Was this joke even tested at all?

[TripleAgent]

i do not think there is a single developer at any paradox studio, nor any game director or other leader who thinks money for shareholder is the top and only priority. we are here to make games we like ourselves and are proud of, while making sure we can do it in the future.

Can you really blame people for feeling that way when it seems like games are forced out the door with gamebreaking bugs, rather than delaying it for a few weeks to iron out things like the performance issues that prevented many players from even finishing the game?


I get it's a labor of love for the devs. I don't think anyone thinks the devs want anything else but to make a great, fun game. But I think our issue might be with the culture of PDX. You're aware of the reputation. Fantastic games that are often messy and broken but end up being swiftly patched and expanded into iconic, long-lasting gems. But it seems like over and over again we see these releases where the game is utterly broken in ways that are obvious after playing for an hour.

I (and most others here) don't think the devs are incompetent or greedy or anything. But I think that whatever the process is at PDX that decides when games are fit for release and when they aren't needs major fixing.

 

[Aliquam]

One can only wonder what drives to repeat over and over in this thread that "Paradox is doing things right since they are making money!". People in this thread are players and you keep imprecating them to look at it through the eyes of the shareholders. You might have some point you are trying to make or a lesson you are trying to teach ("you are part of the problem"), which would be vain and futile, you may be a troll or, worse, an ancap. Maybe you're just the kind of person that takes great joy to explain people that it's their fault they are getting fooled and that you are way more clever than them because you can see behind the veil, which would be sad. Anyway people in this thread are just distraught and concerned about a game they care about, which make them not care the slightest about your argument. I probably shouldn't have fed you, but hey, I can't play Vicky 3 so I'm kind of bored.

One can only wonder what drives people to think of the "company - product - customer" trio in emotional terms. The guy you quoted didn't dwell in apologetism, he said it's just a matter of fact that Paradox isn't your friend, it's a company, and if a company assesses it can earn bigger profit by riding on the fanbase's sentiment than adhering to quality, it will absolutely do it.
It's an absolute failure of the community when you have people going out of their way to warn others about some "review bombing", behaving as if they were righteous defenders of a sound cause.

 

[Ir0nSlug]

One can only wonder what drives people to think of the "company - product - customer" trio in emotional terms. The guy you quoted didn't dwell in apologetism, he said it's just a matter of fact that Paradox isn't your friend, it's a company, and if a company assesses it can earn bigger profit by riding on the fanbase's sentiment than adhering to quality, it will absolutely do it.
It's an absolute failure of the community when you have people going out of their way to warn others about some "review bombing", behaving as if they were righteous defenders of a sound cause.

Oh I agree with that, V3 is the first and probably last Pdx game I buy on release and I'm seriously considering never buying another one of their products either, as I don't want to support these practices. But look throught the thread, the guy just keep posting the same thing over and over. I mean we get it.

 

[OllyOllyOxenFree]

now i am not sure working on the v3 team, nor am i involved in making decisions for them, but..

i do not think there is a single developer at any paradox studio, nor any game director or other leader who thinks money for shareholder is the top and only priority. we are here to make games we like ourselves and are proud of, while making sure we can do it in the future.

/ a founder of paradox, a non insignificant shareholder, and veteran of 20+ gsgs.

Oh hey, Johan didn't see you there...

How's EU4 been recently?

 

[UBERWASP]

I think they don’t play their game much. They play sure but do they play enough to realise these problems themselves? I think devs are most suitable to be „play-tester” they should play their own games more.

 

[gkbba]

I find it hard to believe that it was tested "thoroughly", or at least thoroughly on a meaningful non-specific issue hunting way. Any player, after 30 minutes of playing the core game loop, would have noticed that the Industrialists IG. Arguably the most important early-mid game IG to bolster besides intelligentsia, is not growing and that you are locked out of most of the game mechanics [...]

is it though? I dont wanna excuse the bugged release (they are professionals, and should be able to playtest thouroughly enough for something like that to not happen), but would "any player, after 30 minutes of playing" noticed it?

I played the game for a few hours after the patch released with Ottomans. I noticed the industrialists being very weak which bothered me bc I wanted to pass "Interventionism" (needed to pass a better tax law for the bureaucratic reform tanzimat), and they somehow didnt grew BUT: did I realize it was because of a bug instead of a intented change?
honestly, no.

you dont start with a lot of industry as ottomans and doing the urbanization tanzimat rather disencourages building industry heavy at first (interestingly enough and arguably a balancing issue: urbanization fast and wide is done easier with mines and construction sector - they have far better urbanization per construction point rates). I instead changed plans and enacted "Agriaranism" which allows passing a new tax law too, and thinking about why the industrialists just didnt grow was annoying but until 1855 it wasnt really breaking anything major or interfering with the goals set until that. now, its good that I have read the forums and know its a major bug, that would have subsequently destroyed my healthy man of europe run very likely and that I can hold off for now. but its a complex game and playtesting is not easy, which is why the fastest way to improve the game is ironically releasing rather early than later, which is of course and understandably enraging customers (in particular the loyal ones). open betas would be an improvement to this discrepancy imho.

 

[EwaldvonKleist]

Imho it is a communication thing. Paradox could release the game as open beta first with a small discount, then declare it final after a few months of bugfixing and polishing. I think one more patch, and people would consider the game a decent release.
Personally I waited until 1.1 with buying to see if the game develops into a good direction/if Paradox will fix basic issues before selling DLCs.

In the end, consumers have the decision. Don't buy immediately, set your personal "release date" 4 months after the official rlease, and you will have a much better first experience. Takes self discipline though.

 

[Brynjar]

But then I found myself staring blankly at my ever increasing mod list for a game 1 month and a half old, unable to figure out what I though the game was supposed to be, and I just realized I didn't wanted to play anymore.

I'm sure that feeling has nothing to do with you playing 150 or so hours in the first 4 weeks...

But for this patch it was stated explicitly that it's gonna take longer because they want to make sure it's a solid release. Yeah, about that...

Judging by the reception so far, it seems to be pretty solid for a Paradox release. It's even getting some very quick hotfixes by Paradox standards!

One can only wonder what drives to repeat over and over in this thread that "Paradox is doing things right since they are making money!".

Well, the answer doesn't change just because the question/complaint is repeated, or because someone refuses to accept reality.

Anyway people in this thread are just distraught and concerned about a game they care about, which make them not care the slightest about your argument.

A large part of that concern is due to them not having realistic expectations. Not having realistic expectations will usually end in disappointment. As long as people refuse to adapt their expectations to reality, they will continue to be disappointed.

 

[Brynjar]

Imho it is a communication thing. Paradox could release the game as open beta first with a small discount, then declare it final after a few months of bugfixing and polishing. I think one more patch, and people would consider the game good to got.

That's not just a communication thing. That's a big finanicial decision. What would be in it for Paradox? Judging by steam player count at release it is their 2nd best selling title of all time at release, and that's with the content bare games Imperator and ck3 being their most recent full releases...

 

[Darsara]

Can you really blame people for feeling that way when it seems like games are forced out the door with gamebreaking bugs, rather than delaying it for a few weeks to iron out things like the performance issues that prevented many players from even finishing the game?

Well, there a real possibility that a delay would honestly have been worse for their public image & response. "Oh my god, they delayed the game and yet there are still bugs!?!? What were they doing with that time were they weren't giving me the product I'd already paid them for!?"
Plus, I have no idea how hard or easy it is to get Steam to change a release date without much warning.

 

[TripleAgent]

Well, there a real possibility that a delay would honestly have been worse for their public image & response. "Oh my god, they delayed the game and yet there are still bugs!?!? What were they doing with that time were they weren't giving me the product I'd already paid them for!?"
Plus, I have no idea how hard or easy it is to get Steam to change a release date without much warning.

Games on steam get delayed all the time, I don't know if it's that big of an issue. Even if it was, the solution would be to call your buggy game "Early Access."

If there were still bugs of THIS magnitude after a month and a half delay, I'd agree with your point. But I consider the devs more competent than that if they're given the appropriate amount of time and resources to actually get it done, rather than the schedule corporate handed down.

 

[EwaldvonKleist]

That's not just a communication thing. That's a big finanicial decision. What would be in it for Paradox? Judging by steam player count at release it is their 2nd best selling title of all time at release, and that's with the content bare games Imperator and ck3 being their most recent full releases...

True. I am not qualified to weigh the financial implications. A real release of course makes building up excitement, press coverage etc. easier. A staggered release reduces the chance of community backlash, review bombing, frustrated players quitting the game for good.

Another option is to invite a few dozens/hundreds of established players (veteran modders, people who write in-depth game mechanics posts on the forum or reddit, dedicated AAR writers) a few weeks before release for early access testing to get a lot of outside eyes checking the game. I am sure many would do this for free.
Matrixgames does this a lot with titles like GG War in the East.

 

[Darsara]

Games on steam get delayed all the time, I don't know if it's that big of an issue. Even if it was, the solution would be to call your buggy game "Early Access."

If there were still bugs of THIS magnitude after a month and a half delay, I'd agree with your point. But I consider the devs more competent than that if they're given the appropriate amount of time and resources to actually get it done, rather than the schedule corporate handed down.

See, maybe you interact with a better class of gamer then I do; with a lot of the ones I've encountered, a single spelling mistake would be enough to turn into Major Topic after a delay, since those folks would expect everything to be fixed, other wise what good was the delay. After the Cyberpunk launch fiasco you'd think people would realise otherwise, but in practice it's mostly just made other people certain that a delay means doom, and the the developers will be crunched to dust for no net improvements.

I'm certain that delay would have have opened the floodgates on 'Victoria 3 the next Imperator, abandoned on launch!' as soon as it was announced.

 

[Brynjar]

A staggered release reduces the chance of community backlash, review bombing, frustrated players quitting the game for good.

I'm not so sure about that. I have seen too many games die due to leaving early access too early. I also doubt the Paradox DLC policy would work well with early access. While I agree that they have a tendency to release with a quality I would expect to see from an early access game, I don't think simply changing to an early access model is a realistic solution.

Another option is to invite a few dozens/hundreds of established players (veteran modders, people who write in-depth game mechanics posts on the forum or reddit, dedicated AAR writers) a few weeks before release for early access testing to get a lot of outside eyes checking the game. I am sure many would do this for free.

Paradox already have a fairly large amount of people testing their games for free afaik. I don't know if they are the same "yes men" who tested Imperator and gave the feedback that made Paradox expect Imperator to get a good reception though...

 

[Johan]

Can you really blame people for feeling that way when it seems like games are forced out the door with gamebreaking bugs, rather than delaying it for a few weeks to iron out things like the performance issues that prevented many players from even finishing the game?

of course not. I am the same with games i play. i just didnt like the narrative that profit for shareholders is all that matters in decision making,

 

[PedroLuiz]

If you have bought the game, you are a part of the problem.

I just wanted to play video games goddammit

 

[PedroLuiz]

"Oh my god, they delayed the game and yet there are still bugs!?!? What were they doing with that time were they weren't giving me the product I'd already paid them for!?"

that is literally me now since i expected it to be dropped on Thursday last week

 

[PedroLuiz]

the solution would be to call your buggy game "Early Access."

i'm still old enough (23 yo) to remember the time when "Early Access" meant barebone games not buggy releases

 

[Meneye]

I just wanted to play video games goddammit

No, go play outside and maninpulate actual economies, it's healthier for you

 

[PedroLuiz]

it's healthier for you

but not for the rest of the country