When a game release a mayor update might be modders best and worst day of the month.
HOI4 Waking the Tiger and 1.5 Cornflakes Patchlog
- Thread starter podcat
- Start date
-
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.
Love how you lock many features that should be in the base game behind a $20 price 
Love how you lock many features that should be in the base game behind a $20 price
Strictly speaking, it makes the most sense to charge for everything (all the development took resources after all) - so if things had been in the base game, then the base game would either:
- Have cost more
- Been missing other things
- Ran the risk of not making enough of a return on investment to justify further development of the game/series
.
Strictly speaking, it makes the most sense to charge for everything (all the development took resources after all) - so if things had been in the base game, then the base game would either:
That's not to say you're wrong to have different preferences of what should be in the 'core' game or what shouldn't, but keep in mind that everything takes resources to be developed, and if Paradox doesn't get a return on investment then development on HoI is likely to stop - so PI charging money for things isn't perhaps as 'evil' as it might seem at first glance
- Have cost more
- Been missing other things
- Ran the risk of not making enough of a return on investment to justify further development of the game/series
I would be perfectly fine with that if the game was actually finished. HOI4 is early access with a full game title slapped on top of it. Look at many other paradox games with not much dlc that were successful. The core game is boring as hell and after the patch it has almost become unplayable for me and others without the dlc.
How are you defining "unfinished" here - I got the Field Marshal edition, so I can't talk about how the game plays without the DLC but with the recent patch, but the game at launch was the most 'finished' HoI Paradox has ever released (by a huge margin) - in that it was very stable, and most things worked, and worked well. There were bugs of course, and every WW2 GSG ever hasn't managed to replicate many of the 'key themes' of the period, but this doesn't make it an unfinished game. May have missed something though, so by all means pipe up and clue me in
.
How are you defining "unfinished" here - I got the Field Marshal edition, so I can't talk about how the game plays without the DLC but with the recent patch, but the game at launch was the most 'finished' HoI Paradox has ever released (by a huge margin) - in that it was very stable, and most things worked, and worked well. There were bugs of course, and every WW2 GSG ever hasn't managed to replicate many of the 'key themes' of the period, but this doesn't make it an unfinished game. May have missed something though, so by all means pipe up and clue me in
The AI in the game is so unbelievable idiotic with leaving front lines open, god awful peace deals that make no sense whatever, and just bullshit in general (as we were talking my friend playing the Soviets watched Italy perform a naval invasion in Siberia). Some semi-important countries like Spain don't even have a focus tree and the ones that do are locked behind a dlc. Diplomacy between countries is a joke and is almost non-existent. I mean I know the game is mostly on the war aspect but at make it so I do more than click a button and something happens.
Last edited:
The AI in the game isn't perfect, but was better at launch than previous HoIs at launch, and is far better now. Judging AI performance is always difficult, but I've played a lot of strategy (and other) games, and if we're classifying HoI4 as 'broken' because of it's AI, there are very, very few strategy games that wouldn't also be classified as broken (many far more so) - so unless we're going to write off virtually a whole genre of games as "broken", I think it's more likely a case of accepting that AI in GSG is hard to do, and it'll never be perfect (but hopefully always improving). Same story with peace deals. Diplomacy is limited, but not so much that I would consider the game broken (by any measure) - but that doesn't mean you shouldn't hold that view, just a matter of perspective. However, in terms of diplomacy I'm pretty sure it was clear what was and wasn't possible prior to release, so at the very least you would have known what you were getting into if you read the dev diaries.
The focus tree stuff, on the other hand, is a content issue pure and simple - you need to make a choice between wanting a more expensive game that takes longer to develop at launch, or a cheaper base game and DLC. Your preference either way is perfectly valid, but it's a preference, and it's not inappropriate for the devs or other players to have a different preference. This isn't a "broken" thing - this is just different ways of making sure there's an appropriate return on investment for the cost of development.
Just my thoughts on it - there's nothing wrong with you wanting better from certain aspects of the game (and you may well find in some areas the devs share your views), but (and I don't mean this in a nasty way) your guide to what qualifies as "broken" may not be particularly practical, as you're likely to find the vast majority of GSGs similarly "broken" (or "broken" in other ways), and it may be more useful to readjust your expectations of what devs can and can't do with a given amount of time and resources.
I don't hate this game or the devs by any means. I have put countless hours into the game and have had some enjoyable moments. I don't expect the game to be perfect by any means but after playing the base game and playing the dlc with a friend I just feel like they added features in the dlc that should of been in the base game. Not nearly all of it but not being able to send airwing volunteers without the dlc just seems like a little too much.
Your preferences are your preferences, but (iirc - my memory can be a bit patchy) airwing volunteers have never been in a HoI game until now (and I can't think of other WW2 GSGs which include them as well), so that feels from my perspective like an odd example of a "must-have" feature (particularly as outside of the Spanish Civil War the impact of volunteer air wings was pretty limited at the strategic level, however useful the Flying Tigers and Eagle Squadron were tactically and operationally). It is, however, a good example of how different fans will have different things they see as "essential" (for example, corvettes were far, far, far more important strategically than volunteer air wings, or a Spanish focus tree, so some might think these are a more important element of the game) - and it's important to recognise that what you see as essential may be very different from the devs and other fans. I think it's a top idea to post on forums about things that are worth including, but when it comes to what defines a "broken" game or otherwise, I'd argue the inclusion or exclusion of features is, in general, not the best gauge - but rather whether the features that are included work at an appropriate level (so from the examples you've provided, the AI would be your strongest example from my perspective of something that could potentially be classified as such, although I'd disagree in this case - but that doesn't mean I'm right, just that we have different perspectives
).
