Constructive criticism: For a "character" based game, the gameplay in CK2 is shallow

[1alexey]

Depends on what people consider an RPG, and how you play.

RPGs in general are based arround some adventure or narative you must come thrugh. In CK2, you have this map painting adventure. Now, you can be a manipulative bitch that always tries to maximise his power, and looking at every decision that way. You can, on the other hand, play a character, appoint court people based on how you like them, not just on their skill value, react to events corresponding to what your character is, iteract with factions based on just that, if you`re zealous, build&expad churches, go on Crusades, improve relations with priests and pope, if you have martial prowes expand the castles, if you`r character is greedy, hoard gold, build universities and schools if your character has high learning,
Try to support people you like, or oppose people you do not, again your wife and children gave quite a field for iteraction.

You can be George Washington and build a noble republic, by giving power to cities majors, and building administration arround non-hereditary, elected officials, with the head of state chosen by representatives of states(elective monarchy with all ducies being given to majors), you can build an eastern-style "emperor is divine" empire by giving power to priests, or you can just be a great king.

In fact, CK2 is a very deep RPG with huge roleplay that you can do, if you`re into roleplaying.
Sandbox RPGs, like TESMorrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim) series, are pretty similar in roleplaying to CK2, you set your own target, and go for it.
If you`re into painting the map, then there is a pretty well pre-set playstyle that will get you the most provinces.

But are RPGs really about min-maxing?

 

[grisamentum]

Before I begin, I just want to say that CK2 is a great game. A really great gem that PI obviously put a lot of work and heart into. I commend them on their achievements and I do not regret being one of the people who pre-ordered their game. May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon them.

With that said, Crusader Kings II is a deeply, deeply flawed game if you acknowledge that it's supposed to be character based. There is absolutely nothing to do in this game other than conquer and prepare to conquer. "What about marriages, and um, plots!?" To what end? What exactly are marriages and plots for other than a means to paint one or more map modes with your colour of choice?

Despite CK2 being a heavily character focused game, I never feel any kind of personal attachment to any of the characters I encounter, whether they're the characters I'm controlling, or someone else. The characters in CK2 lack any personality at all. They all feel the same, and occasionally having an extra button to click on in events because of traits really doesn't fix this. A character based game should be a game that's heavy on story telling. Why even have unique, individualized characters if you can't come up with stories to involve them in? "Well, you're supposed to make them up in your head!" If I wanted to make up stories in my head, I wouldn't need CK2, as I would just use my head. Crusader Kings should have a strong RPGish element if it's going to continue being a "character-based" series. To be fair there are some mild sightings of some story based content in the game. Take for example the "Gates of Hell" line of events. This is a set of events that proceeds based on your choices. The problem is that it's very short, and very impersonal. It doesn't feel like my current character is really involved in these events anymore than he/she is involved in any other events.

Because there are no events or decisions to keep me occupied, what's left for me in this game is constant war mongering so I have some goal to strive for and just something to do in general. Letting the game run and just addressing the same handful of events simply isn't engaging and it's not a style of game play that's demanding my attention. What else can I do then other than conquer the world just because? There's no real character intrigue, no economy, and no substantive game play here that doesn't ultimately lead into a means to conquer everything.

CK2 has no trade. CK2 has no exploration. CK2 does have many mechanics which all seem to just help you blob over the map. I was reading some posts on the EU4 board yesterday from a Mr. Johan Andersson about how hard it is to blob in EU4. I read posts from him and other developers about trading, and relations, and all kinds of other ways in which you can play EU4 (as in actively participate in the game) without conquering the earth. I guess you could say that EU4 inspired me to make this topic. I look at CK2 now and just see so much wasted potential. I think to myself "why can't CK2 be a game where the player is always actively participating in ways that don't ultimately lead to super-blobbing?" I hope some members of the CK2 team read this and perhaps consider expanding the game in ways to improve the overall experience of the game regardless of what religion or type of lord your character is. Thanks.

Agree 100%.

 

[Adelhard]

The game at its current state certainly has tremendous role-playing potentials, that's exactly why I'm counting on Paradox to further flesh out this aspect of the game. Foundation for greatness is already there, we just need more script writing.

As a side note, I think what could work out well is to tie the ambition/plot/faction mechanisms completely or mostly to events. May feel restrictive as currently they can be chosen by the player at will, but if the events (i.e. serial choices) which lead to them are plausible, they would be much more immersive.

 

[nitroholic]

I would really love CKII to be given more depth. Would be nice to have an update/dlc that focused on solely on flavor/immersion, with tons of new events. I think the lack of interaction between characters in the game could be greatly improved.

 

[Arizal]

As a side note, I think what could work out well is to tie the ambition/plot/faction mechanisms completely or mostly to events. May feel restrictive as currently they can be chosen by the player at will, but if the events (i.e. serial choices) which lead to them are plausible, they would be much more immersive.

This could be good, as an option. Problem with options, as I understand it, is that it double the balancing time since they have to try the game with one setting and the other. If it were linked to character traits, however, many would be sad taht the "god" part of the game would be left behind, so I don't see it happens nless it is an option.

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

This could be good, as an option. Problem with options, as I understand it, is that it double the balancing time since they have to try the game with one setting and the other.

Maybe events that don't influence anything, but only tell a story and justification for the plotters in the faction ?

If it were linked to character traits, however, many would be sad taht the "god" part of the game would be left behind, so I don't see it happens nless it is an option.

But the point IMHO in the CK series is its difference to other "map paintig" games and that you are rather a greece god than an almighty abrahamic/christian/muslim one.
That you wish to be almighty, but that unruly vassals and "shit that can happen in life" events/traits/relations counter this attempt and wisfull thinking.
To portray what actually happened in medieval times contrary to absolutism in the modern age.
Kings constantly struggling, the adventure to get to the top and stay there.


While i agree that many could be lamenting, but what if they already own the game, got hooked on it and will enjoy that nevertheless ?
That would solve the problem Paradox might have encountered with attracting new players. First release a polished game (for Paradox' means) and make it (comparably) easy to get hooked and then work on its complexity.
If thats their approach to that and i hope so very much, there can be more be added in the future, the games can be still as complex as in the past, while still gaining new players to the Paradox universe and keeping the old moaners/fans like me.

 

[Arizal]

While i agree that many could be lamenting, but what if they already own the game, got hooked on it and will enjoy that nevertheless ?
That would solve the problem Paradox might have encountered with attracting new players. First release a polished game (for Paradox' means) and make it (comparably) easy to get hooked and then work on its complexity.
If thats their approach to that and i hope so very much, there can be more be added in the future, the games can be still as complex as in the past, while still gaining new players to the Paradox universe and keeping the old moaners/fans like me.

Except that some players, even in PI fanbase would feel fooled if they were to remove options. Just see the fuss they made when they released SoI and made the muslims "playable" (although they were already moddable). This is why I think they should really keep that as an option. The events that tells a story seems far from pushing the player in a certain way because his character has some traits, but even that could be troubelsome for some. I'm not talking necessarily about painting the map (although I admit it is tempting right now), but if you play a poor count, you would like the court intrigues around you, since it would be all you would have to do. If you play the HRE and are informed of every single thing you vassals or courtiers does, it would not do. Thereby, there ought to be a way to get rid of some of those messages, like by delegating the less important to the AI.

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

Except that some players, even in PI fanbase would feel fooled if they were to remove options. Just see the fuss they made when they released SoI and made the muslims "playable" (although they were already moddable). This is why I think they should really keep that as an option. The events that tells a story seems far from pushing the player in a certain way because his character has some traits, but even that could be troubelsome for some. I'm not talking necessarily about painting the map (although I admit it is tempting right now), but if you play a poor count, you would like the court intrigues around you, since it would be all you would have to do. If you play the HRE and are informed of every single thing you vassals or courtiers does, it would not do. Thereby, there ought to be a way to get rid of some of those messages, like by delegating the less important to the AI.

Ahh, now is see your point.
Delegating stuff when you get into a higher position and rather have some events (storytelling only maybe, while the" arranngements" just still happen if you would take care of them yourself) and maybe then influenced by the according councillor.
Marvelous idea !



On the muslim/modding/removing part, they didn't remove them as they weren't playable in the first place.
Providing good moddability shouldnt restrict a company to only create DLCs were no Mods have been created, try to see it that way.
Try to see it like a producer would.
Muslims didnt have anything for their own as well before, just another religion by name.
Thats quite a difference to the DLC. In CK1 they didnt even work properly after making them playable by modding, not even mentioning the missing special mechanics.

Despite defending Paradox' policy in this case, i'm in the same boat when it comes down to releasing a game in an unfinished state and profiting on stuff that should be in anyway in general (as other companies do),
but i naively trust Doomdark and his explanation in the "Post Mortem DevDiary" reposted in post #114 and Paradox that they do that on mentioned reasons (in summary: financial worries and bug related issues)
alone/in the very first place.

 

[ArmchairGenera1]

Agree with the OP. The game has tremendous potential. Right now it's a good game, but it is too easy to blob here or be blobbed out and that's the point when the game turns into a map painter.

 

[MasterofMagic]

The core of this game has been well established upon release. And I would say Paradox has been continuously adding major mechanisms (SoI, LoR, Republic) as well as fleshing out the "conventional" parts (i.e. map and units) of the game.

Therefore I believe that the events and general role-playing parts of the game have not been fleshed-out as much as we want, simply because Paradox has been working on more important stuff. Once the major mechanisms have been well established, they may then focus on scripting.

In short, I don't think there is a problem in development focus. We just have to understand the priorities, and give Paradox some time.

Their priorities right now are EU:IV so I don't think you'll be seeing anymore MAJOR improvements to CKII. Everyone will just HAVE TO BE HAPPY with the roleplaying elements of CKII as they are now.

 

[nitroholic]

Their priorities right now are EU:IV so I don't think you'll be seeing anymore MAJOR improvements to CKII. Everyone will just HAVE TO BE HAPPY with the roleplaying elements of CKII as they are now.

Paradox tends to continue to support their games for a long time. Hearts of Iron III was released in 2009 and it got an expansion with new major improvements recently. CK II has been their most successful game so i think we're going to see a lot more DLC's/updates.

 

[Hector of Troy]

Agree with the OP. The game has tremendous potential. Right now it's a good game, but it is too easy to blob here or be blobbed out and that's the point when the game turns into a map painter.

I completely agree. It´s not uncommon to easily achieve your goals in 100 years and then quit the game because it ceased to be a challenge. And a lot of that could in my opinion be fixed by simply balancing the game better and making it harder to expand and sustain an empire. I see some people saying that there is always a way to cheat and do gamey stuff, but the truth is right now game mechanics are incredibly oriented towards blobbing.

I haven´t tried CK2+ yet, but I´ve heard this mod addresses most of the game balance issues. And if that´s true, then there is no reason why vanilla Crusader Kings 2 should not be also more difficult to blob than it currently is. Easily blobbing and peacefully sustaining a vast empire shouldn´t be that easy.

As usual, great mods are those which use common sense most of all. Here is a sentence I quoted from CK2+ developer: “Reworked difficulty system: Instead of giving flat economy bonuses to the AI, higher difficulties means slower expansion, slower and costlier warfare and more dangerous plots and revolts for the player”

That´s for me the most important concept Paradox should always have in mind for all future releases.

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

@Hector
Disregarding the topic, but regarding your post. Ever tried to load your game again as your worst enemy or an infidel of your former religion and tried to fight your former self and restore the "only true" faith opposed to your former one.
No ? Do it. Fun !



Regarding mods: Project Balance may suit you more as it doesnt change that much compared to CK2+.

 

[Hector of Troy]

@Hector
Disregarding the topic, but regarding your post. Ever tried to load your game again as your worst enemy or an infidel of your former religion and tried to fight your former self and restore the "only true" faith opposed to your former one.
No ? Do it. Fun !



Regarding mods: Project Balance may suit you more as it doesnt change that much compared to CK2+.

Thanks for the advice , bud.

Oh, and please don´t get me wrong here. This is truly a constructive criticism. Paradox is for me the best game industry in the world and Crusader Kings 2 is one of the best games ever released. My only intention is, hopefully, to provide helpful feedbacks that will perhaps contribute a little bit to the future patches.

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

Thanks for the advice , bud.

Oh, and please don´t get me wrong here. This is truly a constructive criticism. Paradox is for me the best game industry in the world and Crusader Kings 2 is one of the best games ever released. My only intention is, hopefully, to provide helpful feedbacks that will perhaps contribute a little bit to the future patches.

I won't and yes mine too. I share your mentioned criticism and just guess that its intended to blob comparable easily at this stage of development. Hopefully tougher/more diverse times lie ahead.

 

[Wallain]

What vanilla CK2 is, is a base for future development. It is/was a well polished game that allowed for the addition of more features. I have to agree that some very basic things are lacking, namely:

- Pagan religion system
- Trade (Coming next patch)
- Resources
- Naval Combat
- Better crown law system

But that is really it. All that is left after that is adding what I would call "fluff". Sure, event chains are fun but it is fluff. Right now you are perfectly capable of roleplaying your character to your heart's desires, so everything in addition to the existing RP features are just there to make better immersion.

 

[yezhanquan]

I do not agree with event chains being fluff. Events are very lacking in CK2 as it stands now. Playing PB, I feel that it is one of the few things I would want to be added, without PI going all crazy on how to develop a new system, debug it, and add it to what they already have in the game in a reasonable period of time.

 

[Wallain]

I do not agree with event chains being fluff. Events are very lacking in CK2 as it stands now. Playing PB, I feel that it is one of the few things I would want to be added, without PI going all crazy on how to develop a new system, debug it, and add it to what they already have in the game in a reasonable period of time.

It is fluff compared to base mechanics that cannot be modded into the game. Event chains are extremely easy to mod in.

 

[yezhanquan]

It is fluff compared to base mechanics that cannot be modded into the game. Event chains are extremely easy to mod in.

Which is a major part of my point: I believe that PI has lost its taste for implementing complex mechanics, which, like you say, cannot be modded into the game. From now on, what we can expect from DLCs are mechanics that do not greatly upset the balance (programming balance) of the base game, and do not give trouble. No more mechanics that give CTDs, or otherwise need a few patches to resolve. If these mechanics are "complex", I will consider them a bonus.

 

[Wallain]

Which is a major part of my point: I believe that PI has lost its taste for implementing complex mechanics, which, like you say, cannot be modded into the game. From now on, what we can expect from DLCs are mechanics that do not greatly upset the balance (programming balance) of the base game, and do not give trouble. No more mechanics that give CTDs, or otherwise need a few patches to resolve. If these mechanics are "complex", I will consider them a bonus.

So trade posts and trade are not complex? What are you basing this on?