It's Time for EU5

[Leivve]

This isn't a cenario like CK3 where the devs even admitted after jade dragon that the game is in its twilight years. EU4 still has plenty of life in it. Maybe in like five years we can discuss if the game has finally reached its last legs, but as it is, there is still plenty of work that can be done.

 

[Zhetone]

This isn't a cenario like CK3 where the devs even admitted after jade dragon that the game is in its twilight years. EU4 still has plenty of life in it. Maybe in like five years we can discuss if the game has finally reached its last legs, but as it is, there is still plenty of work that can be done.

in 15 years it will be 13 years old, I don't think it's good enough to last that long

 

[SwordofKhaine123]

Hard no on this one.

 

[ImperatorLJ]

Seeing lots of people saying no to EU5 because we don't have Vic3 yet. Those two are not related as far as I know, so working on one one should not impede the other.

 

[sjobenrit]

in 15 years it will be 13 years old, I don't think it's good enough to last that long

but bad enough to make a new one, which is probably worse for the first 4 years?

 

[Kapi96]

Agreed. When the devs are literally saying they're struggling to add new stuff due to how old the game is... it's time to move on!

 

[Zhetone]

but bad enough to make a new one, which is probably worse for the first 4 years?

will it be worse? I always though EU4 on release was superior to EU3. obviously now, we would never go back to vanilla EU4, but it was very well-received when it came out and people made the switch immediately, aside from people who loved sliders.

for me anyway, Eu4 has lost much of its shine. I don't think I will ever fully go back to playing this game regularly. I might check out the next patch a bit but there are too many big things that bother me in this game

 

[Akbar The Great]

Yes, it's time. The disaster that was was "Emporer" should have been the end.

 

[tului]

Seeing lots of people saying no to EU5 because we don't have Vic3 yet. Those two are not related as far as I know, so working on one one should not impede the other.

I'm only posting it for the meme. Although I do seriously hope Vick III drops first(as in I hope an announcement is soon) I realize they both could be developed in tandem

 

[Ivashanko]

What is the feature you cant have in EU5? Pops?
I dont like the idea to get pops in eu4 or even eu5 i think it doesnt fit to this timeframe and this kind of game eu is.
There are thousands of people who like the actual system, but you dont hear about it, cause why should people write "I love EU like it is atm, dont change the system".
I see many ways they still can improve EU4 even with the limits they described in the last diary.
Making a EU5 would mean, to stop working on EU4 and you will start over with a game with way less feature then you have now and my fear is, with a game which isnt so deep like eu4, cause games tend to get easier in these days so it isnt so hard to get into them. (And this way make it accessible for more players/buyers)

There are a lot of mechanics that could be reworked to provide engaging content for players. My big wish is estates. I hope they are the foundation of a hypothetical EU5.

 

[Vohen]

I used to think that EU4 was a game still full of potential, which could still have a long shelf life to come, but last DD made me reassess that, I'm not so sure anymore.

That said, I don't think EU4's dev cycle ending will have so much to do with the game itself, but instead I believe EU5's development progress is what will dictate it.
If we are to take CK2/3 as reference (and it is the only one for current PDX business), EU4 should have its last expansion the year before EU5 is announced, which would mean EU5 won't be released for at least another two years, and probably more since Johan has implied that Leviathan won't be EU4's last DLC.

Then again, knowing that CK3 started development around 2015, I cannot imagine at all that EU5 isn't already in development, as that would imply a release after 2026, which to me seems rather absurd.
My guess is that we will have another two DLCs or so after Leviathan, throughout 2022, and in 2023 we'll get free patches similar to Great Works and Iron Century, with EU5 announcement towards the end of the year to be released in 2024.

Seeing lots of people saying no to EU5 because we don't have Vic3 yet. Those two are not related as far as I know, so working on one one should not impede the other.

You're probably right, but I imagine PDX wouldn't want to release or even announce both simultaneously, or within a short period.
They'd end up in direct competition with each other, which could affect sales.

So, while both games could very well be in development, the announcement of one most likely implies the other not coming for some time still.
Unless the pandemic threw PDX off their release schedule for last year, and now they have two games in the pipeline ready to come out, or something of the sort.

 

[MachopPower69]

This is my opinion, btw. EU4 is in a good place to grow, but expanding to a new game because there is nothing left to update or it is outdated is a stupid excuse. EU4 is being updated with lots of new content every quarter/half year, like 1.30 or 1.31. There is still a lot of stuff to update like Africa and Scandinavia, but that's the tip of the iceberg. Yes, EU4 was an upgrade to EU3, but that was because it was controversial and having bad features like the sliders and chunky provinces. CK3 was basically the next version of CK2 because of new changes such as graphics and mechanics. Should Stellaris get a second game because it is popular? What about EU4, where it is one of the most popular map games besides Civ 6 with lots of players and mods weekly with so much to explore?

 

[Romanix90]

Imho i would rather want Vic3 while EU4 expands as long as it can. Whether via standard expansions, imersion packs or free updates.

 

[zorkman]

Imho i would rather want Vic3 while EU4 expands as long as it can. Whether via standard expansions, imersion packs or free updates.

That is two different things. I would certainly look forward to a new Victoria game, but also EU5, as present version is on its last legs as far as I am concerned. Best days were years ago, which is not a positive sign to keep it going.

 

[tribunus_plebis]

I feel overwhelmed in just contemplating the idea of having to wait 8 years for EU5 to have the same amount of content and features that EU4 has today.
My recent experience with Paradox sequels (on why releasing a sequel with full features of its predecessor when you can just start from scratch) it's not one of my favorite aspects of it.

Not getting any younger here.

 

[Koopa]

i know vic 3 is kind of a running... theme in the forums but i kind of remember some PD (ex) employee saying vic2 wasn't that big and vic 3 would not sell good enough to justify making it. To be fair he said "I believe" so he did not know either.

also i do not see them making vic 3 as a true successor to vic 2. so no one would be happy. might be too hard for vic newbies like me, and too easy for vic 2 players and so on.

 

[zorkman]

I feel overwhelmed in just contemplating the idea of having to wait 8 years for EU5 to have the same amount of content and features that EU4 has today.
My recent experience with Paradox sequels (on why releasing a sequel with full features of its predecessor when you can just start from scratch) it's not one of my favorite aspects of it.

Not getting any younger here.

I am not sure why people keep saying this. EU4 has been in decline for years, & the really relevant DLC's & patches came in the first 2-3 years. Been downhill ever since. So what 8 years you are implying to I have no idea, as certainly wouldn't want most of the latter stuff tagged onto a new version.

 

[blackbirdgriffi]

I've always thought that given the fact that life cycles of paradox games take ages to develop (even the bare bone I:R on release had years of development behind it) and build new iterations, so by that logic (which maybe be biased or/and unprecise) there is already a dev teams affiliated with an EU5 project type and they just aren't ready to talk about it for a numerous amount of reasons or was this just applicable to CKII and I:R ?

 

[Romanix90]

That is two different things. I would certainly look forward to a new Victoria game, but also EU5, as present version is on its last legs as far as I am concerned. Best days were years ago, which is not a positive sign to keep it going.

Imo it's to early for EU5 and Vic3, well there's a hype for that game. Then again what do i know. My opinion for EU4 is it should be developed if possible as long as it can.

 

[Leivve]

Agreed. When the devs are literally saying they're struggling to add new stuff due to how old the game is... it's time to move on!

Except that's not what they said. They said the game is to old for massive system overhauls. Things like the fort rework or development rework are still within their scope, he was specifically talking about doing things like completely overhauling the mana system; which is so deeply tied into the game that doing so would make the game unfunctional.