Who else is staying?

[DPS]

Yeah, it's funny. I bough the original Crusader Kings when CK2 was already in the works. Played it for years. When I finally got bored with it, moved on to other things instead of CK2.

After many years, I finally came back and bought CK2, only to find CK3 already in the works. Deja vu!

I've still got lots of things to do in CK2 that I haven't tried. Lots of playing time left! When I get bored with it, I'll probably turn to other things rather than CK3.

I'll probably come back and buy CK3 just in time for them to release CK4!

I bought the original CK pretty much on release, but I didn't get CKII until 2016. I had a lot of fun with the original even though on balance, it was really pretty much a broken game--there were large areas of gameplay that never worked as intended, but, typically of Paradox products, it did get a lot better when patched. Had there been a couple of more patches/expansions, I would have probably been more willing to buy CKII sooner; I felt like Paradox had abandoned CK before getting from being a good but flawed game to a state where it was a great game. That, and a couple of other disappointments, got me to a point where I wasn't willing to give new Paradox games a chance anymore. Fortunately, someone finally convinced me to give CKII a try, and I bought it on sale. I'm glad I did, but I'm also glad I didn't get it right away, because had I done so, I probably would have abandoned it after a couple of attempts, given what I've heard of its initial state.

There are still a few things I think the original did better than CKII--for example, whereas in CKII, sieges always progress at a set amount every 12 days, siege progress was somewhat random in the original--but overall CKII is a far better game.

 

[jhhowell]

There are still a few things I think the original did better than CKII--for example, whereas in CKII, sieges always progress at a set amount every 12 days, siege progress was somewhat random in the original--but overall CKII is a far better game.

I also prefer the way CK1 handled building up provinces, with a little visualization of the terrain and all the stuff you had built and could build on it. Seeing more and more little buildings, roads, bigger castle on the horizon, bigger church, etc. gave a more satisfying sense of progress and development than CK2's bland text menus with "Stables IV" or "Castle Walls II" etc.

I'm not sure it would have been possible to do something like the old visualization in a game where there are several holdings per province (need one visualization per holding, and that might be messy and confusing in the user interface), and presumably that's why they did CK2 the way they did.

 

[Weyird]

I very much intend to go to CK3. But I'm forcing myself to play my last few campaigns with CK2 that I never got to before - one in Africa where I try out the new paganism reforms from Holy Fury, and one in India since I got Rajas years ago. It's my birthday in November so I'm secretly hoping my wife will get it for me then, lol.

 

[InvisibleBison]

I doubt I'll ever get CKIII, as it has the Conclave council mechanics, which I abhor, baked into the base game.

 

[zorkman]

I have been on these boards for many years, playing many Paradox games, & when a new version comes out there is always a sizable section of each one that says they are staying put & not buying the sequel. Usually within a year the boards are dead, as people move away, either to the new version or elsewhere. I expect this game wont be any different.

 

[Jayavarman]

I have been on these boards for many years, playing many Paradox games, & when a new version comes out there is always a sizable section of each one that says they are staying put & not buying the sequel. Usually within a year the boards are dead, as people move away, either to the new version or elsewhere. I expect this game wont be any different.

Did you read the OP or other comments? They literally say they will eventually move to CK3.

The key observation should instead be that the base sequel game later gets built on by enhancing DLC and/or mods that modify game design choices.

 

[Iniovan]

I'm with you here.
CK2 is one heck of a game honestly, I've only ever spent more time in CIV4 and maybe WoW.
Clocked 3000 hours in CK2 before CK3 hit and I'm not going to stop

 

[bloodyglasspuppet]

I have been on these boards for many years, playing many Paradox games, & when a new version comes out there is always a sizable section of each one that says they are staying put & not buying the sequel. Usually within a year the boards are dead, as people move away, either to the new version or elsewhere. I expect this game wont be any different.

And while the board will be dead, i'll still be here, playing this game... watch me!

 

[Snake_Squeezins]

CK2 with all DLC is much, MUCH better than CK3. We're probably *at least* 6-12 months from that changing.

The only reason to move from CK2 to CK3 is if you don't own any CK2 DLC - and even then I advise waiting for CK3 to hotfix clearly broken stuff like fervor and heresies before beginning a serious campaign.

 

[JtW]

I very much intend to go to CK3. But I'm forcing myself to play my last few campaigns with CK2 that I never got to before - one in Africa where I try out the new paganism reforms from Holy Fury

This was my last campaign in CK2! I had a lot of fun building up Ghana into an empire. Right around the time when I moved on to CK3, I had just feudalized and was sealed off by a mega-Abbasid blob on all sides.

 

[tvotr7]

i played ck3 for around 50-100 hours. it's fun but barren as the farther you get away from Europe the more ahistorical it is. last night i went back to ck2 and will probably be staying there for a while. honestly, if ck2 had ck3's religion system and the same amount of cultures, there would be no point of ck3, lmao.

 

[bloodyglasspuppet]

I'm curious: what would interest me the most in the sequel is an improvement in the AI-department. Everyone seems to talk about the features which CKIII improves upon, but not the AI. Can someone enlighten me concerning this point?

 

[cyclosa]

I've played Paradox games for many years and I've never bought one on release. I always wait for a good sale or bundle (or, in the old days, for it to appear on the shelf at my local discount store). Even though CK2 is possibly my favorite game ever, buying CK3 on release would break my cycle of getting everything a couple years behind, and would feel like a commitment to spending more in the future. CK2 is just as fun now as it was a year ago.

 

[Pied-Noir]

I'm curious: what would interest me the most in the sequel is an improvement in the AI-department. Everyone seems to talk about the features which CKIII improves upon, but not the AI. Can someone enlighten me concerning this point?

The AI in CK III currently does not upgrade buildings/holdings.

I do own CK III and I have tried it (and released a couple of mods), but it feels both bland and bugged, so I'm holding off for now.

 

[Kangarus]

I'm waiting until CK3 gets a few updates and there's a lot of things I've yet to do in CK2 before I make the switch. I'm enjoying a modded CK2 with fantasy elements and such. I will probably like CK3 when it is updated and such, and I did pre-order the game, but I'm more interested in CK2 and getting really stuck in with a campaign at least once.

 

[wthree]

I bought CK3: Pop-up closer 3000, spent about 30 hours on it, and I'm back to CK2.

 

[JtW]

The AI in CK III currently does not upgrade buildings/holdings.

I do own CK III and I have tried it (and released a couple of mods), but it feels both bland and bugged, so I'm holding off for now.

Slight correction: bishops do upgrade temples.

 

[junassa]

I wouldn't call it "done" given that there are numerous bugs that have gone unaddressed for a year or more, which makes me somewhat resentful of the introduction of ck3. I expect that they will patch it eventually, but I worry that it won't be a thorough job.


I appreciate the moddability and the community's attempts to get the game in the state that it deserves to be in.

I bought CK3. Paradox literally has the same bloodline bug as Holy Fury when it first came out. I really like both CK games but if they refuse to be more proactive re: bugs I'm done buying anything at launch or full price again. I'm just going to wait for the humble bundle.

 

[TheCrimsonMajor]

Me, I'm nowhere near done with CK2 (let alone mods), and history has taught me that it's foolish to buy a Paradox game (or any game, these days) at launch, no matter how good the reviews are. I'll probably pick up CK3 on sale with its first couple DLCs in like 3 years.

 

[Pied-Noir]

Me, I'm nowhere near done with CK2 (let alone mods), and history has taught me that it's foolish to buy a Paradox game (or any game, these days) at launch, no matter how good the reviews are. I'll probably pick up CK3 on sale with its first couple DLCs in like 3 years.

Paradox Interactive's QA staff allege poor treatment, low pay, and mismanaged layoffs

Paradox Interactive recently signed a collective agreement with an employee union, but many current and former staff to…

www.rockpapershotgun.com