Imperator: Rome (New Paradox game)

[Do not look here]

IIRC, there was some random number representing how civilized your province is and only way to boost it was to have more civilized neighbours/trading partners in that particular province. If it reached 50% you could start colonizing neighbouring barbarian province providing you triggered them to raise earlier and they still haven't regenerated. It was pain in the ass to spark, but snowballed easily, which only added to ridiculous blob gameplay.

It also meant that if you wanted an early start as some backwater Germanic tribes or some other Picts, then once you collected all the available lands around you had to pretty much wait for Romans to come to you and slaughter you mercilessly.

 

[Dystopian]

The civilization mechanic itself was also an enigma, using the unreliable tech system in the game.

 

[Anarion]

I guess they'll probably make it so that only Romans, Hellenistic polities and maybe Carthage are worth playing, while the rest are generic unwashed barbarians. Then there'll be DLC later for the other cultures, then more DLC to further flesh out the Romans and Greeks and Carthaginians, etc. I might get this on sale.

 

[Harkon Haakonson]

I guess they'll probably make it so that only Romans, Hellenistic polities and maybe Carthage are worth playing, while the rest are generic unwashed barbarians. Then there'll be DLC later for the other cultures, then more DLC to further flesh out the Romans and Greeks and Carthaginians, etc. I might get this on sale.

You're most likely right, looking at CK2 and EU4.

 

[kalarhan]

I guess they'll probably make it so that only Romans, Hellenistic polities and maybe Carthage are worth playing, while the rest are generic unwashed barbarians. Then there'll be DLC later for the other cultures, then more DLC to further flesh out the Romans and Greeks and Carthaginians, etc. I might get this on sale.

if they keep the game alive and with updates for the next 5 years, than that is a good thingy 

other games like to have a title a year/every two years like Fifa and CoD with small/incremental changes with each new one. Some like Warband are fine making us wait 10 years. Each model has its pros and cons for sure.

 

[Seek n Destroy]

It's not so fun having to pay for each small incremental changes though, I'd rather see major expansions/overhauls than a portrait pack for Finno-Ugric tribes.

 

[kalarhan]

It's not so fun having to pay for each small incremental changes though, I'd rather see major expansions/overhauls than a portrait pack for Finno-Ugric tribes.

a portrait pack? Dont buy it then, it is not like you need to buy every single DLC they release 

you can also wait to buy the game and expansions (instead of doing it at release), as with any game, and get a full package (on a heavy discount) 6-12months later. Tends to be less buggy as well lol.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

You can also wait to buy the game and expansions (instead of doing it at release), as with any game, and get a full package (on a heavy discount) 6-12months later. Tends to be less buggy as well lol.

And therein lies the problem. Paradox has gotten accustomed to releasing barebones games that aren't really much fun, and then "fleshing them out" with DLC after DLC. But at the same time they can't connect any of the new mechanics to each other in a meaningful way because people might buy DLC in any order or permutation. So you start off with a lacklustre game and end up with 5 lacklustre games on top of each other.

 

[Moose!]

a portrait pack? Dont buy it then, it is not like you need to buy every single DLC they release 

MY OCD begs to differ.

 

[Almalexia]

Hit the nail on the head on that issue for me. 

 

[kalarhan]

And therein lies the problem. Paradox has gotten accustomed to releasing barebones games

I disagree. The games I played from them, including CK2, EU4 and HoI4 (most recently 3) were full games at release. You could play them for 50+ hours or hundreds of hours and have fun while doing it. Future updates would add diversity and improve on the original formula, not be there to complete a unfinished job.

Yes they got bigger and better over time, but that would be true to any game that gets updates over years. We are used to games being released and forgotten (like Warband SP). It is not a fair comparison to a live game like a MMORPG or a Paradox game.

I always wonder what Warband would be like today if TW kept working on it (including taking inspiration from the community works). I bet it would be quite a interesting game. But that wouldnt change the fact the Warband was a full game in 2010 as well (with all the good and bad that came with it).

But that is my opinion, you guys can of course complain how the game 5 years later was what it should had being released years before too 

Looking forward for this new title, but like HoI4 I will likely wait at least a year before buying it (to avoid all the buggy patches that plagues the gaming industry).

a portrait pack? Dont buy it then, it is not like you need to buy every single DLC they release 

MY OCD begs to differ.

Avoid any mobile game with IAP. You will be broken in 6 months 

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

I disagree. The games I played from them, including CK2, EU4 and HoI4 (most recently 3) were full games at release. You could play them for 50+ hours or hundreds of hours and have fun while doing it. Future updates would add diversity and improve on the original formula, not be there to complete a unfinished job.

Paradox has been making variations on the same game for the best part of a decade, but they're still plagued with the same bugs. The patches don't just fix a few bugs, they practically restructure the games because many of the mechanics are fundamentally broken on release. They suck as historical simulations because they're so anally gamified, and they suck as game-y strategy titles because just about half the game's systems are designed specifically to reign the player in and railroad them to the same gameplay loop over and over. In EU4 you have:

Revanchism
Aggressive Expansion
Manpower
Diplomatic Reputation
Monarch Points
Institutions / Research Limits
Stability
Unrest
War Exhaustion
Coalitions

All to prevent anyone expanding quicker than a few provinces per year.

I don't know how anyone can defend Paradox's DLC model. They have full-price games which stay full price for years, and introduce DLCs which make certain mechanics in the base game borderline unplayable and hopelessly unbalanced. Even you're saying "wait until a year after release" because only a sucker would buy a paradox game at launch.

Yes they got bigger and better over time, but that would be true to any game that gets updates over years. We are used to games being released and forgotten (like Warband SP). It is not a fair comparison to a live game like a MMORPG or a Paradox game.

It's also not a fair comparison to compare free updates to paid ones. Paradox DLCs are structured like Patches. Major Paradox DLCs are a random, completely unrelated smattering of features and UI changes. When the ability to see how many troops have died in a war is locked behind DLC, or a time-saving UI choice like multiple recruitment is paywalled, something's wrong. To make matters worse, the features they decide to put in the concurrent Free Updates are almost completely arbitrary.

 

[kalarhan]

I don't know how anyone can defend Paradox's DLC model.

all models have pros and cons. There is no perfect model. Even free to play games have cons. It is not about defending or attacking the model, but about being fair when talking about it (instead of only focusing on cons).

Major Paradox DLCs are a random, completely unrelated smattering of features and UI changes.

if you dont like the games they make that is fine. Noone is suppose (or should) enjoy all the thousands of games available out there. However there are a few hundred thousand people that do enjoy Paradox games, enough to keep the company updating their games.

CK2, EU4 and HoI4, to use my examples from above, got 8-10 score reviews at release. They also enjoy a good score on Steam.

They are clearly not what you would call a perfect game. You seem to actually play them regardless, otherwise you wouldnt have so much hands-on experience to talk about them, so maybe they are not that bad on your own opinion 

Feedback (positive and negative) is always good and helps them improve future titles. So keep bashing the game on their forum as much as possible (doubt they would check stuff here) and pushing for better games.

 

[TheFlyingFishy]

It's to the point where I purposefully go out of my way to not read anything Jacob posts about games because he seems to hate everything ever made for minute reasons that have never bothered me, but once I read one of his post every time I boot up whatever game he was talking about my eye starts twitching at **** I'd never noticed before.


I think Paradox is fine in regards to their games and DLC policies. Anyone with any sense just waits until a holiday and buys all the DLC for $5 apiece.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

I don't know how anyone can defend Paradox's DLC model.

all models have pros and cons. There is no perfect model.

How is that relevant? Hitler had pros and cons. The rape of Nanking had pros and cons. I don't have to make a completely balanced argument when I'm literally trying to argue something. It's asinine to suggest I give token mention to the pros of something I'm vehemently opposed to.

if you dont like the games they make that is fine. Noone is suppose (or should) enjoy all the thousands of games available out there. However there are a few hundred thousand people that do enjoy Paradox games, enough to keep the company updating their games.

CK2, EU4 and HoI4, to use my examples from above, got 8-10 score reviews at release. They also enjoy a good score on Steam.

How is that relevant either? Why should I factor in majority opinion when deciding what I think is good and what isn't?

They are clearly not what you would call a perfect game. You seem to actually play them regardless, otherwise you wouldnt have so much hands-on experience to talk about them, so maybe they are not that bad on your own opinion 

I played EU4 a lot and grew to hate it quite quickly. I've exhausted just about every mod I've had a passing interest in. Just because I played it a lot doesn't mean it's a good game. It means I expected it to be, but it wasn't.

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

For me updating games how do CA and Paradox with DLCs not seems even a cool thing, because purchasing a package cost so much, also some are only cosmetic. I like Taleworlds's policy regarding updates, or if Warband have released bare-bones as Rome 2, I believe as game not was so popular nowadays, but this not have so much bad as Warscape-era games. Paradox games are generally-speaking concentrated on game mechanics than strategy, similar how CA spent time in graphics.

 

[kalarhan]

Just because I played it a lot doesn't mean it's a good game.

time is a precious thingy for me, so I usually dont do stuff that I dont want/like to unless it is mandatory. Seems you are under different set of rules, you dont mind playing a game that you dislike, which is just fine 

How is that relevant?

lol. So there are only two types of posters. Hatters and fanboys. Got ya.

Moving on

It's to the point where I purposefully go out of my way to not read anything Jacob posts about games because he seems to hate everything ever made for minute reasons that have never bothered me, but once I read one of his post every time I boot up whatever game he was talking about my eye starts twitching at **** I'd never noticed before.

That made me laugh 

 

[ArnulfFloyd]

I not buying games which I believe as I not will playing anymore, none of acclaimed and multi-awarding modern games not awoke my interest despite people lauding ones modern to have better graphics and engines. I playing only classic titles as Medieval 2 and Warband

 

[Age of Empires ¶ Densetsu]

Age of Empires II

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

time is a precious thingy for me, so I usually dont do stuff that I dont want/like to unless it is mandatory. Seems you are under different set of rules, you dont mind playing a game that you dislike, which is just fine 

I played EU4 a lot and grew to hate it quite quickly. I've exhausted just about every mod I've had a passing interest in. Just because I played it a lot doesn't mean it's a good game. It means I expected it to be, but it wasn't.

all models have pros and cons. There is no perfect model.

How is that relevant?

lol. So there are only two types of posters. Hatters and fanboys. Got ya.

What the hell is wrong with you? That has nothing to do with what I just said. Neither does anything else in your post or in any reply you've ever made to me. Appending "There are pros and cons to every system" with a condescending smiley isn't an argument.

I get that you and lots of other people like EU4 and other Paradox games. I'm happy for you. But seriously try and work out for yourself exactly why you like them before throwing wild assumptions and smug assertions around to make a point.