Okay Paradox, it was funny the first two times with Royal Court and Legends of the Dead, but I can’t stay up until midnight editing elaborate shitposts forever.
That would imply that other dlcs were good or st least okay releases FoI is bugged to this day where you can get a never ending cycles Tours and tournaments is at best also mediocre, but actually not a good release North lords is not even worth to mention, should be considered part of the base game Lol So pdx pulled it more than just two times lol
@@Bleilock1 I actually liked Tours. I think it provides a great platform for modders and I love how much it opens up the game to all titles. It was very refreshing after Royal Court. I'm also partial to Fate of Iberia. Although I've criticized it in the past, the struggle mechanic was original and it made Spain much more interesting to play
I think it was wrong how they handled the legend system. Not all legends are forgotten. Think of Robin Hood, King Arthor, Alexender the great. Heck some legends even become holidays such as Saint Patrick Day and Saint Nicolas (Dutch Holiday.) What they should have done as extra making a system that remembers the legend. For example combine it with the Tours and Tournament DLC. And at a new Contest in it, named the grand play. Giving the player bonuses on recreating that has ties to their family history. Perhaps also adding it somehow to your feast activity. That our court poet will bring forth all the legends of the world but will mostly pick that happened in your nation. Traveling Bards and Poets were the story tellers back in those days and they were the ones that spread legends and stories.
My main issue with Legends is that the story each Legend tells is really similar or even almost the same as other ones. In a two-player game with a friend we and two big ai empires all had almost the exact same story in each respective Legend wich really deflated doing it at all.
Its so unreal how paradox never takes the blame for backlash, they literally said that the main issue with LotD was “miscommunication about the scope of the dlc”.
For real, they could have described legends with all the details, it wouldn't make that feature good. I believe that people are right when they say that mods make a better use of DLC mechanics, but I have no hopes for legends, it is flawed and should have a complete rework
@@unciuncia420 People aren't upset that they didn't get what they were promised. People are upset that the DLC and new mechanics in general actively make the game more annoying and tedious to play. The DLC legit makes the game worse.
"takes the blame", you take the blame for continuing to buy something you don't want, it's a great game, sorry that it can't also take your virginity at the same time, f off
I really miss the Bloodlines system, it was quite unique and helped with the replayability of the game, encouraging people to try new approaches to their games in order to try to forge their bloodline. In my opinion, though I can see why some could call them "simple modifiers", they were a fitting reward for a character's journey into greatness, the best part of forging a bloodline was the fulfillment of all the conditions necessary, with the modifiers being a reward that you could maintain for the rest of the game to remember the effort you put into it. In contrast, the legends system feels like a money sinkhole whose only useful purpose is farming legitimacy (which without the dlc is a constant headache for the player)
It's literally a pain in the butt. I started playing again and... what the heck is legitimacy and why the hell do I lose it for marriages!?! Or when a child joins the brothers in prayer. And why the hell does everyone hate me at a -40 opinion for it pretty much all through the time and how the hell can I raise it back up without fighting 100 wars, do pilgrimages and the likes. I literally don't want to be higher than a count in the early game anymore.
CK2 Bloodlines system: >be a woman >marry matrillineally to a male character with bloodline >profit I swear to god you CK2 glazers didn't play it that much
@@filip4767 I probably have over 1000 hours in ck2 and I still play it more than ck3 to this day. Its just more fun and has an actually complete and fun agot mod. Also, its way easier to mod and fix it yourself.
You want to know who else is to blame? You tube content creators "reviewer." Every time you watch one of these videos, they say "in partnership with paradox" or any company for that matter. These companies are paying for great reviews. This latest DLC was universally praised by You Tubers who got the "First Look" by paradox, who afterwards went radio silent, to then comeback and say it wasn't that good.
My biggest problem with CK3 is that even after nearly 4 years after it's release, it is still so bare bones and repetitive. I feel like the only way for CK3 to improve is for the devs to add around 30 times the events that currently exist. I feel like if more events were added (even if they were short and simple) the game would feel a lot closer to the quality that CK2 set. In CK2 even after hundreds of hours of gameplay, I was still getting new events that I hadn't seen before. This made all the playthroughs for characters feel unique. In CK3 wherever you play it just feels the same, boring and repetitive.
when I first played ck3 it felt like sailing over a deep ocean I could feel all the potential depth I could explore later but was 2 dimensional. years later it just feels 2d (really sad that steppe horse lords feel the same as every other culture/government)
One such event I am dying for as a romani person is the romani expansion(s) into europe and to be able to create myself as my culture. It could be done as a pop up like the Mongol invasion. You can get events to come across them while traveling with tours and tournaments or on walks and outings or during hunting excursions and a pop as entertainment during a feast. I was hoping for romani people and culture to come with tours and tournaments and am still holding out hope for roads.
@@vladthecon Exactly. The potential is there. So it's still possible to fix it, however at the current rate in which they are adding new content, I don't think that will happen anytime soon.
The main problem is lack of player interaction! I thought they learned from the success of TT expansion but they went back to ck2 style dlc where its just reacting to events and waiting. Thats not fun. Harm re duction and prevention by picking the same optimal dialogue is not fun. Do something special that actually involves some measure of gameplay, player involvement, calculation, something!
I really hope they do something interesting the historical "theme" system in the byzantine empire. Hopefully they make it actually engaging and fun instead of making them regular feudal vassals that give you 2 or 3 events as "interaction" with the player.
Their response annoyed me big time to be honest. “The problem wasn’t with our half baked unfun mechanic, we just didn’t explain it well enough to you idiots.” No, the mechanic sucked. Legends are an unhistorical generative ai textslop modifier generator and plagues are overtuned garbage. The latest dlc for CK3 have been horrible and I no longer defend it to my friends, we just play Stellaris
The difference in DLC between Stellaris and CKIII is insane. The has never been a bad DLC or update to Stellaris. Some are less good than others but they are all good. Every single DLC and major update for CKIII has made the game worse with a possible exception of Royal court which is just ok. CKIII mods are awesome though.
@@evilemperorzurg9615I have to massively disagree with you. Stellaris dlc has also been trash on more than one occasion. There is quite a bit that isn't worth it to get even when on sale. There have also been numerous updates that have only served to make the game worse, oftentimes having most of the changes reversed in later updates. Stellar is still a decent game (not as good as it's been in the past and overly bloated now, imo), but it isn't perfect by any means.
@@evilemperorzurg9615 nemesis was 1) reused low-poly textures for anything, even the big bad galaxy destroyer 2) absolute f ton of game breaking bugs. Some crashes today are still from nemesis features 3) the worst absolutely annoying crisis mechanic you could've come up with. Compare it with cosmogenesis, for example. 4) it's personal, but the new mechanics weren't particularly fun even on the first run. Not to mention that I've played with a "no become crisis" mod ever since, because having a random hegemony leader on the other side of the galaxy ruin your very successful lategame tech rush once was quite enough. AI tends to take the perk without any regards to ethics, which makes the most random shit suddenly get a huge game ending fleets. Not to mention that there can be several at once.
I talk about this point briefly in my last video with Invictus. Although exceptional mods are a pathway to player numbers some may consider to be… unnatural ⚡️. If the game has a poor enough performance and is cancelled too early, it is an uphill battle to develop certain assets from scratch. Paradox has always treated its modders well, but they can only do so much for cancelled games - hopefully CK3 isn’t next
Oh, if only it was that simple. The Invictus mod for Imperator is perhaps the perfect example of how mods should not be overstated as a fixes for a bad game. Even though the Invictus team do awesome work in making Imperator reasonably playable, they still can't do much about the heaps of half-baked, shortsighted, incomplete, and poorly thought out mechanics built into the game.
TLDR: PDX forgot what made the CK2 great: emergent roleplaying, and all they needed to do was copy the CK2 DLC and add more depth so their autistic audience will feel challenged (yet not overwhelmed), all in the effort to create emergent roleplaying experiences, like roleplaying a doctor in a disease guessing game, similar to what people felt when diseases popped up in CK2, just with added depth. I think the designer on CK3 doesnt understand what made CK2 and its DLCs successful and well loved. CK2 was always trying to be a simulation that focused on emergent gameplay in the form of roleplaying. It seems their focus on roleplay, while not necessarily a bad thing, it puts the designers in a bad headspace that has them focusing on all the wrong aspects of the game when designing new mechanics. Basically the disease system should feel like a medical diagnosis minigame (that can be bypassed with having good physician who can narrow it down or if skilled enough bypass the minigame entirely with some caveats). The goal is to have so much care put into the DLC that someone actually trained in modern medicine should do better than someone not trained, but in-turn a new player can be successful through repetition and subsequent experience, or with the aforementioned Excellent Physician. If you have the player to essentially play a medical diagnosis minigame (something most players will know very little about), you dont have to worry about roleplaying because the player will be playing a role without realizing it, and that feels good for the player. This minigame doesnt have to be overly complex, but it has to have the mystery of the CK2 DLC, while having extra depth that players expect CK3 DLC to have over the CK2 DLC, and there is no better way to do that then to make a system that has the player activly caring about disease like what wouldve been the case IRL, and having good physicians should increase the players chances of success, so the player doesnt feel trapped in the minigame (if they are willing to pay the ducats for the convenience). This is just my spitballing on the issue, probably not the best explanation but Im working off the cuff here. I do hope CK3 realizes the benefit in emergent roleplaying, and realizes that their audience is autistic enough to love what is essentially a disease guessing game (with added depth over CK2). I think players can connect with that much more than the current system, in part just because guessing the disease you have based on emergent symptoms is something all of us do to some degree, especially when we develop a sore throat lmao.
I think the developers still need to be careful on not taking a super heavy lean into specific roleplaying styles. CK2 was great because it offered a variety of different paid content tailored to different playstyles. I teased this a tiny bit in the video, but DLC like Monks & Mystics allows players to decide if they want to play with some of the wackier elements or not. There is a colossal menu full of customization options when you first open CK2, and I think this is why it was so beloved. While the map is not generated like Stellaris, these mechanics really alter how you interact with certain gameplay elements. I like some of your ideas, but at the same time I would also add options to play it in a more standardized manner. Players have limited bandwidth and may not always be in the mood for more fantastical elements, or vice versa. A lot of people seem to be of the opinion that mechanics need to tie more heavily into roleplay, and I agree. You bring up an interesting point with physicians, and the game so far has done a very lackluster job with tying in character interactions to core mechanics. It may be time consuming dev wise, but I would be willing to wait far longer between releases if there was more thought put into how preexisting mechanics could be interwoven with new content - not just resources like renown and prestige (Although renown should have had a far bigger role in Legends imo)
@@4Xtraordinaire Apologies in advance for the long-ass comment, I didnt want to oversimplify and cause the same miscommunication that my first comment seems to have done lol. I think there is too much of an emphasis on creating a game ((everyone)) can play, It leads to trouble designing interesting gameplay loops for PDXs target audience, and thats the primary reason I think PDX is having trouble with CK3s development over something like Stellaris, who knows their target audience. PDX is trying to appeal to everyone and instead appealing to no one, and so they fail to take risks and ignore adding realistic simulation for fear of losing players, but doesn’t realize that they are losing players keeping the systems dumb-ed down like this. But yeah I definitely didnt do the best to convey exactly the design I am thinking of (mainly because every sentence would be full of qualification and workarounds that the player can choose to increase options to deal with the system at hand, so I’ll just explain my philosophy rather than direct mechanics, or else this would be an even longer comment). I guess my main point would be that simulation elements can help encourage roleplay through realism, and it seems the devs also realize this but seem to not be taking risks. The system should be realistic to the point that if someone is trained in modern pathology, the system should be easy for them (thus exemplifying that the simulation is realistic), but the average player, who isnt trained, should feel like interacting with the system is both fun but also allows them to use the system better with experience or educated guessing (You cant remove the 21st century modern medical knowledge from the player, so you have to play into it). For example, if a certain disease is common in the game, then a player should feel confident that those certain, common symptoms will likely (not always) yield that diagnosis; Similar to playing CK2 and having your heart sink when your character gets a headache because you don’t know if your character just has a migraine or is about to die, this is the basis for the “guessing minigame”. The CK2 system has flaws, but the foundation is there for a system where a player can get good at guessing diagnosis to the point where they can recite Wikipedia-article-level of information on the symptoms of Diphtheria, or completely\partially bypass the guessing minigame using currency for an excellent\good physician. Ideally the minigame should be fun enough for people to want to learn atleast certain common diseases and their symptoms, but also giving the player an option to relatively ignore the system, if they can pay (or are the physician themselves). Of course the secondary nature of this system is to implement ways for players to counteract these symptoms, or even cure the diseases, based on their experience with the game or having a good physician recommending treatment automatically. Reward player engagement, but don’t punish the player for not engaging. Regardless, there needs to be some form of engagement from the player the way Reapers Due caused when the player would drop everything to make sure their character wasn't gonna be dead in 6 months. With what we got right now seems more akin to an Ant Farm where you just kinda watch the progress of diseases and their effects on the world, with minimal engagement from the player. I believe the solution is that the gameplay loop needs to harness a degree of realistic mystery to keep player knowledge in check, versus the medieval lord they are controlling, rewarding a knowledgeable player who fully interacts with the system, while even allowing the most casual player to use a good physician to bypass most of the system with ease, but not without risk, as the convenience should come with minor drawbacks. PDX is having trouble rectifying the depth of the systems they made in their previous games, with the ease of access to contemporary casual audiences, and unfortunately they cant seem to get that balance right and its costing them their target audience. At the very least, I think we can both agree on that.
And now they are proceeding to do the same with EU5... Like "Hey, see all this stuff that make the game cool and accessible to a lot of people, how about we remove all of this, and make it a Imperator/CK3/Vic3 clone? Our latest and greatest successes!"... I pre-ordered Imperator, and now holding for the other games to be developed and discounted long enough for them to be worth...
@@SaintRubicon I will agree that Paradox has been making wider, more broadly 'applicable' expansions unlike with CK2. I talk about this in the video, but CK2 took far bigger risks on average with mechanics like secret societies - yet they had a smaller and more dedicated community in my opinion, so they could afford to be more experimental. The point I am trying to make here is that instead of immediately pursuing 'riskier' content, they need to have a better understanding of what the community wants in the first place. Many people have aired desire for government changes - but how can you implement them without making it overly complex and confusing for newer players? I can understand being frustrated as a developer at this point, because finding compromises between certain groups of players is going to be a nightmare to begin with. Just look at all of the different ideas people have throughout my latest comments sections. As much as there is a need for deeper and more dynamic game mechanics, I can understand why Paradox is still being conservative with some of the latest DLC they have put out. They have a great foundation, far stronger than what they started out with in CK2, but you're going to step on some toes no matter your approach. They have talked about balancing and even potentially adding more complexity to existing systems, but what that involves I do not know. In the end, it only makes sense to chase after deeper gameplay mechanics if there is a genuine desire from the community. Do most players want plagues to expand beyond what they are now, instead of focusing dev attention towards other areas, like governments? I don't know.
I was excited for LoD when I read what it offered. I wanted to form a norse/celtic culture and take over Britain having the legend of my house was decendent of King Arthur. It was so disappointing that legends aren't continuous for your house really felt horrible starting the legend only to have my guy die a few years later and basically lock it out for the playthrough as a failed legend. On top of that what made me quick CK3 was the plague spam 9/10 events are a plague popping up and demanding 100+ gold or you lose development. By year 1100 my empire jad under 8 development in every county and it just killed the game for me. I can't fathom why the released the dlc like this it just ruined the game for me.
Really? WIth all the busted disease recovery events I've been racing to 100 development faster than ever... even after they nerfed it, it's still way OP if you focus even a little bit on development.
@@leofwulf268 I have played 2 campaigns with the new update and if you're having trouble with legitimacy you're doing something wrong... That's not to say that I love the new DLC and all the stuff they added, but the idea behind legitimacy is going in the right direction imo, even if just to make super cheese strats less viable.
@@leofwulf268 Yeah, the plague frequency is busted. Though it should only give you a legitimacy hit if it started in your domain IIRC, so either you got extremely unlucky or you didn't manage it properly.
I had the idea to retool the legends system to make it about spreadi g rumors instead. They would be like legends but negative and targeted at people. The more evidence you get, or the higher you diplomacy/intrigue the stronger the effects would become over time. It would lower general opinion, legitimacy, and may e even give people a fake trait. Like murderer. The character may not actually be a murderer, but people think they are, which is bassically the same as what currently happens in the game. I think spreading lies a out your enemies would both be funnier and more memorable than makeing a fake legend about yourself
There was a big missed opportunity to incorporate the lifestyle mechanics into how Legends function. I actually think that they could have pulled off doing more generic legends if it in turn used them as a base to build an ever-evolving dynamic tale that you customized throughout your dynasty's history. It was an opportunity to go back and reminisce on past experiences with player characters and make campaigns memorable. What a shame
When CK3 first came out, I remember defending it cause some people said it lacked content compared to CK2. I pointed out then that at launch it had a lot less content aswell and it dlc practises were not too good either. I thought then that Paradox would have learned and not make the same mistakes. It seems to me they have become either lazy or just sloppy. Also the console port is absolutely terrible and the fact that Paradox hasn’t tried to improve it themselves says enough. I love these games, poured thousands of hours in them. But as of lately I just feel underwelmed and dissapointed about the game.
Only looking at the more recent releases: Imperator was garbage, Ck3 sucked, Vicky3 sucked (Cities Skylines 2 also...). They're going to make EU5 also suck and I am going to mald so hard. I just dont see how they improve over games like EU4/Hoi4 with how poor the modern successors have been. This also may just be a personal gripe, but something about the modern Paradox map art styles just doesnt do it for me. I do believe these games will get much better over time but with their current directions, I don't see how any of their new titles surpass their predecessors.
I said it back then when ck3 was released on their forums You didnt listen I will say it again now Its players like you who are at fault why games are so bad You will uncritically defend a small indie, and throw money at them like a mad man And only after 4 years have passes will you come to complain If you complained right away like we did, some of this couldve been avoided But players like you literally encourage such company behaviours and never listen/learn Paradrones
@@justafella69HoI4 was already a poor successor to the previous games. The game was pretty much untested when released, there were multiple duping bugs that were found out on a release date and it took 2 months to fix the most prominent ones because the dev team took a vacation. It's barely reaching the depth of vanilla HoI3 which in itself was not the greatest launch. It just sold well because they promised QoL features that would make HoI3 a bearable experience for most people.
I could tell how much the dlc must have under performed when the dev diary came out and they just openly tslked about the responce and issues, instead of a jokey half rp post about new features. It resembled what CA did after they set WH3 on fire last year. CA also proved that you can bring back players who are angry at you, just give them good content. I really hope they learn that the offers from current dlc is just not enough, esspecilly for the price they are demanding. Some of them have less content than free mods
Roads to power would be like tours and tournaments it would be well received as many characters who are now unplayable would be playable El Cid Rollo Russel Balliol and even Sir Marshal
It's weird to me that legacy of persia and the fate for iberia didn't do to great. They've seem to be popular amongst the youtube creator community and they did what they wanted to do quite well in my opinion. Persia quickly became my favorite region to play after it's dlc came out and it even made fate of iberia better due to the overhauls to the clan government system.
Persia was criticized because it reused a lot of Iberia's features with a new splash of paint. Players were expecting most of the struggle mechanics to be spread out across a few different regions in similar conflicts for a lower price tag. There's also the discussion of inflation and 13 dollars not being enough for what you get. The intermezzo tends to be much shorter than the struggle, and there are not as many interesting zoroastrian characters to play with in the 867 start date. CK2 got around this because of the Charlemagne DLC, which is one of the best ways to play Persia to this day imo
@@4Xtraordinaire Is everyone just playing persia just for the zoroastrians? I thought the conflict between caliphate vs non-caliphate supporters was much more interesting 😅
@@senseishu937 CK3 has a very strong base of byzaboos partly due to EU4’s influence, and I feel like the desire to restore eastern rome also transfers over to post-sassanid persia
Imo they’re leaning too far into the roleplaying aspect and by extension the ‘make your own fun’ aspect of the game. It’s a video game, add some game lol Actual mechanics to interact with. Modders understand this with Princes of Darkness adding coteries and extra highly expansive skill trees you can earn XP for on the side so characters are significantly more diverse and Godherja has interactable stories down well especially now they’re adding ‘end the world’ scenarios players can work towards.
I'll break from the crowd and defend the heavy lean into RP. I think this is one of CK3's strong suits, and one of the reasons why it is so different to other titles. A lot of paradox games are falling into the trap of going heavy into pop mechanics which can cause performance issues and lean into micromanagement (See: Stellaris & Sectors). I will say that there is a cutoff limit for me personally where there is too much roleplaying expected, but it's also the heart of the game.
@@4Xtraordinaire Roleplay mechanics are nice but that’s all they’re giving us from what I can see. I’m still waiting on basic mechanics from CK2 like Republics and Nomads to get ported over.
@@pyxelknyght7149 I agree, more depth in basic mechanics like warfare and the politics between the ruler and the council would add a lot to the game. I think they went the right direction with their upcoming byzantine expansion, I'm just hoping it's good.
@@pyxelknyght7149 I wouldn't even say that Legends offered great roleplay mechanics. There are very little opportunities for character interactions and building a family history. The ideal DLC adds key features that create opportunities for more complex gameplay AND roleplay if the players want to pursue it
Roleplaying is important, but what lacks is a gameworld thats alive. Religions are static, there is no real inter vassal interaction, vassals are only thorns in your side you have to appease or humiliate instead of them being the stewards of the land you cannot control yourself. There is no real essence behind tge actions of the AI. It only reacts beside declaring war or havi g a faction.
We do need a law system, but hopefully not the one in ck2. That one is completely lackluster and vassal contracts already do a better job at what it tried to do.
@@LunaMoon0 Lmao all the things you can do in ck2 law system you can do in ck3 with vassal contracts and centralization. Only thing missing is stuff for women’s right and by extension minorities.
The biggest problem in royal Court is that every Noble had a court and the fact that you have to be a key to access it instead of the minimum being a bass is the biggest problem of royal especially since many Dukes used to call himself Kings back in the day
Some Lesser complaints, but still important in terms of immersion: Another thing that I would love to see changed is the Gene Balding, its literally so dumb, that 100% of All amle Characters get balding when they reach the age of 30, balding like that, is a Phenomenon of modern times, because of our Diets and lifestyles, yea people back then would go bald too, but not that young, and not everyone. I would love to see them add the option to turn it off, for me it really killed the Immersion, when my Character (28 years old, strong and healthy) suddenly lost his long glorious locks and looked like grandpa. Something else that Is also immensely immersion breaking is that characters are wearing clothes from different periods to soon. When playing from 1066, you start of historically accurate, but then you come to 1120 and suddenly knights start wearing Greathelms and such, those should come around 1200, but instead, of putting the Greathelms into the 13th century, they put 14th century plate armour into that period, and the characters start to wear the 14th century Plate around 1240.
Paradox needs to actually take a step back and think what made CK3 into such a good game. They're wasting time and resources on things that we don't need. Legends are glorified money sink modifiers with auto generated text. Meanwhile modders have added fully playble blackjack.... and ARENA WHERE YOU CAN FIGHT. Paradox should focus more on expanding warfare so it's actually more bearable. They should focus on more interaction between characters that aren't events. Diplomatic negotiations, deals, promises. On the darker side, add schemes, sabotage, espionage etc. Instead of adding new events and some additional modifiers that barely matter.
Ck3 was never a good game There were players like me who complained since day one And delusional players like you who defended it under the pretense thatb"it will get better" Now you even have memory wipe and all of the sudden "it used to be such a good game" Can you stop defending pdx? It was never a good game And it didnt become a good game after 4 years Stop shilling and buying if you want to see changes, players like you are to blame on the state of gaming industry quality Lol
Also there is a mod that adds a WHOLE CONVERSATION SYSTEM THAT ACTUALLY ADDS MODIFIERS TO THE GAME. Like I can actually talk with my lord to buy a title off one of my fellow dukes. This is what Royal Court was meant to be.
Wait hold on, I think I missed the part where CK3 was ever a good game, because as far as I recall since release it has basically always been just a very shallow experience that despite having some good ideas never went anywhere with them and is still plagued by a spam of meaningless events (with bad writing might I add) in lieu of an actually deep gameplay. CK3 has never actually been good, so far it has only been a pretty shallow game that has the *potential* to be good but is never taken anywhere, it's like if you have the foundation of a house but it's almost completely empty with very few rooms inside and the ones that are there lack furniture or wallpaper, but instead of working on it you just decide to focus on renovating the facade to make it as appealing as possible to onlookers who might be interested to come see it closer (the job is sloppy however)
How about charging $15 for a South America DLC where half of the focus tree is copy and pasted from one country to another? Paraguay, Brazil, Argentina and Chile all have the exact same military tree.
I agree with the you and the devs that CK3 needs more longevity for campaigns. All too often I quit a game at the empire stage bc it gets boring or I'm getting overwhelmed with pop ups. I think adding more late game decisions would make it more interesting. Especially for the cultures that don't get much love. Also a new notification system would be useful. The pop ups would be alot less annoying if they were just notifications that I could open. The main issue I have with pop ups is when I'm at war I can't see shit and they can sometimes fuck over my game if I'm in 2x or 3x speed.
I should’ve known something was up, the DLC bundle has been on 20% off sale for a good bit. Like I wasn’t complaining cause it gave me time to get it a wait a thought was the fairer price but I swear they had never had sales that for long for new/upcoming stuff
As a ck3 player who only really has the base game (I’ve only bought the Viking DLC) I’d say the DLC’s are ill received because most of their contents are just things that should’ve been in the base game already. I can understand having stuff like cults, more unique interactions, and or clothing choices being DLC, but having what should be base game features in a medieval game like having a court, unique events like tournaments and custom feasts, or culture mergers is just stupid especially in a bad economy like we have now. If it was 10 dollars per DLC I could understand but there’s no way that I’m paying 20+ dollars for something that is neither expansive nor justifiable as not being a base game feature. Stuff like the Byzantines not having having an imperial system and not being able to play as republics is just stupid and either shows a lack of though or time that went into the game’s initial development. I’ve played a few mods and I don’t really see a justification for why most of this stuff wasn’t either base game material or released as non dlc. Something I’d absolutely pay for is a map expansion to Asia, more events like uniting the North Sea empire that actually feel rewarding, or even more horde invasions. Just giving us what we already should’ve had just feels greedy and lazy especially when moders casually do more in a few months than paradox has done in years. At the end of the day I just want to role play so the upcoming dlc seems promising since unlanded characters seems both expansive and as something that the base game shouldn’t have. It seems like a true dlc as long as paradox doesn’t botch it.
I think a separate game focused on Asia would make more sense as opposed to adding even more regions east of India. There are already enough areas of the game that need to be developed, and east asia would just be adding fuel to the fire
@@4Xtraordinaire adding China would ruin the game (not just being good but from the crashes) as China will break apart it will reform it will break again and reform 80 times IN ONE FUCKING YEAR
Tributaries would fit very well with a DLC focused on the near east/steppes akin to horse lords in my opinion. There is a lot of potential for interesting content with the mongol invasion and the conflicts that arise from it
@@4Xtraordinaire Maybe tributary was the wrong word to use I ment more like Client States where they do partially what vassals do without the risk of rebellions. P.S I agree that the far east needs more content I literally never play over there
@GreenSkinGentleman i mean most of them wouldnt fit in the way ck3 is done which a big reason why they aren't their yet. Also ill be honest so many of the ck2 features are so half baked and rushed like the tributaries and thats after being fixed through updates and patches. I do wish paradox would focus on updating and bringing those back though. Hope the byzantine dlc has some of that spark
paradox is a publicly traded company, they create revenue not to make more content but to appease shareholders, no matter if some of them are the same people who previously held stakes in the company
From the moment CK3 released for the streamers to showcase it was clear that it was wayyyy dumbed down. Everything is just way too easy in comparison with ck2
For some reason they seem completely unwilling to do anything that worked in CK2. In my opinion Northern Lords was by far the best DLC that has released for CK3 (despite the fact it was limited in scope) because it followed a simple model - but one that worked. Now the devs seem obsessed with adding mechanics that don't interact with anything else, and more importantly, are just boring to use. I love CK3 and it has so much potential but at this point I don't think it will achieve it, and that disappoints me.
CK3 vanilla will never achieve it's full potential but for a while now it has become clear that CK3's greatest advantage is mods and on that matter, no matter how much Paradox messes up the mechanics they implement, mods will find a way to make them fun
Because if they do anything in CK2 the idiot fanbase would complain. If they make it similar to ck2, people get angry about buying it for ck3 and then not doing anything new, if they c hangs it substantially people will get mad about it not being as good as the system in ck2
I'm convinced the heads of these major game devs are made up of chimps in suits. These people are so out of touch with the player base that it isn't even funny. It isn't that difficult to find out what the player base wants.
It isn't? Half the time the player base wants things that are in opposition to each other or have half-baked ideas with no idea how to implement or balance them. By now I don't even take steam reviews serious anymore, because it feels like there is a hard core of people who just review negatively anyway, because they hated the last Stellaris DLC or something else.
This. We habe romaboos, weird nationalists and whatnot. Giving the masses what they want is not always the best choice. Heck. I bet those who wanted landless gameplay will be disappointed by the pdx version of it just because it wasnt possible to logically implement better in RtP. I think also that a lot of the playbase is detached of what they want in ck3. @@HDreamer
@@elmarm.5224 I remember the glory days of debates about what culture and religion Bosnia should have...in EU3! lol never mind that anything regarding the Balkans turns to madness anyway,but the details demanded for one single province were insane.
this along with the cities skyline and vic 3 announcements i think is evidence of a big shakeup going on behind the scenes and a serious reflection of their development process
I think the problem with CK3 is: They need to focus on the people. I really hoped bannerlord would introduce ck elements giving it the perfect in game and grand strategy blend but... nope.
if RoP goes badly, I don't think I will buy a chapter of Crusader kings 3 anymore. Up until now I have trusted and received stuff of little value, I only save TaT for me the only decent DLC released. I open a discussion on paradox's philosophy of putting the real content in the free patches, I'm pleased that those who can't afford or don't want to buy certain DLCs get some content, but I find it frustrating that those who pay don't get anything important by paying LoD I got "legends" meh much worse than bloodlines and black plague "wow". I think it's thanks to us consumers that people who don't pay can enjoy these substantial free patches and I think we consumers deserve even more content than the little we receive compared to what we pay. sorry for the bad English this message was written using google translator, greetings from Italy
In my opinion piracy is acceptable if you wanna try out the game, but if you end up enjoying it and can afford it without issues you're morally obligated to buy an official version- especially in case of indie games.
>Scots can diverge into Ancient Egyptian >Egyptians/Nubians/etc CAN'T diverge into Ancient Egyptian Legends of the Dead had the potential to be good but they took every opportunity to add meme options at the expense of more grounded parallels. Yeah, the legend of Scota is cute but the British Isles have like 9001 legends specific to it while actual geographical owners of theses cultures (trojans, egyptians, etc) can't even adopt legends native to their land and they currently have 0 legends unique to them. They let the brits larp as the Trojans but a Carthagian/Phoenician legend is too much? Really, PDX? Really? They didn't even add *real* fun meme legends like Lithuanian "romans".
At this point I don’t feel confident in CK3 in 2024. Playing the game is okay, but needs more work on multiple levels to feel better. Meanwhile, Stellaris just got a huge win with the latest free update and DLC. So, I’m going to wait until 2025, come back and seeing how things are going.
4 years and there are still no conclave mechanics nor functioning crusades. Continuing to play this failed project is masochism and only feeds the delusion that someday, after you buy x dlcs it will be good like ck2. It will never be like ck2. i speak from experience, stellaris squandered its potential over the years, becoming a bloated corpse which does nothing but adding new mechanics which dont communicate with each other. Nu Paradox doesnt deserve your money, nor even your time.
Stellaris is mostly solid imo, it’s different than the other games because of how sandboxy it is. I don’t like that new release, but frankly I can still have a lot of fun in Stellaris vanilla even today. I didn’t like some of the changes but honestly it’s not as bad as their more recent releases and it’s openness means that I can get even more play time out of mods
Fr paradox used players as a making Machine through stupid dlc models , I never bought one yet , have played eu4 and hoi4 pirated and playing ck3 now through game pass
We don't have to make any compromises. If a dlc is bad, it should get a bad review. They keep developing this game, they keep charging money for it, so we as consumers have a right to demand quality. Free updates are cool and all, but if the true meat content of the update, which is always the DLC, is bad, underwhelming, disappointing, or introduces a massive, unfair power creep (looking at you, Stellaris), it gets a negative review.
The multiple succession options is huge, completely transforms the game! Now I can give up the throne without feeling like I've been robbed because a shitty character I don't want to play is set to inherit. I feel it allows me to play much more organically and explore more, and is likely to see me finish CK3 games to end date
Your channel is criminally underrated, you cover the news I want to hear about PDX that no other creator seems to talk about. Truely carved out your own niche and the highly produced content is great!
Paradox are trying hard to monetize for little work is the sad truth, take a look at Hoi4 DLC's as well. I'd argue CK3 has it better than HOI4 but at least HOI4 is carried by the golden dlcs like No step back and Man the guns, they need to monetize but actually make DLCs worth buying.
Tbh, I find that dev diaries should really be more like diaries. Weekly updates and in-sights into the development of the game and the people behind it. Not only frequently coming up advertisment texts, when a new dlc is coming up.
The army AI is still lacking. Your allies randomly splitting from the army group just to pluck up daisies in regions around is so infuriating to me. To the point I don't even start wars if I can't win with my troops only. And I miss the vassal casus beli from the ck2. In ck2 if an enemy attacked your vassal, not just you as a liege, but that vassal also took arms to defend his own lands. I miss that logical step in defense. The republic states are still unplayable, I know they will dlc it eventually, but we all know this game will be unfinished even in 2034. Also, the piety and prestige resources are underimplemented, give me somewhere to spend them. As a tribal lord, I can spend the prestige but even that comes to a halt at some point, and piety is just massing up if you don't want to constantly create new religions. I do like Legends of the dead though, the plague/disease spreading mechanic is actually great.
Maybe I'm part of the minority but I play with the goal of unlocking specific achievements. I look at something like 'Beta Israel', check what else I can pick up along the way and that's it. Once I get the achievements, that's the end of that run. It means I do end up playing all over the map and can balance my time between easy achievements and very hard runs
I never play for official achievements, I set strange goals for myself and play towards those; hybrid Greek-norse culture that has united Christianity under a new Temporal pope. Reform Sunni islam to be syncretic with Christianity before the crusades even start. star as Khazaria and convert to organized Jewish religion and create a hybrid; khazar-Israeli or khazar-Magyar culture and conquer eastern europe and the steppes before the mongol invasion and stop the Mongol khans. form the west Francian empire as the Karlings and form a new French-Saxon or French-Dutch hybrid culture and take Britain and culture convert it all. I also always has a side-quest; of capturing various people from famous dynasties and have them stay as my landless courtiers and have them breed offspring with albino - dwarf and have them as my Jesters.
The notion of adding filler mechanics and text walls in order to not disrupt the "sandbox" exoirience is faulty. People play a computer game to have a challenge, paradix game specifically to chalkenge their idea of a cool alt-history with the game . The mechanics should reflect these chalenges and unexpected burdens and reward you if you make it trough . Mechanics like stress forve you to act in accordance to the traits the descendants you raised have . TT forces you to plan your trips and not teleport . Thats what makes them great
There is really no excusing the price tag on Paradox games. Even World of WarCraft had the sense to package earlier expansions. Even now, with all the wanton greed, you don't have to individually purchase all xpacks for WoW. If all these games were "Buy basegame and 2 major expansions for a full game + 2 xpacks worth of content" then that would be right. Stacking DLC upon DLC until, let me check, it costs 214€ to own the full experience? That's one querter of what I make in a month bro. Even if I made 10 times as much I wouldn't buy into this. In fact if piracy wasn't an option and I had to chose between buying the game or not playing at all, but someone handed my 5k to spend on steam I still wouldn't buy it. It's just ridicolous, that's what it is.
I think one thing we need to acknowledge is that almost every major paradox dlc across their games change the gameplays completely. It’s almost like a completely different game from what was originally released. Look at EU4 from the beginning till now. After all these years, there’s so much content and the entire gameplay has changed. I’m happy buying a new dlc every year rather than a new game completely
This holds true only for EUIV and Stellaris tbh. And those in fact are the most successful games atm (aside HOI4 which has a completely different foundation though)
I don't know... my attitude towards paradox decreases with each new game released, with each new DLC. I have the impression that they have changed from masters of making grand strategy games to masters of marketing. There are a lot of promises in their productions, a lot of giving hope for a good title. and then it all breaks down and suddenly it turns out that no one knew anything, that the poor state of the game was not their fault. And everything you don't like will be fixed in paid DLC. Which, by the way, doesn't fix much, but rather causes more problems. At the beginning of Tinto Talks, Johan said that the average time to develop new games is less than half a year. SERIOUSLY?! The most complicated strategy games on the market take half a year to develop?! GET ME OUT OF HERE. What then is the reason for the constantly increasing price of games? Certainly not from an increase in quality. Lately I've been feeling like I'm like a sheep that Paradox is slowly shaving as they please.
Love CK3, recently hit 3000 hours played. Wild to see people complaining about $20 DLC that actually brings new mechanics to the game, meanwhile most other games now days charge $40 for a cosmetic pair of boots that do nothing...This is one of the few games left still putting out regular updates at a respectable price, not to mention all the free updates on top of that. Clearly CK3 players don't play many other games, or they'd realize real quick how good they have it.
Communication was never the problem. The DLC are simply just lackluster for the most part, especially if you don't care about a region tied to a new mechanic. The best part about CK3 is in my opinion the RP. The stories you generate and I wish they would focus much more on that. The plague gives me more "story" windows sure, but you can't really do anything about it outside of pressing 2 buttons and have the same interactions with your doktor you always had. I want 10 more different ways for my character to find out that his wife/husband is cheating. 10 more different ways to handle my rival etc. These are just two random examples, off the top of my head, but I hope you get what I am talking about.
The biggest problem with the video game industry right now, across the board is community management. Bad community management across multiple studios, not just AAA, but AA and indie now too. Developers need to stop DEI and Reddit hires, specifically, hiring people with Journalism and Social Studies Degrees OR people with degrees from Games Schools into Community Management roles; The problem is, Governments incentivise these hiring because they cover their pay checks. The issue is, these individuals *are not* qualified for these roles; Not only are they complete snowflakes who are incapable of handling passionate fans being angry, but they don't care to do their jobs correctly by condensing what fans want into categories of importance based on highest similar requests then presenting them to the developers, in fact, most of the time, they just give customers lip service then relay no information to the developers, instead lying to them that everything is fine because those who employ them tell them to do so, because they want to protect developers feelings. On the flip side, they also fail to convey the scope of the work the developers have done to the customers, often embellishing or overhyping something which isn't as broad or as in depth as it really is, in hopes that customers will not flip out at the pricing or are doing this intentionally because again, their boss tells them to so they can charge more than what customers are willing to pay. It is all bad faith practices which if anyone could afford to sue over, will land many companies in the industry in hot water, because it is unacceptable and eventually Governments will go after them if customers get too pissy over it. Companies need to hire professionals, who have social worker degrees, counselling degrees, experience in customer service of at least 18 months (this is what they used to do before DEI), demonstrate they are apolitical in dealings with customers, apolitical in their behaviour in the work environment and have a tough skin (can tell the difference between genuine threats and people just being overly passionate in a moment of weakness) whom respect the people they are interacting with; Respect goes both ways, it is expected for the "help" to respect the customer, full stop. Because their livelihood depends on the customer's money, this should be non-negotiable. Customers should not have to care about the feelings of the help, this notion we have today is ridiculous, politeness should be something that goes without saying, but it isn't the customers responsibility to care about someone's pronouns nor someone's feelings or political leanings. End of discussion.
Paradox is also notoriously bad at QoL improvements of the interface. It is crazy that you still cannot filter court invitation by acceptance for example.
PDX has had a huge problem with DLCs across all games. Even HOI4 where theyre a bunch of fanbois and simp for pdx all the time has pushed back on the last dlc. Vicky 3 hasnt had anything good said. CK3 had a good base and just shat on it. Im about done with buying their stuff. Its not even worth pirating.
For me this shit just costs too much for being a visualized pick your own adventure book with Microsoft excel. The DLC should be at LEAST half the cost they’re asking for. Do I buy a whole game like V rising? Or add 4 more flavor text boxes to my game about maps?
I never make it very far in my games, typically because things get stable and there isn't much to do. But conquerors sounds good, I've been using the mod Historic Invasions which is the same thing essentially. That's really what I wish there was more of: an actual historic narrative that you get to be apart of. Basically the reason why I kept playing CK2 with HIP for a loooooong time after ck3 came out. Making it to endgame would be awesome if the world genuinely changed in an at least semi historical manner. Right now YOU the player have to MAKE the AI recreate history yourself, by intervening and funding it (have to get another mod to let you join all the wars, haha).
I want more start dates, because I don’t like the current ones. I would like a 1204 or 1081 one, were Byzantium is in trouble. The updates make mods have a hard time to adapt, so having the devs making the start dates is best.
Make the flavor DLC's 5.99 and the big ones 9.99 we won't complain as much. I've spent thousands of my dollars on Paradox throughout my life and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth when we get a 30$ addon that gives us... crickets - when we all know we can play these for free and effectively collapse Paradox if we wanted to. At what point does the fan base just say enough already we've been had too many times. cough Victoria 3 cough
Funny thing is, the flavour DLC were 5,99€ for CK3. The retroactively increased the prizing (shortly before Friends and Foes was announced) because supposedly they were worth so much more money.
Adding new start dates is a must. Constantly dealing with the same scenario is boring. England in both start dates is an immediate annoyance cause you have no time to prepare for the onslaught. France is bordergore central. Which i feel adds to people always playing in the same areas.
Well, personally, I'm still waiting for some variety in governments and gameplay. I like a few of the new mechanics, like adventuring ... but everything else feels the same for me. On one hand, it's nice that you can play any region you like, and it is not different, but I still go back to CK2 to play as merchant republics or hordes. Similar to ck2, the change from tribal to feudal doesn't click with me, and it's all just a drag. Also, I think that's me but on one hand CK3 feels slow, but at the same time many pointless events and popups come from all sides and flood me without any benefits or real impact of my choice ... if I have any. Sometimes I can't even differentiate quickly enough if a popup is for a plot I started on my own or something that came from another side. Technically, ck2 has the same problem, but something about ck3 UI just makes me uncomfortable.
I think Legends can take a hint from Bloodlines, because CK2 always did a good job with balancing the fantastical elements and the more medieval elements and when you played CK2 so much more existed, I think Legends needed to honestly be part of a later DLC with combat being a big part of a DLC before then as fighting to the death and being a great fighter should be something which allows you to create a Legend and thus that Legend will give you modifiers like Future house members have a higher chance of gaining high prowess traits and high Martial traits. I will say Minigames don't really belong in Crusader Kings, it should very much still be a bit RNG heavy because the RNG of Crusader Kings II allowed every playthrough to feel different. Crusader Kings III on the other hand, a lot of the leaders do feel too similar because lifestyle events are always very similar. Although I will say CK2 is a lot harder than CK3 ever was.
In CK3 the only game I ever did from 867 all the way to end date was a matriarchal coptic Nubia game. I still have notes of every character and a small summary of what they did. But aside from that I still find myself going back to CK2 cause it's just that good. I wish CK3 gets its act together cause it obviously has the potential to be better but I'm not hoping much tbh.
The main point of CK2 was always that it was a 4x/grand strategy game, but deeper. It had all the layers of a regular game, with conquest, alliances, CBs, military compositions, tactics, terrain, etc... But it had one additional layer of depth and strategy that other games didn't, with the management of dynasties, relationships, vassals, having enemies within and without your kingdom you should be weary of. Ck3 made a game that's supposed to be a greater grand strategy game, and made it, somehow, lesser, hell, it's turning into a visual novel at this point.
I feel like Paradox is expecting the player to roleplay being a medieval run of the mill ruler and they design the game along those scales. But then the player decides to conquer all of Europe and the Middle East in one lifetime and then rightfully expects to be remembered as Alexander the Great Reborn, which the game doesn't do. There has always been a disconnect between the actions of the player and the reaction of the game (even in CK2) and I don't know if Paradox is even interested in fixing that because it would require them to modify their vision for the game.
I myself have unfollowed every single content creator that makes Paradox content. Most of them are liars and hypocrites. Taking sponsors deals and proceed to lie about said sponsor being good or bad. If there are any negative comments, they delete them.
I have avoided taking sponsorships thus far and the only reason I would consider changing my stance would be if it was unrelated to the product I’m playing or talking about. There is a massive conflict of interest when it comes to reviewing content for a company that you have a contract with, which is why I have relied purely on money from the RU-vid partner program
@@4Xtraordinaire I understand and respect that. Although, I am NOT saying content creators should never take sponsors, you should. But stay honest ffs... F.e. One Proud Bavarian kept deleting my comments. I called him out about not being honest in sponsored videos. Its disgusting really.
I stopped watching One Proud Bavarian after his Victoria 3 pre-release video where he broke the game while simultaneously going on and on about how great it was.
@@KitteridgeStudios I left the community when Chapter 3 of CK3 was announced and every yt kept saying how great it was. Yeah, sure... Paying 50 bucks for features that the game should have from launch.
CK3 DLC has been so weird. CK3 itself was disappointing and not a worthy successor to CK2 (my most played game on STEAM and probably my second most played game of all time) but I thought that, given time, DLC and expansions could bring it up to scratch. But it hasn't. I remember the day The Old Gods was released for CK2 like it was yesterday. It was an absolute blockbuster of an expansion. A new start date, game changing mechanics, new portraits, AMAZING new music (seriously some of the best videogame music I've ever heard), it was an amazing time to be a grand strategy gamer. Where is CK3's equivalent? There's just nothing here at all. Every single DLC that has released for CK3 has had me like "meh, maybe I'll buy it in a mega sale next year, but only if it's like -80% or something." It's like they gave up!
I was really disappointed in legends. They should have been something akin to bloodlines that would pop up if your ruler satisfied certain requirements. Something akin to talking up your ancestors, and your dynasty by extension. Like a badass general/duelist that slew many men. A whoremonger… A ruler that liked sewing plots and was ruthless in his pursuit of power. Conquerors… etc. something that would tie into the dynasty renown and legacies.
I honestly can't believe I'm saying this but I would've preferred if they just cut and paste LotD's relevant mechanics from CK2 (bloodlines and plagues). Bloodlines were a fine mechanic as a permanent reward for a notable achievement and would've melded well with ck3's new family tree and diverging house system. Instead you get the chatgpt ai generated 3 chapter stories that last some years at best. Ck3 plagues needed to be playtested and get more events, getting an event notif and Alms events every time a plague hits one of your provinces (which is crazy often) is obnoxious. For landless gameplay I beg paradox to just study the Rise to Power mod from ck2, it had mini activities to build up wealth and influence from literal nothing and would work really well with the travel system
Its because there wasnt enough in the base game on release and they are releasing all these DLC's but they also havnt got enough content. If people can remember the last year of CK2 they were releasing free updates that actually improve the game maybe these updates didnt have enough content but with how many updates there were during that 1 year it made it worth it, whereas CK3 we are lucky if we get 2 major DLC's and 2 major updates a year, meanwhile modders are making whole DLC Sized mods and others feel like a new game LOTR and GOT for example, im not saying the devs dont work hard but other game devs seem to be more involved with their game with more frequent updates, i feel like the devs of CK3 dont even know their own game or playerbase or where its going.
For me its all the busywork, all they're doing is adding buttons to click that don't manifest significant changes in the experience. I cringe and screech with stress when i have to go through and refill all my courtiers, and legitimacy and legends feel just like more additions to that long list of chores that get in the way, not add.
I just wish, as a console player, we can eventually get good dlcs for both versions of the games. Please may roads of power be good so when it (eventually) comes to console I can play the Byzantines in all of their glory.
$30 for a dlc is criminal. Especially when we get such a small amount of content for the price. You could buy Subnautica, Dave the Diver, Satisfactory, Stardew Valley, Foxhole, They are Billions, Regiments, Myth of Empires, and Pacific Drive each for $30 or less.
In Johan we trust Sadly ck3, cs2, v3, millenia, stellaris(star trek), and recently hoi4 (they're keeping it afloat with free weekends) have all fallen victim to paradox's 'these dumbassess are eating up anything we throw at them' strategy All we can do is pray and cope that they don't kneecap Johan I personally have given up on paradox altogether because they sell you the promise of a good game and to say that they under deliver would be an understatement. It doesn't help that they're basically alienating the people that brought them here >[company] releases a unique thing >people like it because its authentic >[oh its popular globally] >[thing] starts being made with a more globalized audience in mind >original fans lose interests because it no longer feels like the older [thing] >[thing] stops attracting new people because it lost all of its character in the process of making it 'more palatable for newcomers' >[company]: 'where money?'
