Always glad to hear another sing the praise of CK2. Strangely one of the most played, yet underappreciated game in Paradox's catalogue. Pro-tip for any interested in experiencing CK2's DLCs. They aren't hard to find in packs online.
@@lightningmcqueen1717 Great question! CK3's basegame I believe has more mechanics than CK2's but the latter is actually more enjoyable imo. To me CK3's core gameplay loop, combat and overall art style are lacking when compared to CK2's and those are some of the main reasons I stick to CK2 to this day. Now, I wouldn't recommend to anyone to just play the basegame of either game. CK2 shines far brighter with it's DLCs than any other Paradox game imo. One day CK3 with it's DLCs might surpass it, but unless they fix the things I consider to be the core issues with the game, specifically the combat, the arcadey feel of the game compared to CK2 and the subpar recruitment system I recommend CK2 over CK3. And thats before I even get into the lack of mechanics and features present in CK2's DLCs that were promised to be in CK3 and still aren't 4 years after release.
Regarding your first point regarding art, I 100% Agree with, but even more so with a game like mount and blade warband and bannerlord. The art in warband is MASTERFUL, the detail, how they depict various events in the game. There is such a great deal of accuracy, detail, and it's inspired from the factions and their historical counterparts. The art at the start of the game combined with the glorious music, the DUN DUN DUN of horns followed by the drums. It feels completely foreign, but glorious! When I look at Bannerlord, the art is so... bland. You can barely tell who's being represented in the artwork. Are you looking at Battanians, Imperials, or Vlandians? Even the art that is supposed to represent a faction, like the Aseria, feels so generic and boring. In addition, the armor... it's not even there. A lot of the times you seem people wearing bland leather cuirasses or rags. There's nothing there to identify anyone with. (Bannerlord also has a problem with cultural identities in general, and the lack of distinction). It's one of the many things that bothers me with the sequel that I feel is very similar with the ck2 and ck3 games. It's the art, it's the music, the general atmosphere is just missing in exchange for enhanced fidelity.
Paradox downgraded it to around vanilla CK2 standards so they can repackage features/mechanics long added into CK2 through paid DLC and resell it to you. I'm fed up with their business practices. Just put another year into your games and charge me $80 if you must. But this $150-300 to purchase a full game. $100-150 for the DLC's that actually add features/mechanics, it's just ludicrous. $20 for 3-5 minor features is extravagant. Especially when a lot of them really should have been in the game to begin with. It should be an upgrade to an all DLC playthrough of CK2. Not it's vanilla state from 10+ years ago.
I clicked on the video, saw the sup boys and clicked off but then I thought about it and was thinking "I am a boy" so I clicked back on. please dont make me regret it.
tip for future uploads, don't repeat yourself as much. I understood what you meant when you said its more gritty however you could have put a side by side comparison and asked which one feels more medieval and then you could have said your opinion after.
1 Please write what you want to say(it dosent have to be script) just so you dont have to spend time to find words. 2 Personally i would disagree with your statement. It is better then CK3, but cuz its paradox they ofc add more importance to de-jure part of things, than de-facto. Lot of mechanics in CK is janky and other games in other ganres do a better work than paradox in this time period.
I'm not sure the idea hat grittiness supposedly made something more authentically medieval is a hill you'd like to die on. I appreciate the recognition of the value of hardship as such, but at the same time, the notion that simplifying historical politics to mutual envy were a recognition of realism is rather off.
Always glad to hear another sing the praise of CK2. Strangely one of the most played, yet underappreciated game in Paradox's catalogue.
Pro-tip for any interested in experiencing CK2's DLCs. They aren't hard to find in packs online.
You can just subscribe to have them all for a month at a time now right?
@@DiviAugustionly the fake and gay pay the sub fee
Pirate em
how is ck2 basegame vs ck3 basegame?
@@lightningmcqueen1717 Great question! CK3's basegame I believe has more mechanics than CK2's but the latter is actually more enjoyable imo.
To me CK3's core gameplay loop, combat and overall art style are lacking when compared to CK2's and those are some of the main reasons I stick to CK2 to this day.
Now, I wouldn't recommend to anyone to just play the basegame of either game. CK2 shines far brighter with it's DLCs than any other Paradox game imo. One day CK3 with it's DLCs might surpass it, but unless they fix the things I consider to be the core issues with the game, specifically the combat, the arcadey feel of the game compared to CK2 and the subpar recruitment system I recommend CK2 over CK3.
And thats before I even get into the lack of mechanics and features present in CK2's DLCs that were promised to be in CK3 and still aren't 4 years after release.
Quick tip, make your title a bit shorter so people can see it fully without it going …
"Why CK2 Captures The Medieval World Better Than Most"?
lol nah
It's perfectly fine.
I prefer titles that actually explain what the video is about instead of some clickbait shit.
Regarding your first point regarding art, I 100% Agree with, but even more so with a game like mount and blade warband and bannerlord.
The art in warband is MASTERFUL, the detail, how they depict various events in the game. There is such a great deal of accuracy, detail, and it's inspired from the factions and their historical counterparts. The art at the start of the game combined with the glorious music, the DUN DUN DUN of horns followed by the drums. It feels completely foreign, but glorious!
When I look at Bannerlord, the art is so... bland. You can barely tell who's being represented in the artwork. Are you looking at Battanians, Imperials, or Vlandians? Even the art that is supposed to represent a faction, like the Aseria, feels so generic and boring. In addition, the armor... it's not even there. A lot of the times you seem people wearing bland leather cuirasses or rags. There's nothing there to identify anyone with. (Bannerlord also has a problem with cultural identities in general, and the lack of distinction).
It's one of the many things that bothers me with the sequel that I feel is very similar with the ck2 and ck3 games. It's the art, it's the music, the general atmosphere is just missing in exchange for enhanced fidelity.
I have over 4000 hours in this game ( mostly due to the great mods). I've barely touched CK 3. It's just not the same.
I need to play the Latin Empire more often, I'm a big fan of Byzantium/ERE so I don't play it often out of spite.
Paradox downgraded it to around vanilla CK2 standards so they can repackage features/mechanics long added into CK2 through paid DLC and resell it to you. I'm fed up with their business practices. Just put another year into your games and charge me $80 if you must. But this $150-300 to purchase a full game. $100-150 for the DLC's that actually add features/mechanics, it's just ludicrous. $20 for 3-5 minor features is extravagant. Especially when a lot of them really should have been in the game to begin with. It should be an upgrade to an all DLC playthrough of CK2. Not it's vanilla state from 10+ years ago.
I clicked on the video, saw the sup boys and clicked off but then I thought about it and was thinking "I am a boy" so I clicked back on. please dont make me regret it.
tip for future uploads, don't repeat yourself as much. I understood what you meant when you said its more gritty however you could have put a side by side comparison and asked which one feels more medieval and then you could have said your opinion after.
@@Canada_Matt bro spent 5 minutes saying its gritty and medieval but im ngl there was something endearing about it
1 Please write what you want to say(it dosent have to be script) just so you dont have to spend time to find words.
2 Personally i would disagree with your statement. It is better then CK3, but cuz its paradox they ofc add more importance to de-jure part of things, than de-facto. Lot of mechanics in CK is janky and other games in other ganres do a better work than paradox in this time period.
I'm not sure the idea hat grittiness supposedly made something more authentically medieval is a hill you'd like to die on.
I appreciate the recognition of the value of hardship as such, but at the same time, the notion that simplifying historical politics to mutual envy were a recognition of realism is rather off.