Do we have a Flop on our hands??

[PlacidDragon]

Since I'm here since EU 1, I'd actually wager Paradox' games have become increasingly polished on release. You obviously weren't here during HOI 1 release

Also gotten every Pdox title new since EU (apart from CK and Diplomacy), and remember well, hehe. I have some issues with various parts of the game (sliders, trades, unpausing bug, etc), but on a whole, im having a very enjoyable time.

Happy with the release here (knowing that the bunch will be cranking out patches to fix the problems)

 

[Edward D.G.]

So really what we can all agree on is the game has a lot of promise, but it was a horrible release. Is that about it?

I wouldn't go that far--there is too much agnst pent up for any agreement! There must be fighting!

 

[Vulture]

So; a third is dead weight from a production point of view--sorry accounting and marketing; and 2 need to really have to have their references checked--looking at QA and 'historical research' here.

I like what the 'code monkeys' do, the game will work soon enough--I hate it when everything around it looks so shoddy and unfinished.

Well well. Nice to hear Chiwiss is apparently doing a bad job on historical research. I'd like to know what this statement of yours is based on? Argentina's capital and Stalingrad being a bit off? That's not her job. What she did do is actually checking every single OOB out there for the new division-design system. Pretty awesome job if you ask me.

 

[Vulture]

I doubt that somehow.

Well I don't. And I do not say that as a moderator and, beyond any doubt in your eyes, a Paradox fanboy. This game takes WW2 gaming leaps further than before. Sheer size.

 

[PlacidDragon]

I alt-tab, thank YOU very much

That makes two of us then

Things have just gotten more interesting now that WW2 has actually started, but the first two years were dire... not to mention the tutorial is rubbish, and your ability to actually change things is far too limited for my liking. If I wanted a true to life Sim I'd go watch a documentary.

Not started yet here, im still trapped in 1937.. getting there sloooowly, hehe.

Ability to change things too limited ? How do you mean, that you dont have complete freedom (like the neutrality for example ?)

 

[Vulture]

And I'm 100% sure HoI 3 release is complete and utter fail.

We'll just have to agree to disagree then.

 

[tric]

No, not a complete flop.

I'm not really liking it so far though.

HoI2 was nearly perfect imo, top 5 games of all time for me. It had a perfect balance of depth and ease of play.

The threat/neutrality system may be more realistic, but it feels really sluggish to work with. Same goes for drift. In HoI2, sliders were nice and straightforward, once per year you can do whatever you want with a few limitations. It didn't take any extra management and while it may not have been super realistic it was good from a gameplay standpoint.

I also miss the tech teams alot. In HoI2, you could have Porsche develop your tanks as Germany, Yamamoto developing naval doctrines as Japan, etc, and it was REALLY sweet, it added some color, flair and personality to the system. But now, in 3, we just have a massive excel spreadsheet for teching. And it's just so sterile and drab.

That's the feel I have in general. HoI3 just seems more like an excel spreadsheet with a ton of extra stuff, statistics for stuff I don't give two shits about, etc, stuff tacked on that apparently make it more realistic. Realistic at the cost of ease of play, style and fun.

I wanted to mod cores but apparently each province has its own file now, so instead of taking a few minutes it'll more like take hour(s) to edit each file in turn, especially since there are 913543543 provinces now. Sucks.

 

[SIJoe]

Whilst I agree whole-heartedly with not talking about stuff you don't know about, the dude may have a minor point. I can't help feel at time that there's depth for depth's sake in some areas, and the fact that the code is so bloated at the moment indicates that someone, somewhere either A/ Messed up or B/ Made the decision to release the game the way it is.

 

[Edward D.G.]

Well well. Nice to hear Chiwiss is apparently doing a bad job on historical research. I'd like to know what this statement of yours is based on? Argentina's capital and Stalingrad being a bit off? That's not her job. What she did do is actually checking every single OOB out there for the new division-design system. Pretty awesome job if you ask me.

Really, your opinion, mines different. Take a look at the 36 French scenario and tell me that the divisions are right--they aren't, take a look a the 43 panzer divisions--they aren't either. And those are just the countries I've tinkered with. Maybe the OBATS and where you want to start a defence. . .

The geography is poor, the copyediting is poor and the historical research is poor. All my opinion so take it for what its worth--probably nothing to you; but hey, thats your opinion, it's cool with me.

 

[Mnoracle]

Well I don't. And I do not say that as a moderator and, beyond any doubt in your eyes, a Paradox fanboy. This game takes WW2 gaming leaps further than before. Sheer size.

Obviously you havn't played in War in the Pacific

Yes it's a very good game (potentially) and yes personaly I was ready to a poor release. But every single possible thing clicked in the wrong direction here.

Poor download speed - check
Gamebraking issues right in the release date - check
Lots of completly stupid mistakes in the map (pretty obvious stuff) - check
Perormace issues - check
Untested fixes (diplomacy) - check
Unworking features (weather) - check

And so on...

 

[kingterranes]

Well I don't. And I do not say that as a moderator and, beyond any doubt in your eyes, a Paradox fanboy. This game takes WW2 gaming leaps further than before. Sheer size.

The game is great in general but have tons of small problems but also some big like the slow speed for example.

The tone of those who complaints regardless if they say ''code monkeys'' without knowing jack shit means that they are unhappy with the game.

So unhappy that they make assumptions, it is maybe a good game but well it is receiving a lot of complaints.

Now THIS point i am to make is maybe naive but start saying a little what you will fix or if you acknowledge the problems at hand.

Instead it feels like there is a big chunk of the moderators etc. that will back the game to no end rather then improve it. (I.E criticizing the game)

 

[SIJoe]

Ability to change things too limited ? How do you mean, that you dont have complete freedom (like the neutrality for example ?)

Ever heard of a Game called SuperPower 2? Now THAT was deep. When it came to shaping the way you wanted your country to go, that game let you do just about anything... but yeah, I'm talking about that neutrality thing. It virtually cripples your ability to do anything early on. There's also the fact that you can't easily change your government style and ideologies, etc...

 

[unmerged(74599)]

Also gotten every Pdox title new since EU (apart from CK and Diplomacy), and remember well, hehe. I have some issues with various parts of the game (sliders, trades, unpausing bug, etc), but on a whole, im having a very enjoyable time.

Happy with the release here (knowing that the bunch will be cranking out patches to fix the problems)

Remember the "game breaking" carrier bug from Armageddon? The forum was on fire with that for weeks. Good times. Woot!

 

[kingterranes]

No, not a complete flop.

That's the feel I have in general. HoI3 just seems more like an excel spreadsheet with a ton of extra stuff, statistics for stuff I don't give two shits about, etc, stuff tacked on that apparently make it more realistic. Realistic at the cost of ease of play, style and fun.

This sums up my opinion quiet well

 

[SIJoe]

I want to know who wrote the tutorial so I can slap them...

 

[unmerged(67641)]

What was the game breaking bug from Armageddon? I don't remember that.

 

[enigma_]

I tend to agree, the tutorial was not as comprehensive as I would have liked (especially the technology research section).

 

[SIJoe]

I tend to agree, the tutorial was not as comprehensive as I would have liked (especially the technology research section).

That, and it all turned out to be one big Hitler skit.

 

[Diet of Worms]

I want to know who wrote the tutorial so I can slap them...

Now that's unfair.. it's the person who sacked that person when they were only half way through that I want a word with

 

[Vulture]

The game is great in general but have tons of small problems but also some big like the slow speed for example.

The tone of those who complaints regardless if they say ''code monkeys'' without knowing jack shit means that they are unhappy with the game.

So unhappy that they make assumptions, it is maybe a good game but well it is receiving a lot of complaints.

Now THIS point i am to make is maybe naive but start saying a little what you will fix or if you acknowledge the problems at hand.

Instead it feels like there is a big chunk of the moderators etc. that will back the game to no end rather then improve it. (I.E criticizing the game)

Oh, but complaining I don't have a problem with. Not at all. It is through constructive criticism that this game will become better. And yes, we all know there are problems now, I agree.

I was always taught however that criticism should always be constructive. And civil. Even if you're disappointed. I think this thread has numerous examples of people getting their disappointment across in a nice and civilized way.