Why do you prefer CK3 to 2?

[Flickmann]

CK2 seems to have more interesting content but the UI is a trainwreck

[humble_fool]

引用自 Scyth：

The expansions are like a tennis court or a Koi pond

But will the Koi pond have death sounds when the fish cark it? If not, instant zero ;)

引用自 brownacs：

I think a lot of people are comparing a finished house with the foundations of a potentially nicer house. It is a bit cheeky that the building company sells us the foundations, without the walls, roof, doors, electricity, plumbing etc., as a house and then asks us to pay for those things in instalments but c'est la vie (as you point out, the finished house was also sold in this slightly dubious way).

Really fair comment ... tho I can't imagine the amount of labour that went into constructing the house as it stands, so I'm cool with the builder's business model.

[Sel Und Irae]

2 has more content
3 needs 100 mods to be relevant

It's not up for debate as of writing since they rather do dev diaries than actually update the game.

[Spetsnaz]

引用自 brownacs：

引用自 Spetsnaz：

Tbh, played ck2 from the start and ♥♥♥♥ it was bare bones at the start. Too many people cry that ck3 has less content then a 300+ dollar game... Ck2 without DLC is boring and that will be the same thing for CK3

I love ck2 and think it is a great game but also love ck3 it looks a lot better and the UI is not a mess. Could it be better for sure but comparing a game with so many DLC against a game that only had one small content pack is a bit silly to me.

I think a lot of people are comparing a finished house with the foundations of a potentially nicer house. It is a bit cheeky that the building company sells us the foundations, without the walls, roof, doors, electricity, plumbing etc., as a house and then asks us to pay for those things in instalments but c'est la vie (as you point out, the finished house was also sold in this slightly dubious way).

But they sold the first house at full price as a foundation the first time too. In ck2 they sold you the same thing as now without the walls, roof, and go on and with DLC you got your full house. So, why is it good to compare them? In the end it is the same thing.

[Poliut]

I think CK3 is slowly getting there but CK2 still has more going for it.

[Flickmann]

引用自 Poliut：

I think CK3 is slowly getting there but CK2 still has more going for it.

Slowly isn't the word. Hopefully they'll release the next DLC pack before cockroaches take over the earth.

[Ser Slack]

For the last few years of CK2 play for me were all with the AGOT mod. Once it's released on ck3 i doubt I'll ever play ck2 again. Though it's a great game.

[Androzin]

I dont

[Manius Julius Prime]

I enjoy a 3D model vs a 2D portrait which always looked strange. The 3D model almost feels life like where the 2D portrait is just that. CK2 still has more stuff due to several DLC packs. Where CK3 once it gets the throne room will feel far more complete to being a better presentation.

[Dufflebags]

引用自 Scyth：

tl;dr CK3 is more accessible and has better graphics, plus it has a better DLC direction.

I found CK3 far more accessible, no doubt the "cleaner" UI plays a part in that, as well as the in-game tutorial and official tutorial videos, plus the overall less steep learning curve.
In addition to beginner friendliness, I find CK3 quite pleasing to the eye from a graphics as well as aesthetics point of view.
Lastly, I find the dozens of DLC for CK2 off-putting. The idea of paying $263 (imperial collection) for a decade-old game with all features is not appealing to me at all. CK3 has more than enough depth in the base game and will (hopefully) have fewer but more meaningful DLC expansions.

+1

[Dufflebags]

引用自 Spetsnaz：

引用自 brownacs：

I think a lot of people are comparing a finished house with the foundations of a potentially nicer house. It is a bit cheeky that the building company sells us the foundations, without the walls, roof, doors, electricity, plumbing etc., as a house and then asks us to pay for those things in instalments but c'est la vie (as you point out, the finished house was also sold in this slightly dubious way).

But they sold the first house at full price as a foundation the first time too. In ck2 they sold you the same thing as now without the walls, roof, and go on and with DLC you got your full house. So, why is it good to compare them? In the end it is the same thing.

Thats the irony. CK3 in comparison actually came with the walls and foundation. But probably not the roof.

Some of the best additions in CK2 where just base in CK3.

The reality is people just love misery and love to complain.

I also notice a trend that the most vocal audience is the once with thousands of hours in both games already. Maybe it's less the content, and more you've played a single game for an eigth of your mortal life time....