![]() ![]() But games like Stellaris, CK3 and HoI4 will. IR did not sell well so it probably gets no more DLCs. This can involve money from Apple or Sony or Epic.ĭLC model has worked well for Paradox for many-many years and I doubt they will abandon it for new games like CK3 or EU5. normally new project is only started once the projected profit has been cleared. ![]() They could of course make mistakes, sometimes large investments fail, studios go bankrupt and so on, but it happens rarely. In general, developers and publishers (in case of Paradox, they manage both) do not work on anything that is not expected to be profitable. Hope their own stocks will tank harder, continuously like a boss. That's the best perspective to see on how much they care about their costumers, most of the time they were talking about their shareholders. Instead of an apology video with bullet points on how they should fix their broken mess, they made another one some days ago with the topic on how great they are, and how they became a public trade company, like nothing happened. But to wait for a new version of the game that will have even a worse business model via hundreds dlcs or various subscriptions, it's preety depressing I must say. Business wise will be a very bad timing for them especially with the justified "revolts" that are going right now, not unless this mess will be fixed. So to respond on your thread I don't think would be a fresh start or a good idea, especially if you don't ignore the ridiculousness that they were doing with their last patch/expansion. In top of that to be planed in such a way to milk from it even harder via hundreds of DLCs and new subscription models that could be even more atrocious. ![]() Sincerely I'm tired to think about it, on how they will release a new game that will be almost identical with some graphical improvements and 3D models and call it EUV. It's time to move on, start fresh, and save the reputation of our beloved PDX Developers, if not PDX Management or PDX Community Relations. Stepping back, I think the lasting impact of Leviathangate is CRYSTAL CLEAR: They're totally free to keep playing the game they love and have sunk those huge sums into, but I hope they realize that they can't stop the rest of us from wanting EU5, just because they bent to marketing and sold out for endless DLC content that either adds overpriced gimmicks or features that should be in the base game for free, or at least not for $20 extra (but the bugs come FREE, how nice is that?). The money is spent, moving on or not moving on doesn't change that. Opposing EU5 because you've sunk hundreds of dollars into countless EU4 DLCs is like refusing to cash out a crashing stock because you're afraid of losing your investment. In economics, the good investor knows when to quit. They're afraid of losing on an investment that many of us did not make in the first place, for good reason. I believe what these people are thinking when they oppose an EU5 is that they are (either subconsciously or consciously) worried that all of their SIGNIFICANT financial investment into the endless DLC nightmare that is EU4 (like CK2) will be "wasted" or "not worth it" if they move onto EU5 (like CK3). Then CK3 was like a breath of fresh air, especially the MASSIVELY SUPERIOR UI. I mean seriously, $20 for the "right" to play as a Muslim ruler or in a certain time period? I hated CK2, everything from stupid DLC policy to terrible tutorials and UI woes. I do find it interesting with the focus on nations more than dynasties as in Crusader Kings. What do you think the chances are of this happening? Or should i just suck it up and learn EU 4. (Also, the current state with the patch isn't really helping). Instead of trying to get into this game i am more likely to just wait for a new fresh start with EU 5. But, that's more or less exactly what they did to Crusader Kings? And i do think they would take the opportunity to change some things for the better in a new iteration. I did see the argument that there was no point in creating EU 5 since they would just create the same game again. For me personally, a fresh start with EU 5 in the same way as Crusader King 3 was treated would be a great thing. Now, looking at EU 4 i get the same feeling as Crusader Kings 2. Also an updated engine with better performance and it all just felt right. A compareable better UI and more focus on just the core game with no DLC's. A much easier game to get into and understand from the get go. Crusader Kings 3 on the other hand i had a much better experience with. That and the fact that there where loads of DLC's and i generally felt i was too late to the party. ![]() Backstory: I never got into Crusader Kings 2 because of all the content presented in a dense way. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |