why does this list a 2012 release date for a game from 2007 ?

[sage40]

14 February 2012 is the date that Crusader Kings II came out, but this is also the date listed here for the 1st game.

Is "complete" some kind of remastered version of the 2007 original? I don't see this mentioned anywhere on wikipedia.

Also curious if anyone knows what the 6 feb 2023 depots update for this did. Seems strange they'd still be tweaking something old, were there bugs?

[Varainger]

No idea.

The game was relased in 2004, the expansion in 2007 and sold already before 2012 as the complete version, so including the Deus Vult expansion.
There was no relevant change for the player in 2012 or after.

All just Steam database stuff changes, most likley.
IF anything, then there were some secruity fixes included, though i doubt it.

You didn't miss any patches or content change, if that was your intent to ask.

[sage40]

was wondering what your thought was on skipping CK1 and playing CK2 right away since it's free, is that like skipping the WC1 story to play WC2 tides of darkness?

[Varainger]

Originally posted by SCAP:

was wondering what your thought was on skipping CK1 and playing CK2 right away since it's free, is that like skipping the WC1 story to play WC2 tides of darkness?

Err.....are you saying you haven't played CK1 yet and are asking if it's alright an idea to not have played CK1 before CK2 ?

IF so, there are both different games, but there is no reason why you need to have played CK1 beforehand, other than that it's a nice game and i prefer for example some graphical decisions (buildings in picture of province, rather than what is basically a text spreadsheet in CK2) and i prefer the.....let's say immersion i got with CK1 to CK2. Also how things are worded and the overall impression. I suspect as CK2 already feels as what was intended for it contrary to CK1, for it to be basically a Game of Thrones simulator, as the head dev more or less said it himself. CK2 being closer to WoW in a sense than to Defender of the Crown or Civilisaton or such classics.

Compared to that CK1 is in basic feel still a typical strategy, as in building up your territory on map, do some reasearch, get events through it, build and army and go. That mixed with the character relations, getting born and dying, event related to traits and stuff happening made it feel better to the clearly roleplaying focus that CK2 has. Which got worse in my opinion with way of life, then Reapers DUe and the Monks and Mystics DLC and the fantasy societies.

By what i know and seen CK3 exaggerated that even more and turned it into a storytelling simulator rather than a strategy game. Ah well....

I love CK1 and play it from time to time every few years.
IF you don't mind old games with different interfaces and far weaker (but still often better fitting) graphics than today, then i definetly recommend it. I would still strongly suggest to use a mod that changes the sounds, as CK1 has some rather unbalanced strong interface sound effects. There are also some great mods that improve it quite a bit and are more or less required.

IF you meant to say and ask someting else with that, then please rephrase.

I have no idea what you meant to say with
"WC1 story to play WC2 tides of darkness".

[sage40]

that's a reference to Warcraft Orcs and Humans > Tides of Darkness

[Varainger]

Originally posted by SCAP:

that's a reference to Warcraft Orcs and Humans > Tides of Darkness

Oh okay. That were my only encounters with WoW. Now that's long ago.
I don't recal anyone caring about any background story back then, so not a comparison that i can make. Though there is no story for CK in the first place, apart from history, so...
Well i suppose my response was sufficent either way then.