Next DLC should be premium tutorial.

[unmerged(287474)]

Heres how it works:

All of the features that you could possibly imagine in the game would have a short 1 - 2 minute walkthrough with audio comments explaining the feature in depth, how each feature interacts with other aspects of the game, and demonstrating it in action. This is needed because this and every other pdox game is extremely complex and can be very confusing.

Because this involves explicitly defining the intended purpose of the feature and demonstrating it in action, this DLC would double as a massive bug fix, as you can't very well define and demonstrate something that doesn't work.

While pdox is doing this, they might take this opportunity to create automated unit testing for their game systems and scripts.

I KNOW some of you may think this is a troll, as the more entitled owner might say "this should be free and standard", but I hate documenting as well and I have billed hours to customers for documentation. You'll pay for music, faces, and flags, well consider that artists enjoy making art, and coders hate documenting and writing unit tests.

Ok so I know it couldn't be DLC for the game itself, but maybe give some kind of discount on the next game. Pay $10 to crowdfund this, get $11 off the next pdox game.

Only thing I can't really think of how it would work would be who would be the authority on what features/scripts get automated unit testing and video documentation. And also who decides when the testing and documentation is satisfactory.

 

[Prime624]

No. Tutorials/manuals should be free. Big fixes should be free.

 

[najd101]

Agree, this should be free. Though just watch a few let's plays on YouTube.

 

[brxbrx]

After a single game, you pretty much know the ropes well enough. The game's tutorials were pretty daunting, but you can pick it up fairly quickly as you go.

And yeah, tutorials should not be DLC. That's messed up.

 

[l3ol3o]

A better tutorial is a great idea but there is no way any company could get away with charging for a tutorial. It would have to be free.

 

[Kanaric]

Agree, this should be free. Though just watch a few let's plays on YouTube.

the only tutorial needed.

Its almost like people put no effort into learning games now when they are easier than ever to play and learn.

 

[unmerged(287474)]

the only tutorial needed.

Its almost like people put no effort into learning games now when they are easier than ever to play and learn.

I understand its almost absurd to sell a tutorial, but if thats the only way to get one, they should do it. Jack the price up of the game or something. And Kanaric do I even need to say how wrong you are?

 

[Westernesse]

They had a pretty decent explanation of the major things at launch. As far as strategy goes, I'm not a big fan of tutorials telling your how to to play the game, part of CK2 is the different play styles will you be a tyrant or beloved duke? A tutorial that goes beyond mechanics makes people try and follow it rather then their own style. I love reading one forum topic which states you should never land your children/dynasty and another saying your should only/always land your children/dynasty and both of them are talking about playing Western Europe Catholics.

Do you play a loyal and peaceful ruler or an opportunistic warmonger? I could easily see a tutorial misleading people into thinking you need to conquer land and expand to up your prestige when you can get lots of allies on a ducal/county scale fight in small scale wars as an ally and dominate the war score so you get 80 prestige from your contribution and the bonus prestige from being an ally in every battle.

 

[ticattack]

And Kanaric do I even need to say how wrong you are?

Yes. You do. I'm certainly not seeing it as self-evident.

Games are, in many ways, easier to learn than they were in earlier eras. That's not to say that any modern game is easier to learn than any older game - some games are simply more complex than others - but there are many modern or semi-modern innovations (tooltips, loading screen hints, the little advisor/reminder things present in some strategy games) that aren't there in older games that change learning from "trial and error" to "mouseover and review". You can still stuff up, and you probably will for your first few games, but CK2, out of all Paradox games, tends to lay the bulk of things out for viewing by the player.

Consider what you're proposing. I'm a new player. I've never heard of Paradox before. I throw down good money for a product, then see that this "evil company" is demanding more money before they show me how to play the damned game I just bought! I have no knowledge of Paradox, no established loyalty to them. How many people will give up right there, ragequit and not come back? Even those that don't will either (a) slug through without the tutorials (like they do now), or (b) buy them begrudgingly. Or, (c) go watch the runthrough of the tutorial someone uploaded to YouTube.

Or let's look at it from the point of view of the existing fan base, the forums. Did you see the backlash against SI, because people didn't want to use it, and therefore didn't want Paradox "wasting time" (I realise they weren't, but that was/is a common misconception) working on something they didn't consider valuable. Consider the Paradox forums. Can you imagine the nerdrage that would erupt if the devs came out tomorrow and announced something like this? The thought makes me cringe.

So, this is an idea that will have one of three effects on new players: turn them off the game, be ignored by them, or make their first impression of Paradox / the game in question "Surprise! Hidden costs!". Meanwhile, it will cause several hundred sizeable posts to be written detailing how, exactly, this is the worst thing that Paradox has ever done, and the devs have betrayed everything that ever made them good because they want a bigger swimming pool filled with gold and diamonds, drinking a cocktail of French champagne and the sweet, sweet tears of their fans, or whatever's being accused at this point.

 

[Zireael]

I'd want an improved tutorial, but not as DLC.

 

[nestorius]

The tutorial is ok not great but ok. Tbh the game is too complicated for a tutorial to teach you everything, you need to start playing personally a tutorial campaign would be better but not as a dlc

 

[Spartanlemur]

Better idea - if the community want better tutorials then why not start a youtube channel posting user-made ones which fit the bill? Personally, I'd rather just see pagans/republics.

 

[Olaus Petrus]

To be honest I didn't even realize that the CKII has tutorial, because I usually skip tutorials of Paradox games and learn by playing what new features each game has (I've been playing Paradox games since EUI). After one or two test games as medium sized realm I know how the game works and I'm ready for full campaign. So it's not surprising to learn, that I wouldn't pay for premium tutorial, because I don't even use the regular one. And I already know how CKII works.

 

[unmerged(287474)]

The tutorial is ok not great but ok. Tbh the game is too complicated for a tutorial to teach you everything, you need to start playing personally a tutorial campaign would be better but not as a dlc

If something is too complex to make a tutorial for, then it is admitting that it is too complex to even test.

I'll give you an example of where this idea falls apart with something as simple as demense size. You think you know how its calculated? You're wrong, whatever you might think it is, incorrect. This is one of the few numbers in the game that actually tells you how its calculated with tooltips. The tooltips are even wrong. Dig up some of my earliest posts on this forum and you'll find my scientific discovery of the true demense size formula, which clearly was not tested. Some of my other posts on this forum detail how certain scripts in the game are broken.
Spreading vicious rumors still turns your own spymaster gay even after I reported it and at least two pdox posters replied to the thread.

Sorry but theres no such thing as too complicated for a tutorial, theres only such thing as too simple for a tutorial. Mario bros is too simple for a tutorial. Pdox games must greatly improve their tutorials in the future or they'll never expand their customer base beyond the niche we are. I'm part of several other gaming communities where i've witnessed noobs saying how impossible some games are to play. Pdox games and the X (space game) series are in competition for which one is more impossible to play. Neither are really too terribly complex, they simply fail at teaching the player how to play. Failing horribly. And if the devs ever look back and wonder if there is anything they could have done to expand their customer base, yes there is, and they continue to shoot themselves in the feet by making new games and game systems that don't educate.

 

[Miinda]

no. Tutorials/manuals should be free. Big fixes should be free.

qft

 

[Prime624]

^^Dude. He and everybody else is just trying to say that you can't learn the game through tutorials, and that they don't want Paradox to waste their time making tutorials. Even if you know how primogeniture works in theory, you never learn how tricky it can be without playing.

 

[Prime624]

^^Dude. He and everybody else is just trying to say that you can't learn the game through tutorials, and that they don't want Paradox to waste their time making tutorials. Even if you know how primogeniture works in theory, you never learn how tricky it can be without playing.

Sorry. Meant the guy above you and my browser won't let me edit.

 

[nestorius]

really as far as I know the demesne limit is your plus half your wives stewerdship divided by 4 plus your rank plus the legalism (plus a bonus from some laws) I am actually pretty sure I know how it works.

I played a little bit of CK1 though tiny compared to other games so it helped and I went through the tutorials which actually were quite good. But tbh I am still learning now. And while the demesne limit I get I still dont get decadance.

I think the CK2 tutorial is fine but everyone to their own.

This idea is the case for any game. for instance in World of warcraft you just need the basics but the tutorials really dont help you to be a good raider or good pvp, or which gear is useful which arent what builds are a must. I agree that the demesne limit is not the most clear value and several other issues could be better explained, I also would really like a tax breakdown for instance, but I have found that the tutorials are enough to start playing the game, which is really all that is needed.

 

[ticattack]

If something is too complex to make a tutorial for, then it is admitting that it is too complex to even test.

These things are, as far as I can see, unrelated. Testing, unless you're using some sense of the word of which I am unaware, is making sure something works as (a) it should, or (b) you think it does (Paradox tests in the sense of A, when you checked the numbers, you did it in the sense of B). You either already know how it's meant to work, or you're aiming to find out how it does. All that either requires are analytical ability and patience. Making a tutorial involve more than that - if you just dump out the algoritms and formulas, that's not a tutorial, it's a textbook. A (good) tutorial is harder to make, as it requires guiding someone through a number of steps - and keeping their interest as you do so!

That's like saying that solving a murder is akin to writing a murder mystery. There's probably a chunk of overlap, but they don't have the same goals and have many skills and considerations unique to one and not the other.

I'll give you an example of where this idea falls apart with something as simple as demense size. You think you know how its calculated? You're wrong, whatever you might think it is, incorrect. This is one of the few numbers in the game that actually tells you how its calculated with tooltips. The tooltips are even wrong. Dig up some of my earliest posts on this forum and you'll find my scientific discovery of the true demense size formula, which clearly was not tested.

There's a few tooltips that are wrong. I understand that some of them were once right, but the mechanics were changed and the text not. I don't which of these are affected. However, if you had to perform "scientific" tests to determine how far off it was, it must have been in the general region of correct.

A new player can sit down and go "oh, okay, I get some from stewardship. So, higher stewardship means I get more?". It may be wrong, but that's more of a localisation issue / bugfix than proof of the complete failure of tooltips.

Further, I think you and I are using different definitions of "tutorial". There wouldn't be tutorial on demesne size. That's a single message, maybe two, in the context of a larger tutorial. "Your demesne is the holdings you control personaly, as opposed to through vassals. You have a maximum demesne size, depending on a variety of factors, primarily your rank (Count, Duke, King or Emperor), your stewardship rating (and that of your wife / husband), and the legalism technology in your capital. Some other factors may also play a part: for example, under Gavelkind succession, you can have a larger demesne. If you go over your maximum demesne size, you will suffer increasing instability and unrest from your vassals and people."

Some of my other posts on this forum detail how certain scripts in the game are broken.
Spreading vicious rumors still turns your own spymaster gay even after I reported it and at least two pdox posters replied to the thread.

These are bug reports. These take time to fix. One of the devs posted somewhere within the last week or so (I forget who or where), pointing out that, even if the "fix" would only take 5-10 minutes, there might be a backlog of a hundred of these pointed out by the players. And that's not counting those that are fixed before shipping, the ones we never see. So, it's possible that these problems are on some internal to-do list, and will appear in 1.09, or 1.10 or whatever.

Sorry but theres no such thing as too complicated for a tutorial, theres only such thing as too simple for a tutorial. Mario bros is too simple for a tutorial.

Really? I think you're looking at it from the eyes of the informed. Grab someone who's never seen a video game before, give them a NES with SMB1. They start, hit the buttons, work out that the arrows move them and one of the other ones makes them jump. The other red button doesn't seem to do anything. They move left, can't. Fail one. They move right, and come across some bricks and gold question marks. They jump on top of the bricks and try running over the gold question mark. Nothing happens. Maybe they hit the "nothing" button. Nothing happens. How are they supposed to intuit that they're meant to slam their head against the bottom of the thing? What logical leap takes you there? Must just be scenery, they figure, and move on, reasoning they can come back later (they can't, of course, but no matter).

They encounter an angry-looking brown mushroom that's taller than Mario. They charge! And die. They restart, and re-find the goomba. They realise now that touching him is deadly, and so jump over him and progress - they worked out how to overcome the baddies! They get past a few more goombas, a couple of cheerful-looking turtles - some of these were tricky, almost like the game designer didn't want you to be able to dodge past them all! - and make their way to a staircase, with a steep cliff on the other side. They ponder how to climb down the other side safely - it does appear to be a long fall! - but can find nothing. In the end, they try just walking slowly off the edge, and find that the fall doesn't kill them. Huzzah! They run past the decorative flag pole, and into the castle.

That's one approach to Mario with no tutorial. It's simple to us because we've had it for twenty-odd years. Try to look at something like that with truly fresh eyes, and you'll find there's a lot of knowledge that you have that you don't even consider "knowledge".

 

[unmerged(512626)]

Hmmm...not really sure I'm for it, but in defense of the OP's idea there sure are a number of overpriced guides out there for games...many of them not so great. I suppose this is similar just a different medium. Before the (public) Net and print guides, I remember making $1.99 a minute (or similar) calls to Sierra -- back in the day, for tips.