Whoa, this game is brutal.
Having played through all the classics on the hard difficulties, I'd say I'm pretty good at RTS games.

But the third (or is it fourth?) mission already seems completely impossible of you do not play 100% perfectly. On normal!!!! This is still supposed to be the tutorial... I have only three unit types lol.

You are under a constant pressure from 2/3, later all 3 sides, have to defend multiple choke points against enemies that are just MUCH more numerous than you are.
I did it after 3-4 tries, but wow, I had to put units into perfect positions, put them on hold so they wouldn't break the line and I could finish the mission without any losses... this is not a game for people new to the genre, despite the first impression.

And the unit cap is ridiculously low. It should at least be twice as high.
25 units really is pretty much nothing in RTS games where you have to spread out so much.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'm definitely gonna give this a try.
Not sure how much lasting appeal it'll have, but it does look cute and different. Without looking like a mobile game.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Not really, no.
I've moved on to other games for now. I'll trust that they'll eventually release the linux version for good and then it can be played.

Just wanted to help out with testing, but I guess that is left to others now ;)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I just cannot for the life of me figure out how to get the linux files.
I switched to the linux beta, uninstalled, reinstalled, restarted Steam, checking integrity, everything.

It still insists on downloading the Windows files and starting them via Proton.
When switching to the Linux beta, it downloads a 29MB update - not an 8GB one.
And when trying to start forcing the Steam Linux Runtime, it complains about the missing linux launch executable. Removing the specific use of any Steam Play tool "updates" the game -> back to its Windows version.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Philadelphuswhy shouldn't I be allowed to pay whatever price I like for a video game, if I likewise deem it worth the price?

Of course you are allowed to. I just think at some point it becomes silly.
Especially for new players.

I somewhat understand it from the perspective of someone who invested hundreds or even thousands of hours into a game - at that point, you reach MMO levels of time investment and the payment becomes akin to a monthly subscription or some MTX every now and then.

But you have to look at it from the perspective of those just getting started. Those are the ones most negatively affected.
If I wouldn't already be "done" with EU4 (I might come back at some point, but I haven't had the inclination in a year or so) - I'd never even consider getting into it unless it is a very, very, very deep sale. Hundreds of $ just to get started with a complete game? And it is not even free like CK2 so you can get a "demo" version to try and see if the DLCs would be worth it to you.
No. Just no. It's not ethical and even I consider that anti-consumer (and I usually don't give too much about that as I think it's mostly a smoke and mirrors term).

Quoting: PhiladelphusNow, even though I quite like it, I'm not claiming EU 4 is "the Sistine Chapel ceiling of games." But I do think it's very good and still has potential for improvement, which is why your attitude personally distresses me so much: I see it as potentially cutting off something artistic before it's reached completion, for what is, to me, a completely arbitrary limit to how much games should cost or how long developers should be allowed to work on them.

The analogies don't really work, because the chapel or other paintings do have a point where they are done. And that point is usually known/defined fairly well before the work is even started.
EU4 changed its core nature multiple times - after release. I remember a time when forts were just local defenses - by now they are essential choke point holders that cannot be walked around (don't think about why lol).
The trade systems was fundamentally changed around at least once. Same is true for other core parts.

Changes like that you usually see when? Upon the release of a new title in a series. Say, Civ or so.

They aren't improving small parts of the game, putting in only more content or adding QoL features.
They are essentially creating a new game on top of the old one. Why do that instead of taking all the changes you want to make and create a truly new game?
What if someone liked the way it was before patch X better? Well, sucks to be that guy, I guess.
And they can keep doing it forever - the medium video games does allow for that, in theory.

Quoting: PhiladelphusI highly suspect that Emperor stands to EU 4 in much the same relation as Holy Fury did to CK 2. Over a year between expansions, lots of quality of life improvements, the two games are at about the same age…we might get one or two small DLCs after this (like Rule Britannia/Third Rome/Golden Century size), or maybe one last normal one (people have requested a south-east Asia overhaul for a long time and it's one of the last places not majorly touched), but I'd be surprised if we see any beyond that.

Probably true.
Hopefully true.

Quoting: Philadelphus

Quoting: TheSHEEEPThere's also the question how other developers manage to support their games for years just as well - without requiring a yearly/bi-yearly payment of 20€.

Different development team size, perhaps? If Eric Barrone makes $5 million (just throwing out numbers) off of Stardew Valley he can probably live of it for the rest of his natural life and continue making new updates for free. If the EU 4 team makes that much money, it'll probably run the team for, I dunno, a couple of years? (Taking into account salaries for all the people involved, rent and utilities for the whole company, etc.)

As someone who does development for a living, you don't require the full initial size of people to support a project like that once it is released, to put out improvements and some DLCs.
I can practically guarantee you most people who created EU4 initially have long moved on to other projects and what remains is a comparatively small team.

Yet that small team keeps raking it in just fine. This goes way beyond just "maintenance cost".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This one and Volcanoids are the two survival games I currently wait for the most.
Waiting until they mature a lot more, that is.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Philadelphus

Quoting: TheSHEEEPThe game was released 7 years ago. S-E-V-E-N!!!
Any DLC at this point, no matter if it is actually a good one or not, is milking.
When you need to spend hundreds of <insert your currency> to get a complete game, something is very, very, very wrong.

They should have been working on EU5 since years ago. Instead we got Rome... and we all know how that went.

Whereas spending hundreds of <insert your currency> on EU5, EU6, and EU7 instead is somehow better…how, exactly? :wink: I'd personally rather pay hundreds for one truly great game refined over seven years than a few mediocre ones churned out and abandoned after a year or two.

Nobody is saying there shouldn't be any DLCs, but there is a sweet spot here. 2-4, I'd say. Not 10-99+.
After that, a complete game package just becomes too expensive to be reasonable. And unfortunately, some of those DLCs really are mandatory if you don't want a severely limited experience. Not only limited in flavor content, mind you, but actual functionality.

Though HoI4 is way crazier in this regard than EU4, to be fair.
TfV basically made you pay to click a button without which you'd be severely handicapped if you conquered anyone.

There's also the question how other developers manage to support their games for years just as well - without requiring a yearly/bi-yearly payment of 20€.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The game was released 7 years ago. S-E-V-E-N!!!
Any DLC at this point, no matter if it is actually a good one or not, is milking.
When you need to spend hundreds of <insert your currency> to get a complete game, something is very, very, very wrong.

They should have been working on EU5 since years ago. Instead we got Rome... and we all know how that went.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Sad news, I hope it is just a timing issue and not a financial one.

Quoting: TeodosioAs Phoronix noted, Feral has terrible employee reviews on Glassdoor. There is something not working there.

Glassdoor is an outlet for disgruntled ex-employees. People there all have a bone to pick.
I wouldn't give it too much credit.

View this comment - View article - View full comments