Why Imperator Rome was going to be a far better game than other Paradox titles we have now

[Godd_Howard]

Most people have got the wrong impression that I:R was meant to become more than it currently is. I doubt that though. Its rather uncommon DLC policy as well as a mix between GSG and RPG elements indicates that it was merely a testing ground for different game mechanics, price models and developers‘ experience. Lessons learned on these matters would then be applied to other titles that are more focused on one genre, especially CK3 and EU5.

First of all, just like yourself I also want to say a light handed "fuck you" to anyone who bought Sengoku and March of the Eagles(Lool like how dumb can you be guys?Those games were not meant to be good and finished - they were just a prank bro, just get over it amirite)

And second... "EU5"??? Yeah sure. I want to see them try.
Don't take it too personally btw, it's more about the "It's was not meant to be anything else" mentality as a whole.

 

[Lamisatr]

At least this will not be killed by bloat ala CK4,EU4.

Which is another unintended bonus of leaving the game to modders. EUIV has totally collapsed, it was fine after Dharma and that's where they should have left it. but but another two large expansions have utterly broken it, they didn't have a clue how to fix Emperor and then doubled-down and plonked Leviathan on top of it.

 

[scriptkiddy]

Which is another unintended bonus of leaving the game to modders.

Why not making it open source then?

 

[Rossigil]

Why not making it open source then?

And let other people officially make money out of PDX game? Impossible move for effective managers that take decisions

 

[scriptkiddy]

And let other people officially make money out of PDX game? Impossible move for effective managers that take decisions

Well, I’m still looking for the proper word describing modders doing the job of code owners, in this case Paradox Interactive, for free. Peak capitalism? Exploitation of goodwill and labour? Semi-slavery?

 

[Ixtli613]

Well, I’m still looking for the proper word for letting modders do the job of code owners, in this case Paradox Interactive, for free. Peak capitalism? Exploitation of goodwill and labour? Semi-slavery?

It's not peak capitalism until they ignore the game/brand for years so a big impressive mod gets rolling, then they hit it with a cease-and-desist order and go back to ignoring the property.

 

[Lamisatr]

Why not making it open source then?

No idea you'd have to ask Paradox.

 

[Iosue Yu]

On review bombing,

I think it is a civil thing to do.

If you do something bad, you get protests. For a government, people take to the streets. For a game, people take it to Steam ratings.

Besides, the game is sold on assumption that there is a future. And when that future is taken away, the game is just half a game. So it is reasonable to actually think the game is less than appealing at the current state.

 

[Godd_Howard]

Besides, the game is sold on assumption that there is a future. And when that future is taken away, the game is just half a game. So it is reasonable to actually think the game is less than appealing at the current state.

Many people don't get this reasoning because they are used to playing terrible games from other publishers. I first got into Paradox games when I got CK2 for basically free(can't remember if t was free or not but it was years ago). Now at that moment I knew theese games existed and people played them but then I started seeing there is a very active community on youtube, reddit and such. The memes and videos got me interrested so I started playing CK2 day after day. I went 100 hours without understanding anything about the game and just having a moderate ammount of fun. I got EU4, HoI4 and played them as well. Then I got into the rabbit hole of buying the DLCs on sale. At the point of CK2 Holy Fury comming out I had bought every CK2 DLC and that was when the light hit me - I was addicted.

Now imagine my anger with Imperator(a game I pre ordered, which I never even do after I pre ordered Rome 2 total war - yeah ironic how both games are about the same thing and they both had a terrible launch). At that point i considered Paradox to be 10 times better of a developer and publisher than SEGA/CA. So I get mad and go back to older games like CK2 and EU4. But then when Imperator is getting the much needed love he was supposed to be getting from day one and I start enjoying it as a game they abandon it like it's a sinking ship. Well I say it wasn't sinking, it was sunk from the beginning and just as the devs pulled it out of the water and patched up the holes the Management tossed it back in the sea deck down.

 

[Basileus2]

Imperator is going to become a cult classic, then a Victoria 3 type meme. People will be wanting Imperator: 2 in droves at some point.

 

[Godd_Howard]

Imperator is going to become a cult classic, then a Victoria 3 type meme. People will be wanting Imperator: 2 in droves at some point.

I still want Imperator 1...

 

[tribunus_plebis]

On review bombing,

I think it is a civil thing to do.

If you do something bad, you get protests. For a government, people take to the streets. For a game, people take it to Steam ratings.

Besides, the game is sold on assumption that there is a future. And when that future is taken away, the game is just half a game. So it is reasonable to actually think the game is less than appealing at the current state.

I strongly disagree here.

First, this false equivalence between street protest and steam rating is an insult to every man and woman in history that has taken the streets to protest for whatever reason. Clearly you've never felt teargas going through your lungs nor the gentle caress of a police baton. There's no risk nor personal consequences for doing a bad steam review.

Second. Using steam review as form to complain against a company policy is extremely childish and useless as it distorts the reality of a game, which, independently from who finances it, has a value on itself as a ludic experience.

If I have to binary judge a game, I prefer to do it by the gaming experience and not because I disagree with the publishers policy. Would you do the same with a book or a movie? It is plain dumb.

 

[Iosue Yu]

I strongly disagree here.

First, this false equivalence between street protest and steam rating is an insult to every man and woman in history that has taken the streets to protest for whatever reason. Clearly you've never felt teargas going through your lungs nor the gentle caress of a police baton. There's no risk nor personal consequences for doing a bad steam review.

Second. Using steam review as form to complain against a company policy is extremely childish and useless as it distorts the reality of a game, which, independently from who finances it, has a value on itself as a ludic experience.

If I have to binary judge a game, I prefer to do it by the gaming experience and not because I disagree with the publishers policy. Would you do the same with a book or a movie? It is plain dumb.

I'm from Hong Kong. I guess "Enough said" is a good enough response.

 

[Roy1012]

Step 1. Release unfinished game with massive issues
Step 2. Spend 2 years fixing it, finally releasing an amazing version
Step 3. Pull development on the project
Step 4. ????
Step 5. PROFIT!

 

[Godd_Howard]

Step 1. Release unfinished game with massive issues
Step 2. Spend 2 years fixing it, finally releasing an amazing version
Step 3. Pull development on the project
Step 4. ????
Step 5. PROFIT!

I want to belive this is an omega brained marketing stratery for Paradox to then come out and say "We can see that our loyal players love Imperator Rome and want to see it realised to it's full potential so we are going to release a new DLC that you MFs better buy instantly or else you will never see your beloved Imperator ever again". But I doubt it.

 

[netgmx]

On review bombing,

I think it is a civil thing to do.

If you do something bad, you get protests. For a government, people take to the streets. For a game, people take it to Steam ratings.

Besides, the game is sold on assumption that there is a future. And when that future is taken away, the game is just half a game. So it is reasonable to actually think the game is less than appealing at the current state.

Yes, but actually no.

If you want to bomb - do it on Leviathan - "We lost imperator for this?!" etc etc, dont punish Imperator and its team for management...

Assumption of future - lately, after what happened to eu4, leaving game in good condition isn't bad idea. I stopped plaing pdx games on latest patches for years now.

 

[Iosue Yu]

Yes, but actually no.

If you want to bomb - do it on Leviathan - "We lost imperator for this?!" etc etc, dont punish Imperator and its team for management...

Assumption of future - lately, after what happened to eu4, leaving game in good condition isn't bad idea. I stopped plaing pdx games on latest patches for years now.

And then there is still the difference between just bombing and actually believing that paying for the game including future patches and that removing the future of the game depreciating the game's values.

 

[DavidBrewster]

I dunno, I'd consider two years of support pretty generous for a game with basically zero audience. I get that some of you here love the game and at times, I loved it too. But the patching the game got was a lot more than its audience size mandated.

 

[Ixtli613]

I dunno, I'd consider two years of support pretty generous for a game with basically zero audience. I get that some of you here love the game and at times, I loved it too. But the patching the game got was a lot more than its audience size mandated.

You're correct objectively speaking, but no matter how we try no one can really be objective. That is to say, it's the feeling of being betrayed that matters more than the fact that it wasn't an unreasonable (or unpredictable) decision for a business to make. Getting the rug pulled out from under you leaves a lingering bad taste in your mouth, justified or not.

 

[Godd_Howard]

I dunno, I'd consider two years of support pretty generous for a game with basically zero audience. I get that some of you here love the game and at times, I loved it too. But the patching the game got was a lot more than its audience size mandated.

That was not the point I was arguing.

Lets say a game about WW2 comes out named "Dictator: Germany". It has some problems on launch, people are disapointed. But just as the devs start adding things like factories, divisions and equipment production along with events focused on the historical aspect of the game ranging from the annexation of Czechoslovakia to the invasion of the USSR in 41. How much of a let down would it be if management canned the game in order to save their own failing DLC spam for their older games? Would you be satisfied with a WW2 game with almost no WW2 in it? I wouldn't be.