I love Paradox's games and have played most of them, and I would have to agree with incgamer reveiw, if not the score. Game is about 6.5 right now, and it really is pretty shallow, which is quite sad, since it had/has so much potential....
-
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.
Yea, in a way I feel it's worse then Rome, I don't get why they keep doing the same thing, they really need some innovation. You can only refine till a certain point and just changing the theme doesn't work forever..
It's interesting how diverse sengoku is affiliated, i for myself can't find anything shallow in the gameplay, but i also don't think that rome is a bad game. I too love paradox games and played a lot of them, that said i think sengoku is pretty innovative. It doesn't play like any other paradox title and has a lot of unique elements.
I posted a really bad review. I mean, no tactical battle?! WTF?! Come on, Shogun TW has it wayyy better...
I'm joking, off course...
I'm joking, off course...
Very hard to see the coloured text. Almost took you seriously for a second, then saw the post count and thought you were trolling.
Only saw the "I'm joking, off course..." after hitting quick reply.
Very hard to see the coloured text. Almost took you seriously for a second, then saw the post count and thought you were trolling.
Only saw the "I'm joking, off course..." after hitting quick reply.
You fell right into my trap! Ninja, attacks!
But I gotta say I just spent 60$ on Shogun 2 TW, and I am having a lot of fun out of it. Problem is, I just LOVE paradox's EU3 and all expansions, and I think I'd love Crusader King if it was more modern in its interface, so I have the feeling I'd love Sengoku too.
I'll probably try out the Demo. Play as the Date Clan, like I did in my current TW game :-D
edit: Oh, and on Gamestat, this game has a perfect score of 2x 10/10. So I think some pro reviewers know what they'll be talking about.
Actually, this is completely wrong. Metacritic isn't gaming journalism at all, it is an aggregate of several gaming journalism sites. They don't have their own writers, they leech reviews from everywhere else and show an aggregate value. If anything, Metacritic serves to mediate individual effects in the stats. When harsh reviews show up on Gamespot or other major review sites where they have clearly given the game to the wrong reviewer is when things have gone horribly wrong.
I never said nor implied Metacritic did reviews. I am aware of what Metacritic is. However, Metacritic -does- compile scores from blatantly corrupt sources (Gamespot to name the biggest offender of under the table deals with publishers and developers.), and while it isn't Metacritic's fault that gamers place high value in it, it does perpetuate the issue, and I would urge anyone here not to base a purchase off of a Metacritic score. You'd be better off using it as a hub to find reviews, but I'd ignore it completely and stick with a news source you trust.
There are more than few innovations in Sengoku (Plots being the most famous one). And Sengoku itself, with its own design, is radically different from other PI games.
I don't completely agree with the "shallow" tag here. While I was initially worried about the game being shallow, due to how easily I learned it being familiar with Pdox games, I've grown to enjoy it the more I play it and discover strategies and situations not initially apparent. It certainly needs some more content added in a couple updates, but it's far more playable than most at this stage of release and I'm actually playing it more than I ever did the rest at just such a point.
A good indicator of this is that I often find myself running the game at the slowest setting while patrolling my courtiers and vassals, constantly exploring advantageous marriages, and plotting expansion. So I'm kept pretty busy in comparison to EU3, Vic2, and EU Rome. With those others, I turn up the speed after the initial setup period, then just sit & watch while occasionally giving an order, waiting for something to happen and twiddling my thumbs. Sengoku is the only other game besides Crusader Kings in which I'm usually kept busy by keeping up on my court while the game is running. That's the best praise possible in the comparison between all PI's own games, as the long do-nothing periods of some are the biggest drawback.
I'm saying 7.5 right now. More content (more plot types, character decisions & events, etc.) would fill it out to greatness, aside from some tweaking & minor bug fixes, and it could easily achieve CK status at that point hitting 8.5 or even 9.
Lol "shallow". I guess everyone is dumbing down their grand strategy games lately, from Civ to Paradox. I think this game is thoroughly enjoyable as a simplified version of a Paradox title and if it makes Paradox games more accessible, draws more people in, and ultimately gives Paradox deeper pocket books, then we all benefit as they'll have more resources to build the games we know and love. Thankfully there is a lot of breadth in the depth and style of the different PI games. They can't all be Dwarf Fortress.
I would disagree, especially with the word radically. Viewed from a very general point of view all PI are the same, real-time grand strategy games with ledgers and abstract battles. That would be the same to say as that all shooters are the same of course, or any other genre for that matter.
What I'm asking for however, is that they thoroughly break open there own format and innovate it's gameplay mechanics.
I'm aware that there are plenty of people that like it just the way it is, otherwise they wouldn't stay afloat, but I feel they become more and more greedy by releasing a product that is essentially a dumbed down extract, hopefully, from Crusader Kings 2 and Europa Universalis. Same as Rome.
Rome had potential and there were even developers within the team that would have loved to work further on that idea, but they just left it hang there. They seem to be on an automated pilot, especially with this one.
I mean it's one thing that you keep refining and expanding up on your original concepts, and that you let people pay for these updates, but another thing to throw out "unfinished" games without the intention to ever do something worthwhile with it. Sengoku tastes like a Big Mac to me.
When you talk about radical differences in say a shooter, I don't expect other ways to kill a monster, or shoot or whatever, I expect another feeling, another way of thinking, I expect a radically new experience. And I haven't felt a radically new experience playing Sengoku to be honest, but that might be just me.
Hack, I think Magna Mundi even will be more of a radically different experience to Europa Universalis then Sengoku is to Europa Universalis.
And that's partly because I believe MM will be much more love-crafted then Sengoku was, or most games in the paradox interactive arsenal.
So yea, I don't expect the world from PI, but I think they could and should explore new avenues of presenting the Grand Strategy genre and put more heart into there games and not go on what has worked before alone...
What I'm asking for however, is that they thoroughly break open there own format and innovate it's gameplay mechanics.
I'm aware that there are plenty of people that like it just the way it is, otherwise they wouldn't stay afloat, but I feel they become more and more greedy by releasing a product that is essentially a dumbed down extract, hopefully, from Crusader Kings 2 and Europa Universalis. Same as Rome.
Rome had potential and there were even developers within the team that would have loved to work further on that idea, but they just left it hang there. They seem to be on an automated pilot, especially with this one.
I mean it's one thing that you keep refining and expanding up on your original concepts, and that you let people pay for these updates, but another thing to throw out "unfinished" games without the intention to ever do something worthwhile with it. Sengoku tastes like a Big Mac to me.
When you talk about radical differences in say a shooter, I don't expect other ways to kill a monster, or shoot or whatever, I expect another feeling, another way of thinking, I expect a radically new experience. And I haven't felt a radically new experience playing Sengoku to be honest, but that might be just me.
Hack, I think Magna Mundi even will be more of a radically different experience to Europa Universalis then Sengoku is to Europa Universalis.
And that's partly because I believe MM will be much more love-crafted then Sengoku was, or most games in the paradox interactive arsenal.
So yea, I don't expect the world from PI, but I think they could and should explore new avenues of presenting the Grand Strategy genre and put more heart into there games and not go on what has worked before alone...
the reviews that gave the lowest ratings were:
"A fairly shameful display if you ask me. I spent thirty minutes flying around the map wondering what was going on. I should've learned from the shoddy demo that it wasn't worth my money. Refund?"
this guy only reviewed sengoku. gave it a 1
and
"I saw an ad for this so thought I'd download the Sengoku demo as its out this week. I spent my lunchtime trying to play it but had absolutely no idea what I had to do. There was a loads of text to read which is fine I guess, but no instructions so I ended up just randomly clicking on things. Couldn't work out who I was! The Japan map looked quite nice but there wasn't much happening. A tutorial would have been much more useful I think but I just couldn't get into it like Civ 4 and The Sims. I was just hoping to play with some ninjas! Oh well. Maybe if they release an easier demo or something Ill give it another go."
this one gave it a 2. he/she did not even buy the game
rather unreliable reviews imo. dont lose hope guys
"A fairly shameful display if you ask me. I spent thirty minutes flying around the map wondering what was going on. I should've learned from the shoddy demo that it wasn't worth my money. Refund?"
this guy only reviewed sengoku. gave it a 1
and
"I saw an ad for this so thought I'd download the Sengoku demo as its out this week. I spent my lunchtime trying to play it but had absolutely no idea what I had to do. There was a loads of text to read which is fine I guess, but no instructions so I ended up just randomly clicking on things. Couldn't work out who I was! The Japan map looked quite nice but there wasn't much happening. A tutorial would have been much more useful I think but I just couldn't get into it like Civ 4 and The Sims. I was just hoping to play with some ninjas! Oh well. Maybe if they release an easier demo or something Ill give it another go."
this one gave it a 2. he/she did not even buy the game
rather unreliable reviews imo. dont lose hope guys
well these guys who reviewed sengoku are dumb, how they don't know who are they playing when you can see your leader's portrait and your clan crest, and you can even click those two things to find out more about your clan leader and clanthe reviews that gave the lowest ratings were:
"A fairly shameful display if you ask me. I spent thirty minutes flying around the map wondering what was going on. I should've learned from the shoddy demo that it wasn't worth my money. Refund?"
this guy only reviewed sengoku. gave it a 1
and
"I saw an ad for this so thought I'd download the Sengoku demo as its out this week. I spent my lunchtime trying to play it but had absolutely no idea what I had to do. There was a loads of text to read which is fine I guess, but no instructions so I ended up just randomly clicking on things. Couldn't work out who I was! The Japan map looked quite nice but there wasn't much happening. A tutorial would have been much more useful I think but I just couldn't get into it like Civ 4 and The Sims. I was just hoping to play with some ninjas! Oh well. Maybe if they release an easier demo or something Ill give it another go."
this one gave it a 2. he/she did not even buy the game
rather unreliable reviews imo. dont lose hope guys
they are just not trying to learn the game and randomly review the game
What a dumb and insulting comment for a polished game that is even lower priced than usual, and for a very customer loyal company.
And yes they use golden spoons at paradox and are filthy rich giants of the gaming industry.
The problem was very simple: people weren't buying Rome. If they had you would have seen a number of expansions by now.
MM is a very different project. It's a fan project which means that A) they are more developers on it than our three production teams combined, and B) they have been working on for a couple of years. If we did the same as a company we would have to charge you 100-150 euro for the game just to break even...
Rome was a terrible game though. I even made the mistake of buying it twice. More fool me.
And Captain Gars is right about MM. Those guys had many concepts already fleshed out before they even began the development and they are still taking their sweet time. Paradox has to employ a bunch of people to do work that will sell for more than what it cost to hire them (among other costs) and need to build the engine to run the game and do all the research and design and marketing. There is a pretty large amount of work even without writing a single line of code.
While I have been fairly vocal about my displeasure in a few aspects of Sengoku I do have to admit that they do consistently seem to get the majority of it right. They ARE a good company who is happy to look after their fans but they are still a company and we need to be mindful of exactly what that is. They exist to make money; making money by producing an excellent gaming experience but still there to make money.
And Captain Gars is right about MM. Those guys had many concepts already fleshed out before they even began the development and they are still taking their sweet time. Paradox has to employ a bunch of people to do work that will sell for more than what it cost to hire them (among other costs) and need to build the engine to run the game and do all the research and design and marketing. There is a pretty large amount of work even without writing a single line of code.
While I have been fairly vocal about my displeasure in a few aspects of Sengoku I do have to admit that they do consistently seem to get the majority of it right. They ARE a good company who is happy to look after their fans but they are still a company and we need to be mindful of exactly what that is. They exist to make money; making money by producing an excellent gaming experience but still there to make money.
I don't have a numbers but from what I've heard it seems to be selling pretty good.