Are there actually any data about CK - sales ?
I mean, do we have a chance to see a CK2 ?
I mean, do we have a chance to see a CK2 ?
-
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.
Why start that thread in the public beta forum?
And no, there is no information about whether CK will get a sequel and at least I haven't seen any data on CK sales either. I'd presume the actual retail sales were not all that good, but lately quite a few people seem to have bought an on-line copy from Gamersgate.
And no, there is no information about whether CK will get a sequel and at least I haven't seen any data on CK sales either. I'd presume the actual retail sales were not all that good, but lately quite a few people seem to have bought an on-line copy from Gamersgate.
Grosshaus said:
It'd be nice to know, but certainly the major bugs (esp. the crashy MP) deterred a good many people who otherwise would've signed up. To reach a truly mass market, they'd prolly need to add sieges and player-controlled battle, which would make the game huge, but also possibly a sales phenomenon.
Here's hoping. Lord knows these guys deserve to make a mint for their efforts,
j.
Sales were bad; but as Grosshaus said they seem to be improving.Hen said:
But sales aren't the only thing you have to consider. Paradox had to rush CK because the original developer blew it. As a result there are many things they want to add to the game, or at least fine-tune. From their point of view CK's low sales figures have to be viewed as as a low-ball estimate. It's hard to argue a CK-style game with a full development cycle would only do as well as CK did.
Also keep in mind that a major part of the job is already done. CK's scenarios were not easy to create. For each County you had to find good information on the Count; what he was like personally; what his family was like; etc. This was not an easy task.
IMHO, there will be a CK2 eventually. They've got a suitable engine (EU3), most of the research, and the programmers to get it done. It's just a matter of finding the time. But not soon -- a full development cycle is about 2 years, and they haven't even announced CK2 yet.
After the EU3 hulabaloo is over they'll have to start another game. I'm hoping it's CK2, but it is Vicki's "turn" for a sequal and HoI3 is guaranteed to sell a gazillion copies.
Nick
But how can you further expand a game like HOI2?
I said that back when EU3 was still being planned that a sequel to EUII should totally enhance and improve the experience with the sort of quantum leap that Rockstar Games made when GTA 2 became GTA3. Someone mentioned an idea for a CK 2 that would be a combination of CK with Medieval: Total War, and would be an MMO. Could Paradox ever attempt that sort of project?
I said that back when EU3 was still being planned that a sequel to EUII should totally enhance and improve the experience with the sort of quantum leap that Rockstar Games made when GTA 2 became GTA3. Someone mentioned an idea for a CK 2 that would be a combination of CK with Medieval: Total War, and would be an MMO. Could Paradox ever attempt that sort of project?
I'm hoping that Revolutions will sate the need for a Vicky sequel for the time being. If we're looking for an expansion of existing P'dox games, ie not considering a Napoleon game, then I'd consider CK to be best placed for a reworking.Nick B II said:
There's also the issue of the potential market. I'd imagine that there is a far larger market for a medieval/crusader game than Vicky's timeframe. Indeed within the medieval "genre" CK is the exception in that it did not sell well.
Strategos' Risk said:
I personally wouldn't like such an amalgam. I really enjoyed Crusader Kings and even now, with all of the buzz about Europa Universalis III, EU3, in my humble opinion, seems kind of empty. The depth of CK is something you can't compare, as it focuses on the family per se, actual beings. I truly believe that Crusader Kings is the most underrated game that this company has ever made. Hopefully sales via the internet will increase buzz in it and we'll get to see a truly remarkable sequel.
Lord Costabella said:
I agree, I found CK at Amazon.com along with Hearts of Iron in a jewel case for a steal at $4 and some change. It's a great game and I probably would have bought it retail if Paradox hadn't been so problematic with patches taking a year and a half to fix a game like Hearts of Iron origional. When I get a crap game I become pretty leary of the publishers/developers after that and let's face it in the last few years we've gotten a LOT of crappy games out of the box. I don't care if they do patch them up. When I buy something I expect it to be pretty perfect out of the box, can you imagine buying a box of cracker jacks say only to find the whole box was stale, old, rancid tasting, but, the producers of course said they'd get another box out to us in a year and a half?
But, I must say regardless of the past, CK with it's 1.05 patch or is it 1.04? Is just simply the best Medieval game out there bar none. Makes Rome Total Crap War look like a romper rooms kiddie clickfest of a game. So, I'd really enjoy seeing a CK 2 with perhaps more tweaks to the AI, more things that can happen with ones dynasty and family members (more events for them) which was a big part of the fun an entertainment for me was the things I got to do with family members. I think I forgot about playing the wargame part of it for a couple of three decades there lol. Oh and don't make the Horde so historically unstoppable in CK 2 plz. I'd like to be able to do more than just shovel up the crap they leave in their wake. THanks
Paradox has certainly made some other not so wonderful adaptations of their EU engine (Hoi origional and Victoria and that Crown & Glory one), but, this is definitely not one of them. I don't even have ambitions to get EU III yet I'm enjoying CK too much.
Last edited:
Lord Costabella said:
I completely agree, except about the EUIII thing, I haven't played it, and so far there isn't a paradox game I have which I haven't enjoyed. I don't think making CK2 a merger between MTW and CK would be a good thing, I played Rome Total War a week ago, and my god the AI was terrible the battles weren't as impressive as I remember and the depth was non existant, it completely reminded me of why I play Paradox games.
English Patriot said:I completely agree, except about the EUIII thing, I haven't played it, and so far there isn't a paradox game I have which I haven't enjoyed. I don't think making CK2 a merger between MTW and CK would be a good thing, I played Rome Total War a week ago, and my god the AI was terrible the battles weren't as impressive as I remember and the depth was non existant, it completely reminded me of why I play Paradox games.
Yeah me also. The AI in Rome Total Crap War is so awful the only way to get any challenge out of the game at all is before you start a campaign turn OFF Morale. Then it doesn't matter how much you can stomp the AI, you're going to have population problems because you ARE going to lose a LOT more men per battle than the paultry 18 or so when morale is ON. Play on VH campaign and MEDium combat difficulty when playing with morale off and I guarantee you a challenging game, even though you still "should" win if you're really that good at all. haha
CK now it's AI is pretty good if you don't play "exploits". Yeah, I've found a few things that one can do to run circles around the AI, but, if you're going to use exploits to play a game why do you play anyways? Once you know it's something the AI won't or can't do then you shouldn't do it as well. That's the way I've always played games against the computer when I discovered exploits. And using "wife finder" mods are "exploits" people. lol Now, I play the game as I feel what would have really happened back during those days. I'd go looking for an alliance wife for my offspring, not use a "wife finder" mod so I get the best cookies out there and no using the console to kill your wives off at 25 so you can marry another and have more children....if you're going to knock her off then you HAVE to do it the game way with "assassins". Quit using exploits.
I'm the type of person that looks for things to make the game harder not easier by using exploits. I guess the Nintendo age of gamers is alive and well though because you see it all the time on every forum, almost immediately is "where are the cheat codes....what are the cheat codes....what do I type in for god mode?" lol
I don't think that would do much good. The remaining problems with CK are far too fundamental to be sloved by a mere patch. Even a Revolutions type expansion probably wouldn't be able to fully fix the game.vertinox said:
ComradeOm said:
I say it's worth a try, give it the ole one more for the gipper or the ole college try.
Kellysheroes said:I say it's worth a try, give it the ole one more for the gipper or the ole college try.
?
You're missing his point. We've already got the IPs and sure the game would improve with more work, but in the context of improving gameplay to the extent that many new customers would purchase it at retail, they'll need to (eg) fix military access and naval transport rules - things that would require truly manipulating the source code.
Another, slightly less important, factor is that improving the game by event has already exploded the out-of-the-box system requirements and adding many more is generally frowned upon in the name of lag time. But in time, no doubt, computer performance will improve enough itself for this to be a nonissue.
In a similar vein, though, people above seem to have misunderstood what I was saying about incorporating new features into a CK2. I personally like CK more than those other games too and dislike the Total War series. What I was saying is that there is an additional market and fanbase that could be reached by adding to CK's already phenomenal dynasty system at least some system for fighting our own battles, personalizing names and castles, and conducting sieges. A game like that would be the epitome of the mediaeval period and I for one would pay retail to get ahold of it. MMOGs are a cash sink and generally a waste of time, but CK could become a truly compelling one. The sad thing is that noting these ideas, I still don't really believe pdox would stray so far from their current approach, and so tactical details - even at the simplistic level of KOEI's Genghis Khan or Rot3K or the old Castles series - will prolly be skipped over.
That said, beyond discussing ways to help Pdox sell more copies, we should move our wishlist discussion over to the CK Wishlist thread.
Somehow incorporating the old Castles games into CK would be fantastic. I would definitely be down with that idea.
Anyways, remember my example of a gaming quantum leap- the original GTA was a fun and open-ended game, but it was also simplistic and could run on GBC.
GTA3 was light-years ahead. Not only did it have the whole open-ended kill whoever, do whatever, jack carever thing, but it was in full 3-D, incorporated both third person and first person views, and was simply gigantic. I'm still amazed how Rockstar Games could go from 2D li'l GTA1 and 2 to GTA3. I guess they had a lot of funding.
How could Paradox make that same sort of jump once all of their franchises (I'm thinking especially HOI and EU) reach their upper limit? I guess what I'm saying is that while the engines for those series could be streamlined, more featured added, AI pumped up, etc., eventually you're going to get to a point where if you continue to improve the game within its current model, you're doing not much more than what sports game makers do- add new playable groups each year and slap on a fancier paint job.
GTA3 was light-years ahead. Not only did it have the whole open-ended kill whoever, do whatever, jack carever thing, but it was in full 3-D, incorporated both third person and first person views, and was simply gigantic. I'm still amazed how Rockstar Games could go from 2D li'l GTA1 and 2 to GTA3. I guess they had a lot of funding.
How could Paradox make that same sort of jump once all of their franchises (I'm thinking especially HOI and EU) reach their upper limit? I guess what I'm saying is that while the engines for those series could be streamlined, more featured added, AI pumped up, etc., eventually you're going to get to a point where if you continue to improve the game within its current model, you're doing not much more than what sports game makers do- add new playable groups each year and slap on a fancier paint job.
The old Castles games were pretty awesome. I remember that the Bishop always wanted to play chess with me in those too.
I'd prefer CK, if there ever were to be a sequel, be worked on from the ground up. I think the ideas are great but I found the implementation somewhat lacking. That said, the latest patch makes the game more enjoyable to me and I'm happy to see that others have been buying it up on Gamer's Gate. There really is something to the dynastic family being the center of one's empire. Also, in CK, money was not everything...which is fun!
Strategos' Risk said:
I think that's a great idea on the surface. The weaknesses of MTW (and they're awful) are in the very areas where Paradox games are strongest. The strength of MTW is the battle simulation engine - exactly where Paradox tends to suck.
But I suspect it won't happen. I doubt it's within the Paradox folks skillset to make that sort of battle engine and do it well, and face it, if they did it half-arsed they would have wasted a lot of time and money on something no one would actually want.
I still see a lot of room for improvement in CK without going that route though. And I honestly doubt even that level of fix will be forthcoming, without it becoming CK2. But a man can dream...
Personally I find battle-field level games more than a bit tedious, and I suspect I'm not the only one. There are plenty of other things that could be improved enough to make people buy a sequal. Principly multiplayer (have paradox ever managed to make a good mp system in one of their games?) Though even getting CK2 mp to EU2 levels of mp-playability would be nice.
fasquardon
fasquardon