V Rising & Old World are my latest purchases. V rising has some potential for multiplayer, though, so I'm waiting on actually playing it. Old world is basically "what if your immortal civ leader was a dynasty instead?" so it borrows from CK3.
Speaking of which, CK3's Battle for Iberia just dropped, (the last piece of the Royal Edition I bought a long time ago.) I've been having a blast being a Viking interloper, ruining the lives of Andalusians and Asturians alike.
There's also a modded minecraft world I've been fiddling with-- but that's on life support. Can't maintain interest in it.
CK3 itself is woke. CK3 took out 'Deus Vult' because they hate the IRL people who say it. CK3 added in same sex marriages to the middle ages. CK3 was made by such cucks that they launched the game where more than half of children popped out were from cuckoldry and thought it was fine.
Paradox? They're Swedish. You have to vet them project by project on that front.
They earned a reprieve by axing the Bloodlines 2 team, but they're still questionable-- even to me, with my raging Grand Strategy boner making me less hesitant.
If anything, leaving Paradox alone on principle because of their DLC policy would make sense, but I'm hardly rational about my map staring games.
Paradox DLC is basically as monetized as you get without microtransactions.
Their current model is to launch a game, and then ~7-10 20 buck DLCs, with supporting 7 buck content packs that are associated with them, and 10 buck 'flavor packs' that bridge between the major DLCs-- all of which launch in parallel with a free patch that supports the system changes in the DLC.
It's cancer, but it funds their studio's continuous development.
The game itself is free, but the 'full experience' will run you 300 dollars, and buying in after the game has launched requires a strategy guide for which DLC you need to buy and which are optional.
V Rising & Old World are my latest purchases. V rising has some potential for multiplayer, though, so I'm waiting on actually playing it. Old world is basically "what if your immortal civ leader was a dynasty instead?" so it borrows from CK3.
Speaking of which, CK3's Battle for Iberia just dropped, (the last piece of the Royal Edition I bought a long time ago.) I've been having a blast being a Viking interloper, ruining the lives of Andalusians and Asturians alike.
There's also a modded minecraft world I've been fiddling with-- but that's on life support. Can't maintain interest in it.
CK3 itself is woke. CK3 took out 'Deus Vult' because they hate the IRL people who say it. CK3 added in same sex marriages to the middle ages. CK3 was made by such cucks that they launched the game where more than half of children popped out were from cuckoldry and thought it was fine.
Paradox? They're Swedish. You have to vet them project by project on that front.
They earned a reprieve by axing the Bloodlines 2 team, but they're still questionable-- even to me, with my raging Grand Strategy boner making me less hesitant.
If anything, leaving Paradox alone on principle because of their DLC policy would make sense, but I'm hardly rational about my map staring games.
Paradox DLC is basically as monetized as you get without microtransactions.
Their current model is to launch a game, and then ~7-10 20 buck DLCs, with supporting 7 buck content packs that are associated with them, and 10 buck 'flavor packs' that bridge between the major DLCs-- all of which launch in parallel with a free patch that supports the system changes in the DLC.
It's cancer, but it funds their studio's continuous development.
You get things like this: CK II.
The game itself is free, but the 'full experience' will run you 300 dollars, and buying in after the game has launched requires a strategy guide for which DLC you need to buy and which are optional.