Should I upgrade to this game from 2 with all DLC?

[FizzMan]

Or is 2 with all DLC still better then 3?

[Abacus]

I would get it and then get any DLC you like.

Major mechanics are added with a free update, DLC usually expands of that.

The upcoming DLC is going to be a game changer.

Base game ck 3 has like 95% of ck 2 with all the DLC now. Not to mention things ck 2 never had like hybrid cultures, actually existing on the map, etc. Soon to have unlanded play. doesn't even come close, imo.

Both good games, but ck 3 is just flat out does the genre better, and it still has 5-6 years of dev before it reaches the same dev time ck 2 got.

[FizzMan]

Originally posted by Abacus:

I would get it and then get any DLC you like.

Major mechanics are added with a free update, DLC usually expands of that.

The upcoming DLC is going to be a game changer.

Base game ck 3 has like 95% of ck 2 with all the DLC now. Not to mention things ck 2 never had like hybrid cultures, actually existing on the map, etc. Soon to have unlanded play. doesn't even come close, imo.

Both good games, but ck 3 is just flat out does the genre better, and it still has 5-6 years of dev before it reaches the same dev time ck 2 got.

Hmmmmmmmm what's so game changing about the new DLC?

[jpcerutti]

How important are graphics to you in this genre?
Do you have a particular style of play?
Is similarity or difference the important thing to consider for purchase?
Is there anything specific CK3 has got to do to be worth buying?

[FizzMan]

Originally posted by jpcerutti:

How important are graphics to you in this genre?
Do you have a particular style of play?
Is similarity or difference the important thing to consider for purchase?
Is there anything specific CK3 has got to do to be worth buying?

I mean a little bit, I haven't played very much of CK2 despite owning all the DLC XD.

[FizzMan]

Originally posted by jpcerutti:

How important are graphics to you in this genre?
Do you have a particular style of play?
Is similarity or difference the important thing to consider for purchase?
Is there anything specific CK3 has got to do to be worth buying?

Is CK3 more casualized compared to CK2?

Is CK2 with all DLC a more hardcore or better game then CK3?

[jpcerutti]

Originally posted by FizzMan:

Originally posted by jpcerutti:

How important are graphics to you in this genre?
Do you have a particular style of play?
Is similarity or difference the important thing to consider for purchase?
Is there anything specific CK3 has got to do to be worth buying?

Is CK3 more casualized compared to CK2?

Is CK2 with all DLC a more hardcore or better game then CK3?

CK2 is the older franchise. It has gone thru a complete life cycle and is as developed as it is going to get.
Ck3 has better graphics, a better GUI, and far better 'tooltips' and tutorial. You can learn to play CK3 without reading the WIKI first.
CK2 has both a better overall AI and a better warfare system - if you don't want to mod anything either game.
If you are looking for some specific features, like bloodlines, or Aztecs, or Magic from CK2 they are not there in CK3.

Yes. CK3 is much more forgiving of mistakes, and open to various ways to achieve the same goal, than CK2.

[Rex is back, baby!]

Honestly, ck3 might not be your cup of tea if you believe ck2 > ck3.

Ck3 vs ck3 is a fundamental mind shift. Ck2 is more logic-based where stats/numbers matter with the overall objective of map painting.

Ck3 is more creative-based where roleplay and probability matter with the overall objective being the survival of your dynasty.

You have to treat ck3 as a different game when comparing it to ck2, else I don't believe ck3 will ever reach your standards.

[FizzMan]

Originally posted by The Rextinguished Gentleman:

Honestly, ck3 might not be your cup of tea if you believe ck2 > ck3.

Ck3 vs ck3 is a fundamental mind shift. Ck2 is more logic-based where stats/numbers matter with the overall objective of map painting.

Ck3 is more creative-based where roleplay and probability matter with the overall objective being the survival of your dynasty.

You have to treat ck3 as a different game when comparing it to ck2, else I don't believe ck3 will ever reach your standards.

That sounds like more my type of game, I was pretty overwhelmed heading in with all the expansions with CK 2 XD

Just endless amounts of charts and numbers, hope to give that game a fair chance one day!

[jpcerutti]

Originally posted by FizzMan:

Originally posted by The Rextinguished Gentleman:

Honestly, ck3 might not be your cup of tea if you believe ck2 > ck3.

Ck3 vs ck3 is a fundamental mind shift. Ck2 is more logic-based where stats/numbers matter with the overall objective of map painting.

Ck3 is more creative-based where roleplay and probability matter with the overall objective being the survival of your dynasty.

You have to treat ck3 as a different game when comparing it to ck2, else I don't believe ck3 will ever reach your standards.

That sounds like more my type of game, I was pretty overwhelmed heading in with all the expansions with CK 2 XD

Just endless amounts of charts and numbers, hope to give that game a fair chance one day!

I don't think you will regret it if you like the theme, and idea, and can live with adding any magic as mods if you want. I own both. I bought most of the CK2 DLC as they came out that weren't music or cosmetic. I don't play it anymore, but I play a lot of CK3.

It IS still Paradox Games. Things are still buggy when released, DLC can need rebalancing, and this game only a portion of each DLC is locked to a buyer - a fair bit of them are just code added to the base game.

[WalrusMan]

Originally posted by FizzMan:

Originally posted by The Rextinguished Gentleman:

Honestly, ck3 might not be your cup of tea if you believe ck2 > ck3.

Ck3 vs ck3 is a fundamental mind shift. Ck2 is more logic-based where stats/numbers matter with the overall objective of map painting.

Ck3 is more creative-based where roleplay and probability matter with the overall objective being the survival of your dynasty.

You have to treat ck3 as a different game when comparing it to ck2, else I don't believe ck3 will ever reach your standards.

That sounds like more my type of game, I was pretty overwhelmed heading in with all the expansions with CK 2 XD

Just endless amounts of charts and numbers, hope to give that game a fair chance one day!

If you feel that way, I definitely think you would appreciate Ck3. It's pretty forgiving for newcomers and does have quite a lot of features that didn't exist in Ck2. I'd say Ck3 is more of an outright RPG-Strategy hybrid whereas Ck2 is more of a strategy game with heavy RPG elements. Ck3 focuses in on what makes Crusader Kings unique to other grand strategy games, with the heavy focus on characters and roleplaying. The strategy elements suffer in some regards but honestly I think 3 is my preferred game now. Definitely wasn't true at launch, but 3 has reached a point where it's improved features are worth losing out on some features for 2 imo.

I heavily recommend at least getting the Royal Court dlc for this game to deepen the roleplay aspects. Tours and Tournaments is also good to that effec. Both games also have great modding communities, but 3 is definitely getting more active development on that front as well now.

[Bordric]

Originally posted by FizzMan:

Originally posted by Abacus:

I would get it and then get any DLC you like.

Major mechanics are added with a free update, DLC usually expands of that.

The upcoming DLC is going to be a game changer.

Base game ck 3 has like 95% of ck 2 with all the DLC now. Not to mention things ck 2 never had like hybrid cultures, actually existing on the map, etc. Soon to have unlanded play. doesn't even come close, imo.

Both good games, but ck 3 is just flat out does the genre better, and it still has 5-6 years of dev before it reaches the same dev time ck 2 got.

Hmmmmmmmm what's so game changing about the new DLC?

It is going to reform Byzantium a very popular country to play. Lots of other things.