Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
Правила обсуждений
Пожаловаться
With finally a FULL SCREEN BARBERSHOP without having to resort to MODS .
Another about their VISION , which the CK3 community riot , not cause their vision was flawed. cause people are waiting for NEW mechanics.
Now finally they see the new Mechanics and finally it got a real positive view of the DLC, something of QUALITY , not only 3D wise but mechanic wise, and a lot of work they have to do. something people were used to in CK2 , even if people disliked the Societies , the Nomads , nobody could not deny they were mechanics that were new.
Even the way of life people revolted against it , anybody play CK2 without way of life ?
Sure it might not be everybody cup of TEA , but for once nobody can say it is just a EVENT PACK , that some modders could also do for free.
That boast well for the future of CK3.
You can have vastly improved fantasy CK2+ soon. Probably never be able to have CK2+ that is historical
The moment you as player interfer with history , it is no longer historical.
Infact the historical effect of this game is so flawed , I am amazed nobody even bother with it.
With People popping historical Sons and Daughters , while married to somebody else or made infertile.
.... >,< you want to call that historical .
So honestly ask yourself how historical is that game ?
If you love history , just log in and observe. isn't that what you want ? and complain to paradox the game isn't going to go historical .. cause none of the observe ones did.
Republics in 2 weeks
Horselords in 4 weeks
Trust the plan.
However the main, most important and crucial thing which kept me going in CK2 for days, basically gluing my face to the screen was the dynamic storytelling the game was able to pull off, the fragility of my characters or dynasty members I care for, the other characters and my lieges which I was able to plot against for years because of certain interactions which make sense. Their personality/characters just feels more real, in CK3 they feel shallow. The goals I decided to go for were more motivating because the world, and the way it interacted was 1. dangerous 2. ''real'' or how to call it.
The game feel also easy, that's tied up to the fragility. It's not motivating me to keep going. I understand that they wanted to introduce IP to more players for obvious reasons but all that RNG made CK2 essentialy so captivating. Your ruler dying of cancer, splitting the realm among sons which then wage a war for years. Rebellions throwing all of your work in complete chaos ongoing on for years until you get defeated, getting sick, maimed, dying and then have your heir assasinated by regent, plagues wiping out almost whole court. All of this and many more didn't produced artifical difficulty, opposite actually considering time-period and general randomness of life anyway. Many of these things are in CK3 but they are toned-down too much. You can't fail, and when you can't fail where is the fun in doing it?
I don't care for Nomads, or Republics or Tours and more events packs while I off course gladly take any of them but if CK3 dev. team can at least be on par with CK2 dynamic stories I will be more than happy just with vanilla.
for that to happen it needs more mechanics. tied to events, to make it meaningfull.
Sadly one of the first casaulties in CK2 were the AI courtiers scripts.. so they could optimise the game better, what you see in CK2 is the left over , when they gather their own lifestyle , improved themselves as they age.
Pre removal of most of those script to optimise, the courtiers were even more lively and improving themselves , but back then stats wasn't nerfed down to 12 ..
The events a lot of them were nerfed too or removed, so like your carefully raised son/daughter suddenly asking to join the holy order, get kicked out of the holy order cause He/She found a wife/lover , or Norse son ran off to varangian guards and gotten married to somebody worthless or return back to you a crippled body... aside from returning back with the varangian trait.
there were things out of your control , but not really out of your control ...
A lot of stories were tied to mechanics. and still gave players choices like yes or no.
A lot of CK3 events , are like ok does it matter... not really does it .
infact the childeren are more active in CK3 with bully and friendship and rivalry behind the screen. infact play a child for a while you notice you get more meaning full events and interaction, But then they grow up, suddenly everything is FINE and DANDY ...
Even that friend and foe rivalry was really stupid, I just murdered out a whole rival family didn't even feel any accomplishment or important or yeah that Duke started a rivalry , who was he again . I have no ties with him or her, just some random dude want a rivalry .... same as get a friend doesn't feel like a friend.
A friend in CK2 could offer to help you with the wars.. or donate gold to your cause.
Well the happy birthday was a nice event.. for example , but then slowly become dull again cause it happens so often.. but it is your birthday .. I rather had that event once every 5 year about friendship suprising you then every year happy birthday.
CK2 forexample the chain EVENTS lead to something GREAT and often permanent, here in CK3 the rewards are better , but the events feels ... bleh . so while the rewards are great in CK3 .. but even the rewards are just temporaly all those buffs X years , nerfs Z years.. they do not have lasting consequences .
Infact you reload CK2 at any point and it leads to a totally different story , then the previous game, in CK3 you reload and more often then not it leads to the same story or no story at all.
Best example in CK2 child of destiny , CK2 you could play child of destiny , you could witness child of destiny , and the child of destiny had multiple path they can take.
Same story for spawn of satan , same story for Joan of Arc , all of them have one thing in common , their rewards are GREAT , and Permanent... it feels you accomplish something, instead of just some TEMPORALY BUFF , lets reload CK3 .. another temporaly stats buff.
For example what was done well was the Joms Viking Pirates .. yes finally inheritable event troops after everything you done to set up that holy order.. feels terrific , but wait they just die out as other event troops. another temporaly reward. why bother to do it again ?
This is the issue with CK3 the most , why bother to do everything again.. for no real feeling of gratitude or no real meaning.
I played CK2 since way back in the day (originally owned it on CD, years before I made a Steam account). I *remember* what early CK2 was. I also watched it grew with each update and expansion, all the way until its last update before CK3 launched.
As a point of fact, CK3 day one had almost every single piece of CK2 content including and especially things that were CK2 DLC. Lets both be honest and acknowledge that the Aztec Invasion was more like a monetized mod than an actual DLC expansion and disregard it in a serious discussion. So outside of Aztecs invading...what mechanics from CK2 are missing in CK3? What content from CK2 is missing in CK3? I ask sincerely, because when I think about it I cant find anything that comes to mind. Can you accurately describe something present in CK2, after over 8 years of dedicated deving, that was not present in CK3 day one?
I loved CK2...it was a bit rough around the edges when I first got it, and def didnt become a mainstay of my gaming hobby right out of the gate, but it had charm and got much needed updates that made it so much better over time, to the point where I started playing it more after Holy Fury than even EUIV, the first game to dethrone the EU series from my top spot. But trying to say CK2 is objectively a better CK game in the series than CK3 is just bonkers, regardless of if you personally enjoy one over the other.
THIS is stuff worth complaining about. This is what we as a "community" of gamers (slightly cringe, ik, but stick with me) are supposed to be doing here, holding devs accountable by demanding the best out of the game they are responsible for. Not crying about core aspects of what make the game different from other titles in the Grand Strat space.
Eh seriously Aztec Invasion was meant cause people complain about Mongol Invasion..
And the WESTERN SIDE of the REALM was too secure , thus they introduced Aztec Invasion and tons of people went STUPID AZTEC , while they did the same as Mongol Horde... to balance that Muslim Empires who were tore apart. by the mongol horde.
You haven't been around have you , same way a lot of people never touched Merchant Republic aside from trolling stuff like , look African Merchant Republic.
The advantage of merchant republic was that you could CONTROL everything from city temple and castle.. the families could go TWO ways helpfull or Backstabbing,
In the end they messed up Merchant family so much , that it had become broken.
Cause players intermarry and owned all of the Merchant Rival Family. they put a stop to that.
So you can say you own the CD , but you sure have a poor memory .
Name the most perfect feature in CK3 .. bet you haven't touched that one did you.
The one feature that most people skip but it is more then perfect and sets the standard for CK3 above excellence.
So in all 3 years time , they never saw how much love was put into the COAT of ARMS.
But the 3D graphic and faces , are also excellent , cause it is a NEW feature , especially at 200% render .. (don't do that unless you have a very beefy graphic card, that is water cooled) .
Now I agree with you OP that CK3 has the potential to surpass and even be better then CK2.
But for that to happen , people better not like Nick Names .. something a average modder can do in 2 Minutes time.. by just Nick_the_name and localisation desc of the nick_the_name.. and then find a event/decision that gives out nicknames.
Cause ever praising something that simple , didn't made all the DLC after Raja of India masterpieces they are today. everything after Raja of India even if people didn't like it .
Has substance and mechanics .. and even the Society which Hendrix made .. how many people found it ridiculous was a NEW mechanic. and did brought out a laugh or two , with cultist rule the world , but sadly after 1 or 2 play trough I disabled it.
But the modded society I still use till today in CK2 :P
As for trying to suggest I "havent been around", its a stupid tactic to try and really just shows you dont have a better argument. When CK2 dropped in 2012 I was obsessed with EUIII (also owned on CD, still have my physical copy of it too, though my physical CK2 was lost after a recent move...something im still a bit peeved about tbh) and I didnt buy CK2 until...2013? At first I tried playing CK2 similar to how I approached EUIII, and as a result had a terrible time lol. But every now and again I would tire of EU and give CK2 a try, and eventually it won me over after a few more updates (though I didnt officially start liking CK over EU until Holy Fury, finally fleshing out the Vikings to the max). The way I enjoy playing, Republics were never really my cup of tea, but I did have a few campaigns playing as MRs just to test the waters and see what it was like. Honestly, I didnt much enjoy it and it felt underwhelming, but I chalk that up to it just not being something I personally enjoyed rather than an issue with the objective gameplay itself...which is why plenty of folks like yourself enjoyed it just fine.
As for your last bit, asking for what makes CK3 "above excellence"...that is a rather bizarre question to ask. CK3 is the next iteration in the CK series. Most of the things I would point out to those who arent familiar with the CK series would be things also present in CK2. So if you are asking for my subjective opinion on what I like about CK3 more than CK2, at this point I guess I would say the customization, which has been fleshed out WAY beyond any point in CK2. Having an actual character, as opposed to just a small portrait that doesnt really change anything except a background and a crown, is really neat to me. I remember when CK2 customization feature dropped and I was so excited, but compared to CK3 it doesnt hold a candle. I will say Day One CK3 I didnt like not being able to tailor make CoAs/Banners, but now we can so that complaint is gone. As someone who played CK2 since way back in the day before you could even choose to play as Africans and Vikings, I will say that if we were keeping things even between the two (a game that had 8 years to dev, vs a game that so far has only had less than half of that time to get to what will eventually be its best point), I could argue that from the jump you can select and play anyone, anywhere on the map and just start playing (theocracies aside...which I would like to see change as I feel that could be fun, but honestly Im not personally religious so I wouldnt utilize that mechanic very much). If nothing else, that alone put CK3 head and shoulders above CK2 in my eyes as that was my biggest issue with early CK2 which wasnt *fully* satisfied until Holy Fury...literally the last expansion CK2 ever got, 8 years after release. Northern Lords felt like a cherry on top for me lol.
Honestly though, once Tours and Tourney DLC expansion drops and adds the travel system and truly ties characters into real locations on the map, CK2 will feel officially outdated to me. You and others may still prefer CK2, but for me that will be the day CK2 will be permanently relegated as one of many greyed out entries in my vast Steam library, unless PDX absolutely F's the whole thing up or way underdelivers from its Dev Diary promises.
or improving CK2 .. they took the gamble and made CK3 , with superb 3D graphics.
But that doesn't mean CK3 is without substance after 2.5 years. which should have brought it closer to REPLACING CK2 .
Sorry the DLC with Fate of Iberia , people who didn't care about Spanish Reconquista will never be excited for Spanish Reconquista. while it was one of the most fun start for me in CK2 , cause I lived in Spain for a while and gotten introduced to their Rich History and Cultures.
Same as people hardly play in India do they ? but somebody keep working on India.
When they have some of the coolest mechanics.
Like people who didn't care about Mongol Horde , hardly know that you can get the GREATEST of KHAN with the mongol horde as event troops to conquer the world.
Cause they stick to their small western territory.
Everybody their own , and yes CK2 can feel outdated now I am done modding CK3 into the game I wanted , took me a while to do. so yes going back to CK2 while most of my important features are there in CK3 , plus glorious 3D graphics , I can understand that.
But I also understand I am not having the same Vibe once I am 2nd generation into CK3 .
Then the game feel too lackluster , infact for me it is too easy to control Succession fallout.
thus what does that leave me with CK3 ? just another easy map painter. without substance.. making it harder wouldn't matter , cause it still lacks meaning full substance.
Yes agree Travel and Tournement is the way forward, as shown by the DEV dairy , finally new Mechanics , even the making of CARAVAN shows you they put thoughts into it . wanting more interactions , but finally they are making stuff that benefits ALL AREAS , not just Iberia , or Norse ...
My goal is that CK2 can be abandoned that everybody moves over to CK3 cause you don't use the same PC as 10 years ago do you ?
By this point in development, CK2 would have the base game plus:
- Sword of Islam, allowing you to play as Islamic characters and denoting a difference between Shia and Sunni Islam, plus a small expansion of the map into Mali.
- Legacy of Rome, focused on Byzantines and also adding the Retinue mechanic.
- Sunset Invasion, again more of a monetized mod than an actual DLC, added Aztecs as a possible invading force to the West similar to the Mongol Invasion of the East.
- The Republic, making Republics playable with their own unique gov types and politics as well as adding new CBs around their mechanics.
- The Old Gods, adding 867 start and allowing the player to use most pagans, with viking mechanics, revolts, adventurers, and ability to reform certain religions.
- Sons of Abraham, focused on mechanics around Christianity, Islam, and Jewish faiths and added Holy Orders
- Rajas of India, allowing you to play Indians with a few new religions and a slight expansion further east into Bengal.
- Charlemagne, to my recollection heavily debated in the community for a number of reasons, added new start date of 769 and focused entirely on the Franks and the man who was to become Emperor Karl the Great, but also adding custom kingdoms and a viceroyalty mechanic to the game.
At this point, that DLC would have dropped not too long ago, and we would be looking forward to Way of Life, to dramatically expand the RPG element of the game by putting more power in the hands of the player and less in the hands of a simple equation of "personality trait + RNG". Nomads wouldnt even be announced yet nor even be in development for a future expansion, councils would still be basically useless to the overall game, childrens education wouldnt even be a thought, interacting with vassals would still be about as basic as "if like, then loyal, if not like then not loyal", plagues and epidemics and diseases would be laughable if present at all, secret (or no so secret) societies arent even a pipedream in the mind of the wildest modder never the less being thought of as a legit DLC, artifacts arent even a thing, allied armies kinda just do whatever they want which is sometimes useful and oftentimes annoying or outright infuriating, China not only continues to be out of bounds but completely non-existent, and finally (my personal favorite) Holy Fury and all of its glorious content such as allowing complete customization of pagan religions, new crusade mechanics, coronations, sainthood, bloodlines, and the "shattered" and "random" map modes are not even the faintest twinkle in the eye of a bright eyed and bushy tailed dev team...who are at this moment keenly focused on expanding Way of Life into an actual thing and maybe holding a few discussions on if nomads should be more fleshed out.
That would be the current state of development of CK2, approx 3.5 years after launch day.
Where are we with CK3?
- Fashions of the Abbasid Court, purely cosmetic DLC for Expansion Pass holders, adds some cosmetic options for N Africa and Middle East folks. Underwhelming, but its not even a real DLC...which I say is a good thing, kinda, as locking a good DLC behind a Pass would be horrid, but at least its a small sort of "thank you" for those who do drop the fat stack in support of the games content.
- Northern Lords, the first real DLC for CK3, focused on Vikings and various related mechanics including Adventures, Holy Warriors, Shield-Maidens, adding an entirely new and unique Dynasty Legacy tree, and culture specific decisions and events, along with additional cosmetic options
- Royal Court, another full DLC and a massive expansion, creates the "Royal Court" for Kings and Emperors to customize their culture specific throne rooms for various perks and opens a multitude of court specific events and activities, with big changes around cultures and artifacts.
- Fate of Iberia, focused on the Iberian region and the unique sequences of events that unfolded throughout the CK timeline, added the "struggle" mechanic which puts the region and all of its key players in various stages based on actions and decisions in the region, as well as adding many unique events and cultures and decisions, as well as fleshing out a few small details with relationships and the "board game" events.
- Friends and Foes, focused on relationships and adding an ungodly amount of new events centered around the various relationships the player can have with the characters around the world, and introduces the Memory mechanic where certain events in a character/players life can have impacts big and small for the rest of their life as they look back on those events positively or negatively.
- and finally, we are looking forward to the release of the Tours and Tournaments expansion, which will tie the player(s) and characters to the map itself and introduce massive changes to "basic" mechanics such as feasts, hunts, and more while also adding several massive events labeled as Grand Activities, while also introducing new mechanics which will completely alter how a liege can and will interact with their vassals through various smaller events localized to where characters and players are on the real world map.
Love or hate or indifferent to any of the DLCs from CK2 or CK3, you cannot say that somehow the approach to DLCs has changed. The approach is still the same. Each DLC is focused on either: A wide set of small changes to everything, a few massive changes to a certain specific region, or completely new additions to the game itself which also require changes to previous mechanics. A key difference is that with CK3 almost everyone and everything is playable, so each regional DLC isnt also "unlocking" playability in that region, but other than that the focus of the regional DLCs is much the same.
So frankly, what is the real issue here? Because if the issue is "game not even halfway through development isnt as developed as older game with double development time", Im sorry but give the new thing time to grow up and lets see how it stacks up then. Im not really sure why you end on a note of if I still use the same PC or what relevance that has to the topic, but the answer is no. I played EUIII and CK2 on an old Dell laptop that was part of a large donation from a company that wanted a tax write off when they upgraded to newer laptops and my mom "donated" one to me. Now, Im playing on a rig I built myself which im pretty sure will be able to play CK5 if I keep it that long lol. But again, not sure what that has to do with anything.
As for if CK3 can replace CK2, to be honest...CK3 replaced CK2 for me after Northern Lords, and Tours and Tourneys will officially make CK2 outdated. But its all subjective. I know people who still think previous versions of Sid Meiers games are superior to newer stuff, and its because of subjectivity about personal likes and dislikes, not about actual objective points of fact between the titles. Heck, I might be one of the last people who still likes CivCity: Rome more than any other SId Meiers title lol. (thankful I added it to my steam library, as I lost the physical copy like 10 years ago). I dont go around saying its BETTER, I just prefer it...and thats fine.
Cause that serves no purpose, since I like CK3 new way of handling things.. like the Focus tree (even if those perks are overpowered but fine new generation love those things) ,
But the mechanic that were in CK2 should return in one way or another .. or atleast , even if not Merchant Republic , make Republics Playable with a CK3 twist and perfection.
And there did a terrific job with the Tenents and Doctrines .. for none modders to enjoy some diversity while not having to learn Modding . infact I prefer this new Tenents and Doctrines to just modding everything I wanted in CK2.
The real issue is the lack of focus, when somebody says they will work on the mechanics , it is almost 3 years in the game , and the DLC are so meager (not talking about the content and upgrades for all that is free) .
Even that has been handled last DEV dairy , they want to go more RP that is good, I don't mind crusader "sims" .
But isn't it better to have a CK community united then divided.
Tons of people in CK2 didn't like the dlc but still bought it , infact CK2 was for a while Paradox Flagship , that other competitors gotten confused how come they get away with it.
It is by releasing Quality Content .. not half baked stuff.
Royal court was really IMHO opinion badly done, no free camera , cause they don't even want to finish the room with a gateway or door nobody sees it . limited on banner placement when it does fit into small flags. , why only 2 furniture or statues , when the center hall can also be fitted with Small statue or furniture. most of all spouse Throne, why can't I change her throne. sure I modded a lot to make it all fit , but like Tenants and Doctrine , why do I have to mod stuff , when Paradox could make things easier and more complete.
If you build a rig that can handle all the MODS within CK3 and multiple layer of clothings and still play at 200% render , you have one very good looking CK3 .. hats to you.
The issue was lack of a vision , when people start cheering NICK_NAMES , and EVENTS PACK without new mechanic , that doesn't really show progress does it .
When there are tons of mechanics from CK2 to copy , if they do not wish to copy CK2 topics , it is also allright , as long they stick to their vision , instead of taking the easy way out.