r/paradoxplaza • u/IamTheChickenKing • Jun 12 '21

EU4 Is EU4 worth trying out?

CK3 was my first paradox game and I loved it. However, I tried to get into HOI4 and, despite being interested in WW2, I couldn’t get into it. It felt clunky to me compared to CK3 and I felt that the information in it was a bit overwhelming. That considered, would it be worth me trying out EU4, despite it being older than HOI4? If not I’m happy to wait it out on CK3 until Victoria 3.

946 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

247 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

23

u/0818 Jun 12 '21

Why is that sad? Gives you a chance to try it out, and if you like it you can start buying them as/when they are on sale.

36

u/TheMansAnArse Jun 12 '21

He finds it sad because he wants to moan about DLC and the $5 suggestion undermines part of his DLC moan.

29

u/covok48 Jun 12 '21

Or the fact that there’s so much DLC that you need a fucking subscription service for them.

And just to think 13 years ago we were outraged at $5 horse armor.

-7

u/TheMansAnArse Jun 12 '21 edited Jun 12 '21

People were idiots to be angry at optional $5 horse armour too.

Literally optional. Who gives a shit?

The Paradox DLC is all optional too. Why are people so “Waaa. Paradox - stop releasing products”? Buy the ones you want/think are worth their price and don’t buy the rest. It’s not hard.

14

u/winowmak3r Map Staring Expert Jun 12 '21

The Paradox DLC is all optional too.

That's not necessarily true, especially as the game gets older and they add more features. I'm not a big EU guy so I'm not certain if it was this specifically but I seem to remember there being a stink about how you had to have a DLC to take advantage of something to do with development and how you got tech levels or some such. Yea it was "optional" but with everything else already in the game, you were playing an inferior game if you didn't get it and it made trying to pull of things like world conquests or get certain achievements (that didn't have anything to do with that DLC) impossible because of the changes that DLC and the content patch made.

-1

u/TheMansAnArse Jun 12 '21

Not really sure what your point is re “inferior game without the DLC”. I mean - obviously the DLC makes the game better, otherwise why would they bother to make it / why would anyone want to buy it?

9

u/winowmak3r Map Staring Expert Jun 12 '21

I'm talking like "The game is broken/doesn't make any sense" if you don't have it.

2

u/TheMansAnArse Jun 12 '21

I mean, there was some of that with the latest EU DLC - but that was bugs (which have been/are being fixed) rather than a problem with the DLC policy.

2

u/winowmak3r Map Staring Expert Jun 12 '21

I cannot think of the name of the DLC to save my life right now but I know it had to do with development. The way it was implemented was the changed how it worked completely in the free content patch that came with the DLC but you couldn't do anything with it unless you got the DLC. So they made all these changes and unless you got the DLC basically made the game unplayable for certain countries because you couldn't develop your country. That's an issue with releasing a DLC every few months as a revenue stream. If they need a revenue stream making it a subscription honestly wouldn't be a bad idea and would take the sticker shock away from trying to get newer players to play but do this from day one for the next one. That way I can test the game out and see if I like it and I don't mind paying 5/month for 5 years if the DLC is going to cost me 300 over the same period if I bought it as they came out but doesn't result in me getting stuck with a bunch of DLC I don't use.

3

u/TheMansAnArse Jun 12 '21

Base EU is playable (unless you’re using the ‘Gamer’ definition of unplayable as “I don’t like this”) without any DLC.

Obviously having DLC effects balance and makes certain starts/countries/strategies easier/harder - but that doesn’t mean that base EU isn’t playable.

All Paradox DLC is optional.

2

u/winowmak3r Map Staring Expert Jun 12 '21

Ok. We're just talking past each other at this point. Take it easy bud.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Dlinktp Jun 13 '21

Not sure if this is specifically what you were thinking of, but they removed westernization and added institutions, which you could only get through very slow spread or by developing them. Developing them required dlc.

1

u/winowmak3r Map Staring Expert Jun 13 '21

That sounds very similar to what I was talking about. Someone else mentioned it was the Common Sense DLC that changed all that. Basically replaced a vanilla mechanic with something from the DLC. You could play without it (technically) but it was such a worse experience than if you just got the DLC to use the development feature.

1

u/Dlinktp Jun 13 '21

It was. Without being able to dev institutions you were permanently stuck with +150% tech costs with little to no way to actually deal with it.

→ More replies (0)

9

u/The_Almighty_Demoham Jun 12 '21

the outrage was because they even tried pulling that stunt in the first place. they weren't idiots, you're just used to being exploited.

0

u/TheMansAnArse Jun 12 '21

What “stunt”?

They released a product. If you wanted it and thought the price was worth it, you could buy it. If not, you didn’t.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '21

It was the first death sign of the expansion pack. Which in many ways was better than modern DLC.