New article from usgamer expand on 12 questions

[JosunUrashima]

maybe fans will just blindly follow no matter how bad things get. my point with bringing up How people DIDNT follow with imperator before they bent over backwards to regain player interest, was to illustrate that its not a guarantee at this point.

Part of the problem however in these two is that Imperator didn't have a strong standing fanbase to build upon. The fanbase for CK2 is both large enough and diverse enough (and full of plenty of more casual players who are just generally excited about new game) that it can easily handle things better.

Essentially, for it to actually matter would require CK3 to be more of a flop than Imperator was.

Precisely the reason you'd have thought they would have been reworked and improved for CK III. Of all the features either cut or not brought back, this is the biggest disappointment to me. This game has been in development for something like four or five years, so you'd think it would have made the checklist. Nomads and republics I can understand, but the Pope and papacy were key to both crusaders and kings, so for his mechanics to be overlooked on release is a real shame.

This is one reason why I'm not sure about the game. You'd think that at minimum they could have imported the mechanics for them from CK2. Sure, the mechanics for such don't work as well as they could, but they're at least there in the game.