63% review: a very bad sign for Victoria 3. Here's why.

[Mad_House]

Ok being for real here.

You have to ask yourself if you want to see this game still being worked on 3 years into the future, because chewing people out isn't going to fix the following issues here.

#1. It'll put the break on sales.

People actually do look at the rating. It is confirmation of a binary choice; "yes" or "no." That percentile and Steam telling them "Mixed Rating" makes the "yes" or "no" unless they're already dead-set on buying it.

_

#2. It damages credibility of the company.

Paradox Interactive has made some flops in a short span of time, recently:

- Imperator: Rome.

- Leviathan (EU IV).

- By Blood Alone (HOI IV).

- Royal Court (CK3).

- Overlord (Stellaris).

All across the board, the user feedback indicates that they've lost their touch.

That means people like me, who would otherwise buy everything they've got without hesitation, suddenly stop themselves, and start thinking it might just not be worth it.

_

#3. Long-time fans upset, upsets long-time fans.

This game is "great for people new to paradox," as some of the 'positive' reviews indicate. Other 'positive' reviews blast anyone that thinks Paradox should've tried to be closer to the original game, or anyone that thinks the far different formula tried in Victoria 3 was a bad idea.

Old folks that've been with Paradox get it: We're not wanted.

So we're more likely to voice our concerns. That seems to agrivate some people around here.

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

I'm so happy that Paradox is slowly exorcising their toxic old fanbase.

Yet we've got money, and we spend that on the games, which keeps the industry profitable. Does harassing, intimidating, and insulting old fans of previous games really help us feel welcome? Not really.

_

#4. Because it has failed right out of the gate, there is a present risk of no long term support and abandonment for this title. There was no funeral, no honors, just a silent burial for Imperator: Rome as it entered "Legacy" status.

The last time Paradox Interactive had to fix a complete mess of a game, they ultimately were so ticked off that they ended up shelving it and turning it into a "legacy" game and fired the lead developer. Did you know it was a Legacy now, or is this new in your book? That's how little they cared to announce it.

Proof is in the pudding: https://strategycon.org/imperator-rome-goes-into-legacy/

_

All of the above factors are something that you should seriously keep in mind if you're an owner of this game and want to keep seeing it updated into the future.

You need to ride Paradox Interactive, hard, to make sure they don't abandon this game like they did Imperator: Rome.

That's a fact. Whether or not you like the game has absolutely no relevancy here. I had one simple reason for refunding this game (which I have NEVER DONE previously for a Paradox title): I do not believe in them to continue development.

It is that simple. Yes, I did not care for the behavior of most of you who continuously defend this game, but I can understand why - you don't want this game in Paradox Interactive's dustbin. You have power as a consumer, you have an online lobbying platform here, and you have plenty of ways to communicate with each other to turn your energy into something USEFUL.

Maybe you'll see the point in these words, maybe you won't, but the bottom line is that only you have the power to tell this corporation to get their ♥♥♥♥ together, and stop slamming low quality content down on the table and selling it. Make Paradox reverse course back to when they were great, or you won't have a product to defend.

[HASHEM]

Originally posted by Mad_House:

All across the board, the user feedback indicates that they've lost their touch.

been like that for a long long time. look at hoi4 at release compared to hoi3. hell, look at hoi4 now compared to hoi3.
hoi4 is basically unplayable without mods like Kaiserreich.

Victoria 2 was such a refined game that it only had 1 DLC, and the game is still playable without it. Every game since EU4 (and as you mentioned, they're still pushing useless DLC) has been an underdeveloped cash grab. This will probably be the straw that breaks the camel's back for paradox. (as you mentioned) their future games will flop.

[Damedius]

While I agree with some of your points. Why don't we wait a month and see what player retention looks like?

[【Ｎｉｃｅ Ｈｉｓｓ】]

It is really not a big deal at all and was entirely predictable. Victoria has always been EXTREMELY niche with a very, very small fanbase. Which means certain groups voices are amplified. Victoria 3 ostracized a small, very fanatical Victoria 2 crowd (the Spudgun and TheArchCast fans). So of course they were going to flip out. Which is why you see them crawling over the forums and reviews spamming their videos. On top of, yea, the game is rough around the edges.

Give it a year and it will shake out once they get tired and move on.

Old folks that've been with Paradox get it: We're not wanted.

Good to see someone understands. Paradox is rife with extremely intense, fanatical, and aggressive old school fans who had everything new. They hate Stellaris, they hate Ck3, a good portion of them hate Hoi4, and they hate V3. And these people bomb every review every single time.

But here's the thing. The sales couldn't care less. CK3 brought in a ton of new fans, most of which never left a review. So did Stellaris. So did HoI4. And so Did V3.

[Mad_House]

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

It is really not a big deal at all and was entirely predictable. Victoria has always been EXTREMELY niche with a very, very small fanbase. Which means certain groups voices are amplified. Victoria 3 ostracized a small, very fanatical Victoria 2 crowd (the Spudgun and TheArchCast fans). So of course they were going to flip out. Which is why you see them crawling over the forums and reviews spamming their videos. On top of, yea, the game is rough around the edges.

Give it a year and it will shake out once they get tired and move on.

Yet it has 13,271 reviews... 92% of which are positive.

[【Ｎｉｃｅ Ｈｉｓｓ】]

Originally posted by Mad_House:

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

It is really not a big deal at all and was entirely predictable. Victoria has always been EXTREMELY niche with a very, very small fanbase. Which means certain groups voices are amplified. Victoria 3 ostracized a small, very fanatical Victoria 2 crowd (the Spudgun and TheArchCast fans). So of course they were going to flip out. Which is why you see them crawling over the forums and reviews spamming their videos. On top of, yea, the game is rough around the edges.

Give it a year and it will shake out once they get tired and move on.

Yet it has 13,271 reviews... 92% of which are positive.

Which doesn't mean anything at all. Victoria 2 was an objectively bad game. People talk smack about Imperator, but Victoria 2 was a commercial flop and failure. Entirely. It barely sold anything initially. The game was functionally broken and the majority of what people like about it was the mods. When Victoria 2 came out people HATED it. People just forget that because they are way, way, way more lenient on V2. Victoria 2 managed to dredge itself up because it ended up as a cult classic status despite it's initial failure.

Most of Victoria 2's sales came after Victoria 3 was announced. And once again, the people who reviewed Victoria 2 were the fanatical core fans. Those 13 represent less than 0.05% of people who have played the game. And most people who own the game have played less than 10 hours.

Victoria 2's all time peak couldn't even crack 5,000. And yet here we sit with V3 at nearly 70,000. For referance, HoI4, which is their best selling Grand Strategy sits at 70,000 as well.

Give V3 1 year and it will do what V2 did in 10. As I said in the comment above, it just needs to shake out the old toxic fanbase. They'll get tired eventually.

[【Ｎｉｃｅ Ｈｉｓｓ】]

Also, FYI, Victoria 3 already outsold Imperator Rome. The social media exposure has also been WAY bigger. The initial reviews were also better despite being mixed. And it has 5 times the people following it. <100,000 versus >500,000

The game is rough, but it will be fine. Nearly everyone hated Imperator at release. But despite what you say, plenty of people like Victoria 3, flaws and all.

[【Ｎｉｃｅ Ｈｉｓｓ】]

Originally posted by Mad_House:

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

Also, FYI, Victoria 3 already outsold Imperator Rome. The social media exposure has also been WAY bigger. The initial reviews were also better despite being mixed. And it has 5 times the people following it. <100,000 versus >500,000

The game is rough, but it will be fine. Nearly everyone hated Imperator at release. But despite what you say, plenty of people like Victoria 3, flaws and all.

Ah, there it is. The irrelevant banter is always iced with denial.

It isn't denial, it is literal facts. It sold fine and the current situation isn't even remotely similar to Imperator. Literally all the data is freely available.

Victoria 3 sold many times more than Imperator.
Victoria 3 had far more media exposure.
Victoria 3 wasn't nearly as torn apart as Imperator was.
Victoria 3 is a flagship title, Imperator wasn't.
Victoria 3's player count blows Imperator's out of the water.
Victoria 3's core gameplay is fine, unlike Imperator's which was ground-up bad.

Nobody gave a crap about Imperator long before it was ever released. In 1 week Victoria 3 sold more than Imperator did in 3 years.

[Legend28]

If anything imperator Rome was beter game at release. I kept playing Rome and still got it installed on my laptop. On other hand i cant refund Vic3 now and i don have any wish to play it. Thats how much broken mess of a game VIc3 is.

Paradox really should rename this game to something else to not pollute great legacy of Victoria 1 and Victoria 2

[【Ｎｉｃｅ Ｈｉｓｓ】]

Originally posted by Legend28:

If anything imperator Rome was beter game at release.

Player reactions and sales speak wildly different. Imperator wasn't just mixed at release. It was mostly negative. And the player retention and median playtime is also wildly different.

[Kimlin]

Are we going to see another post after a month that says "don't let the sales #s or the average player count fool you, this game is in real danger!" and then another after 6 months. Then a year from now when a full expansion is released. So on and so on?

[Legend28]

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

Originally posted by Legend28:

If anything imperator Rome was beter game at release.

Player reactions and sales speak wildly different. Imperator wasn't just mixed at release. It was mostly negative.

I have 5 hours victoria 3 played and dont think it will go higher ever again.
I have 300 hours in Imperator Rome

Affter Imperator Rome i still conttinued to suport and buy paradox games and dlcs, after Victoria 3 paradox can go ♥♥♥♥ themself

[【Ｎｉｃｅ Ｈｉｓｓ】]

Originally posted by Legend28:

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

Player reactions and sales speak wildly different. Imperator wasn't just mixed at release. It was mostly negative.

I have 5 hourse victoria 3 played and dont think it will go higher ever again.
I have 300 hourse in Imperator Rome

Affter Imperator Rome i still conttinued to suport and buy paradox games and dlcs, after Victoria 3 paradox can go ♥♥♥♥ themself

You can speak for yourself all you want, but broadly speaking it was a flop. Entirely. Victoria 3 wasn't. At least not so far.

The fact you actually liked Imperator kind of speaks for your tastes. Tastes that are far contrary to most people.

[Legend28]

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

Originally posted by Legend28:

I have 5 hourse victoria 3 played and dont think it will go higher ever again.
I have 300 hourse in Imperator Rome

Affter Imperator Rome i still conttinued to suport and buy paradox games and dlcs, after Victoria 3 paradox can go ♥♥♥♥ themself

You can speak for yourself all you want, but broadly speaking it was a flop. Entirely. Victoria 3 wasn't,

I tought we were talking about wich one is better game and not wich one fooled greater number of people

[Kimlin]

Originally posted by Legend28:

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

Player reactions and sales speak wildly different. Imperator wasn't just mixed at release. It was mostly negative.

I have 5 hours victoria 3 played and dont think it will go higher ever again.
I have 300 hours in Imperator Rome

Affter Imperator Rome i still conttinued to suport and buy paradox games and dlcs, after Victoria 3 paradox can go ♥♥♥♥ themself

I have 40 hours in Victoria 3 and 80 hours in IR. I will continue to play both and support PDS with the purchase of DLC content.

If we just took the 63% for face value then for every 3.7 of you there are 6.3 of me.

[Damedius]

Originally posted by 【Ｎｉｃｅ　Ｈｉｓｓ】:

Originally posted by Mad_House:

Ah, there it is. The irrelevant banter is always iced with denial.

It isn't denial, it is literal facts. It sold fine and the current situation isn't even remotely similar to Imperator. Literally all the data is freely available.

Victoria 3 sold many times more than Imperator.
Victoria 3 had far more media exposure.
Victoria 3 wasn't nearly as torn apart as Imperator was.
Victoria 3 is a flagship title, Imperator wasn't.
Victoria 3's player count blows Imperator's out of the water.
Victoria 3's core gameplay is fine, unlike Imperator's which was ground-up bad.

How many units did Victoria 3 sell? How many units did Imperator sell?
Are you sure you know what a flagship title is?
Don't you think we should wait a month before we make judgements on player count?
If Victoria 3's core gameplay is fine, why does it have mixed reviews?