This game is awful

[Clemente]

I love the period, but I hate the war "mechanics". It's a shallow game, with the entertainment value of Cookie Clicker.

[Herr Wolf]

Origineel geplaatst door olstar18:

Origineel geplaatst door Burma Jones:

Is this a corn field? I'm seeing all these straw men everywhere. Very lazy shilling.

Having an opinion you disagree with doesn't make someone a shill.

Having an opinion that completely misrepresents the other person and argues against things no one has actually said or claimed would be something a shill would do, just saying.

[Jojo]

Honestly I'm largely fine with the underlying mechanics of warfare in Vic 3, especially since they have at least partially addressed the spam of new un-defendable fronts being created. Still plenty to criticise and plenty to improve RE warfare, but generally it's okay.

What isn't okay is the woefully dull and samey economic and diplomatic simulation. Every country, economic system, distribution of power etc etc, plays and feels utterly identical. Whether you're playing an industrialised European country or a south east asian agrarian country, the game is exactly the same. This isn't okay.

[kgkong]

Origineel geplaatst door Burma Jones:

Is this a corn field? I'm seeing all these straw men everywhere. Very lazy shilling.

Pretty sad to still see you're harassing and insulting others because they enjoy the game and you aren't.

You are so quick and loud to call people for being a shill cause they enjoy something you don't... But I wonder... It's known that big corporations will lobby people to protest against something they don't like. Given how you're trying so hard to throw mud on others, it's strongly implied that you're a shill brought in to take down Vic3/PDX.... Add in that you've been caught arguing 2 contradicting views for the game.

But nah, I'm not gonna stoop low to making assumptions about you that can't be proven. It's more likely just that you emotionally invested into the game and got disappointed when it wasn't what you hyped it up to be. You feel hurt so now you're going around paying that forward. Go get some fresh air and find something you actually enjoy.

[kgkong]

Origineel geplaatst door Jojo:

Honestly I'm largely fine with the underlying mechanics of warfare in Vic 3, especially since they have at least partially addressed the spam of new un-defendable fronts being created. Still plenty to criticise and plenty to improve RE warfare, but generally it's okay.

What isn't okay is the woefully dull and samey economic and diplomatic simulation. Every country, economic system, distribution of power etc etc, plays and feels utterly identical. Whether you're playing an industrialised European country or a south east asian agrarian country, the game is exactly the same. This isn't okay.

The devs did acknowledge this in an earlier Dev Diary but they haven't really gone into a whole lot on what they're going to do about the flavor and economic bits (beyond what they showed and gave us for the autonomous system).

[kgkong]

PDX had gone through a few public relations issues over the last couple of years. One of them pertaining to EU4 and the massive amounts of DLCs and the way DLC models were introducing core game mechanic fixes/rebalances behind a paywall. It wasn't even just PDX that was doing this but due to some consumer intervention and some respectable game journalism, these issues were brought to light and questioned and challenged. Is the problem fixed? No, but there are changes occurring in the industry where long term supported games that introduce a series of DLC, they're not introducing free content patches alongside the DLC that introduce minor and smaller features and content.

Give it another year or so, and we should see more consumer friendly approaches to long term supported games with series of DLC and free content patches.

[whatamidoing]

Origineel geplaatst door BOOM:

Origineel geplaatst door KingGorillaKong:

Pretty sad to still see you're harassing and insulting others because they enjoy the game and you aren't.

You are so quick and loud to call people for being a shill cause they enjoy something you don't... But I wonder... It's known that big corporations will lobby people to protest against something they don't like. Given how you're trying so hard to throw mud on others, it's strongly implied that you're a shill brought in to take down Vic3/PDX.... Add in that you've been caught arguing 2 contradicting views for the game.

But nah, I'm not gonna stoop low to making assumptions about you that can't be proven. It's more likely just that you emotionally invested into the game and got disappointed when it wasn't what you hyped it up to be. You feel hurt so now you're going around paying that forward. Go get some fresh air and find something you actually enjoy.

Yes I can confirm it to you that if paraducks does not change the way of doing things the way they do it. The only thing we want is the total bankruptcy of this company to be replaced by a less demonic company.

Make full games with all game mechanics as the previous game, fix game bugs,
give us an interesting\similar game for those who have always participated in the game (Victoria 2) and give us DLCs that are really worth the money they ask for.

If this company keeps trying to usurp our rights and rob us outright.

Yes solemnly we all want this company to face bankruptcy and the sooner the better so that finally a honest company can take the place and sell us games worthy of being consumed.

What "rights" are being "usurped?" It's a video game, my guy.

[olstar18]

Origineel geplaatst door Herr Wolf:

Origineel geplaatst door olstar18:

Having an opinion you disagree with doesn't make someone a shill.

Having an opinion that completely misrepresents the other person and argues against things no one has actually said or claimed would be something a shill would do, just saying.

Isn't that what you did when you called me a shill.

[shadain597]

Origineel geplaatst door BOOM:

Yes solemnly we all want this company to face bankruptcy and the sooner the better so that finally a honest company can take the place and sell us games worthy of being consumed.

To be honest, this is a somewhat naive take on things. For-profit companies will do what they can to make money. In some cases, the humans running the company have something that resembles the morals you're thinking of, and have the financial luxury to follow those morals, but most of the time it's all about the profits. If Paradox disappears and another company jumps in to take their place, it's safe to assume they will also milk as much money out of the products/customers as they can.

Part of the issue is that in many cases you've got a developer and a separate publisher who both want money. The publisher, in particular, wants that sweet, sweet return on investment. By and large, that's their thing: money. Sure, the developers aren't running a charity either, but a LOT more of the people working for the developer will be passionate about what they do and whether or not they can take pride in the end result.

So, basically, you either need to cut out the publishers, which isn't realistic for most large games, or get enough competition going such that companies have to produce better products for the money, or risk losing business to the competition. To that end, we shouldn't hope for Paradox to disappear entirely, but instead that plenty of worthy challengers appear and force them towards (slightly) more consumer-friendly business practices.

[Top Cat]

OK so it sounds like it still sucks. I'll keep waiting. Dang, I wanted to believe!

[Vyndicu]

Origineel geplaatst door shadain597:

So, basically, you either need to cut out the publishers, which isn't realistic for most large games, or get enough competition going such that companies have to produce better products for the money, or risk losing business to the competition. To that end, we shouldn't hope for Paradox to disappear entirely, but instead that plenty of worthy challengers appear and force them towards (slightly) more consumer-friendly business practices.

To expand on this line of thinking, Paradox Interactive is one of the fewest examples of what people would consider triple-A publishers (think Ubisoft, EA, and Microsoft's Xbox Game Studios but in a smaller and niche market) that does Historical Grand Strategy Games (Victoria 3 is a GSG). Don't get me wrong; other publishers also dabble in this market but nowhere on the same level as Paradox Interactive.


As shadain597 says, fewer competitors exist in this small corner of the Historical Grand Strategy Games market. Consumers would typically gravitate toward the better product if they had more choices.

People often need to remember that if there are fewer products and fewer choices, then the Consumers would be out of luck if they wanted a product to buy and none of the existing products fulfilled what they wanted in a product.


I want a fun Victorian-era economic grand strategy game, and Victoria 3 only fulfills some of the checkboxes that make it a must-have/buy.

My options for an alternative to Victoria 3 are limited to the following options: Walking away from Victoria 3 without letting anyone know why, putting up with the flaws in Victoria 3 until it is in a better shape, and advocating for changes I want to see in Victoria 3.


Unfortunately, some people are having a difficult time accepting this and only seek out evidence of hatred where there is none to be found.

[kgkong]

As shadain597 says, fewer competitors exist in this small corner of the Historical Grand Strategy Games market. Consumers would typically gravitate toward the better product if they had more choices.

People often need to remember that if there are fewer products and fewer choices, then the Consumers would be out of luck if they wanted a product to buy and none of the existing products fulfilled what they wanted in a product.

Most, if not nearly every single grand strategy is a niche. More often than not, the competition that spawns against the triple A title and super popular game/franchise is from a developer who was a part of the origins of the franchise but in a new company. Think of Civilization series with Humankind and Old World. The niche sub genre for the grand strategy games really limits the core market demographic, and as much as PDX own titles are direct competition to each other, they're not even cannibalising the sales of the other games.

Sure, Total War (campaign) is a good competitor to CK and EU. But they don't directly compete with each other. And this is assuming you ignore Total War's actual battle system and just auto battle on the campaign.

If developers feel like the overall direction a franchise is going is not in a direction true to the game, more or less, you get the team splinter and branch out with some developers taking their own approach to develop games how they see would have been better (with or without community support/feedback). If the remaining team continues to do well in the quality and profitability of the franchise, then that's great. (Look at Civ still being the better franchise versus Humankind and Old World but those two games are still young and fresh) If the team doesn't do so well with the game, then that's when the potential for a better game to take the place. And sometimes those games don't come from any developer who worked on the main triple A franchise, but the better games usually have them have some involvement.

What's going on with PDX is that there doesn't seem to be an issue with developers not liking how the company is going per se or the direction of the game. No one is taking off and seriously giving PDX developers a run for their money in any of the niche

[Vyndicu]

Origineel geplaatst door KingGorillaKong:

Most, if not nearly every single grand strategy is a niche. More often than not, the competition that spawns against the triple A title and super popular game/franchise is from a developer who was a part of the origins of the franchise but in a new company. Think of Civilization series with Humankind and Old World. The niche sub genre for the grand strategy games really limits the core market demographic, and as much as PDX own titles are direct competition to each other, they're not even cannibalising the sales of the other games.

The only thing that comes to mind is that Paradox Interactive plans to recreate EA's The Sim with "Life By You."

No one would try to compete with a long-running franchise like "The Sims" unless they think they have something new innovative-wise, capital investment, and a "reason" for customers to buy it.

Even then, you could end up with something where people preferred a particular game/iteration over others in the same franchises.


As an aside, I am indifferent toward "Sims" or other Second Life kinds of video games.

Origineel geplaatst door KingGorillaKong:

Sure, Total War (campaign) is a good competitor to CK and EU. But they don't directly compete with each other. And this is assuming you ignore Total War's actual battle system and just auto battle on the campaign.

Which Total War games are you talking about? The Historical ones? Or the more popular and recent Total War: Warhammer franchise?


Regardless, my answer will remain the same either way.

Those Historical Total War games are not Victorian Era Economic Simulators Grand Strategy Games like Victoria 3 is. It would be like comparing Total Annihilation (Macro-scale Sci-FI RTS Game) to Warcraft 2 (Micro-scale Fantasy RTS game), they are both RTS but play very differently and cater to different people.

Historical Total War video games differ significantly from anything Paradox Interactive offers, mainly since Paradox Interactive is all real-time games. In contrast, Total War is all turn-based games with skippable real-time tactical battles.

Origineel geplaatst door KingGorillaKong:

*snip*

Okay, I don't see the point of discussing how Paradox Interactive Studios' management, leadership, and employees are happy working as part of the Paradox Interactive franchises. That has nothing to do with what I discussed earlier.


Paradox Interactive AB is the parent and publisher company (several Paradox Corporations exist). Paradox Interactive AB has been buying out several video game studios in the past decade. More than half of the studios under Paradox Publisher are now non-paradox studios. Examples are included but are not limited to: Triumph Studios, Harebrained Schemes, Playrion Game Studio, Iceflake Studios, and Paradox Arc (they are still inside of Paradox but seeks non-Paradox Indie game to be published).

I wouldn't know how a small group of former Paradox Interactive People could break off and form their video game studio without running the risk of being brought out or consolidated under the Paradox Interactive AB Umbrella without external support.


Once again, this has to do with how competing Grand Strategy Games products could be produced outside of the Paradox Interactive AB parent company and how they don't exist.

[Burma Jones]

"My options for an alternative to Victoria 3 are limited to the following options: Walking away from Victoria 3 without letting anyone know why, putting up with the flaws in Victoria 3 until it is in a better shape, and advocating for changes I want to see in Victoria 3."

Exactly. But there are a bunch of insecure shills around here who think criticizing Victoria 3 is exactly the same as insulting them personally so they derail every thread and spam passive aggressive little cowardly remarks. They can't even discuss the game, it's so pathetic.

[olstar18]

Origineel geplaatst door Burma Jones:

"My options for an alternative to Victoria 3 are limited to the following options: Walking away from Victoria 3 without letting anyone know why, putting up with the flaws in Victoria 3 until it is in a better shape, and advocating for changes I want to see in Victoria 3."

Exactly. But there are a bunch of insecure shills around here who think criticizing Victoria 3 is exactly the same as insulting them personally so they derail every thread and spam passive aggressive little cowardly remarks. They can't even discuss the game, it's so pathetic.

If we are insecure why are you the one who has to call everyone who disagrees with you shills while making comments that fit what you described in your own post.

[kgkong]

Origineel geplaatst door olstar18:

Origineel geplaatst door Burma Jones:

"My options for an alternative to Victoria 3 are limited to the following options: Walking away from Victoria 3 without letting anyone know why, putting up with the flaws in Victoria 3 until it is in a better shape, and advocating for changes I want to see in Victoria 3."

Exactly. But there are a bunch of insecure shills around here who think criticizing Victoria 3 is exactly the same as insulting them personally so they derail every thread and spam passive aggressive little cowardly remarks. They can't even discuss the game, it's so pathetic.

If we are insecure why are you the one who has to call everyone who disagrees with you shills while making comments that fit what you described in your own post.

This.