-
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.
You missed out:
Step 2.5: Count on morons buying this so called expansion.
It is basically unethical releasing an expansion for such a half baked game. Expansions are supposed to add to an already completed game. Like Warlords and BtS did for Civ4.
Don't buy this chickenshit 'expansion', if you do HoI3 be a blank CD with a message: Game in the expansions guys.
crapmann said:Reading the OP is sometimes a good idea before you whine
"- Mobilize the Senate to back important laws such as 'Lex Gabinia' to fight piracy or the 'Lex Acilia Repetundarum' to reduce corruption. Players can also enact decisions at various levels, working with regional governors to grant citizenships to a region or a province."
This does however render a big part of our mod redundant
Hehehe. I am thinking exactly the same thing.
The impact of Vae Victis looks very, very similar to the (intended) impact of the next version of SPQR 0.4!
I don't know whether this says more about Paradox's responsiveness to the community, or my brilliant anticipation of what the dev team were going to do next anyway. ;-)
Era of expansions just adding things is gone long time ago.Today, every developer knows exactly what will exp bring even before they start making the actual game.
Releasing the game sooner to increase the budget and make money in order to have enough resources to completely finish it in expansion is one of todays strategies. Nobody caresa about ethics, neither the developers nor the customers.
Why would they make a crappy game to make people buy the expansion when making a good game would probably be a more effective way to achieve that?
Anyways: Will there be vicky-esque regions? Or even dynamic regions? *hoping*
Anyways: Will there be vicky-esque regions? Or even dynamic regions? *hoping*
I don't think they intended to make a crappy game.
Possibly it was just hubris, every preceding game has been excelent, so therefore EU:R must be excelent.
Possibly restricting beta testing to fanboys was a mistake. Fanboys aren't going to be critical.
Serial publishing the game was cynical and immoral. Even EA don't do that.
Don't buy this travisty.
Possibly it was just hubris, every preceding game has been excelent, so therefore EU:R must be excelent.
Possibly restricting beta testing to fanboys was a mistake. Fanboys aren't going to be critical.
Serial publishing the game was cynical and immoral. Even EA don't do that.
Don't buy this travisty.
Flooper X said:
Susana said:
It looks like, yes there will. The statement "region or province" certainly implies that. Also, we know that HOI3 will have 10,000 land provinces and they are going to be organised in regions, so this facility clear has/weill be developed for the engine.
Yay! My hopes are up and they are high!TheLand said:
OTOH, Decisions were brought into the engine at the time Rome was first developed, and still they're only brought into rome with this expansion...
krasny said:
AFAIK the process of selecting beta-testers for EU:Rome has been the same as for all Paradox games.
Nyrael said:
Quite.
I think the outcome of Rome was a deliberate decision on Paradox's part to make a game with a lighter feel.
They didn't mess it up, they didn't screw people over... just made a slightly different game.
Nyrael said:
There's a world of difference between fans and fanboys.
Fans are critical. I'm a fan. I'm being critical.
Fanboys go frothy at every available orifice at the prospect of a new Paradox game / expansion. They would cheerfully eat shit and say that it tastes good.
EU:R is a fundamentally flawed, shallow, badly thought through, sorry arse excuse for a Paradox game. It's not going appeal to mainstream gamers, and judging by forum traffic, it's not appealing to Paradox fans either.
krasny said:
There are those fans, like myself, who honestly like EU: Rome, despite it's flaws. Situation was even worse with Crusader Kings. It was full of bugs and flaws, but still very enjoyable game. Eventually patches made it great game and likewise I think that recent patch did good job with Rome. But then came Deus Vult which made good game even better and I hope that Vae Victis will do same thing for Rome.
Olaus Petrus said:
I admit, that Rome 1.0 had a lot of flaws, but Rome 1.3 is much more better than Crusader Kings 1.0. In fact CK wasn’t enjoyable for me, it had horrible interface and graphics, horrible map, many bugs... That’s why I haven’t bought Deus Vult, although, maybe I should. Maybe then I would get to like this game. With Rome I have much more fun. If with this expansion it will be even better, I’ll buy it. Especially if it is only 9.99, it could be worth it.
Nevertheless, I think, that Paradox is making too expensive games. It has always been the same. I bought EU2 just to find out, that is just EU1 with some new features, and today’s expansions give us more changes. CK, Vici and HOI2 had their own expansions. I guess we have to live with that, Paradox is not a charity foundation, they are here to make money. As long as they make good and not to expensive games there is nothing wrong about it
Last edited:
krasny said:
Patch 1.05 for CK was done through a public beta and it was done mostly by what you call fanboys. It is safe to say that patch 1.05 was a really major improvement of CK
Veldmaarschalk said:
Heh, I don't think that I have ever been as active outside OT than I was when there was Public Beta forum for CK. I don't know anything about modding, but I sure did give plenty of feedback and suggestions.