could all too easily be turned to that purpose by walling off content that was previously freely available or making it de facto near-impossible to play without the updates. Hopefully that won't happen anytime soon, but as we've been reminded, no king rules forever.
First of all, I don't think this post should be in the Stellaris forum, it should be in general.
I disagree with most of your assessment of PI.
Personally, I buy their games because I'm a history nut and no other company makes games like they do. Other than that, they're business as usual and their DLC model is as predatory as any other, in some cases, worse. CK2 and all its expansions is more than 500 BRL on Steam, making it near impossible to bring new players to the game. EUIV is even worse and most of their games follows this absurd DLC model, with the ocasional bundle here and there (which usually do not include all DLC).
I would also contend that they do not "listen" to their customers because they're nice people; they take feedback when needed and make business decisions over it. Stellaris, for example, started as a very good game and 2.0 killed the game for me. A lot of people was against the removal of other types of FTL and they weren't listened. Even those who said they were up for the change, but asked PI to leave the possibility of modding it back in. No such luck. I can certainly understand why that decision was made: a lot of what was in Cherryh and the expansion depended upon the removal of the other types of FTL to be attractive. They wanted to sell their product, period.
With all that said, I bought Holy Fury already and probably will buy Man the Guns on pre-sale as well, because as I said, I'm a history nut. No other games present history like they do. But make no mistake: this is a business relationship. The moment another company starts making games like they do with a better business model or more polished games, I'm off. A lot of the time, when talking about the gaming industry, people say that "gaming companies need to make money, they're not a charity" and I agree - in the same vein, I'm not doing charity either. I don't care if they're big, indie or in dire straits. I'm a customer. If they mess up, they lose a customer, like they lost one when they ruined Stellaris for me. Loyalty, in the current gaming industry, is a fool's mistake in my opinion.
The only possible compliment I can make to PI is how they expose the DLC and patch changes here in the forums. It makes easier for us to decide if a product is worth it or not and that's really nice and counter-intuitive in a marketing sense.
EDIT: I also find selling unit packs and music packs separatedly a really predatory move, forgot to mention that.
Last edited:
A simple question,quote me another big video game company with the notable exception of Valve that make in-house Linux versions of his games simulteanously with Windows.I understand your critics but at least for this reason,i have to disagree.
Cordially.
Indeed,when i say Valve,i say this in addition to Paradox of course.It's why i disagree with @PDR1987 .
I fell way behind in my EUIV DLCs when I got back into it. But waited for the Xmas sale and got all caught up for a good 75% off. Now I just budget $60ish a year to keep current on that and Stellaris.
I much prefer this DCL system for upgrading the game rather than having to plunk down for a whole new version of the game. That upfront cost can make me shy away from upgrading. But $10-20 evert few quarters... that's not painful.
Reading up on D: Immortal -- damn, Blizzard looks really tone-deaf right now. That worries me more than the actual decision to produce a mobile game. The Blizzard of my youth would not be caught flat-footed by their fans' reaction to a game; they were gamers themselves and knew the score.
I've already read the entire ftl thread, months ago. Participated a few times actually, but I'll never step foot in that dark place again, so no thanks..
But 95% of it was just seething garbage that boiled down to nothing more than a bunch of unnecessarily angry people screaming into a void of echos while down voting anything that argued against their angst, usually without even actually reading the post in question, and responding the moment they realized it was a counter arguement. With the rest trying their best to constructively explain why a certain method of "theoretically impossible" ftl is more legitimate than another means of "theoretically impossible" ftl. :/
What little part of it that was actually somewhat constructive and reasonable were any posts explaining just how ridiculous and petty the entire "debate" was and avoided taking sides altogether..
the ironic part about this is that pdx probably sees blizzard as an shining example company that inspires them. who doesn't remember their games from their youths and their "when its ready" attitude. even their business models are roughtly the same trying to go for good/best-in-genre titles at premium prices.
but then blizzard became "too big/succesful for its own good" and slowly but surely corporate interest took over. you can think your creative roots are a core tenet of your team all you want but when you become a billion dollar company certain things just don't work that way anymore.
at the rate pdx is expanding the company, give it 10 years and i'm sure they will be eerily similar to how blizzard is nowadays.
but then blizzard became "too big/succesful for its own good" and slowly but surely corporate interest took over. you can think your creative roots are a core tenet of your team all you want but when you become a billion dollar company certain things just don't work that way anymore.
at the rate pdx is expanding the company, give it 10 years and i'm sure they will be eerily similar to how blizzard is nowadays.
And by "corporate interest" you mean "Activision". Blizzard was actually still a very good corporate gaming company even as a billion dollar company. They descended into madness with the Activision/Vivendi merger/acquisition. Once it became all about sucking the profits out of their IP Blizzard has become a slow-falling "managed decline". This is the first WoW expansion I didn't resub for and based on the fact that Blizzard stopped publishing subscriber numbers as a metric a few years ago you can tell I'm far from the only person doing it. WoW has lost 3/4 of its subscriber base from its peak and is just milking the cow as Blizzard eventually trends away from PC gaming entirely.
<insert Prove Me Wrong table meme>
They haven't published an RTS (their original claim to fame) since WC3. Their LoL clone did well enough, their FPS game did well. Their CCG is doing well. Their next announced game is a mobile game by a 3rd party developer.
the exact details don't matter to much.
pdx is publically traded so it's entirely possible some chinese megacompany can just buy a big share, which wouldn't be entirely unlike the vivendi situation.
it could certainly make sense for pdx to merge/parthner with another big company on its own volition in the future too for any number of business reasons, much like the activision situation.
pdx is already at the size where release dates for games have to be set in stone months/years ahead of time, meaning unfinished projects have to be released sometimes just to keep accounting happy.
eventually they will get a game that has a team of 100+ people too, which also has its inherent management/workflow problems.
the biggest difference is that blizzard never was as big into publishing then pdx, but by and large when companies grow to a certain size things just change, with all the good and bad that comes with that.
Just extra 5 pennies regarding Blizzard:
Looks like some shareholders didn't like the Blizzcon, too.
Looks like some shareholders didn't like the Blizzcon, too.
The irony is thick.
Yeah yeah, "the only reasonable part of the debate is the one I support" is so original.
Blizzard fans have made it very clear that they don't want new games, they don't want change or new things, they just want to buy the old things they already liked again.
I'm looking forward to Blizzard releasing WarCraft2: Remastered: Remastered in 2030 to rave reviews.
That is not how I feel as a Diablo fan...
Sure I was disappointed to not see a PC Diablo 4 announcement and I wasn't expecting much of anything. I didn't really like Blizzard has let us down because my expectation were low to start with.
Also as far I am aware they still have several Diablo project under development and "when it is done" we will have something. Would you rather Paradox announce a game 6-7 years before it is even remotely pre-alpha ready?
That is also your opinion, and nothing in there refutes anything he said, but is rather a different viewpoint.
Congratulations, you proved his point!
My 2p. Blizzard's fans that went nuts at the con? Not the customer-base for a mobile Diablo? Does. Not. Matter.
The game will sell. It'll make a gazillion bucks. It'll make back what it cost to make in a day.
This is AAA gaming today. This is why if you have a niche company like PDX/PDS toeing the line with mobile and console, that's when you go nuts. Because you are the core fan-base. If $$$ light up in the eyes of PDX's CEO (which I doubt because iirc the guy is a real gamer) then you won't be for ever.