Games

God, how can someone be so blind?

But this was such an edge case, removing assets resulting in the unavailability of said assets in game, that this interruption simply couldn't have been for foreseen.

They couldn't foresee issues created by removing assets, in a game that is supposed to support user mods, which can be added/removed at any time? Really?

The explanation I've seen is that they wanted to pull the DLC as soon as possible, since it was - literally - the worst-rated product on Steam. I'm 99% sure the bean counters responsible for all of the terrible decisions (release the game, no matter what state! Release the DLC, no matter the amount of content!) pulled the lever on this one again - no chance they'll see any responsibility with themselves.

Not everything needs a change management procedure, calm down there Satan.

Truth be told, i don’t have an ounce of care in me about this community council. I want them to make a product that was advertised, because so far it’s just a scam of colossal orders of magnitude (ha)

The angry customers and the state of the game are problems.

• it's hard to feel sorry for people who pre-ordered because they got exactly what they paid for - a game of unknown quality and quantity of content
• it's hard to feel sorry for people who bought post-release because they also got exactly what they paid for - a game where reviews detailed poor quality and quantity of content
• customers being disappointed and/or wanting a refund is perfectly reasonable
• people wanting the game to be better is also reasonable
• people abusing the devs is not reasonable

I'm not going to defend the poor quality of the game because it's obviously bad (from what I gather, anyway - I've not played it myself) and should be improved. But I do think gamers could learn to be a little more responsible with their purchases and inform themselves before buying a game.

I'm pretty over the whole cycle of games coming out and not meeting expectations, people buying them anyway (through pre-orders or day-one purchases), people being unnecessarily rude/hostile/sending death threats to developers as if they were forced to buy the game as gunpoint. Yes, developers should try to do better, yes publishers should often give developers more time to polish up games rather than announcing the release date two years in advance and refusing to delay, but also consumers could really take some responsibility for what they decide to give money to.

That said, I just fired up the game yesterday for the first time since launch and was surprised by how much progress was being made. I was surprised to find that mod support is already available; I thought it was still a work in progress cause I didn't hear anything about it. You think that Paradox would have been making a huge announcement about it since it's a huge important thing, but if they did, I surely can't find it on their website nor on the produce page in Steam.

I was also surprised to find that my performance issues were fixed too. Now getting a solid 40-60 FPS on high settings with a medium-sized city @ 4K. Not bad, given that I usually averaged 20-30 on the same machine in C:S1.

Now all they gotta do is make the economy easier to understand. I still don't get how I can be losing money every month, yet my balance keeps going up. But other than that, all of my complaints with the game have been fixed. If anyone reading this hasn't played the game in several months, I suggest you give it a try again. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Hmm, I've only played Stellaris from this company and that game is great. A bit pricey with all the DLC, but the alternative of releasing a new Stellaris every few years probably amounts to the same.
Also, I'd rather play a well fleshed out 8 year old game, than getting a bare boned husk with each iteration - which sadly tends to be the norm for 4x games.

The link suggests the opposite of what you’re claiming

you were of course supposed to keep access to the Beach Properties content until the patch that moves it to the base game arrived. Assets are replaced by the placeholder boxes, but as the waterfront zoning isn't available in the base game yet, I recommend holding off on loading saves with a lot of those zones.

Putting dlc content into the base game doesn’t sound like they are trying to sell millions of dlc

In hearts of iron they always made sure to drop free content along with the paid content.

I think you need to re-read the linked thread. Nobody’s as extreme as you’re making them out to be.

The complaints are fairly level headed. I’ve seen worse in Amazon product reviews.

They have every right to do exactly what you say they shouldn't. Get off your high horse.

Yes, CO did bad releasing an unoptimized game, but if you put pressure for a cosmetic DLC to be removed you can’t be angry that they removed said DLC.

I strongly disagree with this for two reasons:

1. Nobody put pressure on them to remove the content from the game. "Removing the DLC" can be done in productive or non-productive ways, the latter of which happened here - a better solution would be to set it as non-buyable on Steam and wait with refunds until the patch has been released which allows people to continue playing.

2. It's not just grey boxes (which would be bad enough on its own - these people paid for the content, there's no technical reason for them not to have it right now) - the CO employee literally says:

Assets are replaced by the placeholder boxes, but as the waterfront zoning isn't available in the base game yet, I recommend holding off on loading saves with a lot of those zones.

So the people who bought the shitty DLC, as in the die-hard fans, can't play on their saves due to COs fuckup.