Feeling a bit bummed out about Muslims and the Papacy being unplayable

[Dagda]

Crusader Kings is a niche game even inside the niche market that is grand strategy. Look, they only even got the 5000 or so Facebook joins out of the 20000 after which they said they would announce CK2. Of course, there's good reason to assume they were going to do it all along and simply did that facebook thing to create hype, but the point is proven, the player base is small. What applies to HoI3 and V2 applies even more to a small game with less expected profits.

So since it's not plausible to expect Paradox to give us both lots of depth and width at the same, I think we should encourage them to choose depth. I'd rather have one top-rate sandbox than several mediocre ones.

I'm absolutely sure CK2 is expected to outsell Victoria 2. Just as CK outsold Vicky.

More to the point, Paradox is giving a longer development cycle to CK2, similar in length to their EU games. Games like Vicky2, Rome and Sengoku did not see nearly as much attention.

 

[Negru Voda]

muslims, yea.. papacy I can live with

non-christians will probably get a nice expansion.

the papacy would make sense to be playable, if our character gets elected pope. This is about dynasties before all else, so the devs have to simply expand what kind of religions dynasties can be, and what realms they can command.

 

[RedRooster81]

muslims, yea.. papacy I can live with

non-christians will probably get a nice expansion.

the papacy would make sense to be playable, if our character gets elected pope. This is about dynasties before all else, so the devs have to simply expand what kind of religions dynasties can be, and what realms they can command.

I'm hoping there will be a Renaissance expansion, then we can play the Borgias

 

[anomanderus]

I'm hoping there will be a Renaissance expansion, then we can play the Borgias

Wouldn't that be EU3?

 

[unmerged(226921)]

Wouldn't that be EU3?

EU3, as I've said in the past, starts quite earlier than it should. Politics were still very much dynastically focused even in the 1600's.


As for Pagans and Muslims, I have an interest in playing as a pagan dynasty, but not much of an interest for Muslim dynasty's.

 

[RedRooster81]

Wouldn't that be EU3?

If only EU3 had a proper dynastic system. No, seriously I think that CK2 would be a better format for the XV and XVI centuries.

Edit: So yes, John, I'm agreeing with you. I would very much like a Renaissance mod or better yet expansion. Many of the mechanics are there already, only republics and ecclesiastical states won't be playable.

 

[ZomgK3tchup]

We PI fans are a bit spoiled when it comes to playable factions. A lot of strategy games have at least one unplayable boss, minor, what have you. Then you have EU and Vicky where you can play as any country in the world.

While it's a bit of a drag, I think it's a necessary evil for the developers to deliver a good game.

 

[LeifNepstad]

I'll just wait until the Pagan/Muslim mod comes out to buy the game.

 

[unmerged(105862)]

We PI fans are a bit spoiled when it comes to playable factions. A lot of strategy games have at least one unplayable boss, minor, what have you. Then you have EU and Vicky where you can play as any country in the world.

While it's a bit of a drag, I think it's a necessary evil for the developers to deliver a good game.

Especially if the game IS called "Crusader Kings". Comparing modding capabilities of most games you would expect some gratitude (not talking about you here). And it's not the fans who are spoiled, fans make their own mods and occasionally demand more modding possibilities.

I'll just wait until the Pagan/Muslim mod comes out to buy the game.

Maybe you should pay more attention what devs have said about this. Happy waiting.

 

[KonradRichtmark]

While I agree with the post you quoted, it is a fallacy to refer to the name of a game as an argument on what should be in it. What's in a name? It's just a descriptor, and if the name doesn't fit the content, the only implication of that is that the name is poorly chosen.

The game could just as well be named Feudal Simulator, and it would be a more descriptive name too.

 

[unmerged(105862)]

While I agree with the post you quoted, it is a fallacy to refer to the name of a game as an argument on what should be in it. What's in a name? It's just a descriptor, and if the name doesn't fit the content, the only implication of that is that the name is poorly chosen.

The game could just as well be named Feudal Simulator, and it would be a more descriptive name too.

Do you know what fallacy is ?

We aren't talking about few features here and there, it's the core gameplay. The name of Crusader Kings was perfect and it will be perfect in the future. It might become slightly badly descriptive once pagans, muslims and Papacy gets playable. Now don't get me wrong, i'm NOT against pagans, muslims and Papacy to be playable. Nor am i against new traits, nor anything that would enchance the game.

Also, i'm not against suggestions or constructive criticism. I do mind, however, when some people (i'm not talking about you here) are getting bitchy about game they aren't really developing themselves and propably will never develop any game. Lets face it, if they can't even mod the most moddable games in the world, then what excactly can they do besides trolling on forums ? I can't respond directly to them because their feelings might get hurt.

In short: no-one is forced to buy any particular game and anyone can make game called "Feudal Simulator" or "The mighty Popes" or even "The Glorious Expansion Of The Mighty Caliphate" concentrating solely on that.

 

[Johan]

The game will only have christian feudal rulers playable.

No merchant republics, no moslems, no pagans, no mongol hordes, no religious orders, etc...

The mechanics designed just do not fit for them, and in the scope of CRUSADER KINGS we want to make a game about playing crusader kings.

If the game is popular enough, we'll probably make expansions.. Maybe one of them could allow something else to be played, but I'm not sure thats a good focus yet...

Making a mod to play muslims without mechanics to make them different doesn't really sound like anything that would be interesting to those people that know enough about history and what makes the different types of states behave.

 

[unmerged(109046)]

Making a mod to play muslims without mechanics to make them different doesn't really sound like anything that would be interesting to those people that know enough about history and what makes the different types of states behave.

But it WILL be possible to mod in, right? Even if mechanics would seem odd, I'd still like to play a pagan duchy of Pomerania or that Swedish pagan king I heard about in here lately - I just don't like to be limited.
(And it would make some problems for total conversions if only christian religions ever were playable - which would make all fantasy religions unplayable)

 

[Johan]

But it WILL be possible to mod in, right? Even if mechanics would seem odd, I'd still like to play a pagan duchy of Pomerania or that Swedish pagan king I heard about in here lately - I just don't like to be limited.
(And it would make some problems for total conversions if only christian religions ever were playable - which would make all fantasy religions unplayable)

Should be in theory be possible.

 

[Nuril]

Should be in theory be possible.

"In theory"? So it's -not- just a "playable=yes" in the Religion/Government files?! That's what they've been vague about in other religion threads about as well, despite asking for a proper confirmation. It'd be horrid if it was actually hardcoded but could be be worked around "in theory". Please, please don't do such a thing, Johan.. Make it simple, so there won't be a bunch of other issues all the time like CK1 solely for that reason.. ;_;

 

[unmerged(155641)]

The game will only have christian feudal rulers playable.

No merchant republics, no moslems, no pagans, no mongol hordes, no religious orders, etc...

The mechanics designed just do not fit for them, and in the scope of CRUSADER KINGS we want to make a game about playing crusader kings.

If the game is popular enough, we'll probably make expansions.. Maybe one of them could allow something else to be played, but I'm not sure thats a good focus yet...

Making a mod to play muslims without mechanics to make them different doesn't really sound like anything that would be interesting to those people that know enough about history and what makes the different types of states behave.

What i've said before. If they should make a muslim/pagan/order/whatever mod it need to be good with correct events and stuff.

 

[RedRooster81]

What i've said before. If they should make a muslim/pagan/order/whatever mod it need to be good with correct events and stuff.

Right. It would have to be a full conversion, not just a hotfix. So only Muslims for example could be playable. And by the time you do that, you just got yourself a new game. With Sengoku coming close to completion, maybe there will be other titles on the same basic setup, like a remake of Crown of the North for those Scandinavian enthusiasts or something more localized in the Holy Land.

 

[xox]

I don't mind them not being in, its not what the game is about, its about being a feudal lord.

You can pretty much guarantee ability to play the other nations will be modded in virtually from the start anyway too. At first a simple hack to let them play with the feudal lord rules and then further down the line who knows, maybe it could be modded in to better represent them. Hope the game is that moddable!

 

[Jia Xu]

"In theory"?

"In theory" meaning that at the moment he thinks it might be possible. However the game still has like 9 months of development left to go, and things can change drastically in that time. It could be very well the case that Paradox developers have not finalized what can and can't be done with modding, leaving Mr. Andersson unable to give you any kind of definitive answer on the subject. Ask again in December, maybe?

 

[Nuril]

"In theory" meaning that at the moment he thinks it might be possible.

But that's the problem. It shouldn't be some elaborate part of the code. Why make it anything more than "playable=no" on the non-Christian religions and Republics to make a statement for what is officially supported gameplay? "In theory it could be possible" does not speak to them doing it that way, which is worrying, since that can invite all sorts of issues (ever played Pagan in CK1? It's broken even when enabled due to arbitrary hardcoded restrictions). It's pointless and greatly lessens the modding appeal of CK2.