From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 14:18:46 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

So, Paradox is doing its Paradox thing with "Vampire: Bloodlines 2".

The DLC nonsense may have passed but Paradox's involvement has had
other consequences.

Like the fact that "Bloodlines 2" was marketed as the sequel to the
original "Bloodlines" at the behest of the publisher, despite the fact
that the developers themselves didn't think their game was worthy of
that connection.

Which is unsurprising, given the end product we received. The general
consensus is that "Bloodlines 2" isn't necessarily a bad game (for
what it is) but it definitely doesn't live up to the style and quality
of the first. It's more of a glorified walking sim than the
full-fledged CRPG people were expecting. And even the developers
recognized this. "Co-founder Dan Pinchbeck (who left TCR in 2023)
claims that he consistently attempted to get Paradox to change the
game's name."*

But Paradox, a publisher increasingly known for its bad decisions,
insisted on the title. Just like they insisted on the idea to make
several clans DLC-only (before popular outcry forced them to relent),
or pushed "Cities Skylines 2" out the door long before it was ready. A publisher who seems intent on flooding the market with low-quality
wares and then making up the deficit with a ton of DLC.

Well, at least "Cities Skylines" is free of them. Well, not the game
itself, but the developer behind the games, "Colossal Order". They
split away from Paradox, so hopefully we'll see a proper city-building
sim from them again.

Maybe "The Chinese Room", developer of "Bloodlines 2", should take the
hint.







----
* here: https://www.pcgamesn.com/vampire-the-masquerade-bloodlines-2/interview-chinese-room-paradox
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 11:53:53 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 14:18:46 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson ><spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

So, Paradox is doing its Paradox thing with "Vampire: Bloodlines 2".

In related news, Paradox just wrote-down an approx. $40million USD
development loss on "Bloodlines 2" due to poor sales.* Of course, they
blame this on their publishing a game outside their 'core areas',
rather than fucking up the launch with their stupid DLC strategy, or
forcing the developer to release a game as a sequel when it was
nothing like the original game.

In other words, their future strategy won't be to change up tactics
and make games that are fun, but to double-down on the endless-DLC for
"Hearts of Iron", "Europa Universalis" and the like. Good games are
difficult to produce, but if you can nickel-and-dime your way to
success by selling endless swathes of DLC for average title,
constantly selling the idea that if you just buy ONE MORE EXPANSION
the game will finally be worth it, then why bother to change? ;-)



* announcement https://www.paradoxinteractive.com/media/press-releases/press-release/paradox-interactive-ab-writes-down-msek-355-of-capitalised-development-costs-for-vampire-the-masquerade-bloodlines-2


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On 11/28/2025 12:11 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 11:53:53 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 14:18:46 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

So, Paradox is doing its Paradox thing with "Vampire: Bloodlines 2".

In related news, Paradox just wrote-down an approx. $40million USD development loss on "Bloodlines 2" due to poor sales.* Of course, they
blame this on their publishing a game outside their 'core areas',
rather than fucking up the launch with their stupid DLC strategy, or
forcing the developer to release a game as a sequel when it was
nothing like the original game.

In other words, their future strategy won't be to change up tactics
and make games that are fun, but to double-down on the endless-DLC for "Hearts of Iron", "Europa Universalis" and the like. Good games are
difficult to produce, but if you can nickel-and-dime your way to
success by selling endless swathes of DLC for average title,
constantly selling the idea that if you just buy ONE MORE EXPANSION
the game will finally be worth it, then why bother to change? ;-)

* announcement https://www.paradoxinteractive.com/media/press-releases/press-release/paradox-interactive-ab-writes-down-msek-355-of-capitalised-development-costs-for-vampire-the-masquerade-bloodlines-2

My takeaway is that they will continue to make crap games because
they've not proven that they can get a massive tax break for doing so.
--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On 11/28/2025 12:11 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 11:53:53 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 14:18:46 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

So, Paradox is doing its Paradox thing with "Vampire: Bloodlines 2".

In related news, Paradox just wrote-down an approx. $40million USD development loss on "Bloodlines 2" due to poor sales.* Of course, they
blame this on their publishing a game outside their 'core areas',
rather than fucking up the launch with their stupid DLC strategy, or
forcing the developer to release a game as a sequel when it was
nothing like the original game.

In other words, their future strategy won't be to change up tactics
and make games that are fun, but to double-down on the endless-DLC for "Hearts of Iron", "Europa Universalis" and the like. Good games are
difficult to produce, but if you can nickel-and-dime your way to
success by selling endless swathes of DLC for average title,
constantly selling the idea that if you just buy ONE MORE EXPANSION
the game will finally be worth it, then why bother to change? ;-)

Hey it worked for Baldur's Gate 3.
--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 21:31:31 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On 11/28/2025 12:11 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

In other words, their future strategy won't be to change up tactics
and make games that are fun, but to double-down on the endless-DLC for
"Hearts of Iron", "Europa Universalis" and the like. Good games are
difficult to produce, but if you can nickel-and-dime your way to
success by selling endless swathes of DLC for average title,
constantly selling the idea that if you just buy ONE MORE EXPANSION
the game will finally be worth it, then why bother to change? ;-)

Hey it worked for Baldur's Gate 3.

Well, seeing as Baldurs Gate didn't have any real paid DLC (aside from
the bonus soundtrack/artbook "deluxe edition" crap too many games
offer these days) _and_ it wasn't published by Paradox I'm somewhat
confused by that comment. ;-)

In fact, "Baldur's Gate 3" is often held up as the counter-example to
companies that rely heavily on DLC; just release a solid title,
complete unto itself (and keep your costs under control) and you won't
HAVE to rely on post-purchase monetizations.

So the absolute opposite of Paradox's strastegy.




--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2