Where do you want to go, Paradox?

[FrigidSoul]

Honestly what I dislike the most is the new NIs. It's... really not fun playing as Milan or Hesse and unlocking a new NI and then going, "Oh. This is worthless to me." when it's development cost. They took something that legitimately does affect every game and changed it to work with their new mechanic that is only unlocked if you give them money.

Goods produced is worthless?

 

[Grimely]

Goods produced is worthless?

Well there's egg on my face now. I was just checking the wiki, didn't realize that they changed it if you don't own the DLC.

 

[FrigidSoul]

Well there's egg on my face now. I was just checking the wiki, didn't realize that they changed it if you don't own the DLC.

No worries. The wiki actually does show the +goods produced buff (at least in milan's case), but you have to mouse over the relevant idea.

What's funny is that if you're playing optimally (wide), the buff to goods produced is better than the development cost buff. So you could argue, convincingly, that to activate the DLC is to self nerf -- unless you're looking to do something very specific that is otherwise enhanced by the DLC (to play as Protestant or a Theocracy, for example, or to earn one of the development-flavored achievements).

 

[Clownie]

So I'm assuming you had the exact same complaints about Heir to the Throne for EU3, A House Divided for Vicky 2, and Deus Vult for CK1, right?



If you paid money for something, your support for the product outweighs the complaints you have about the nature of it. Period. That's economics. If your reservations about the product outweigh the desire you have for it, you would not buy it. That's not boycott, that's not purchasing something you don't want. If you regularly purchase things you don't want because you feel you 'need' them, even though they are a luxury good, that is not Paradox's problem, that is your own. Learn how money works.

This is pages back, but QFT.

Disagree as much as you want to, but this is capitalism. This is how it works. Get used to it or move to Best Korea.

 

[BFTeixeira]

This is pages back, but QFT.

Disagree as much as you want to, but this is capitalism. This is how it works. Get used to it or move to Best Korea.

The amount of people that calls bad corporate policies as Capitalism, is just buffling...

 

[Clownie]

The amount of people that calls bad corporate policies as Capitalism, is just buffling...

Whether it's bad practice or not, it's reality. No amount of idealism is going to change that. No amount of shouting about it is going to change that. This is how society works.

 

[Outrider]

The amount of people that calls bad corporate policies as Capitalism, is just buffling...

Can we assume you've been in a management role in several successful corporations? Because otherwise your ipse dixit statements on the topic are similarly bluffing/baflfing.

 

[radiatoren]

Whether it's bad practice or not, it's reality. No amount of idealism is going to change that. No amount of shouting about it is going to change that. This is how society works.

Negative reviews and particularly an increase in negative rating of the game may actually have an effect. What I see as problematic in this particular discussion is people trying to make general points on account of a single DLC.

 

[Mudcrab]

I played Eve Online for 5 years ending in 2014. Towards the end of that period, the developers made sweeping changes to certain planned roleplay mechanics. In short, pew-pew was in and the much anticipated 'walking in stations' was out. I decided to leave the virtual billions behind and quit for good in protest (that and a cancer diagnosis .. ugh). Do I regret paying all those many monthly subs while times were 'good'? No, of course not. Bloody hundreds upon hundreds of hours of entertainment were enjoyed and I look back with a great fondness for EvE despite its faults.

So I had a great time. Same as Paradox's EUIV. I don't much like this CS expansion -I called it a turd and haven't changed my mind -but per Stirling Pound per hour of entertainment, I've no right to complain. My money is and was, well spent. Simple as.

Was yours?

 

[Zwentibold]

Anyway.. it seems as if there are several people who have misunderstood a what we have said about expansions and features.

Please log in to the old forum, and read my old blog-post , from September 26th in 2011, where I outline our new patch and expansion policy.

http://oldforum.paradoxplaza.com/fo...sion-policy-for-the-Internal-Development-Team

Since we started doing modular expansions, there have been a large amount of features, which have made the experience better if you own the expansion or not.

When you play with the expansions in Eu4 compared to not having the expansions, you will be able to do more, and the game is balanced around the fact that people play with all expansions enabled, as most do.

I personally feel the game is far less playable without National Focus than any other feature we added to a dlc. Maybe the automatic transportsystem rivals it, but not being able to develop as much is not even top 10 in game-difference makers, IMHO.

There will always be people that disagree with what we do, but the metrics we get from amount of people playing and paying tells us another story than what userscore and forumposts does. Common Sense is by far the most popular expansion in units bought (% of users & raw numbers) and also in the amount of people who play 1.12 compared to previous patches.

However, we see that some are complaining that they feel they lost something cause they can't increase the number of building slots in a province, while those that paid can, and for them this is wrong.

We can only promise to look more carefully when improving the game to support the minority that does not buy expansions as well.

Never felt that much of an outrage in CK2, nevr add problem with this policy. But in EU4 it's gone too far. If i'm told ingame Emperor can grant free city status, and when I access the imperial crown I can't because a dlc is needed, without any previous ingame notificaton, it feels like a toll, not an upgrade. CK2 was a fullgame, upgradable, this is half one.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

Never felt that much of an outrage in CK2, nevr add problem with this policy. But in EU4 it's gone too far. If i'm told ingame Emperor can grant free city status, and when I access the imperial crown I can't because a dlc is needed, without any previous ingame notificaton, it feels like a toll, not an upgrade. CK2 was a fullgame, upgradable, this is half one.

You heard it here first, folks. EU4 is only half a game because you need a DLC to unlock a feature created in the DLC.

 

[Bobby555nc]

I was about to give up on Europa 4, but Common Sense restored some of my interest in the game. Modding alot helps keep my interest as well.

On the other side of the coin, the ai locks up frequently and seems to have gotten much worse and they (Paradox) have made buildings very boring, while failing to teach the ai to build/attack/defend efficiently.

The DLC model has taken over gaming and I think thats why people get so harshly attacked on the forums for saying the game was "bare bones" at release. Thats the system, leave stuff out and then add it in at a cost. It still feels like a very shallow game years later. Look at Paradox making like 4 games at the same time, its not a priority to focus on anything too much. Rebels go from weak to godly to weak to finally somewhat manageable but still a threat.

The main problem is that the gaming market is very weak right now, with most games at almost a child like level- makes it hard to find competing strategy games. And it seems like every game is released in beta level development with no features, enormous bugs, and then the dlc cash/ "free patch" machine kicks in.

 

[Bobby555nc]

This is pages back, but QFT.

Disagree as much as you want to, but this is capitalism. This is how it works. Get used to it or move to Best Korea.

You need to look up the definition of capitalism. And know the difference between different forms of capitalism.

Your options:
1. Buy Paradox products. Your value is only as a consumer.
2. Move to North Korea.

Somehow I think there are more options.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

I was about to give up on Europa 4, but Common Sense restored some of my interest in the game. Modding alot helps keep my interest as well.

On the other side of the coin, the ai locks up frequently and seems to have gotten much worse and they (Paradox) have made buildings very boring, while failing to teach the ai to build/attack/defend efficiently.

The DLC model has taken over gaming and I think thats why people get so harshly attacked on the forums for saying the game was "bare bones" at release. Thats the system, leave stuff out and then add it in at a cost. It still feels like a very shallow game years later. Look at Paradox making like 4 games at the same time, its not a priority to focus on anything too much. Rebels go from weak to godly to weak to finally somewhat manageable but still a threat.

What reasonably sized games company doesn't make multiple titles at once? Bear in mind that there are different teams working on different projects, and there's a practical maximum size for the programming team on a project like these ones, so the fact that there are multiple games in development shouldn't impact too much on each of them.

Besides, Paradox would have to have some sort of mystic foresight to leave out chunks of the game that weren't even asked for until well after release, just so they could sell them as DLC...

The main problem is that the gaming market is very weak right now, with most games at almost a child like level- makes it hard to find competing strategy games. And it seems like every game is released in beta level development with no features, enormous bugs, and then the dlc cash/ "free patch" machine kicks in.

 

[Zwentibold]

You heard it here first, folks. EU4 is only half a game because you need a DLC to unlock a feature created in the DLC.

You obviously didn't get my point : I'm not against paid dlc (as I said, never felt CK2 half baked), I complain about a business model more suited to facebook or smartphone games, with ingame advertising and restrictions if you don't pay the toll. Is it so hard not to mention that you can grant free city titles if you play vanilla? no, but it's a business policy. And that policy will imo drive off new commers to the series as well as veterans.


Edit

Even this forum is a nonsense. X people disagree/agree... nice... thumbs down/up? That's not even close to a discussion (forum first purpose)

 

[Zwentibold]

Besides, Paradox would have to have some sort of mystic foresight to leave out chunks of the game that weren't even asked for until well after release, just so they could sell them as DLC...

They just said earlier that was their business model. Believe them or not. It's not being a seer to know that better merchant republic mechanics, better empire mechanics and so would be welcome... not mandatory (or feeling that way)

 

[Cataphract887]

You obviously didn't get my point : I'm not against paid dlc (as I said, never felt CK2 half baked), I complain about a business model more suited to facebook or smartphone games, with ingame advertising and restrictions if you don't pay the toll. Is it so hard not to mention that you can grant free city titles if you play vanilla? no, but it's a business policy. And that policy will imo drive off new commers to the series as well as veterans.

Well johan posted recently that this was his most successful policy ever so i think they are pretty pleased with it and will keep it rolling. I dont think this is a good policy for us consumers but if people are supporting it to the point its labeled a financial success complaining on here wont change their minds.

 

[Zwentibold]

Well johan posted recently that this was his most successful policy ever so i think they are pretty pleased with it and will keep it rolling. I dont think this is a good policy for us consumers but if people are supporting it to the point its labeled a financial success complaining on here wont change their minds.

No doubt it's a financial success, yet it hardly concerns the consumer. Veteran consumer on a mid-long term will be driven away (played EU2/3, HOI2/3, CK2, vicki2, never got this feeling of being robbed), and new commers on a short term having to pay 150$ to play a game... good luck with that Johan. Oh... you'll launch EUV... Don't even get how people adoube this... and this is the right place to criticize this policy (where else?).

Edited for some misspelling, sure there are others, not my native language so...

 

[Cataphract887]

Abide by it? Dont even get how people tolerate this makes the most sense i think.

 

[Outrider]

No doubt it's a financial success, yet it hardly concerns the consumer. Veteran consumer on a mid-long term will be driven away (played EU2/3, HOI2/3, CK2, vicki2, never got this feeling of being robbed), and new commers on a short term having to pay 150$ to play a game.

I'm fairly certain that you can purchase the game for about $20 when it's on sale.

Considering the number of sales and continued players per steam data, consumers haven't been driven away.

If the current model is driving you away, fine, but don't project your individual feelings to a consumer base that quite obviously doesn't agree with you.