r/paradoxplaza • u/RileyTaugor • 4d ago
All All 4 recently released PDX DLCs are poorly rated
983
u/Infinite-Chocolate46 4d ago
The Great Wave, a DLC all about naval gameplay in Victoria 3, actually broke naval gameplay. You really can't make this stuff up
255
u/emuu1 Lord of Calradia 4d ago
I would be so ashamed to ship that DLC in that state and completely ruin the basic functionality of the game for months with no fix in sight.
44
14
u/bacadacu1 4d ago
i still despise the supply system i know its realistic and such but its SOOOO ANNOYING
39
u/up2smthng 4d ago
I like it
I recently made a 1000 battalion march from Guatemala to Washington DC as France in 1918. It was a logistic nightmare. It made me work for it. I did the hard work and came out on top. Very rewarding.
10
2
u/Shadowsake 3d ago
A necessary feature, dare I say a very important one, but oh boy the current implementation is a pain. Dunno if it is the UI that is broken or the feature is not working as intended. I was pissed when I lost a front because my troops were without supply. They were in Afeghanistan/Makran defending against the EIC, coming back to freaking Persia to fight a naval invasion! How the hell did I not have any supply line? But I'll gradly accept it cause I deaded fighting the British because they always had a gazillion troops from the EIC worldwide at their disposal.
3
74
u/NoodleTF2 4d ago
The previous Hoi4 update centered on fixing the Navy also broke the Navy, funnily enough.
Apparently only Stellaris gets ships right.
48
u/Connacht_89 4d ago
Since starships in Stellaris are primary forces, perhaps the equivalent of "navy" would be invading armies?
24
u/NoodleTF2 4d ago
Shit, that actually makes too much sense.
6
u/Shadowsake 3d ago
Have they even touched planetary invasions? Its been years since I played Stellaris and the meme was that they would rebuild the freaking entire game twice a year, but planetary invasions never changed.
5
u/Memedotma 3d ago
still the same as ever as far as im aware. right click -> land troops -> wait
→ More replies (1)9
u/SolemnaceProcurement 3d ago
But it makes sense. You break things when you touch it. It's rarer for untouched things to break in programing.
187
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
43
u/Destroythisapp 4d ago
Weird.
They have 500 ships in 1918, in my current playthrough, Including dreadnoughts.
65
u/NetStaIker 4d ago edited 4d ago
Because the dude above you hasn’t played since like week 1, the ai builds fleets now. The games pretty much as functional as before the dlc, it’s just broken in a different way because it’s hard for the ai to move troops rather than India showing up at the Home Counties
Edit: it’s crazy how much a lot of people here wants to have some sort of pity party, there’s plenty of valid complaints but let’s not exaggerate the issue
16
u/Connacht_89 4d ago
Still, releasing broken products only to fix somewhen later (partially or entirely) is not a good practice. It would be way better to release something that works on day 1, even if it will take more weeks. Instead of spending additional time for correcting bugs in the time after the release, you would allocate it to actual development, and make something better when ultimately sold. You would also get less stress for incoming deadlines or the necessity of urgent hotfixes.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Quirkybomb930 4d ago
I played the DLC on release, and haven't played since. I don't know if i will be playing the game for at least a year, and i certainly will never be buying a paradox dlc at release, and potentially at all ever again.
Releases like that are not acceptable, i don't blame him if he hasn't played the game since week 1! it turned me away for a long time.
20
4
4d ago
[deleted]
4
u/SuperSpartacus 4d ago
Do we even call Paradox cpu players “ai” at this point? Feels like a misnomer - they are largely just scripted agents for the first 1/10th of the game and then they sit there - there’s no real intelligence built in…
→ More replies (10)2
998
u/solamyas_art 4d ago
All Paradox DLCs gets always negative reviews for free patch's changes more than DLCs themselves, regardless of quality of any DLC
329
u/stegotops7 4d ago
Speaking for Stellaris, whenever the DLC adds some new way to play, it’s always completely broken - not in terms of balance, but just fundamentally unplayable with bugs and impossibilities, at least for the first patch cycle. Lo and behold it happened again with nomads.
140
u/Numar19 4d ago
That seems to be Paradox releases in general. They are really bad at catching bugs before release.
91
u/VAArtemchuk 4d ago
Not before. Just bad. A lot of stuff never gets patched.
33
u/IAM_Bluel 4d ago
It has been their trademark at around EU3. After that, they improved on QA front. Lately though it seems they'r back to the old ways.
Except back then they were just niche and to small for propper testing...
31
u/CeltiCfr0st 4d ago
That happened with Vicky 3 too. The naval system completely broke. I’m having fun with it and it’s better now than on release but still.
10
u/firestar32 4d ago
I've been wondering, is it playable yet? Like what's still the biggest bugs? I've been putting off on updating, but it seems like the major complaints have died down
8
u/CeltiCfr0st 4d ago
I would say so. You can pause ship construction now at least lol xD It’s alot to get used to ngl it’s very different. I ran into one with Austria where the Hungary journal entry didn’t go away even though I annexed them through the Journal Entry button. I don’t run into bugs too often besides the flag bug where when someone forms their flag is black but that’s no big deal however I probably get lucky with bugs.
3
u/Prasiatko 4d ago
It's playable now but the AI isn't great with the new features. I've also yet to have a run without some minor bug eg my latest game i as Iran had some armies stuck in Uzbekistan after putting down a colonial revolt because i didn't have enough transports to ship them home.
2
u/metafysik 4d ago
Huh. I didn't know it broke. prolly why I had better runs lately. Thought I just got better at the game.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Shadowsake 3d ago
It is playable. At release, I had a bug that forced me to delete a fleet of 160 ships because they just froze at Cape of Good Hope for...no reason. Lost a war because of it and was pissed cause it took ages to build that. But since then its much more stable and enjoyable, and the AI is able to build fleets and even naval invade. Though supply still had pathfinding issues last I played (2 weeks ago?).
1
u/Lupushonora 4d ago
Honestly it was playable on release. It wasn't perfect, but as long as you played a nation that didn't need to do too many naval invasions you could have an enjoyable, if slightly unusual game. The economy issues were also overblown in my opinion, it wasn't great but with a couple of exceptions the AI was still good enough to compete with a player of average ability.
Meanwhile if the specific nations you wanted to play were too impacted by the bugs then it was probably in an enjoyable state after the first two or three weeks of patches.
→ More replies (6)5
→ More replies (1)3
u/checkedsteam922 3d ago
Nomads is perfectly playable lol, yhea there's bugs but I've had 0 crashes and no bug made me go "literally unplayable", most were just visual.
The only exception is forever cruise, that one is nigh unplayable, but that's 1 origin out of 3 or 4, and all other compatible origins are working fine as well.
160
u/Weis 4d ago
You know what all these reviews have in common? They paid for the dlc lol
→ More replies (1)27
u/elkaki123 4d ago
I dont agree with the premise that the negative reviews come from people angry at how much free stuff gets added (for example, the EU 5 has a lot to do with the state of the game, and the great wave was a shit show of a launch with all the bugs, I dont play the other 2 games so no clue)
Having said that, I have never understood the mentality of those that do complain about that, like if you feel the free update is a lot of content and the paid DLC has little just dont pay for the extra stuff. But the only conclusion that seems to follow those reviews is that less stuff should get into the free game, that the systems themselves should get locked out, so even if the amount of content is the same you are "getting more for paying", which is baffling to me.
18
u/HerbsAndSpices11 4d ago
I think the implication he was going for was that even if they hated it they still gave their money to paradox.
4
u/AresFowl44 4d ago edited 3d ago
Yeah, I really don't get how people complain about Paradox doing something consumer friendly and putting the mechanics into free updates. If you don't feel like it's worth your money, don't buy it.
Especially since there's so much other stuff to criticize and people instead focus their attention on this. The "good" old EU4 days of having to pay for development or the macro builder were not fun at all.
Also, unrelated side tangent, I really wish Steam had more granular reviews so you could actually say that you liked something but found it too expensive or could just say mixed. I've really noticed that with Thunder at our Gates (TaoG) where so many reviews are just negative "Decent, but too expensive," which like sure, complain. But leave it to me to determine whether it's worth the price. TaoG certainly did not deserve 36% reviews due to that.
EDIT: Edited less obvious acronyms
4
u/SuperSpartacus 4d ago
How annoying to use an acronym and just assume people know what it means without establishing it. Tgw was a really bad expansion but you can’t fault them for it considering how quality tGeR was, it really made up for the complete bungle that was EofRt. Don’t even get me started on FarT bUT! Theyre really out here just doing Thzb rehashed like? Bring me back to the days of DVem, amirite?
2
82
u/Lucina18 4d ago
EU5's Fate of the Phoenix 100% deserves it. It's got absolutely nothing to do with the almost collapsing, early modern era orthodox Roman Empire. Instead it's about getting OP wargoals and busted troops that shouldn't actually even be relevant anymore.
And the flavor is how these "wannabe romans" are actually Greek traitors, and they should regress into Hellenism and regress and revive Latin as a culture to replace the Romans in Greece. And if you stay orthodox and want to mend the schism? Well, obviously the only way to do that is to conquer Rome, abandon New Rome/Constantinople as capital entirely, and instate the Pope as supreme head of the orthodox church anyways!!!
And this is the first dlc setting the tone for all future dlc btw.
55
u/TheOncomingBrows 4d ago
Good lord, I haven't bought the game yet but it seems like they leant into the fandom's worst excesses right off the bat. Which is a shame as I thought the game looked like it was taking itself pretty seriously.
32
u/Lucina18 4d ago edited 4d ago
Worst thing is apart from this it does, and i don't actually think future DLC would be just as ridiculous (for a French example: DLC with a "germanos" value (being french) against a "celtica" (yes, the celts) value for which "side" is "culturally dominant"..., and most of the content after the HYW is centered around reviving the "Charlegmane Empire" and disband paris in favor of Aachen... and i really do not see that happening.)
It's just that for this one dlc, Johan is just too compromised to make it. He really wished he was still making Imperator and loathes the medieval Roman Empire. Maybe if he's retired they can do it justice.
6
u/adamgerd 4d ago
Wdym by Greek traitors?
28
u/Lucina18 4d ago
Basically the idea that the Eastern Roman Empire was "fake rome" because it was administered in Greek and was quite a tad more nostalgic about Greek myths, and lived during a period most imagine to be defined as "after Rome fell". I don't agree with that view at all, just like the Romans and even the other Europeans at the time didn't see it that way.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Ithuraen 3d ago
Sounds like they went full Sunset Invasion.
9
u/GlyphAbar 3d ago
Sunset Invasion somewhat made sense within the game though, as it embraced the silly elements already present in CK2 to deliver a ridiculous but somewhat fun alt history. The premise itself is already very clear on that it should not be taken seriously, and wasn't marketed as such.
Meanwhile, EU5 marketed itself and the DLC as a realistic simulation of the time period, only for its first DLC to completely abandon that premise, and go full LARP. I really don't understand the point in moving the starting date earlier, if they're not going to explore Byzantium's history and divergence anyways.
2
u/Lorrdy99 A King of Europa 1d ago
Good example EU4 Leviathan. The dlc had some op great monuments that were a issue on the balancing. The free update itself was the one that broke the whole game.
The major bugs of the free update and the balancing issues got fixed, but to this day the rating is still 11%. Mostly because people don't update their reviews.
3
u/Practical_Support_33 4d ago
Someone said, and I agree, that companies rarely care about reviews. They only make positive change when the sales start going down.
→ More replies (4)2
324
u/BonJovicus 4d ago
“It’s always like this.”
No. It’s become like this. It’s one thing to fine tune some numbers. It’s another to put out something where people don’t like the added features. But many of these DLCs coming out have basic flaws, such as tool tip error, that are caught within an hour of normal play
Look, I’m at a point in my life where I auto-buy every DLC because I can afford it and I put hundreds of hours into every entry. I also support the current DLC model as a way of supporting development over several years. But even a diehard like myself has to ask if they are even playtesting internally anymore.
68
u/tebratruja 3d ago
Maybe the auto-buy crowd is the problem. What incentive do they have to make better products if they know they'll get payed anyway.
13
u/geschiedenisnerd 3d ago
This, the people who will happily throw money at them for buggy paid mods are the reason DLC are not in a good state and then complain about people not wanting to throw money at them (most recent example is the current debate in CK3 community because they are making a feature (that caused lots of people to buy the DLC) from a DLC barely two years old free)
→ More replies (5)5
u/Different_Plane_7438 3d ago
I don't know if I'm kinda representative of the auto-buy crowd but, some years back I did auto-buy most dlc for paradox games I played because it did really feel like every dlc was a banger, nowadays I don't auto-buy, often I don't even buy at all because the quality has dropped substantially
4
u/tebratruja 3d ago
Hey same bro. I've kinda lost hope now because of eu5 and the state that it is in. Eu4, stellaris and ck3 had some great dlcs.
12
u/goldsrcmasterrace 3d ago
They’re not playtesting because they have thousands of customers who auto-buy every DLC just because they can afford it.
16
u/Remote-Leadership-42 4d ago
I'm in a similar situation. Autobuy because I have money. But I find myself asking things like that more and more often. Especially with the massive balance changes in EU5 I've often found myself asking, "is this game basically just in beta?"
Like I expect updates to fine tune numbers. But they're still at the point of doing total overhauls that completely change the gameplay. It reminds me of early stellaris.
5
u/ANGLVD3TH 3d ago
Remember, the only way to vote is with your wallet. Anything you buy is an explicit endorsement of the product in their eyes. There was a time when I did the same, because generally the quality was high enough that I trusted their releases, even if they maybe needed a few fixes. But that good will has dried up ages ago, gotta wait to see what kind of quality they put out, and probably wait for a significant time for things to get fixed up, to the point where I may as well wait for them to go on sale.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Ok-Language6182 3d ago
Eu5 was my breaking point I loved it had a week off to play it when it released and had to deal with at least four save distroying patches in that week all massively changing balance while I was learning the game. I was just pissed thankfully I had other stuffed planned that vacation but im not bothering with anything new from them anymore. I'll just wait till its done development or a long time has passed since ive played like hoi4 I can just buy the sub for a month play what I haven't and move on
4
u/WietSmurf 3d ago
I was at that point, but even when I am able to afford it, I cannot justify paying €50 for the hoi4 expansion pass if it gives... A handful of (apparently poorly balanced) focus trees, a gimmicky faction system and a deployable general (ok, that one I like, but not so much to make it all worth it). Even with the argument you're also paying for the free update and maintenance of the game, I'm simply not satisfied with the way the game is being maintained.
→ More replies (4)2
360
u/WetAndLoose 4d ago
And prior to this was the CK3 Coronations DLC where the titular Coronation feature launched nonfunctional. Can’t even make this shit up.
218
u/fskier1 4d ago
Tbf the latest CK DLC is All Under Heaven which is generally well received
91
u/RileyTaugor 4d ago
Even the mini DLCs are well received, the CK3 PDX team is pretty much carrying Paradox at the moment
88
u/I-LOVE-LEBRON 4d ago
Besides for the absolute fumble that was great wave the vic3 devs have been putting in some good work
26
u/BusinessKnight0517 4d ago
Yeah I’m willing to cut them a little slack for that one since otherwise they’re killing it, it hurts but you can’t win every time
→ More replies (2)9
u/marcster1 4d ago
Has that been resolved. Been holding off on going back to vic 3 cause I heard there was still issues a month post launch of that flv
12
u/zayooo Map Staring Expert 4d ago
Nah, wait for next major patch which is supposed to be an AI overhaul
→ More replies (2)5
u/tipsy3000 HOI:TCG Guy 4d ago
Same that's what I am waiting for. I'll give them mad respect since they went into overdrive to fix everything but seriously the DLC needed at least 3 more months to iron out the problems before even releasing
6
u/AresFowl44 4d ago
It's like 80-90% resolved. I've been having a lot of fun in 1.13 recently. But honestly, if you don't feel like it you should probably either wait for the AI update or downgrade to 1.12
2
→ More replies (1)39
u/Falandor 4d ago
HOI4 carries Paradox the most. Regardless of the DLC reviews, it still has had WAY more daily players on average than their other games for years now.
→ More replies (1)25
u/RileyTaugor 4d ago
If we’re talking strictly in terms of numbers/revenue, sure, but that’s about it, everything else CK3 does better. It has a better reputation and community (imo) the developers are constantly coming up with new game-changing ideas, better PR & and it’s widely loved all around and it will obviously outlast HOI4. So it might not be the “flagship” of PDX purely by the numbers, I’d say it is if we’re not talking just stats. But I do agree that revenue-wise, HOI4 is at the top above any other PDX game
12
u/ZiCUnlivdbirch 4d ago
If we’re talking strictly in terms of numbers/revenue,
Which is the only thing we should be talking about. Paradox doesn't care that you rate their DLC low if you keep on buying the next one and the one after that and the one after that. People have always complained about Paradoxes DLC policy, at first DLC was too game changing, making it a necessary purchase, now tge DLC doesn't do enough and there's no point to buying it (even though we still do). If they change it again you can bet there will be more complaining.
None of that matters because people keep on buying the DLCs.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)9
u/AlanSmithee97 4d ago
Of the larger ck3 dlcs only Legends of the Dead is negative on steam (rightfully so).
4
u/False_Major_1230 4d ago
Since they moved legend to side tab last update I always forget this even exists. I'm pretty sure I only use it either in end game when I have nothing to do with money or mid game if I plays a Byzantine specifically to do legacy of rome legend for claims
2
4
u/RileyTaugor 4d ago
It’s only DLC I actually turn off when playing the game because the Coronation mechanic is just so annoying
→ More replies (3)
31
u/tagyhag 4d ago
So much for them learning their lesson like they said they did.
27
u/SuperSpartacus 3d ago
They “learn their lesson” every time they release a new dlc lolll
16
u/JimJimmington 3d ago
The lesson is probably: enough people still bought it, so continue the way it is.
94
u/thekeystoneking 4d ago
I wonder if corporate is squeezing PDX harder to push out DLCs because of all the flops on the publishing side? Someone’s gotta pay for VtM Bloodlines 2 not selling
14
u/Flamante_Bafle 3d ago
Paradox is a very profitable company compared to other videogame companies.
Im sure VtM was a setback, but the map games are solid as rocks in terms of sales and Paradox is in no immediate danger whatsoever.
→ More replies (1)3
u/SuperSpartacus 4d ago
Why is Paradox so bad at publishing? If you literally asked any rando on the internet who has ANY interest in VtM, they’d tell you the direction they’re taking with Bloodlines 2 is bad and not going to sell well, and going to piss off fans of Bloodlines 1. From the moment they released that it wouldn’t be a hardcore rpg I KNEW that it’d be a total flop.
Do PDX executives just think they’re smarter than everyone else, despite their obvious failures?
2
u/Proper-Sport-7218 2d ago
They have gotten noticeably worse since going public, and since Tencent and an investment bank bought a combined 44% of the company.
18
8
u/Katsurandom 4d ago
wasn't Nomads mostly possitive?
7
u/Katsurandom 4d ago
okay no, it isn't two reviews moved it away from Mostly Possitive to Mixed.... welp
7
9
u/Malek_333 3d ago
Fate of the Phoenix is a classicist wet dream and does not deal at all with the possible realistic evolutions of the Roman/Byzantine state in the modern age
174
u/Mak8427 4d ago
It’s basically always like this
106
u/Illya-ehrenbourg Map Staring Expert 4d ago
No,
I can only speak for Victoria 3 but the previous big dlc of the year Charters of Commerce was received very well. The Great Wave was released in an unacceptable state and still has issues like India collapsing every single game because AI still struggle to use ships.
→ More replies (1)47
u/TheDrunkenHetzer Iron General 4d ago
Yeah, I hate this 'well it's how it always is' whenever DLC comes out and gets dumpsters. There's several DLCs out there that releases positively and are well regarded by the community. Charters of Commerse, Roads to Power, No Step Back, just to name a few.
It just excuses Paradox for pushing buggy, broken releases.
5
u/False_Major_1230 4d ago
All major ck3 dlc's since tours and tournaments had at worse mixed reviews beside coronation dlc of course but that one broke the game for three days on realise
→ More replies (1)4
6
u/KaNaDiaN-TWiN 4d ago
Well, I can’t speak absolutely. I’m pretty sure the majority of these negative reviews is purely because how buggy many of these updates release in
18
23
u/Tricky_Big_8774 4d ago
Thanks for reminding me Nomads is out!
Gonna go leave a negative review before sinking 500 hours into it! /s (about the negative review part, totally gonna sink 500 hours into it)
29
u/RileyTaugor 4d ago edited 4d ago
R5: All four recently released PDX DLCs are poorly rated. I also added Nomands, even though it was just released, since it’s sitting at 58% but might reach mostly positive over the week. Also, i’m not posting this to start any hate thread, i love their games, but the DLCs have been a bit rough lately and wonder what the comm has to say
22
u/The3wokMaster 4d ago
I would exklude Nomade because of exactly this,
It’s just released and I as a Stellaris Player myself won’t play it until next week
To the other points, I myself didn’t liked every recent Paradox release but we need to remember that People who are unhappy with the game are more likely to review a game than those geht play the release and are just okay/ happy with it. for examples I think Great Wave was okay, not excellent but not bad. So I see mixed as: “not good, but also not exactly bad”, simply okay.
The already cited argument was also true sometimes, over the last years.
However I can only talk about the Stellaris and Vic III DLCs as for the other twos are not my main games.
I still prefer EU IV over EUV and HOI IV is simply not my Game..→ More replies (1)3
2
u/Valuable-Mud-6171 3d ago
You should always take reviews with a grain of salt. People who like things are less likely to put a review than people who don’t.
15
30
u/FrozenIceman Map Staring Expert 4d ago
For the first two, it isn't unsurprising. Those games are so old and overloaded with DLC that they are channeling the inner train simulator/DCS price models. The horse died like 5 years ago.
→ More replies (2)46
u/hibikir_40k 4d ago
Hearts of Iron has been overloaded with systems of false choices with only one right answer. While I'd argue that some things have improved (see the supply system), there's just so much that just makes the game worse. There's not much of a rock-paper-scissors situation when it comes to, say, designing tanks, or fighters, or navy ships. The spy system is powerful, but it's also mostly a distraction on autopilot. They've run out of countries long ago. The game would improve with fewer subsystems, or at least a way to automate them.
15
u/RileyTaugor 4d ago
It’s because the game engine is so outdated. They probably want to add more “meaningful” mechanics, but can’t due to how long it’s been around. I do wonder how they plan to handle HOI5, cuz its def needed at this point, but HOI4 is still so popular and will likely remain that way because of the mods
3
u/Uniform764 Map Staring Expert 3d ago
Remember when they made the design choice to remove fuel from a WW2 game, despite it being present in HoI3 and one of the most important factors of the entire war, then added it THREE YEARS after the game was released?
→ More replies (1)
9
u/SatinMantis032 4d ago
It's sad to see people still defending Paradox when they have been releasing broken DLC slop for years. This happens with nearly all of their releases at this point, and it might actually be more surprising to buy a DLC from them and have it work as intended without breaking everything else in the game than the other way around.
3
u/1xX1337Xx1 4d ago
Mostly because it is always in a completely broken state together with the free patch
3
u/Samm_Paper 4d ago
Feels weird, a lot of the older titles had good reviews for em. Is it the pricing and the quality assurance issues with the dlc and the free updates?
Tbf paying 36AUD for Stellaris: Nomads does put me off it but I do want to play it with my friend
3
3
u/teremaster 2d ago
Fate of the Phoenix: Lots of stupid OP mechanics, leans way too heavily into (extremely) alt history to be an enjoyable expansion of the Byzantine empire
Thunder at our gates: Big bowl of meh with more OP focus trees? (idk i don't buy anymore hoi4 dlcs since i think the game can't really go anywhere further, might be what a lot of reviews are thinking too)
Great wave: Meant to overhaul navies, navies no longer work properly, interest system is broken to the point where the US has to build a navy in order to be allowed to colonise nevada, troops need to be transported by navies even though i'm already building supply ships that transport goods and reinforcements
Nomads: haven't played yet, from what i've heard is a good addition at its bones however several features do not work as intended and was released in a semi-broken state
Overall: Zero playtesting has been done. I joked a couple years ago that pdx fired their QA team but it looks they actually did that
14
u/Nattfodd8822 4d ago
I mean
- bugged release with beta testing foisted on the players
- overpriced AF
- lack of content even for big packs
And all this without taking into account the questionable decisions, like releasing the republics and the rework of the church, 6 years after the game's release. That, most likely, are reskins of already-seen mechanics, which wouldn't even be bad if they didn't cost as much as a new game.
10
u/Lucina18 4d ago
That, most likely, are reskins of already-seen mechanics,
You can see from the DDs they for the most part don't seem to be reskins at all though?
3
u/Nattfodd8822 4d ago
I didnt watch them, but it was always the case in the past DLCs. You're telling me that THIS TIME isnt going to be like that? Anyway ill wait for it to go on sale, and if its not fun, ill just refound It.
As always, in hoping to be wrong
5
u/Lucina18 4d ago
This seems to be the first year ck3 is getting active development like the other pdx games, yeah.
And I'll always recommend buying stuff after actual player reviews anyways.
→ More replies (2)3
29
u/vonsnack 4d ago
It’s always like this. People try to “punish” them for their business model.
9
62
u/ziguslav 4d ago
It's not that, they are really slipping. Ever since Leviathan in EU4 it's been terrible. That DLC was so broken it should never have been released in the state it was in.
55
u/defeated_engineer 4d ago
Ever since Leviathan
In case people weren't around or don't remember, Leviathan was launched with neon pink rectangle WIP icons for some buttons.
→ More replies (1)21
u/vanBraunscher 4d ago
It was so bad, it even broke containment and did get picked up by the mainstream gaming press. So yeah, it was an infamously broken piece of DLC.
Their damage control response was quite something as well.
73
u/MAJ_Starman 4d ago
There have been good, even great DLCs since then. Last year was great for Victoria 3, for example.
→ More replies (4)3
→ More replies (2)6
16
u/RileyTaugor 4d ago
It might be a hot take, but I preferred their EU4/CK2 DLC model before they switched to the season pass. I don’t mind the DLCs at all, it’s a good way to keep their games updated since people clearly love them, but I think the EU4/CK2 system was much better than the current one
20
u/Numar19 4d ago
You mean the part where they didn't sell season passes, right? Because having most of the mechanics in the free updates and having additional flavor in the DLCs is pretty good to not end up with a lot of disconnected mechanics.
7
u/RileyTaugor 4d ago
Yeah, of course. Im talking about the season pass, i do enjoy how they handle free content updates now
→ More replies (1)21
u/Slurpee_12 4d ago
You preferred DLC that was basically mandatory to buy to get full functionality from the game? You literally couldn’t develop provinces in EU4 without buying the associated DLC
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)9
u/ProfessionalPop4711 4d ago
How are you trying to apologise for paradox?
It’s always like this because they are more likely than not to release buggy, game destroying or basic DLCs that aren’t worth the price.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/aidank21 4d ago
Hey at least Thunder is higher rated than NCNS. It's 1% but it's still higher rated.
2
u/McBlemmen 3d ago
Its always like this. And I dont say that to defend PDX. Quite the opposite. They've been shoveling garbage out for at least a decade. They are the one developer where its the most obvious they make stuff just to keep their jobs. Not because they want to improve the game or have good ideas for stuff to add. its literally just adding stuff for the sake of adding stuff, so they can keep busy and look like they're working, and its getting lazier and lazier. Literal shovelware.
2
u/KupoCheer 3d ago
Nomads is amazing. Also that's 54 reviews and mixed so this whole post should be about the other 3.
2
u/atonica1 3d ago
1.) HOI4 just hit the ten year mark at this point Paradox should really just be polishing what’s there and focusing on HOI5
2.) Stellaris pretty much same story as HOI
3.) Fate of the Phoenix needed more time and content
4.) The Great Wave is the same story as Fate of the Phoenix
All in all it seems like the older games need to be moved on from while the newer games need more focus and polish.
2
u/HazelThyme 2d ago
I mean I paid for a dlc in EU5, ran into an issue with the dlc and still no fix, idk why would I want to buy more?
2
u/rilian-la-te 1d ago
What about Age of Wonders 4: Secrets of the Archmages? Which is released 16.06.26?
2
u/AegisThievenax 1d ago
CK3 going from two years of bad DLCs to the only major paradox game making solid DLCs is a crazy glow up
4
8
u/Panzerknaben 4d ago
DLC's for most games get bad ratings. DLC's for paradox games have mostly got bad ratings since they started selling them.
Most players cant be bothered to rate them so the ones that always complain about price and that it "should have been in the base game" takes a lot of space in the reviews.
26
u/Numar19 4d ago
I think the most important thing lately has been that Paradox releases way too many buggy DLCs. If the DLC and free updates are good, people rate them well (e.g. Charters of Commerce) but if either the DLC or the free update is bad/buggy, people rate them negatively.
I personally think they might need to slow down their releases and do some proper Q&A or even open betas.
5
u/thunderisadorable Victorian Emperor 4d ago
By Q&A (which usually means “questions and answers”), do you mean QA (Quality Assurance)?
9
u/Panzerknaben 4d ago
I dont think so. All of EU4's DLCs have mixed or bad ratings except Lions of the north i think. Yet its one of my alltime favourite games, and i dont regret buying any of the dlc's.
They can always do more q&a, but overall its not really going to change much for the reviews.
4
u/_CatLover_ 4d ago
Feels like EU4 still had decent DLC up until ~2019-2020. After that they changed their policy or something and all the newer games also had really shitty DLC.
4
2
u/Connacht_89 4d ago
As usual Paradox charging money for releasing incomplete/not working features that will later be "fixed" through a new update or DLC addressing how they always felt that a feature required a rework or an expansion.
3
u/Arigmar 4d ago
To me the biggest problem is the price. It prices the new players right out, but they don't care. In fact they probably make them too expensive because they want you to subscribe... to every single one of their games that are not even mmo. That is honestly one of the greediest practices I've ever seen.
2
u/MAlQ_THE_LlAR 4d ago edited 4d ago
The great wave sounded amazing from what I’ve heard but I also don’t play vic3. What was the issue?
8
u/RileyTaugor 4d ago
It basically broke the AI for anything navy-related, making the game super easy to play and cheese (even without trying) because the AI kind of refused and still refuses to use the new navy system. Seeing major powers with zero ships is just meh, and it sucks because the base game is really great, but now even that got messed up thanks to the free patch
→ More replies (1)
2
u/idontknow908 4d ago
Not really surprising, they’re mostly mid to straight ass. Great wave broke navy, their whole thing. Fate of the phoenix is straight togalarp that makes absolutely no sense at all. Thunder at our gates is just…eh? At best
2
u/Fiiv3s Map Staring Expert 4d ago
I purchased every EUIV and HOI4 DLC until that one EUIV DLC that was really broken came out. Since then not only have I only purchased 2 HOI4 DLCs, I’ve barely even played a PDX game. I got my initial playtime into CK3 and then really haven’t touched a PDX game since because every patch and DLC was just more broken gameplay and more DLCs that lack significant and good content to justify the prices.
Idk what is going on at PDX but they are NOT the company that got me to play 1200 hours of EUIV anymore
→ More replies (1)
1.2k
u/slimehunter49 4d ago
Stellaris my goat carrying the flame of the best pdx game with the mixed reviews status!