Is this game as bad as stated in reviews?

[[RA]Khurt]

I really loved Patrician III, PR2 and PR3 and I was looking forward this new chapter of the saga, but I've been quite discouraged by negative opinions. Is this game really a downgrade compared to PR3? I know about the turn based thing during battle, but it doesn't bother me that much.

I'm much more concerned about the trade system. I read that there are few resources compared to previous games, that it is really "manual" (few automatic features) and it overall very simple. Is that the case?

Can you share your own opinions? Thanks for your help.

[[STW] cavour]

@[RA]Khurt: ti rispondo in italiano perché ho come l'impressione che tu possa capirmi, chissà come mai... battute a parte, PR4 è fondamentalmente diverso dai precedenti titoli della Ascaron/Kalypso dato che, quest'ultimo, è stato ideato per mobile e non primariamente per PC ( ora è anche multipiattaforma). La grafica risente di questa scelta, così come le animazioni e il gameplay in generale, come hai giustamente menzionato con le battaglie navali a turni. Niente possibilità di assaltare per via terra una città avversaria così come nessuna possibilità di interagire con la madrepatria, che rimarrà un'entità totalmente estranea nella gestione delle nostre colonie. Il numero delle attività produttive cittadine è sicuramente inferiore a quello di PR2 e PR3, come se mancasse lo spazio necessario nelle varie isole caraibiche: nel giro di pochi anni ( anni in game) non ti sarà difficile saturare tutto lo spazio cittadino disponibile, dovendo compiere complicate scelte tra attività produttive ed edifici utili alla popolazione. Qualche prodotto in più ma il commercio è basilare e ti conviene compiere personalmente le spedizioni navali. Discutibile la decisione di far partire il gioco con il nostro PG già al grado di Governatore, saltando così tutta la parte politico/diplomatica che era il "sale" del gioco. Potrei dire altro, ma preferirei limitare qui l'intervento: qualche passo avanti ma parecchi altri indietro, speriamo alla prossima...

[Skyblade]

No its not at all. Its a really great game which takes patience and isnt "action" orientated like many of todays games. It has elements that are not great but overall its a real enjoyable slow paced game. I like to keep it on as I do other tasks and keep jumping in and out. If you like trading games there is a lot of stuff to enjoy here. Its a game that requires you to think a little too which puts off a lot of people today ;)

[Cutter Slade]

Unfortunately Port Royale 1 and 2 are still far superior imo.
Even PR3 has more to offer when it's about features.....

The devs have pushed some good updates after that 1.0 launch "fail" but there's still a lot of things that need improvement.

I'd give it several months or at least wait for their next roadmap update.

[jonnin]

The game had a ton of things that have been corrected since launch, we just got a 1.5 update (5 fairly large revisions to the launch day version). Its pretty good now, if you are not hung up on the really odd (totally unrealistic, that is, with magic abilities) choices (or the real time obsession). If you honestly don't care about combat at all, I would say buy it.

[Bransor]

Originally posted by RAKhurt:

I really loved Patrician III, PR2 and PR3 and I was looking forward this new chapter of the saga, but I've been quite discouraged by negative opinions. Is this game really a downgrade compared to PR3? I know about the turn based thing during battle, but it doesn't bother me that much.

I'm much more concerned about the trade system. I read that there are few resources compared to previous games, that it is really "manual" (few automatic features) and it overall very simple. Is that the case?

Can you share your own opinions? Thanks for your help.

I'm going to wait to buy it when they add realtime combat back, instead of turn based.
Whoever is responsible for the game should be fired. They took a AAA well known brand and botched it. Reminds me of Bethesda and Fallout 76. AAA game, long history, and..... Total epic failure

Had these guys put Port Royale 4 in early access and got customer feedback(And listened) this game may have been developed into a far superior product that what it is today.

[jonnin]

and that is the source of the negative reviews. ^^ A lot of people are all worked up over the real time vs turn based combat.
my 2 cents on it:
the old real time combat sucked. It took a lot longer to win than the new one, and it was the same fight every single time after a while. And joy of joy at circling a near impossible to kill turret for 30 min trying to not get one shotted (PR2) if it hit you while you chipped away it it with a peashooter, or watching your ships pound the town in a crude animation / 'got big ships test' of PR3. The rose colored glasses aside, it got old quickly for me.

the turn based combat of pr4 kinda sucks too, but its quick. You can win in a fraction the time of the old approach, and that alone makes it a good system. The town siege of PR4 is a step backwards, but that does not seem to be as sore a point as the combat.

You can make up your own mind on that subject, but I think it is unfair to this game to continue to give it negative reviews over what is really a small piece of a large game. The whole thing to me is on par with throwing a tantrum because PR4 lacks the swordfights after every ship battle that were in some of the older versions.

[Skyblade]

Yeah its kinda silly. The real time combat of past titles sucked and was so easy to cheat on with certain tactics. So they tried something new and yeah its not really that great either. However the rest of the game is really good. And no way would I want another Early Access game that never delivers what it is supposed too and stays in early access for its lifespan. Well done to the team for releasing a full game in the era of EA. They also supported the game with a number of good solid patches. I want more development teams to go back to this kinda game development.

They took a brand and they made a great game which i'm going to get way more than 100 hours of enjoyment from.

[Dafader]

outch

[69Inanna69]

Originally posted by RAKhurt:

Is this game as bad as stated in reviews?

I really loved Patrician III, PR2 and PR3 and I was looking forward this new chapter of the saga, but I've been quite discouraged by negative opinions. Is this game really a downgrade compared to PR3? I know about the turn based thing during battle, but it doesn't bother me that much.

I'm much more concerned about the trade system. I read that there are few resources compared to previous games, that it is really "manual" (few automatic features) and it overall very simple. Is that the case?

Can you share your own opinions? Thanks for your help.

Yes it "was" that bad when the reviews were done. The release version wasn't good.
Its been cleaned up a lot since then though..

No its not a downgrade to previous.. they are so old their graphics are barely playable for starters.

Trade system ... hmm, my favoured version of trade is, kill their crew, steal their ship, and everything on it,, then sell it.. "Trading"..

But I was always trading, just never paid much attention to it.. I mainly built trade ships in bulk 100 at a time, and as they were being made, set them, then send them off on their programmed routes, Then barely touched them after that.

[AmdWin]

Yes it`s a disaster PR4. I try refound it but they dont refound me becouse i played 24h(becouse i play since beta pre-release and i wait for fixing the game) but they don`t want to fix. It`s just a waste of money.

[Deschamps]

Originally posted by Tanitha:

hmm, my favoured version of trade is, kill their crew, steal their ship, and everything on it,, then sell it.. "Trading"

That's the caribbean spirit, after all