The future of EU4 and Paradox games, a schism?

[TheMeInTeam]

You're attributing it to the group of people who think that the game is being casualized in order to undermine that position in favor of dragging your pet peeves into an unrelated thread.

What you're claiming is false. I did not and have no intention of attributing that argument to people who think the game is being "casualized". I'm:

1. Refuting the notion that the game is actually being casualized, because its increasingly opaque nature is the opposite of making a game for casual players.
2. Giving my own reason why I perceive there to be a growing schism.

A perceived reason for a schism is relevant, and what I'm getting from you here is approaching fallacious itself.

 

[Pornek]

I think much more people agree with me, whether it has to do with Paradox or not, there is a general consensus that popular game franchises are becoming washed down and marketed at the casual gamer for profit. Many people would agree game series like COD, Halo and Total War(all revered as quality games) all went down the path Paradox is going now so by proxy I have much people in agreement. I'm not saying go back when you weren't successful but why would you would leave behind what made you successful in the first place, just so you could sell out? and opt for quantity vs quality; things said games franchies have all done. It's not a guess that they Paradox would follow the same path, just look at other companies who went with the MP casual gamer path, the evidence is everywhere suggesting my conclusion is more likely. current examples take a good look at HOI4.

Or you could argue, they do it because they dont want to sell you the same game with better graphics.

 

[Sgt.Pepper1947]

But probably not, I'm mean why would they do HOI4 based on HOI3 graphics? just seems straight forward.

 

[Darkrenown]

I've barely played CK2 and haven't bought any Paradox DLCs since the Rajas of India DLC I eagerly bought with great anticipation rendered the game unable to play on my and many other computers, in addition to containing many problems that should have been spotted almost instantly by any playtesters and others which were not instantly obvious but I felt should and would have been found with any adequate testing. That was three DLCs in a row I consider to have been released in a state that made me feel like an idiot for buying them at release instead of waiting a few months for patches and 75% off sales, and three was my limit (particularly as I've seen nothing from Paradox that indicates they feel there was even a problem, or that they plan to do anything to prevent it happening in future).

Don't want to touch on a lot of the stuff in this thread, but we really haven't been happy with the quality of some DLCs. I was unhappy to the point of doing 100+ hours of QA on RoI in my spare time both before and after release. But finding bugs doesn't equal having time to fix them, and not all bugs are even present for the entire testing period. On the plus side, team CK2 has an additional programmer now, and I plan to test Charlie myself earlier in the process.

I also linked MeinTeam's post #101 about unclear UI stuff, sent the link to our UX guy although he is aware of many of them already.

 

[zodium]

What you're claiming is false. I did not and have no intention of attributing that argument to people who think the game is being "casualized". I'm:

1. Refuting the notion that the game is actually being casualized, because its increasingly opaque nature is the opposite of making a game for casual players.
2. Giving my own reason why I perceive there to be a growing schism.

A perceived reason for a schism is relevant, and what I'm getting from you here is approaching fallacious itself.

Okay, great. Since no one disagrees with the idea that the game rules should be fully/sufficiently exposed via the UI, I guess we're done here. Good job, team!

Edit: No you can't Darkrenown, you're not supposed to be reading these forums or taking community feedback into account!

 

[Olaus Petrus]

(I never did play EU1)

N00b!

Nope.



Who did I attribute this to? That's *my* argument as to why there is a schism, and it's used to refute the notion that this game being "casualized" is the issue or cause of the schism here. After doing this, I pointed out that the types of players who defend opaque mechanics are annoying. I never claimed that such happened in this thread or implied that the OP or person I quoted made such a statement. Whose position am I undermining again? The supposed arguments made outside this thread? But their position is the one I'm refuting, and is the source of the schism I'm alleging. That's not a strawman Zodium, that's an attempt to pin the schism on something different than the OP claims is its source.



It's a good thing that the posts I called out in saying that aren't on this thread then, isn't it? Which player am I attributing what argument to again?

When others are arguing about schism which doesn't interest you, then it's best to invent your own schism. Thumbs up.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

When others are arguing about schism which doesn't interest you, then it's best to invent your own schism.

I disagree on the source of the schism, and replace it with my own schism. I master the schism, for I am the schism. Or am I.

Okay, great. Since no one disagrees with the idea that the game rules should be fully/sufficiently exposed via the UI, I guess we're done here. Good job, team!

^_^. Fallacy finger pointing indeed, such good times all around.

Edit:

PI has been pretty good about its community presence, Johan's gaffes aside lol. But while I greatly disagree with some of his design choices, I do applaud that he was willing to state his mind. I feel like he got hammered unfairly for articulating his design intention poorly.

The UI stuff is particularly frustrating because the game has a lot of fun in it, and that stuff just hurts it regardless of true newbie or "most hours in game". The community actually understanding the mechanics would go a long way towards steering criticism and suggestions wrt them. How many times in various threads have different posters had to actually explain the mechanic functionality and what it does first, in order to make their point understandable?

I don't like the Call of Duty model, but at least from a business perspective I can understand it. Even if you do choose that route though, please make the game clear/consistent. CoD doesn't hold my attention long, but before they started building sight delay into the engine (and having it often blamed on "lag compensation", which had issues as well on top of the fact that a person rounding the corner on split screen would see around it sooner than a person aiming for them), it was fun to pick up with friends now and then.

 

[Sgt.Pepper1947]

I think much more people agree with me, whether it has to do with Paradox or not, there is a general consensus that popular game franchises are becoming washed down and marketed at the casual gamer for profit. Many people would agree game series like COD, Halo and Total War(all revered as quality games) all went down the path Paradox is going now so by proxy I have much people in agreement. I'm not saying go back when you weren't successful but why would you would leave behind what made you successful in the first place, just so you could sell out? and opt for quantity vs quality; things said games franchise have all done. It's not a guess that they Paradox would follow the same path, just look at other companies who went with the MP casual gamer path, the evidence is everywhere suggesting my conclusion is more likely. current examples take a good look at HOI4.

 

[Junuxx]

I fear Paradox (/Johan?) has become a little misguided and obstinate in a Peter Jackson way.

Yes, LotR was an awesome masterpiece which received universal acclaim. But it seems he has started to believe that it was just his own skill that made it so. He desperately wants to repeat his success with The Hobbit. However, he doesn't realize it's missing some of the factors that made the earlier work so fantastic, and stopped listening to his advisors. And most of all there are few new ideas, and what's new sadly isn't really all that great.

 

[RobRoy3]

I also linked MeinTeam's post #101 about unclear UI stuff, sent the link to our UX guy although he is aware of many of them already.

Time to touch up that post! Expand, clarify, but brevity is the heart of good communication!

I'd like to petition that the UI stop misleading me regarding the DIP point cost for peace deals.

 

[Pornek]

But probably not, I'm mean why would they do HOI4 based on HOI3 graphics? just seems straight forward.

I dont get what you're trying to say.

My point is: Why would you buy HoI4 if it is the very same game as HoI 3?
Do you actually care about the graphics ? I dont, its nice and I sometimes enjoy looking at them, but what makes the game is the mechanic. If you do care then good for you - you just got a graphic update.
If you dont care there is no reason to buy the game.

 

[CrabHelmet]

Don't want to touch on a lot of the stuff in this thread, but we really haven't been happy with the quality of some DLCs. I was unhappy to the point of doing 100+ hours of QA on RoI in my spare time both before and after release. But finding bugs doesn't equal having time to fix them, and not all bugs are even present for the entire testing period. On the plus side, team CK2 has an additional programmer now, and I plan to test Charlie myself earlier in the process.

I also linked MeinTeam's post #101 about unclear UI stuff, sent the link to our UX guy although he is aware of many of them already.

Genuine question not intended to be mean or anything, but why are the DLCs released if the development team isn't happy with the state they're in?

 

[Sgt.Pepper1947]

I dont get what you're trying to say.

My point is: Why would you buy HoI4 if it is the very same game as HoI 3?
Do you actually care about the graphics ? I dont, its nice and I sometimes enjoy looking at them, but what makes the game is the mechanic. If you do care then good for you - you just got a graphic update.
If you dont like me, I wouldn't have any reason to buy the game.

What was your point? you just responded with an ambiguous "maybe they just want to sell the new graphics"?(not word for word), which I thought was just unrelated to the the topic at discussion.

 

[NCreepy]

Genuine question not intended to be mean or anything, but why are the DLCs released if the development team isn't happy with the state they're in?

Because the person With the final say knows that they will sell anyways

 

[Pornek]

What was your point? you just responded with an ambiguous "maybe they just want to sell the new graphics"?(not word for word), which I thought was just unrelated to the the topic at discussion.

becoming washed down and marketed at the casual gamer for profit. [...]t's not a guess that they Paradox would follow the same path

According to you changes to the game is to get profit and overall reduces the quality of those games.

I am asking you. Would you buy the very same game without changes but better graphics for another 40€/$40 ?

Or you could argue, they do it because they dont want to sell you the same game with better graphics.

 

[NCreepy]

According to you changes to the game is to get profit and overall reduces the quality of those games.

I am asking you. Would you buy the very same game without changes but better graphics for another 40€/$40 ?

Because as the years go by new people grow up and buy new games with better graphics and they despice old games with shit Graphics perhaps.

 

[Olaus Petrus]

Genuine question not intended to be mean or anything, but why are the DLCs released if the development team isn't happy with the state they're in?

My guess is that people would complain more about delayed release than about buggy DLC, which gets it's first hotfix couple of days after the release. Also it's probably bigger hassle to renegotiate the release date again with the distributors than release hotfix patches.

 

[Sgt.Pepper1947]

According to you changes to the game is to get profit and overall reduces the quality of those games.

I am asking you. Would you buy the very same game without changes but better graphics for another 40€/$40 ?

In the specific case with HOI4, yes I would buy it but I think HOI4 is a example of were Paradox is heading and is the biggest reach so far by Paradox to get a bigger audience. However if Paradox were to keep washing down the complexity of their games just so they can appeal to the MP casual gamer even with improved graphics then no, I wouldn't buy their games anymore.

 

[grommile]

Because as the years go by new people grow up and buy new games with better graphics and they despice old games with shit Graphics perhaps.

HoI3 and Vic2 both have far more aesthetically satisfactory maps than EU4 or CK2, if you ask me.

(Especially V2, whose map graphics are strongly thematically appropriate for the subject matter in a way that CK2 or EU4's aren't really.)

 

[NCreepy]

I don't know too much about those particular games as i don't like the setting, as in too resent history wise