I crave CK2's council mechanics in CK3. CK2 allowed me to engage with my council members in ways that CK3 has yet to pull off. In CK3, it feels like I just select the person with the highest number in the relevant skill and forget about them until its time to pick a new member
True, but I love the CK3 travelling/journey mechanics especially with all the individual baronies on the map. If they could just add more CK2 depth to CK3... Even with all they've added it still feels a bit shallow.
I hate that they changed the notification system from ck2. In ck3 i feel less knowledgeable of my surrounding events. I'm a lowly count and not even informed when my king dies. Let alone if he divorces the queen when he discovers she's been cheating.
I agree, I was recently annoyed when the death of an Important vassal wasn't announced (at least not clearly). It should have been a pop-up telling me "omg your most powerful Duke died" If they are some otherwise unimportant person, but for some reason have decided to rival you, then you will get notified. I'm like who the hell is this person?, and why did they hate me?, oh their relative died in my dungeon, okay. But I think we can change notification settings, I will look into it next time I play CKIII.
@@Xorkuss why would? Only good thing in game is you can become white as black African king, or become black as irish . Combat is annoying, chasing enemies who attacked you, waiting Steward to rise your devolvement. Travel. Like travel and fucked by legitimacy..no thank you
CK3 is not a sequel to CK2 but a remake... CK2 was so advanced with tons of DLC, and then you bought CK3, poof, all the DLC's aren't included... but slowly they are getting implemented back with no differences or improvements from CK2 apart graphics... i spent 1000+ hourse in CK2 and was really disappointed by how they massacred a franchise only to steal more money...
even Paradox games are taking notes from Total War and steadily removing distinct soundtracks in favour of cheap ambient mixes. And they still force devs to overwork with unpaid crunchtime as a given while the suits rake in the money, its not like the cost cutting of features or whaling with absurd numbers of expensive dlc is benefit the people making the games
You're right, CK2 is muuuch harder. In some ways CK3 feels more railroaded which is weird because it's not from a design point of view, but I think it's more lenient and less... punishing, less things happening
@@AndysParadox yep. In CK3 My characters almost always live to their 80s, I rarely have other rulers declare war on me, hostile factions almost never form, etc… In CK2 it always feels like my realm is one random event away from falling apart
@@michaelh878idk man I’ve played the game since launch and I don’t think I’ve had a real existential challenge once. Alliances are insanely easy to get so even when you play as a count it’s never too hard to get a massive army to protect you. Assassinations are also insanely easy so it becomes fairly easy to just break scary alliances
What I like in CK2 is, that Tribal Governments or Nomads have that bonus of their Vassals joining a defensive/offensive war. Makes them early on stronger and actually formidable against a big kingdom. Same with the Levys recovering, which is slower in CK2 and feels actually like they get a training or your population needs to recover before you start the next war. In CK3 it recovers a lot faster, well that is what I remember.
There was a mod i think that probably allowed you to be a baron or a theocracy, It was called "Rise to Power", you could start from landless and move up to the hierarchy ladder
I fully agree with everything you say. While the older players age, the gaming industry adapts to the newer generations of gamers. Us older generations are much more used to prominent sounds, big flashy logos that are easy to see, and to us it all "makes sense". That's why in CK3, everything FEELS more minimalistic than in CK2. Despite having 3D characters and a fancy superficial layer on top, it still doesn't quite reach the potential CK2 offered with less visually pleasing aesthetics, while also having events and a UI that's way more in depth. Short and simple, CK3 is oversimplified and has a minimalistic "strange" look to it, and it's gonna take Paradox a few more DLC's and polishing, until the game is even CLOSE to CK2. However, CK3 is definitely getting there with the latest DLC's that have been added to the game. I'm also liking the developers latest plans. Making it possible to play as landless lords and travelers. There is also the upcoming Byzantium-focused major expansion, which might shake up things for the better in CK3.
I think CK3's biggest problem is the lack of difficulty. In CK2, early game as a low noble used to be much more of a waiting game than in CK3, which I think is something much more interesting. But I guess my slower pace is not really something most PDX players enjoy. I still enjoy CK3, I think it has the best modding scene of all PDX games right now, but the base game is indeed lacking a bigger degree of challenge.
I miss the way laws and culture worked, I remember always rushing for legalism to get late medieval administration to get primogeniture and it felt so satisfying, as opposed to just waiting.
I love CK3, but even I still think that CK2 feels like it's had a lot more love put into it, and it's a lot more immersive. I'm an F2P for CK2, but it was still really fun even with the large amount of restrictions. Even with the large amount of restrictions, it did feel like a huge and fun world. I think that if CK3 or even CK4 mixes both CK2's events, duels, and dynasty scores, but also the more interactive laws, cultures, prestige, and piety of the present-day it will literally be perfect. CK3 is fun, but it lacks the immersion and life brought by the interactions and events that CK2 had. The most interaction you get in CK3 is enabled via mods like VIET, or locked behind DLCs like the Royal Court and Tours & Tournaments. Meanwhile CK2 had so much events, although repetitive, it just felt more...alive. Rambling aside, I agree will all of your points Andy, and they seem aligned with mine. The music, the atmosphere, and I think most importantly the art and interactions just make CK2 better. The mechanics of ruling and administration in CK3 is better (albeit I may not know the full extent since I'm F2P for CK2), CK2's focus on truly putting you into the life of a medieval ruler makes CK3 feel like a technically sound, yet fairly bland experience on vanilla compared to its more wonky, yet fun and full of life older brother. I feel lucky to have been able to play the free version of CK2 before buying CK3. It makes you appreciate the improved fundamental mechanics, while at the same time making you miss greatly what was left behind.
Have been thinking of pulling the trigger on EU4. I like the Era and History therein. As I just don't think eu5 will be as good as EU4 is now. Kinda like this current ck2 v ck3 discussion
Yeah i tried CK3 a few days ago and just thought it was far too easy.. Even in base game CK2 you could get screwed over early.. CK3 is far more forgiving and it makes things not matter as much since you can wiggle out of just about anything.. CK3 also had me winning alot of battles i probably shouldn't have.. CK3 just plays itself basically and i don't like it
Crusader Kings 3's memey religious mechanics make me despise the game. The fact that there's so much more depth to playing a catholic in CK2 than in CK3 despite CK3 being a 4 years old is beyond baffeling for a game called "Crusader Kings"
I love CK 2, I always feel like I have no clue what I am doing and wind up restarting minutes to an hour into a playthrough. But my last save I figured I’d just let it play out, I found out about societies and found out a secret organization existed (LO) and figured I’d join it. After a while I had a demon spawn child who killed me, when my heir took over I made the mistake of banishibg him instead of throwing him in a dungeon or killing him so now he comes around every year or so and raises havoc and death to me and my heirs. He’s 2nd in line to the current player and idk what to do. I guess it’ll be interesting to play as him and wreck havoc from my point of view. Great game
I'm playing CK2 with the elder scrolls mod... a kitten randomly followed me so I managed to adopt it. That kitten was more loyal then any vassal. my cat just died after my king returned from a war with rival dark elves an my character suffers from immortality so now I will engage in the illegal art of necromancy with the efforts of bringing back my beloved putter tat.
In CK2, almost every DLC was changing the game experience significantly, no matter who do you play. In CK3, you wouldn't even know about most of DLCs' existence if you don't play in regions that they change
That's the problem with Paradox games. It's going to take many years until CK3 reaches the level of detail and content that CK2 has. Ps. The part about using an election to elect the next Byzantine Emperor like the HRE is historically extremely inaccurate. Byzantine succession was either done normally (from father to son) or not normally (revolution that resulted in the fall of a dynasty and the emergence of a new one).
Damn, you made me remember the building mechanics in CK2 compared to CK3 and MAAAAN let me tell you. Having to grab mods to get more slots and more buildings just pisses me off
The biggest issue for me is that CK3 just feels way too streamlined. I understand that this was likely needed for the game to achieve the mainstream success that it has, but personally I just get rather bored when all thats really required to build a massive empire is clicking a couple buttons without too much forethought.
The most beautiful game ever made. I swear no other Crusader Kings will ever come close to it. They will milk a lot of more DLC's but it will never give us that feeling
100% agree with this video. Holy shit someone finally mentioned the buildings! I know that the more complicated building system in CK2 was harder for the AI to handle, but as a player it feels so crazy to rely on your vassals to provide you with taxes while you build military buildings to gain army advantages. I almost always opt for financial buildings so I can support a larger standing army. By the time it makes sense for me to stop building money printers I'm already reaching the point where the game has started to feel stale. I play with as many building slots as possible and used other mods like More Buildings to help get back the feel.
My problem is that i really love ck2 but ck3 has things that i love but ck2 doesn't have it like: hybrid cultures and diverge ones, lifestyle system is better, tours and tournament and legacy of persia and the upcoming dlc rise to power and the thing that frustrats me with ck2 2d portraits which is if you are english and marry a nore women your kids may have the norse portraits but in ck3 the genetic system is way better and your children will be a mix
CK2 has no business in being better now at this stage. My problem with CK2 is, that I’ve spend over 2k hours into that game. I’ve tried everything. I am even one of the rare specimens that likes the sunset invasion, because it shake up an otherwise stale endgame. It always makes it interesting for me. I think, if the AI got improved and total war Atilia 1212AD got modded to it, I would go back.
In Ck3 you can have a tribal, clan, or feudal government. In Ck2, you can have tribal, iqta (like clan), feudal, republican, nomad, or imperial government. Twice the options! And Ck2 allows automatic conversion between iqta and feudal depending on religion so you don't get stuck in government designed for polygamy when you have a non-polygamous religion and visa versa.
@@gustavingerssonredditors disagree with you on that one, they'd rather see 20 knights kill 500 "levies" (don't know what they're supposed to represent) than have a realistic combat system with three flanks.
The in-game guide for CK2 is very vague and I couldn't learn much from it. The tutorials on TH-cam also aren't as good as they should be for teaching the game. Do you know any methods that can help me learn CK2's complex mechanics more easily and quickly?
What I love with the council is that you can give enough power to the council to think they are in power or for your liege to think he has power by pulling strings in the shadow. Full Intrigue/Stewardship charcater is just something else compared to CK3.
I started with CK3, did not get into it andtook my money back (after 3 hours). CK2 is free to play so i tried it. The tutorial is better but still too small for such a complex game. The Playthroughs of a certain Legend showed me some tricks and hints. What makes CK2 for me better? -character portraits and ui look overall more suitable for a medieval game. The CK3 Ui would be fine if it was for a science fiction game. -conquering counties feels more satisfiying because you have to conquer each barony. -Last but not least, CK2 is basically finished. It wont get new dlcs. What I buy is what I get. I am not a big fan of abos and just used that option in order to see which dlcs are good/necessary. Probably, I will give CK3 a second chance in 2028 - when it has all dlcs and is on sale:D
If you started with CK2 and you have every vital dlc, it doesn't even compare with the new one. Starting as a Jew count a little bit northern than Georgia, becoming Byzantine Emperor, convert the empire to jew religion, conquer every country till you reach China's borders and raging war on them, is hands down my best CK play through ever. There is no play through in CK3 that can even come close to that campain right now
The traits as well, characters in CK2 felt dynamic. I like how my Satanic character started to become really evil after the 20th vanishing without a trace, CK3 characters feel static.
I am a CK II player and I never play other Paradox games. At the same time I don’t really have to spend more than 50$ in a game and prefer to keep them for game like Undertale, Deltarune (when it pays), Stanley Parable, etc.... By cons I love Ck2 and it is literally my most play game (even if in real c normal for a paradox game) I just watched on Steam even CK1 is paid , it literally makes no sense (that Ck II is free while CK1 is not)
Ck3 does some things better but it just misses out on a lot of good content from ck2. Shame. Also unrelated but i wish for more historical events in ck3 for specific characters and more empires to form since that would be cool to aim for
I clawed my way to defeat the Normans and become Sultan of Sicily. I joined the Hermetic Order. The whispers of the stars drove me insane. I married my horse (don't judge me, you don't know Glitterhoof's love). I seduced my sister. The Aztecs arrived and began taking over Europe. The Aztecs Killed me. Here follows my death poem: *Here lies the Sultan, his Race for Sicily is now run,* *He led a mighty dynasty,* *CKII was a grand adventure...yet I forgot to turn off the Sunset Invasion because i'm one of the few who like it.* *I regret nothing.*
I'm not buying CK3 since CK2 is good enough for me and I havn't even played it that much and I don't want buy another paradox game with it's many, many dlc. Maybe I'll get CK3 when CK4 comes out and it's actually feature complete.
I mean, CK3 doesn't yet have the runtime that CK2 had when it became a really complete game. We'll see going forward if they shit the bed or not. For now I'd say they only fucked up like 3 dlcs at most.
Ck3 is by far the better game if only based on release. If, somewhat unfairly, you include all DLCs then there is no contest: CK2 is the better and cheaper game.
I love how these people have to bend over backwards to make their point, and its honestly even funnier to bring out Byzantine goverment right now, when for the first time in franchise history, Byzantinum finally has a proper gov in CK3... 1. Charlemagne - this might actually be the only valid point (spoiler- there is one more), as having an earlier start date IS better then not having it, even though obviously mods like More Bookmarks exist 2. Banum - and here we go, just straight up pretending like the Viceroyalty system wasnt a complete PTSD inducing trash and the main reason I only played Byzantinum once in CK2, despite my love for the Romans. The dev who made this system hates it, players hate it, it simply sucks balls 3. Retinues - here we are, still deep in WTF territory. Bro literally says "Sure, CK3 has MaA, but RETINUES are not just levies, they are actually professional soldiers who cost gold are always ready! Its like your own little private army!" Uhm, yeah, thats... wow, so cool and so different then MaA... just straight up nonsense 4. Portraits - 😃 😃 😃 yeah not even gonna touch this one lol, go ahead and buy that "face pack" so you dont have to stare at the same five empty faces all the time 5. Events - I guess this could be considered a matter of personal taste since bro only talks about the aesthetics (and likes that the CK2 events are less wordy, which is fair). Of course, if he had to mention any actual mechanics, he would have to mention that the CK2 events are extremely boring after some time because there is always only one "correct" answer, so your brain completely skips any content and just goes for the button which means success. In contrast, thanks to thinks like stress and your traits actually having impact, the "correct" answer may vary every time based on who you play as or even which outcome you desire more in that current situation. 6. Music - once again a matter of personal taste, I listen to music from old C&C games like Tiberian Sun or RA2 to this day and if I had to choose, I would go with the original Crusader Kings soundtrack, so its kinda pointless to argue this, its all subjective and nostalgic af 7. Council laws - and this is finally something that actually rings true, after so much BS bro finally touched a mechanic which seems lacking in CK3 and is at least present in CK2, even though he also adds that CK3 has a separate cathegory of laws under religion, which is a whole another topic and is certainly more realistic... it is absolutely true that CK3 lacks in the whole "goverment" department, because it all boils down to one click of a button on one of four levels of crown authority and thats it, the rest is passive and/or delegated to the main NPC interaction loop, which is fine and offers a plethora of stuff to do, but still. I used the Submission to Authority mod from the Mostly Mechanical Mods family to offset this issue and it worked absolute wonders, until it was left unatended. And CK2 at least has some button based play on a council with voting and loyalists etc. so a rare W for CK2 and something to ponder for CK3 8. Maps - its actually just about map modes, this is again something I feel is pretty subjective as I simply do not agree with his points but I wouldnt argue against them, I certainly dont miss the messy and cartoonish map of CK2, but if you like it, go nuts 9. Buildings - bro says that CK2 good because you can build all the buildings, reminds of encumberence... some people would like to just get rid of it and carry every item in the game, but now you just took away one frinction point and regulation of game economy. I would argue its better to have building limit and having to actually think about what building you put where and specializing your baronies, just on the mechanical level. Ties again with the MaA, which you can station in baronies where you invested in infrastructure complimenting them, and if you like strategy, you can appreciate this. 10. Other stuff - and this is just the last few random potshots, like sure, CK3 doesnt have coronation (which came with the last CK2 dlc btw), but it has every culture and religion present on the map in the base game. Sure, it doesnt have playable merchants, but it has a stress mechanic, it has traveling, it has activities, it has cultures which mean more then just special MaA units, it has f*ckin knights lol, it has a milion of things which CK2 could never even dream of, so this type of competition would be extremely unfair. But bro got his views, and thats what counts.
CK3 is nothing but a paintjob over a stripped down version of CK2 , just to resell us the same game again with some casual pointless features that add and change nothing of worth from the CK2 game.
I mean ck2 basegame was also very barebones and the current ck2 is really only this way by means of over a decade of dlc spam while ck3 has existed for less than half of ck2's dlc run
The biggest pet peeve for developers is that when making a next installment they refuse to implement the dlc from the previous game for greedy reasons. The real work was already done, just fit it in! Its the number one reason the Sims is a dead franchise to me. Its not worth buying the game for slightly better looking pictures. Continue to add, never take away without replacing with something else.
Define "better" and make sure you only refer to the base vanilla game without any dlc or expansion or mods,etc. In order to get the "better" features everyone talks about, you have to have more than just the base vanilla game. As a whole the base vanilla ck3 is better its just everyone got so used to dlc for ck2 and was disappointed when ck3 released without dlc, making it look bad... (soure is this same guy in a different video of his)
Well thats the whole reason why the titled said "in 2024" Its just comparison of everything the game can offer as of now, several years from now or so ofc things will be different
@@dinoguy6177 and Ck3 had all of that from the start in form of Ck2. All that they must've done is add all of them into new game. It's been 4 years since game released and they still can't cover good mechanics that Ck2 have
the navy is only tedious because it's treated as a levy which must be united every time to figure out sizes etc. It can for sure be done better and in a less tedious way, say like in EU4, or literally any other strategy game with navies
ck3 has bad deisgn, lifestyle perks are good idea but completely broken on its implemetation, the same also applied to religion and cultural tenets and such. i feel like the game is "bloated" and crumbling under its own weight
I think every PDX game since EU IV is becoming bloated. Their approach to DLCs inevitably leads to that. They need to pump out at least 1 DLC per year with new mechanics. CK2 lifespan was 6 years and you can see by the end that there were already signs of bloatness. Now look at EU IV, that game is probably the least friendly to get into right now.
Ck3 was always bad. You all saw 3D portraits and decided to have yourselves a soggy biscuit over it, giving Paradox a golden ticket to solidify their DLC policy harder than ever, and reaffirmation that they can make 30% of a game and you'll all slurp it right up. The apathy of the CK community has ruined this series.
I myself personally prefer ck3. I don't have any dlc for ck2 which means that I can only play christian feudal nobility which greatly reduces who and where you can play. A lot of mechanics (council voting, retenues, converting cultures, ...) just arent available to me. Without dlc ck2 is a lot worse than vanilla ck3
I would hope a game this old wouldn't be better in base.. CK2 was actually somewhat difficult before the DLC.. CK3 is a stand and wait simulator that gets easier with every DLC
EVERY SINGLE thing you mentioned that made ck2 better was not in the base game it was all dlc, etc. By that point, ck3 is better if you only have the base vanilla game.
![ร้อยพ่อพันแม่ - WanMai [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XY2pNYASEbg/mqdefault.jpg)
I crave CK2's council mechanics in CK3. CK2 allowed me to engage with my council members in ways that CK3 has yet to pull off. In CK3, it feels like I just select the person with the highest number in the relevant skill and forget about them until its time to pick a new member
1000% this. I don't want meme Viking mechanics, I want interesting internal mechanics. Conclave was a top tier CK2 DLC
Conclave was arguably the peak DLC yes
True, but I love the CK3 travelling/journey mechanics especially with all the individual baronies on the map. If they could just add more CK2 depth to CK3... Even with all they've added it still feels a bit shallow.
I miss trade and trade posts. To complete ignore that seems like a huge omission for a game of its kind.
...wait, ck2 council is not just "invite foreigner with highest skill"??
Even though ck3 is more refined I always go back to ck2 it just has has that awesome mechanics and vibes that ck3 does not have tho both are amazing
I hate that they changed the notification system from ck2.
In ck3 i feel less knowledgeable of my surrounding events.
I'm a lowly count and not even informed when my king dies.
Let alone if he divorces the queen when he discovers she's been cheating.
I agree, I was recently annoyed when the death of an Important vassal wasn't announced (at least not clearly).
It should have been a pop-up telling me "omg your most powerful Duke died"
If they are some otherwise unimportant person, but for some reason have decided to rival you, then you will get notified.
I'm like who the hell is this person?, and why did they hate me?, oh their relative died in my dungeon, okay.
But I think we can change notification settings, I will look into it next time I play CKIII.
yeah all ck3 has is flavor pop ups that more often than not are just annoying.
right, remember when tue pope died and we got a notification? Now I never care who the pope is
ck3 is dogshit
@@Xorkuss why would? Only good thing in game is you can become white as black African king, or become black as irish . Combat is annoying, chasing enemies who attacked you, waiting Steward to rise your devolvement. Travel. Like travel and fucked by legitimacy..no thank you
Selecting a character and hearing that melodic beat in CK2 😩
always click around when i don’t know who to play
Ta tara terraaaa
CK2 is a medieval grand strategy game with historical concerns. CK3 is SIMS in a medieval fantasy.
true
CK3 is not a sequel to CK2 but a remake... CK2 was so advanced with tons of DLC, and then you bought CK3, poof, all the DLC's aren't included... but slowly they are getting implemented back with no differences or improvements from CK2 apart graphics... i spent 1000+ hourse in CK2 and was really disappointed by how they massacred a franchise only to steal more money...
Ck3 is close notification simulator
The Sims Medieval is better than CK3, don't you dare compare both of them
Ironic comparison since the Sims 3 was better than 4. For mostly the same reasons ck2 is better than 3.
Also, I agree that CK2 music was so, so much better.
even Paradox games are taking notes from Total War and steadily removing distinct soundtracks in favour of cheap ambient mixes.
And they still force devs to overwork with unpaid crunchtime as a given while the suits rake in the money, its not like the cost cutting of features or whaling with absurd numbers of expensive dlc is benefit the people making the games
@@Rynewulf For real. Rome 2 and Warhammer have essentially the exact same music on the campaign map, "woman ominously humming."
@@TheRealNeonwarrior gotta keep up that early 2000s Hollywood soundtrack deal with the Bulgarian womens choir
CK2 is more challenging and unpredictable than CK3. In CK2 no two games ever played the same for me, CK3 feels kinda stale and passive
You're right, CK2 is muuuch harder. In some ways CK3 feels more railroaded which is weird because it's not from a design point of view, but I think it's more lenient and less... punishing, less things happening
@@AndysParadox yep. In CK3 My characters almost always live to their 80s, I rarely have other rulers declare war on me, hostile factions almost never form, etc…
In CK2 it always feels like my realm is one random event away from falling apart
@@AndysParadoxI feel like ck3 was harder at one point. If a neighbour got into a big alliance they would always attack you.
@@michaelh878idk man I’ve played the game since launch and I don’t think I’ve had a real existential challenge once. Alliances are insanely easy to get so even when you play as a count it’s never too hard to get a massive army to protect you. Assassinations are also insanely easy so it becomes fairly easy to just break scary alliances
I miss the sound of sending peoples to their eternal sleep.
CRRRrcg ASAH AH AAaaaaaAAAAH AAAAAH
*Æthelred was crushed to death*
What I like in CK2 is, that Tribal Governments or Nomads have that bonus of their Vassals joining a defensive/offensive war. Makes them early on stronger and actually formidable against a big kingdom. Same with the Levys recovering, which is slower in CK2 and feels actually like they get a training or your population needs to recover before you start the next war. In CK3 it recovers a lot faster, well that is what I remember.
There was a mod i think that probably allowed you to be a baron or a theocracy, It was called "Rise to Power", you could start from landless and move up to the hierarchy ladder
And now Paradox stole that idea and called it "Roads to power"
Still haven’t bought ck3 yet and still enjoying ck2. So much to discover for me in this game.
I fully agree with everything you say. While the older players age, the gaming industry adapts to the newer generations of gamers. Us older generations are much more used to prominent sounds, big flashy logos that are easy to see, and to us it all "makes sense". That's why in CK3, everything FEELS more minimalistic than in CK2. Despite having 3D characters and a fancy superficial layer on top, it still doesn't quite reach the potential CK2 offered with less visually pleasing aesthetics, while also having events and a UI that's way more in depth. Short and simple, CK3 is oversimplified and has a minimalistic "strange" look to it, and it's gonna take Paradox a few more DLC's and polishing, until the game is even CLOSE to CK2.
However, CK3 is definitely getting there with the latest DLC's that have been added to the game. I'm also liking the developers latest plans. Making it possible to play as landless lords and travelers. There is also the upcoming Byzantium-focused major expansion, which might shake up things for the better in CK3.
I think CK3's biggest problem is the lack of difficulty. In CK2, early game as a low noble used to be much more of a waiting game than in CK3, which I think is something much more interesting. But I guess my slower pace is not really something most PDX players enjoy. I still enjoy CK3, I think it has the best modding scene of all PDX games right now, but the base game is indeed lacking a bigger degree of challenge.
I miss the way laws and culture worked, I remember always rushing for legalism to get late medieval administration to get primogeniture and it felt so satisfying, as opposed to just waiting.
ck3: "I'm the upgrade"
ck2: "kid you're just a cheap fuckin knock off"
CK2 is the definitive Crusader Kings title.
definitive? It's the last CK game
I love CK3, but even I still think that CK2 feels like it's had a lot more love put into it, and it's a lot more immersive. I'm an F2P for CK2, but it was still really fun even with the large amount of restrictions. Even with the large amount of restrictions, it did feel like a huge and fun world.
I think that if CK3 or even CK4 mixes both CK2's events, duels, and dynasty scores, but also the more interactive laws, cultures, prestige, and piety of the present-day it will literally be perfect. CK3 is fun, but it lacks the immersion and life brought by the interactions and events that CK2 had. The most interaction you get in CK3 is enabled via mods like VIET, or locked behind DLCs like the Royal Court and Tours & Tournaments. Meanwhile CK2 had so much events, although repetitive, it just felt more...alive.
Rambling aside, I agree will all of your points Andy, and they seem aligned with mine. The music, the atmosphere, and I think most importantly the art and interactions just make CK2 better. The mechanics of ruling and administration in CK3 is better (albeit I may not know the full extent since I'm F2P for CK2), CK2's focus on truly putting you into the life of a medieval ruler makes CK3 feel like a technically sound, yet fairly bland experience on vanilla compared to its more wonky, yet fun and full of life older brother. I feel lucky to have been able to play the free version of CK2 before buying CK3. It makes you appreciate the improved fundamental mechanics, while at the same time making you miss greatly what was left behind.
CK2 is sooo good. Playing eu4 a lots rn but always thinking about CK2
Have been thinking of pulling the trigger on EU4. I like the Era and History therein. As I just don't think eu5 will be as good as EU4 is now. Kinda like this current ck2 v ck3 discussion
The only drawback of CK2 is neutral armies combining with enemy armies
Lol too true
Nearly 3,000 hours in C.K. 2 for me and I’ve got 3 and prefer 2 as of today. Sept. 2024.
Yeah i tried CK3 a few days ago and just thought it was far too easy.. Even in base game CK2 you could get screwed over early.. CK3 is far more forgiving and it makes things not matter as much since you can wiggle out of just about anything.. CK3 also had me winning alot of battles i probably shouldn't have.. CK3 just plays itself basically and i don't like it
Crusader Kings 3's memey religious mechanics make me despise the game. The fact that there's so much more depth to playing a catholic in CK2 than in CK3 despite CK3 being a 4 years old is beyond baffeling for a game called "Crusader Kings"
I love CK 2, I always feel like I have no clue what I am doing and wind up restarting minutes to an hour into a playthrough. But my last save I figured I’d just let it play out, I found out about societies and found out a secret organization existed (LO) and figured I’d join it. After a while I had a demon spawn child who killed me, when my heir took over I made the mistake of banishibg him instead of throwing him in a dungeon or killing him so now he comes around every year or so and raises havoc and death to me and my heirs. He’s 2nd in line to the current player and idk what to do. I guess it’ll be interesting to play as him and wreck havoc from my point of view. Great game
ck 2 with ck 3 graphics would be perfect
Man seeing him praise the byzantine empire system thing then i remembering that you cannot have a single year without any type of conflict
CK2 changed everything for me. It was my first foray into grand strategy, a genre I didn’t even know existed. And the rest is history.
Pun intended.
I just never could get into CK3. CK2 was a masterpiece and I just couldn't get that same feeling when I played CK3
Can’t wait to see another video like this in 2025
I'm playing CK2 with the elder scrolls mod... a kitten randomly followed me so I managed to adopt it. That kitten was more loyal then any vassal. my cat just died after my king returned from a war with rival dark elves an my character suffers from immortality so now I will engage in the illegal art of necromancy with the efforts of bringing back my beloved putter tat.
In CK2, almost every DLC was changing the game experience significantly, no matter who do you play. In CK3, you wouldn't even know about most of DLCs' existence if you don't play in regions that they change
what happened in 2018 for that kind of player peak?
Probably the time when it became free forever
Holy Fury DLC. A ton of content.
2019@@s4le
That's the problem with Paradox games. It's going to take many years until CK3 reaches the level of detail and content that CK2 has.
Ps. The part about using an election to elect the next Byzantine Emperor like the HRE is historically extremely inaccurate. Byzantine succession was either done normally (from father to son) or not normally (revolution that resulted in the fall of a dynasty and the emergence of a new one).
Damn, you made me remember the building mechanics in CK2 compared to CK3 and MAAAAN let me tell you. Having to grab mods to get more slots and more buildings just pisses me off
Short answer - Yes.
Long answer - 100% definitely Yes.
The biggest issue for me is that CK3 just feels way too streamlined. I understand that this was likely needed for the game to achieve the mainstream success that it has, but personally I just get rather bored when all thats really required to build a massive empire is clicking a couple buttons without too much forethought.
The most beautiful game ever made. I swear no other Crusader Kings will ever come close to it. They will milk a lot of more DLC's but it will never give us that feeling
100% agree with this video. Holy shit someone finally mentioned the buildings! I know that the more complicated building system in CK2 was harder for the AI to handle, but as a player it feels so crazy to rely on your vassals to provide you with taxes while you build military buildings to gain army advantages. I almost always opt for financial buildings so I can support a larger standing army. By the time it makes sense for me to stop building money printers I'm already reaching the point where the game has started to feel stale. I play with as many building slots as possible and used other mods like More Buildings to help get back the feel.
My problem is that i really love ck2 but ck3 has things that i love but ck2 doesn't have it like: hybrid cultures and diverge ones, lifestyle system is better, tours and tournament and legacy of persia and the upcoming dlc rise to power and the thing that frustrats me with ck2 2d portraits which is if you are english and marry a nore women your kids may have the norse portraits but in ck3 the genetic system is way better and your children will be a mix
CK2 has no business in being better now at this stage.
My problem with CK2 is, that I’ve spend over 2k hours into that game. I’ve tried everything. I am even one of the rare specimens that likes the sunset invasion, because it shake up an otherwise stale endgame. It always makes it interesting for me.
I think, if the AI got improved and total war Atilia 1212AD got modded to it, I would go back.
In Ck3 you can have a tribal, clan, or feudal government. In Ck2, you can have tribal, iqta (like clan), feudal, republican, nomad, or imperial government. Twice the options! And Ck2 allows automatic conversion between iqta and feudal depending on religion so you don't get stuck in government designed for polygamy when you have a non-polygamous religion and visa versa.
I FUCKEN PLAY CK2 TILL THIS FUCKEN DAY
DEUS VULT!!!
Hot take: CK2 is the better game.
Just a good take. Army mechanics dont treat you like a child that cant understand complex mechanics
@@gustavingerssonredditors disagree with you on that one, they'd rather see 20 knights kill 500 "levies" (don't know what they're supposed to represent) than have a realistic combat system with three flanks.
@@alik5972i think levies mean peasant recruits from your realm, very untrained soldiers with not much of equipment
@@alik5972redditors usually lie that they played ck2 they started with ck3 thats the thing
@@tomislav2494 Point still stands 20 trained knights will still lose to 500 untrained peasants even in like 99/100 scenarios.
The in-game guide for CK2 is very vague and I couldn't learn much from it. The tutorials on TH-cam also aren't as good as they should be for teaching the game. Do you know any methods that can help me learn CK2's complex mechanics more easily and quickly?
What I love with the council is that you can give enough power to the council to think they are in power or for your liege to think he has power by pulling strings in the shadow.
Full Intrigue/Stewardship charcater is just something else compared to CK3.
I mean, shouldn't this just be a 0:01 length video. Just say, "Yes." Then cut.
I started with CK3, did not get into it andtook my money back (after 3 hours).
CK2 is free to play so i tried it.
The tutorial is better but still too small for such a complex game.
The Playthroughs of a certain Legend showed me some tricks and hints.
What makes CK2 for me better?
-character portraits and ui look overall more suitable for a medieval game.
The CK3 Ui would be fine if it was for a science fiction game.
-conquering counties feels more satisfiying because you have to conquer each barony.
-Last but not least, CK2 is basically finished. It wont get new dlcs.
What I buy is what I get. I am not a big fan of abos and just used that option in order to see which dlcs are good/necessary.
Probably, I will give CK3 a second chance in 2028 - when it has all dlcs and is on sale:D
Plus its free and i like that
If you started with CK2 and you have every vital dlc, it doesn't even compare with the new one. Starting as a Jew count a little bit northern than Georgia, becoming Byzantine Emperor, convert the empire to jew religion, conquer every country till you reach China's borders and raging war on them, is hands down my best CK play through ever. There is no play through in CK3 that can even come close to that campain right now
What’s the name of ur map mod?
7:28 do you have a mod on here? Why does your water "pop" so well?
The traits as well, characters in CK2 felt dynamic. I like how my Satanic character started to become really evil after the 20th vanishing without a trace, CK3 characters feel static.
I am a CK II player and I never play other Paradox games. At the same time I don’t really have to spend more than 50$ in a game and prefer to keep them for game like Undertale, Deltarune (when it pays), Stanley Parable, etc.... By cons I love Ck2 and it is literally my most play game (even if in real c normal for a paradox game)
I just watched on Steam even CK1 is paid , it literally makes no sense (that Ck II is free while CK1 is not)
The only things i like about ck3 are the UI and graphics, the rest is just inferior compared to ck2
Me who still hasn't collected all the CK2 dlcs be like
It's the only Paradox gsg style game that I actually like.
Ck3 does some things better but it just misses out on a lot of good content from ck2. Shame. Also unrelated but i wish for more historical events in ck3 for specific characters and more empires to form since that would be cool to aim for
800+ hours currently, can't wait for the next 800 fuck ck3 lmao
you should put your mod in desc.
CK2 is superior in every way.
Not getti g ck3 because patadox will put out ungodly amount of DLC to complete the game. Ill stick with ck2
2:30 needs a DLC to unlock
I clawed my way to defeat the Normans and become Sultan of Sicily.
I joined the Hermetic Order.
The whispers of the stars drove me insane.
I married my horse (don't judge me, you don't know Glitterhoof's love).
I seduced my sister.
The Aztecs arrived and began taking over Europe.
The Aztecs Killed me.
Here follows my death poem:
*Here lies the Sultan, his Race for Sicily is now run,*
*He led a mighty dynasty,*
*CKII was a grand adventure...yet I forgot to turn off the Sunset Invasion because i'm one of the few who like it.*
*I regret nothing.*
the only things i really like in ck3 are the culture and religious mechanics, the rest i kinda don't care that much
I'm not buying CK3 since CK2 is good enough for me and I havn't even played it that much and I don't want buy another paradox game with it's many, many dlc. Maybe I'll get CK3 when CK4 comes out and it's actually feature complete.
Most important reason: CK2 is free!
I mean, CK3 doesn't yet have the runtime that CK2 had when it became a really complete game. We'll see going forward if they shit the bed or not. For now I'd say they only fucked up like 3 dlcs at most.
The real question here is "is CK3 worth it in 2024?" And I think the clear answer is "no", since CK2 is where all the fun is at.
People dont understand that with mods you can literally covert CK2 into a CK3 with mods
Well, but CK3 with mods can literally become CK2 with better graphics. Unfortunately, CK2 modding is too janky.
I'd rather use mods to turn CK3 into CK2.. not that hard tbh. Modding in ck3 is just objectively much better and loads more better mods
I cant believe you didn't really mention societies
Ck3 is by far the better game if only based on release. If, somewhat unfairly, you include all DLCs then there is no contest: CK2 is the better and cheaper game.
10/10 game
I love how these people have to bend over backwards to make their point, and its honestly even funnier to bring out Byzantine goverment right now, when for the first time in franchise history, Byzantinum finally has a proper gov in CK3...
1. Charlemagne - this might actually be the only valid point (spoiler- there is one more), as having an earlier start date IS better then not having it, even though obviously mods like More Bookmarks exist
2. Banum - and here we go, just straight up pretending like the Viceroyalty system wasnt a complete PTSD inducing trash and the main reason I only played Byzantinum once in CK2, despite my love for the Romans. The dev who made this system hates it, players hate it, it simply sucks balls
3. Retinues - here we are, still deep in WTF territory. Bro literally says "Sure, CK3 has MaA, but RETINUES are not just levies, they are actually professional soldiers who cost gold are always ready! Its like your own little private army!" Uhm, yeah, thats... wow, so cool and so different then MaA... just straight up nonsense
4. Portraits - 😃 😃 😃 yeah not even gonna touch this one lol, go ahead and buy that "face pack" so you dont have to stare at the same five empty faces all the time
5. Events - I guess this could be considered a matter of personal taste since bro only talks about the aesthetics (and likes that the CK2 events are less wordy, which is fair). Of course, if he had to mention any actual mechanics, he would have to mention that the CK2 events are extremely boring after some time because there is always only one "correct" answer, so your brain completely skips any content and just goes for the button which means success. In contrast, thanks to thinks like stress and your traits actually having impact, the "correct" answer may vary every time based on who you play as or even which outcome you desire more in that current situation.
6. Music - once again a matter of personal taste, I listen to music from old C&C games like Tiberian Sun or RA2 to this day and if I had to choose, I would go with the original Crusader Kings soundtrack, so its kinda pointless to argue this, its all subjective and nostalgic af
7. Council laws - and this is finally something that actually rings true, after so much BS bro finally touched a mechanic which seems lacking in CK3 and is at least present in CK2, even though he also adds that CK3 has a separate cathegory of laws under religion, which is a whole another topic and is certainly more realistic... it is absolutely true that CK3 lacks in the whole "goverment" department, because it all boils down to one click of a button on one of four levels of crown authority and thats it, the rest is passive and/or delegated to the main NPC interaction loop, which is fine and offers a plethora of stuff to do, but still. I used the Submission to Authority mod from the Mostly Mechanical Mods family to offset this issue and it worked absolute wonders, until it was left unatended. And CK2 at least has some button based play on a council with voting and loyalists etc. so a rare W for CK2 and something to ponder for CK3
8. Maps - its actually just about map modes, this is again something I feel is pretty subjective as I simply do not agree with his points but I wouldnt argue against them, I certainly dont miss the messy and cartoonish map of CK2, but if you like it, go nuts
9. Buildings - bro says that CK2 good because you can build all the buildings, reminds of encumberence... some people would like to just get rid of it and carry every item in the game, but now you just took away one frinction point and regulation of game economy. I would argue its better to have building limit and having to actually think about what building you put where and specializing your baronies, just on the mechanical level. Ties again with the MaA, which you can station in baronies where you invested in infrastructure complimenting them, and if you like strategy, you can appreciate this.
10. Other stuff - and this is just the last few random potshots, like sure, CK3 doesnt have coronation (which came with the last CK2 dlc btw), but it has every culture and religion present on the map in the base game. Sure, it doesnt have playable merchants, but it has a stress mechanic, it has traveling, it has activities, it has cultures which mean more then just special MaA units, it has f*ckin knights lol, it has a milion of things which CK2 could never even dream of, so this type of competition would be extremely unfair.
But bro got his views, and thats what counts.
The free version sucks. You need to pay for it to have a good experience in it.
Ck2 still better
i like CK2 because its free :))))))) without the dlcs
it is free now and you can get the dlcs for free
it is definetly worth it, more than just worth it considering how mediocre ck3 is
They just announced dragons for CK3AGOT CK2 can finally rest
CK3 is nothing but a paintjob over a stripped down version of CK2 , just to resell us the same game again with some casual pointless features that add and change nothing of worth from the CK2 game.
I mean ck2 basegame was also very barebones and the current ck2 is really only this way by means of over a decade of dlc spam while ck3 has existed for less than half of ck2's dlc run
I'd like to disagree as the base game of CK3 has almost no major locked features. CK2 base game only has Christian rulers which is very boring
@@gregoriancalendar7747but Ck3 has a decade of Ck2 DLCs. They just don't want to add it into new game
Havent played this game but played crusader stronghold when i was young. How come im not seeing any battles like the old games?
CK2 is a grand strategy, not RTS like Stronghold Crusader
@@hypervenom3141 oh ok thanks!
Just yes
The biggest pet peeve for developers is that when making a next installment they refuse to implement the dlc from the previous game for greedy reasons. The real work was already done, just fit it in! Its the number one reason the Sims is a dead franchise to me. Its not worth buying the game for slightly better looking pictures. Continue to add, never take away without replacing with something else.
ck2>ck3
worth
My PC cant run CK3 so yeah
Define "better" and make sure you only refer to the base vanilla game without any dlc or expansion or mods,etc. In order to get the "better" features everyone talks about, you have to have more than just the base vanilla game. As a whole the base vanilla ck3 is better its just everyone got so used to dlc for ck2 and was disappointed when ck3 released without dlc, making it look bad... (soure is this same guy in a different video of his)
I see everyone saying ck2 is better, yet they forget that it's had like 6+ years of updates and dlc
Well thats the whole reason why the titled said "in 2024"
Its just comparison of everything the game can offer as of now, several years from now or so ofc things will be different
I know right? It's crazy to expect the new product to be just better.
Ck2 had more dlc releases then ck3. And since its supposed be an improvement from the previous game why does it lack so many things?
@@dinoguy6177 and Ck3 had all of that from the start in form of Ck2. All that they must've done is add all of them into new game. It's been 4 years since game released and they still can't cover good mechanics that Ck2 have
TLDW : Yes
10x better then ck3
Everything about ck3 is repulsing to me the game is feels disgusting to play, truly horrifying bloatware.
I could not disagree with the navies point more, navies in ck2 are abhorent and ck3 did well to remove them, that being said i overall prefer ck2.
the navy is only tedious because it's treated as a levy which must be united every time to figure out sizes etc. It can for sure be done better and in a less tedious way, say like in EU4, or literally any other strategy game with navies
Ck2 especially agot mod makes it 100 times better imo
Yes
Okuneva Grove
ck3 has bad deisgn, lifestyle perks are good idea but completely broken on its implemetation, the same also applied to religion and cultural tenets and such.
i feel like the game is "bloated" and crumbling under its own weight
I think every PDX game since EU IV is becoming bloated. Their approach to DLCs inevitably leads to that. They need to pump out at least 1 DLC per year with new mechanics. CK2 lifespan was 6 years and you can see by the end that there were already signs of bloatness. Now look at EU IV, that game is probably the least friendly to get into right now.
Yes better
i bought this game and dont know how to play lmao
Ck3 was always bad. You all saw 3D portraits and decided to have yourselves a soggy biscuit over it, giving Paradox a golden ticket to solidify their DLC policy harder than ever, and reaffirmation that they can make 30% of a game and you'll all slurp it right up. The apathy of the CK community has ruined this series.
ck3 biggest "wow" is 3d models. who cares. all i do with it is making my grand child black as night
I myself personally prefer ck3. I don't have any dlc for ck2 which means that I can only play christian feudal nobility which greatly reduces who and where you can play. A lot of mechanics (council voting, retenues, converting cultures, ...) just arent available to me.
Without dlc ck2 is a lot worse than vanilla ck3
I would hope a game this old wouldn't be better in base.. CK2 was actually somewhat difficult before the DLC.. CK3 is a stand and wait simulator that gets easier with every DLC
not gonna lie metal music in ck2 sucks. i don't know why they added it with vikings. like wtf that is only shit that i hate in game
EVERY SINGLE thing you mentioned that made ck2 better was not in the base game it was all dlc, etc. By that point, ck3 is better if you only have the base vanilla game.
I didn't compare base game 2012 CK2 vs vanilla CK3 in 2024, but rather the entire game vs the entire game