so long as dlc and development from CK2 carries over, I think it will be fine. However, if they launch CK3 at the quality and standards of CK2 in 2016, then I'll be severely disappointed.
CK3 came too early
- Thread starter Tomaster
- 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.
That is very cynical. Even Paradox shareholders would want the best possible CK3, Vicky 3 and EU5.
Making these games is not easy. Its hard. You need excellent and experienced developers and game designers. Even then things go wrong. Imperator was not well received because of lack of funding. It was badly received because of game design choices that did not work out well.
As PDX has said before. Vicky 3 hasn't been made because no-one in the organisation has been pitching making it.
- 1
Honestly what ticks me the most is that CK2's body isn't even cold yet, unlike another PDX franchise which has been rotting for six years now.
Not feeling like beating too much on a dead horse (PS: or maybe I am), but the fact that CK2 is getting a sequel before Vic2 is honestly a decision I cannot agree with.
And if EU5 comes before Vic3, then I'll give up completely on this whole thing and resign to the fact that PDX bought into their own stupid meme for no good reason whatsoever, and every time a dev makes a Victoria reference they'll be just rubbing salt in the wound (the CEO making the "who's this Vicky" joke got a chuckle, but after the announcement, in retrospect, I cannot help but be upset about it).
But seriously, CK2's body is still warm, let the game sit down for a while and the franchise rest a bit, let the fans actually miss the Crusader Kings franchise and have a more emphatic call for a CK3 before trying to restart the hype train all over again.
Had this announcement come maybe two years in the future, I'm sure most people (including me) who are now very worried about CK3's state would be starving for it, hype levels would be off the charts, and the forums would be very different from the currently clear cautious reception this announcement had.
In my opinion, PDX clearly jumped the gun on this one.
Yes, as you can probably tell, I'm salty.
Not feeling like beating too much on a dead horse (PS: or maybe I am), but the fact that CK2 is getting a sequel before Vic2 is honestly a decision I cannot agree with.
And if EU5 comes before Vic3, then I'll give up completely on this whole thing and resign to the fact that PDX bought into their own stupid meme for no good reason whatsoever, and every time a dev makes a Victoria reference they'll be just rubbing salt in the wound (the CEO making the "who's this Vicky" joke got a chuckle, but after the announcement, in retrospect, I cannot help but be upset about it).
But seriously, CK2's body is still warm, let the game sit down for a while and the franchise rest a bit, let the fans actually miss the Crusader Kings franchise and have a more emphatic call for a CK3 before trying to restart the hype train all over again.
Had this announcement come maybe two years in the future, I'm sure most people (including me) who are now very worried about CK3's state would be starving for it, hype levels would be off the charts, and the forums would be very different from the currently clear cautious reception this announcement had.
In my opinion, PDX clearly jumped the gun on this one.
Even as a joke, that still hurts.
Yes, as you can probably tell, I'm salty.
This gives me hope. Don't do that.Vicky 3? By pure extrapolation, looks like they're working on it since 2015. It's going to be big. And full of sliders!
Development takes time, it's good they've probably been bouncing features back and forth so you could say we're getting more of the product we want in CK3.
Love you paradox. Just please don’t pull another imperator.... it was the only game from you I’ve ever refunded. CK2 is my bread and butter. I have high hopes for this. But as happy as I am for a sequel to the game I’ve put over 5000 hours into I’m also equally nervous. God speed
- 1
Why would you think so?
I really don't get why you people are so negative.
Hasn't anyone thought that the increased quality of CK2 DLCs after 2016 could be a side effect of CK3 being developed? Or do you think that they started developing CK3 with the old CK2 team and all the amazing stuff delivered since then was done by somebody else?
That's not what I meant and you know it. I'm saying the worrying trend comes when you're never sure if the expansion you buy for your paradox game will be the last, and then suddenly the rug is pulled out from under you and the next game in the series is released. Holy Fury was less than a year ago.
And how's any of that a problem? Was Holy Fury worth the money or not? Whether or not CK3 comes out next year does not affect the answer to that question.
- 1
The point is I have expectations of support for their products when I pay for them, and now all that support will be drying up in favor of the sequel.
And is 7 years of support not enough before they announce a sequel?
- 1
You will have roughly 2 years of support after the last thing you paid for + at least 2 free patches with content worth a minor DLC in the meantime. Is this not enough or worrying?
Last edited:
- 1
Imperator wasn't that terrible. Almost all PDX grand strategy games release pretty bare bones, sometimes completely lacking endgame (I am looking at you, Stellaris) and with game breaking exploits and bugs.
Imperator's curse was being barebones and buggy AND at the same time too similar to EU4, so unlike Stellaris it did not have the wow factor of something with unique look. And just like Stellaris, I do believe that a few patches later it will be awesome. The focus on unique large scale empire building and big population management can set it apart.
- 1
I agree Imperator wasn't all that terrible. It certainly lacked content and had mechanics I didn't like but I thought it was a good base to work from.
And, if nothing else, Imperator is easily their best looking game.
2D art and music is where Paradox truly shines.
Imperator's curse is having to ind its own way, separate from EU and CK. Every person deserves their own niche. And it is a beauty of the games from Paradox, that when you ask a bunch of people to sort Paradox titles from their most favorite to the least favorite, you will get bunch of different answers. For example I absolutely love the art and music in CK2, but I hate the focus on individual characters.
I like a lot of their games for different reasons. My favourite is probably Stellaris but I find myself playing EU4 and CKII the most.
... Why would I think what? I expressed my hopes and fears, not what I thought they were doing. There's barely anything about the game revealed for me to even take a guess at what they're doing. I just don't want to pay for the same dlc twice, and buy a new game with less content than the previous game. That too much of a leap of assumptions to be worried over?
A bit more than a few IMO. Stellaris has a "diplomacy" update right now, literally more than 3 years after release.
Too many people are afraid to call paradox out on this shit.
- 1
oh, sure.
I'm sorry, I'm just shocked by the level of negativity over these forums now. I mean yes, some concerns are legitimate, but the level we can see here recently? Really?
As you said, we know barely anything about the game, so everybody expects or fears the worse and shouts like crazy about it.
Don't worry, you won't pay twice for the same content. And will you get a new game with less content? Well, despite we know very little about CK3, we already know several features that were not present in CK2, so don't worry, you won't get less content.
I just wish people would take everything easier on the internet...
- 1
You will absolutely get less content on release, but to address your comment about negativity: nobody is going to not buy CK3 on day 2 if it debuts to universal acclaim on day 1, but people who preordered Imperator and Stellaris got burned pretty badly on release.
- 1