CK3 came too early

[Kadanz]

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...

To be fair, I'd be confused as hell if everyone was polite and getting along on this forum. I'd probably start my own rage thread just to keep some familiarity when that happens (I'm kidding...or am I?)

 

[elvain]

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.

oh, of course, taking the words literaly, you are of course right. CK3 can't have all the content which was in CK2 including all the stuff which simply blocked further development of said title.
Heck, even if it included 99% of the content CK2 had, which it won't, people would shout out loud about the 1% missing, nevermind the fact that the 1% was removed for a reason, most probably - in order to be replaced by something better, because it malfunctioned. I believe that even if decadence was the only feature removed, people would complain about it, just because, you know, we need to complain about something.

You're of course right about people who got their high expectations burnt with I:R or Stellaris. Yet the amount of people who jump with conclusions about what CK3 will deffinitely not have in the very minute it was announced is simply incredible. But yea, expecting anything else would be naive, so let's move on. Sorry

 

[LordofLight]

It's unfair that Crusader Kings will get a sequel before Victoria.

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.

With how insanely popular CK2 is, is that really a surprise? People love CK2. Vic2 is in more of a cult classic status while CK2 is popular to a much wider audience.

They no doubt looked at estimate sales of a Vic3 or a CK3 and decided yeah CK3 wins by a landslide. You might not like it or find it fair. But it's about as fair as it can be considering more people would buy CK3 than Vic3. The character and RPG aspects have insane appeal to people unlike the mechanics of Vic. No matter how great they are, which they are even if they dont appeal to me, they dont have the widest appeal.

For example I absolutely love the art and music in CK2, but I hate the focus on individual characters.

Yeah i find that amusing. Since for me at least the focus on individual characters is what makes CK2 work for me. And why I just... dont enjoy other paradox titles even half as much if at all (meh I dont like Vic2 or EU4 for example). I was honestly spoiled by CK2 and when I tried other paradox titles I was very disappointed by lack of characters.

For me, CK2 is one of the greatest RPGs ever made. It's below KOTOR (1 and 2) and Tyranny for me and above Dragon Age Origins. What makes it great is the RPG mix with medieval simulation. It kind of makes me think of it as a Dwarf Fortress fortress-adventure mode hybrid. And I love it. I hope they dont just push RPG features but also simulation.

 

[Ma®tin]

Yeah i find that amusing. Since for me at least the focus on individual characters is what makes CK2 work for me. And why I just... dont enjoy other paradox titles even half as much if at all (meh I dont like Vic2 or EU4 for example). I was honestly spoiled by CK2 and when I tried other paradox titles I was very disappointed by lack of characters.

For me, CK2 is one of the greatest RPGs ever made. It's below KOTOR (1 and 2) and Tyranny for me and above Dragon Age Origins. What makes it great is the RPG mix with medieval simulation. It kind of makes me think of it as a Dwarf Fortress fortress-adventure mode hybrid. And I love it. I hope they dont just push RPG features but also simulation.

And that is why having a variety in grand strategy games is good and also why I think there is a solid place for Imperator once it goes through a few patch and DLC cycles. As for RPGs... I think I still rank Gothic I and Gothic II the highest. The immersion...

 

[TheAtreides84]

I don't think it's coming too early. But I'm fairly positive it will need at least two years after release before it becomes superior to CK2 + all DLC.

 

[Acularius]

I mean, I'll just buy it after 2 years with the first few sales, to be honest. CK2 and mods are pretty good.

 

[LordofLight]

why I think there is a solid place for Imperator once it goes through a few patch and DLC cycles

I like the ancient rome setting, and I'll admit if it wasnt for the character aspect I wouldn't even be able to find 10 minutes of fun in Imperator.

Imperator kinda... made me super vary of what can happen to CK3.

My dream game would certainly be Vic+EU+CK. Since their aspects combined would make for an amazing simulator. Sadly a super hardcore medieval simulator wouldn't be that popular

 

[Pellucid]

EU4 does indeed need a sequel pretty badly. The current game is a broken mess.

 

[zorkman]

EU4 does indeed need a sequel pretty badly. The current game is a broken mess.

Definitely agree about EU4. CK3, though hasn't come out too early considering its age & being in development last four years. I don't think Paradox would envisage how strong it would still be going, & how successful Holy Fury would be. They could hardly stop production, & says sorry chaps but we might get a few more DLC's out of this yet, & once they are finished start where we left off. Doesn't work like that.

 

[Nuklearius]

#

 

[Kadayi]

Good lord no. I've been waiting for a CK3 announcement since Way of Life landed in 2014. Much love for CK2 from a gameplay perspective, but the games UI is utterly lamentable and no amount of additional DLC has really improved it in that regard.

Sometimes you've got to go back to formula on these things, and start fresh.

 

[NilsFabian]

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.

Actually this is the reason why I was hoping that they won't do a new CK so soon. Speaking release wise not development wise. My fear is that CK III will get a bumpy start with annoyed fans because CK III is bound to fall short against CK II no matter what cool and great stuff will be implemented. There will be parts missing. Yet. The game itself looks great so I will defently buy and enjoy it.​

... but I hate the focus on individual characters.

Thats the one thing I do love about CK II and looking forward to the improved possibilities of CK III

​