Capacities: Victoria 3 Expert Discussion (Spudgun)

[Alfred Dreyfus]

I have to ask you a question: did you follow the Imperator's development? Because I did and I remember a ton of criticism under the dev diaries, especially under the more controversial ones (about the "fun and engaging" single five-year consul, four buildings, mana etc.). You can read it all here if your memory is fuzzy:

Development Diary Archive

Development Diary #1 - 28th of May 2018 - The Vision: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/imperator-development-diary-1-28th-of-may-2018.1101600/ Development Diary #2 - 4th of June 2018 - The Map: Provinces and Cities...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

Yes, there was hype, because people were excited that a new Rome game is going to be released and it will have pops, beautiful huge map etc. But there was no "unconditional" support of everything the devs announced. People wanted to love the game, but bad features were clearly seen by the majority even then.

EU4 expansions - the same story. People hated the button where you get one building slot for a ton of admin capacity, people were wary of the concentrate development, pillage capital and curry favors. A couple of hyped guys aren't "unconditional support".

It seems like the forum reactions have been erased (probably because the forum update after I:R release), but I'm pretty sure if I recall right that all those I:R dev diaries had a lot more "agrees" than "disagrees" back then.

 

[Spartakusbund]

but people never complain about it.

?!?

You obviously do not spend a lot of time on the forums.

 

[Manst]

It seems like the forum reactions have been erased (probably because the forum update after I:R release), but I'm pretty sure if I recall right that all those I:R dev diaries had a lot more "agrees" than "disagrees" back then.

Maybe the majority had more positive ratings, but there were a lot of DDs that were higly controversial (see: this one about pops)

 

[hjarg]

Are you kidding me?

So if Leviathan didn't break your savegames, you would consider Leviathan a good DLC?

Leviathan bad because Leviathan breaks stuff.
Leviathan not bad because features it introduced.

 

[Alfred Dreyfus]

Leviathan bad because Leviathan breaks stuff.
Leviathan not bad because features it introduced.

Leviathan mechanics very good, yes.

Whatever.

 

[Moppy771]

I highly doubt you followed the development of I:R if that's how you remember it. People were extremely critical of the game before release, with plenty of dev diaries being heavily 'respectfully disagreed' with.

Yes, and Imperator came out perfect because everyone 'respectfully disagreed' their hearts out.

 

[Utik]

Yes, and Imperator came out perfect because everyone 'respectfully disagreed' their hearts out.

Not sure what your point is, but as a developer it's incredibly hard to know how representative forum member opinions are of the general player base. The reception in the forums was negative but the launch could've been successful anyway. It wasn't though. People didn't like it, and they reworked the core mechanics - turning it into one of the best Paradox games after it was clear that people didn't like 1.0.

 

[JKComposer]

It seems like the forum reactions have been erased (probably because the forum update after I:R release), but I'm pretty sure if I recall right that all those I:R dev diaries had a lot more "agrees" than "disagrees" back then.

Depends on the dev diary. I remember the perhaps most important one, the one on pops, was heavily downvoted, as were most of Johan's replies in regards to it. Most of the other dev diaries on other topics were upvoted as usual, but most of that were not really things that in retrospect ruined the game. In general, I think the response to each individual diary was decently accurate to how the eventual response at release was to what was being covered in each respective diary.

 

[Ferrous Will]

Depends on the dev diary. I remember the perhaps most important one, the one on pops, was heavily downvoted, as were most of Johan's replies in regards to it. Most of the other dev diaries on other topics were upvoted as usual, but most of that were not really things that in retrospect ruined the game. In general, I think the response to each individual diary was decently accurate to how the eventual response at release was to what was being covered in each respective diary.

Johan's "No"
Vs
Wiz's "We are actively discussing it"

 

[zorkman]

Johan's "No"
Vs
Wiz's "We are actively discussing it"

CK3 as well. I remember one DD not going down well, & the developers looked at it again, & later changed it. Cannot remember what it was though. Wiz has the same mindset, & would actually look at something that was controversial, & see if it could be improved.

 

[Vohen]

CK3 as well. I remember one DD not going down well, & the developers looked at it again, & later changed it. Cannot remember what it was though. Wiz has the same mindset, & would actually look at something that was controversial, & see if it could be improved.

Vassal contracts, wasn't it?

 

[wilcoxchar]

Vassal contracts, wasn't it?

Yeah that was it.

 

[Rhazzaz0r]

Well, that's the thing, EU4 expansions have destroyed the game by making it so bloated an inconsistent with itself, but people never complain about it.

That's because most people don't go beyond the mindset of "new content for the game, great!".

We need more people on the forums that analyse and criticize the development and design of the games. Devs need feedback, not just hype nonsense.

Bruh 9/10 forum posts in eu4 is how we either need eu5 or why my favorite country sucks but should be better. Its true tho that most of the dev diaries are received well, the only one that weren't were those about the new "tall" features in leviathan. And I'd say concentrade dev is the only bad mechanic from that dlc, with the other tall features just beeing bad balance wise. If it wouldn't be a buggy mess its pretty great otherwise.

 

[IndigoRage]

Yes, and Imperator came out perfect because everyone 'respectfully disagreed' their hearts out.

I don't get your angle on this one. You're actively arguing against the premise that fan concerns are worth anything.

 

[JBolt]

Okay, I just listened to that Nurse Reno guy say that developers answering questions is a “corporate trick” meant to “overload you with information” so you don’t notice POPs aren’t really POPs.

Sorry, these guys are dumbasses.

Lol, you’ve already fallen for Vic3 before it’s even come out. Look, I want Vic3 to be great, but people on these forums saying “the UI is so great” and “it’s fine for Laissez-Faire to not exist” just because Paradox says it (so it has to be the right way to make the game) is dumb. And the Nurse Reno guy intentionally clarified by saying right after: “I’m just wearing a tinfoil hat, take this with a grain of salt.” Are you intentionally trying to cherry-pick that hard, that you ignore everything valuable that was discussed by these OGs of Vic2? Some of them have been playing the game since Victoria 2 was released.

 

[JBolt]

Yes, the one guy who seemed to have actually read the dev comments did say that. It had zero impact on the discussion and received zero follow up or elaboration.

Dude, I’ve been reading through these comments and... cool off. Vic3 is a year plus off, it’s not one camp or another who are going to fight each other. Everyone wants VIC3 to be good, but everyone will also have their own idea of how to get there. None of this warrants going so overboard as to get all factional like what you basically seem to be doing.

 

[Lord Lambert]

Can I ask you guys a question? Did you follow Imperator Rome’s development?

Because I did, and I remember all this unconditional support hype

Why are you lying? Several of the earliest dev diaries had a massive amount of negative reactions on them. Unconditional support hype? I'm not even gonna call this ignorance it's simply a lie.

 

[Plastic_Duke]

Why are you lying? Several of the earliest dev diaries had a massive amount of negative reactions on them. Unconditional support hype? I'm not even gonna call this ignorance it's simply a lie.

Lies and bad faith. I remember that time very well, for having spent quite a bit of my time then being an active part of the "negative crowd" myself. The majority of the first DDs were overly negatively received, and then, the next DDs started to have more positive than negative reactions but it wasn't because they were really more satisfying, it was because the protesting crowd, including me, had just moved on with their lives and given up any hope of being listened to after the devs reacted to criticism in a very dismissive way most of the time. If I recall, this should be shown by the absolute amount of views and reactions to the DDs rapidly decreasing after the tenth or so. I:R was surrounded by a very unpleasant and pessimistic atmosphere ever since its public beginnings, in fact. Somehow, the release managed to be even worse. So no one should try to sugar coat I:R history to try to prove a point like "huh, optimism has ruined the game! And it will ruin V3 too!". This is 100% wrong.

If Vic3 DDs are positively received right now, it's because the majority of people that read those (including myself) genuinely find that what they contain is, indeed, something positive for the game. Not because they are stupid shills or anything. Rest assured that the devs will be called out for every single little missteps, and then some. Internet is a cruel place, after all.

On that note, I'd like to add that, for every new game announced, well, for any event of any kind actually, there are always some people that rejoice in negativity and immediately try to start a doomer circlejerk. This is something anyone should be aware of, and try to avoid. I'm not saying the guys in this video were consciouly trying to do just that, but you also may fall into that trap unconsciously sometimes. Furthemore since Youtube, like all social medias, has a tendency to push people in that direction, to express more extreme and unreasonable opinions, only for the sake of gathering more attention. So, when dealing with YT commentors at large, a lot of caution is advised.

 

[Sigwald]

Calling everyone and one's mother a liar, a shill or a doomer doesn't really advance the main point of interest for everyone in this forums : is Vicky3 going to be a good game or not ?

Considering Victoria 2 is largely less played and understood than the other Paradox titles, the input of people who played a lot of Vicky2 is appreciated. Unfortunately, they are not really the most diplomatic people nor caring to present themselves as such, thus this topic is maybe 3/4th low intensity out-of-ban-range ad hominem attacks based on out of context quotes and 1/5th out of topic discussion (thanks the mod for shutting that down). The rest is salvageable, thankfully, and the addition of a contradictor in the next DD discussion may be interesting if @Spudgun_ manages the debate well enough.

 

[Lord Lambert]

Calling everyone and one's mother a liar

I'm not doing that. I am calling 1 guy a liar because he lied.

I was doing videos on Imperator Dev Diaries from #4 onwards, I only started doing them because I was so negative on them, and I was not alone. Unfortunately I dont show the reacts on #4, but here:
#5

#6

#14

Pretty sure the people in the vid called themselves doomers, and while I still think Reno is overly conspiratorial, I do have a newfound respect of Spudgun and Zombie.