EU: ROME expansion – Vae Victis announced

[Johan]

Nobby, dont worry, you are not alone!

I also feel somewhat indignated by this type of policy paradox has been doing with EU3 and now with Rome. I wish they would hear our opinions, but i supose that as any other company they care more about profits.

You mean you dislike the following policy?

1) We make sure that the games released work out of the box.

2) We spend MORE money and development time on patches than has ever been before, in shorter periods of time for the customers.

3) We then listen to what you guys want, and then make something for the community that basically is priced on "cost recovered" prices.

I can understand getting flamed cause people dislike a game, but dislikin a policy to make it better for the gamers is beyond my understanding.

If Eu3 had been released with the same policy and budgets as back in the eu2 days, we'd currently be at about the content and fixes somewhere between 1.1 and 1.2, and you'd see all the contents for 1.2 around the summer of 2010.

 

[TheLand]

3) We then listen to what you guys want, and then make something for the community that basically is priced on "cost recovered" prices.

I think this is the important bit...

Even setting aside the financial considerations, I think you can get a better product by releasing the game and then acting on feedback to produce an expansion.

Even if you'd had the full budget & time you've spent on Rome plus Vae Victis to spend on Rome, the resulting Rome wouldn't have been the same as, or as good as, Rome plus the Vae Victis expansion.

Long may the expansions continue!

 

[krasny]

I have no doubt once paradox have released an expansion or two that Rome will be a superb game. But I reject the idea that because these expansions improve the game that makes them good value. When other companies offer expansions they give new worlds, graphic overhauls, brand new features. What paradox are doing here - offering an expansion that introduces the Senate - is the equivalent of the Football Manager team offering an expansion that included the Champions League, or the transfer market.

Well said Nobby.

This so called 'expansion' is not an expansion but serial publishing, because they are adding features that a reasonable person would have included in the main game.

The main game has many problems beyond withheld features, but this is not the place to ennuciate them.

 

[Duke of Bavaria]

If Paradox policy means making the greatest game ever out of a disappointed like EU3 then it isnt that bad. Of course i would like to be able to play the ultimate game right away so i probably will go for bundles in the future and be able to play with mods right away , too.

 

[Searry]

You mean you dislike the following policy?

1) We make sure that the games released work out of the box.

2) We spend MORE money and development time on patches than has ever been before, in shorter periods of time for the customers.

3) We then listen to what you guys want, and then make something for the community that basically is priced on "cost recovered" prices.

I can understand getting flamed cause people dislike a game, but dislikin a policy to make it better for the gamers is beyond my understanding.

If Eu3 had been released with the same policy and budgets as back in the eu2 days, we'd currently be at about the content and fixes somewhere between 1.1 and 1.2, and you'd see all the contents for 1.2 around the summer of 2010.

Why do you rip everyone off with releasing a game which isn't complete, and then fix them with patches that cost money? NA, REV, IN, DV, DD, ARMA and now probably this are good examples. For example the EU3 1.1 was more annoying than fun, because it had many numerous little problems, but the biggest flaw was certainly the slow speed, and the province city icons that took a second to load(2,60 x2 ghz,4gb ram and 8800gtx(768mb) fast hard drives). Then you decide to fix this flaw with a patch, but then you decide to call it Napoleons Ambition(or was it fixed in In Nomine?) and you rip everyone off, because you can call it expansion pack if it has something little new, that should have been free, or in the game from the release. Same happened with In Nomine.

 

[Johan]

Why do you rip everyone off with releasing a game which isn't complete, and then fix them with patches that cost money? For example the EU3 1.1 was more annoying than fun, because it had many numerous little problems, but the biggest flaw was certainly the slow speed, and the province city icons that took a second to load(2,60 x2 ghz,4gb ram and 8800gtx(768mb) fast hard drives).

You are completely free to have your opinion on what a game isn't complete,
but that a game is slow on some users machines usually do not count as a "non-complete" game in most universes.

I find it funny that people whine about the current games, and then bring up Eu2 as "how it should be".

 

[krasny]

I do think that's a bit harsh Searry.

EU3 was a complete and wonderful game. NA + IN ADDED to an already great game.

But EU:R is neither complete or even good. It's unworthy of Paradox and the EU prefix. It's a shameful experiment in serial publishing.

Vae Victis is the wrong name for this travisty.

Mae Culpa would be a better one.

 

[Duke of Bavaria]

Well lets lets EU III and IN was a complete and wonderful game. EU III really was slow running sandbox hell. In would be perfectly happy with a release of NA standard and a IN addon, but vanilla was a little harsh for me. Didnt buy Rome yet, after this experience , but might go for the 4 expansion + game bundle, and play with "SPQR Platinum" :rofl: right away. Also havent IN yet, not because its not worth it, it seems great, but waiting for MMP will surely be worth it.

 

[Walker85]

Why do you rip everyone off with releasing a game which isn't complete, and then fix them with patches that cost money? NA, REV, IN, DV, DD, ARMA and now probably this are good examples. For example the EU3 1.1 was more annoying than fun, because it had many numerous little problems, but the biggest flaw was certainly the slow speed, and the province city icons that took a second to load(2,60 x2 ghz,4gb ram and 8800gtx(768mb) fast hard drives).

I’ve never had such problems, even with EU3 1.0, although I play on much worse machine. Maybe something is wrong with your computer.

Then you decide to fix this flaw with a patch, but then you decide to call it Napoleons Ambition(or was it fixed in In Nomine?) and you rip everyone off, because you can call it expansion pack if it has something little new, that should have been free, or in the game from the release. Same happened with In Nomine.

If you call NA/ IN “something a little new, that should be free” I would advise you to play it, because it seems, that you don’t know what are you talking about. And then try to create something like that, during your working hours, but for free. And why should it be in the game that is completely playable without it?

 

[Duke of Bavaria]

Overall said: I DO like the patching policy and even the addon policy as more bang for the buck is bette rthan no more bang. What left me a little unsatisfied is EU III vanilla and Rome (judged by the demo) vanilla. I expected a little more from P-dox, but then i bought EU II when it was years old and fully patched and only with Agccep and also was very tolerant on CK. (didnt understand the constant complaining, was perfectly playable for me out of the box. Oh by the way...how much new content has been brought out now BEFORE the CK patch promised to be coming out next...? Shame on you Johan, and the ultimate praise for still patching this old gem.

 

[Johan]

.how much new content has been brought out now BEFORE the CK patch promised to be coming out next...? Shame on you Johan, and the ultimate praise for still patching this old gem.

There is alot of complaints on crashes in DV, but I can't reproduce it here, and I still wait for a single user to send me a single savegame that crashes before I can continue on it.

 

[TheLoneGunman]

IMHO, neither side will ever convince the other it is right. So rather than fighting about everything we should all be trying to put forth as much help and as many ideas as we can to make EU:R even better.

The game has got a ton of potential if only we try and use it.

 

[Scipio Aemilius]

IMHO, neither side will ever convince the other it is right. So rather than fighting about everything we should all be trying to put forth as much help and as many ideas as we can to make EU:R even better.

The game has got a ton of potential if only we try and use it.

Well said!

 

[POemil]

Man man what a bashing going on here.
I am not overly thrilled and happy with Rome at its current state either, but I dont think there is something wrong with PI and its patches and expansions. Imo there is quite a lot of content in the patches always. And an expansion for 10 bucks, come on! I spend more money when i go to the movies!
And comparing the Eu patches to the TW patches and saying they add more, que??

IMHO, neither side will ever convince the other it is right. So rather than fighting about everything we should all be trying to put forth as much help and as many ideas as we can to make EU:R even better.

The game has got a ton of potential if only we try and use it.

Aah, the lonely sound of reason

 

[BurningEGO]

You mean you dislike the following policy?

1) We make sure that the games released work out of the box.

2) We spend MORE money and development time on patches than has ever been before, in shorter periods of time for the customers.

3) We then listen to what you guys want, and then make something for the community that basically is priced on "cost recovered" prices.

I can understand getting flamed cause people dislike a game, but dislikin a policy to make it better for the gamers is beyond my understanding.

If Eu3 had been released with the same policy and budgets as back in the eu2 days, we'd currently be at about the content and fixes somewhere between 1.1 and 1.2, and you'd see all the contents for 1.2 around the summer of 2010.

I must have explained myself wrongly. I am sorry if that is the case.

I have absolutely no problem with the patching policy (except for specific problems, but these are irrelevant).

The deal here, is that the games are rather expensive, and "lacking something". EU3 is the prime example. I had been playing EU2 for years, and after a few games in EU3 i prefered EU2 by far. Before NA was released, i could count with my bare hands the amount of times i played EU3 because i totaly disliked the game as it was.

After NA and consequently IN were released, i have been playing EU3 more times (even though i still prefer EU2). It is of my opinion, that these expansions, should had been either included in the first release of EU3, or been patches. Because they add too few features to be even called an expansion.

What makes matters worse, is that the game itself already costed about 40-50€, and the expansions costed 20€ each if memory serves. A grand total of about 90€, to make the game actually worth playing. With all respect, i feel robbed. And the fact that i didnt even get a CD for any expansion only agravates things (combined with the fact that you are forced to download them).

I have been playing computer games since around 1995, and i have seen nothing compared to what Paradox is currently doing. Civilization, Warcraft, Empire Earth or even the Total War series (amongst others) have expansions, that, as another user said, "give us entire new worlds". IN or NA, although making the game more interesting, do not give us "entire new worlds", but only a couple of extra features.

Lastly i would like to say that I have no intention of ever "flaming" you, and if i offended you, i apologize. I just feel that since i have bought countless Paradox Games, i have the right to state my opinion in order to make Paradox improve their products and appease us (the users and the buyers).

P.S: Of course, some people will obviously disagree with me, but i have the right of my own opinion.

 

[unmerged(5700)]

Expensive?

I must have explained myself wrongly. I am sorry if that is the case.

I have absolutely no problem with the patching policy (except for specific problems, but these are irrelevant).

The deal here, is that the games are rather expensive, and "lacking something". EU3 is the prime example. I had been playing EU2 for years, and after a few games in EU3 i prefered EU2 by far. Before NA was released, i could count with my bare hands the amount of times i played EU3 because i totaly disliked the game as it was.

After NA and consequently IN were released, i have been playing EU3 more times (even though i still prefer EU2). It is of my opinion, that these expansions, should had been either included in the first release of EU3, or been patches. Because they add too few features to be even called an expansion.

What makes matters worse, is that the game itself already costed about 40-50€, and the expansions costed 20€ each if memory serves. A grand total of about 90€, to make the game actually worth playing. With all respect, i feel robbed. And the fact that i didnt even get a CD for any expansion only agravates things (combined with the fact that you are forced to download them).

I have been playing computer games since around 1995, and i have seen nothing compared to what Paradox is currently doing. Civilization, Warcraft, Empire Earth or even the Total War series (amongst others) have expansions, that, as another user said, "give us entire new worlds". IN or NA, although making the game more interesting, do not give us "entire new worlds", but only a couple of extra features.

Lastly i would like to say that I have no intention of ever "flaming" you, and if i offended you, i apologize. I just feel that since i have bought countless Paradox Games, i have the right to state my opinion in order to make Paradox improve their products and appease us (the users and the buyers).

P.S: Of course, some people will obviously disagree with me, but i have the right of my own opinion.

For the thousands of hours these guys are pumping into these games, you have the some nerve complaining over the price of the game. How many hours have you played the game?

Enough said.

Paradox should charge you double for your insubordination!

 

[vanin]

Don't bring up that topic again, everything to be said has already been said, and as TheLoneGunman said, neither side will think the other is right. Let's contribute to the expansion instead rather than complainging about the system.

Back on topic, i think there should, just like tribal succession in IN, be a risk for all monarchies to get problems within the royal family when a ruler dies. The Seleucid Empire is a guideline concerning how it could have been, were different Seleucid branches fought for control, and eventually wiped the whole family out, during Seleucia's last 100 years.

 

[Nyrael]

The deal here, is that the games are rather expensive, and "lacking something". EU3 is the prime example. I had been playing EU2 for years, and after a few games in EU3 i prefered EU2 by far. Before NA was released, i could count with my bare hands the amount of times i played EU3 because i totaly disliked the game as it was.

After NA and consequently IN were released, i have been playing EU3 more times (even though i still prefer EU2). It is of my opinion, that these expansions, should had been either included in the first release of EU3, or been patches. Because they add too few features to be even called an expansion.

If you played vanilla EU3 more, you would know that NA and IN give a huge amount of features and greately improve the existing ones while the patches befoe took care that no bugs are to be found in vanilla.

What makes matters worse, is that the game itself already costed about 40-50€, and the expansions costed 20€ each if memory serves. A grand total of about 90€, to make the game actually worth playing.

Worth playing is personal opinion. I for one think that EU3 vanilla is one of the best games on market.

I have been playing computer games since around 1995, and i have seen nothing compared to what Paradox is currently doing. Civilization, Warcraft, Empire Earth or even the Total War series (amongst others) have expansions, that, as another user said, "give us entire new worlds".

Besides few games (some of them were mentioned by you), most of them get an expansion whos review is: adds a one or two features and 10 new missions that are almost the same like the ones from vanilla.
PI expansions may not be the best on market, but they don't belong to the "worst" camp either.

 

[Ezzezze]

I have been playing computer games since around 1995, and i have seen nothing compared to what Paradox is currently doing. Civilization, Warcraft, Empire Earth or even the Total War series (amongst others) have expansions, that, as another user said, "give us entire new worlds". IN or NA, although making the game more interesting, do not give us "entire new worlds", but only a couple of extra features.

Sorry, but I have to pick this one up. Only the games I've played though.

Warcraft III expansion adds alot of story and cinematics. One could almost call them new games in terms of number of missions, etc. True. And that's also the reason why such an expansion costs what it costs.

But Civilization IV? In what way does a Civ expansion add more to the game when comparing NA and IN to EUIII. They follow the same type of business model... You can't criticize NA and IN the way you do while praising the Civ IV expansions...

 

[Maupertuis]

We may have different experiences, depending on what Paradox games we previously played.

I never played EU2. So when I played EU3, I had not the expectations or misconceptions EU2 veterans players may have had.

But EU3 and EU : Rome are complete games. The core principles and the gameplay decisions may not please to everyone, but that's the way it is. There's no accounting for taste.

3) We then listen to what you guys want, and then make something for the community that basically is priced on "cost recovered" prices.

Indeed. I can attest that the patches and extensions for EU3 and EU Rome follow this rule. And it's good to have a company with this policy. So, keep up the good work, Johan !