Victoria 3

A bit rough to get in, but when you get it the game becomes very fun! The late game is a bit slow in the games I played, but still enjoyable.

Was good. No longer works, keeps on "Not Responding"

Victoria 3 is an ambitious and rewarding strategy game, particularly for players who enjoy managing complex systems and making long-term plans also victorian era lover. Its historical context, deep mechanics, and focus on economic and social issues make it unique in the Paradox Interactive lineup. If you're a fan of grand strategy and enjoy detailed simulations, Victoria 3 is a game worth diving into.

Key Features:
Economic and Social Management: The game stands out for its deep economic and social systems. Players manage production, trade, and the flow of goods, while also dealing with the intricacies of population needs, class struggles, and ideologies. Balancing the interests of different social groups, such as capitalists, aristocrats, and laborers, adds a layer of complexity.

Political System: The political mechanics are another highlight. Players must navigate the ever-evolving political landscape, from elections to revolutions. Crafting policies, influencing ideologies, and managing relationships with other countries require strategic thinking.

Technology and Industry: The technological advancements and industrial growth system are a central aspect. As you progress, you unlock new technologies that improve production, military, and social systems. The industrialization of your country impacts both domestic and foreign affairs.

Diplomacy and Warfare: Victoria 3 offers a robust diplomacy system, where you interact with other nations, build alliances, and manage tensions. While warfare is not the central focus, it remains important. Managing your military and using it effectively is necessary for defending your interests and ur own country.

Glorified alpha-test with so many underdeveloped mechanics. Military action is a complete joke, international trade does not exist for a half of a game session, big chunk of gameplay is just waiting for some research to complete. Yet my biggest gripe with the game is that often times major events happen out of the blue: no saying on the matter, no chance to intervene, not even a pop-up or notification. And by "major events" I mean not stuff like "country X started investment project in country Y, who is by the way your rival", nooooooooo-o-o-o-o-o. By this I mean "snaps fingers oops, your Washington province belongs to US now, get f-ed, moron, should've assembled Canada faster".

Considering ever increasing graphic and simulation fidelity of more recent Paradox releases, this game will be in this sorry state for several more years. By this point it will have a plethora of feature-adding DLCs costing ten times the base game. But then there will be no point of buying because the financial commitment is too high, and without DLC packs base game is a barren wasteland of subpar gameplay and basic versions of what should be game-changing features. Did I mention that every story-focused DLC will be outclassed by a free mod, but you'll HAVE to buy it because something something advanced trains or powerblocks or some other game mechanic that's castrated in the base game?

This review is no longer about Victoria 3 specifically at this point. Stellaris, Hearts Of Iron 4, now this. New game installment of Europa Universalis is on the horizon. I kept spending money on disappointments. No more.

Don't bother unless you have a few hundred bucks you will not regret throwing in the digital shredder.

Great game a lot simpler than Victoria 2 and “lets you choose your path” but other than a guided story it’s really fun

Yeah sure it's good. Not that it doesn't have it's kinks to work out. Revolutions for instance are an abomination right now so if you want to do a lot of conquering plan on endless hanging revolutions that don't let you properly organize your army or your buildings and also tons of event spam you couldn't care less about. I just wish there was a murder all these people in their sleep button. The whole war system is buggy with armies teleporting across the globe away from your frontlines kinda thing. The game is still fun despite all this. Worthy successor to a great game with hopefully much more to come.

I strongly suggest that you don't buy this game.

There's an interesting game buried here, but it's very inaccessible. The achievements show how few people who start playing it get very far.

It doesn't teach you how to play and the forum on Steam is too dead to be much help. There is a Paradox forum, that rejected my account without saying why, which given that I'm a paying customer, is disgusting and tantamount to theft.

I feel ripped off by Paradox Games. I'll certainly think twice before purchasing from them again.

Gave the game another chance since release.
Optimization is still abysmal. After 1870 you're starting to suffer. After 1900 it's unplayable.
The war system is still the least intuitive and most frustrating in any paradox game.
The economic system is still one of the best out there and got better since release. Though sometimes your capitalists make retarded decisions, which makes it very realistic in a way.
Politics got better but can still be annoying since when the game runs at 1 week every 2 minutes, it can feel like a law will take 3 hours IRL to be voted.
If you guys don't want to improve the war system, since it's necessary when you unlock new production methods to war dec and expand, you could change the trade mechanics when you have a significant ownership of resources building in a nation to improve trade volume (land or convoys) with the nation in which you own the buildings.
This could be seen as "priority trade with an investment partner". And I think this would be a major beneficial change to the game.
Also, though it might be unrealizable, but when having complete ownership of every resource building of a nation, giving the option to change production methods ? I guess it wouldn't serve the optimization problem right. Though it would be very useful.

Game is becoming deeper after each patch. It is still missing some important features like banking, currency management and stockpiling (that i hope will be added). I still highly recommend it.

The combat system is actually atrocious. It feels like it doesnt matter if you have the quantity or quality, the results are based on if the game likes you or not.

I have a lot of time in game and keep trying to make it work but it's so buggy. This game is broken with peace deals and the military aspects suck. You have to buy dlc to make it enjoyable. Don't pay $80 or anything for this dog shit.

This game can be summarized in one word: Unpolished

I really want to love this game however in its current state it really is unloveable. If you plan to buy this just be aware that you'll "only" get a few hundred hours of fun out of this game as opposed to Paradox usual thousand. And this will not change for a long (at the time of writing this, presumably a few years of) time.

Every nation feels and mostly plays the same and its unpolished state applies to both game mechanics AND [nation]flavour.

If you want to know how you'll play 90% of games if you want to do decently well it will look like this: 1. Pick a great power, 2. liberalize, 3. build an economic based on a construction bubble (Iron, steel, tools) and 4. repeat.

Minor nations are even less playable because by the time you fixed your nation the game is already or close to over.

Im gonna list every Problem I have with this game just do demonstrate the unpolished state of the game however be aware this is by far not every problem the game has to offer:

1. The Warfare system is boring, now theres a lot of criticism for the warfare system by the community however this is one of the features that is in my opinion the least in need of fixing. While it is very oversimplified (You basically draw a frontline and then either attack or defend). I think all this game needs are polishing features like frontlines splitting in 2 causing you to have a hole in your line and causing you to be instantly overrun. Military Research actually affecting your units instead of changing your production method (the Ultra Historical mods fix this). And adding a stockpile for equipment so your military factories stay productive in peace time. Plus making your attack orders actually be followed would go a long way.

2. The game runs super slow by the time you reach 1890 [depending on your PC, +/- ~10 years]. This is especially annoying because it means you get cut off from a lot of cool action. It essentially means you'll rarely see your fruits of labor pay off. Want to play Germany and establish colonies? By the time you've unified Germany and have done all the important other things the game is already slowing down. Want to play as a socialist country? By the time you're ready to become socialist your game is so slow that waiting for laws to pass is no longer fun but just annoying. Want to be Japan? By the time you implemented the right laws the game is too slow to start Japans historic rapid industrialization. Want to play as an American trade empire? By the time you unified America you'll at best have time to get the South Americas into your sphere of influence.

3. The economy system sucks. Want to build an economy as any Great power? Heres how, 1. build iron/coal mines and logging camps, make tools, repeat. 2. Unlock Steel, steel needs iron and coal, iron needs tools, make more tools using steel. 3. Unlock Dynamite, make sulfur mine, make fertilizer factory. Dynamite needs fertilizers which you make with sulfur, then you use the dynamite production method to get more resources out of mines.... resources like sulfur. And that's basically it, now go Laisez Fairre so your capitalists invest in some other stuff so you can larp the semblance of a diverse economy.

3b. Trading sucks. Hoi4 has a more interesting trade mechanic/balance then this game. Every game devolves into an Autarky Simulator. Don't have enough of something? What can you do? You have to build it yourself. Basically no shortage except engines and other rare goods can be fixed using trade. Want to larp an imperialist power that dumps massive amounts of cheap goods into a country causing local competitors to go bankrupt forcing the country to economically rely on you? Tough luck, you cant.[This is a game about colonialism and trading by the way]

4. The politics of this game are super boring and lame, if you want to be decently successful you have 2 options: Capitalist Liberalism to focus on a game with a lot of GDP or Communism to see that standard of living go up. There is no incentive to play anything else. Monarchism and other Authoritarian ways to play only compensate you with "Authority" which are points you can use to implement decree's that buff you in a selected state in a bunch of different ways however quite frankly, its useless. And while its obvious that playing as a Theocratic Ethnostate will have little benefits, there is absolutely no reason other then larp to pick them. Theres no specific unique buff, no odd situational event, nothing. They could have went with something like Monarchies uniting the populace causing less Radicals from political movements or Ethnostates/Theocracies giving less radicals from Standard of Living for the Primary culture but more for oppressed cultures but they chose nothing and hence you are always forced to pick the same old boring policies.

5. The game lacks utter immersion. Despite this game being set in unarguably one of the most important and most rapid changing times of humanity you, the player, feel nothing about it. Are you an industrial great power? Are you a small, non industrial tribe? Are you an oppressed puppet/colony? It "feels" the same. The game lacks utter immersion, while even hoi4 tries to immerse you in its setting with news events like the olympic games, the Hindenburg, etc. no such thing is going on in vicky, add this with the already distant experience from the Global Strategy approach and you're in for a dissapointment. Very very rarely do you feel like you're in these turbulent times. Events that are supposed to immerse you rarely work to do that. The only events that do make me feel immersed are that of nihilism, positivism and communism. However 2 of these rarely fire. And it is just as bad for nation specific immersion. As Prussia/Germany, you'll never feel like you're uniting people that want to be united, you just start 3 wars, get an event and annex lands. Or as Japan, you do not get experiences that make you feel like your world was basically turned upside down when the Europeans [yes Europeans because America will not even reach you] open up your country. There is a massive missed chance of adding visual novel'esque events [or news events like hoi4 does] that immerse you. Imagine how great it would be, you play as Japan and suddenly you're forced to open up. And while you change your laws you keep getting pop ups about people/interest groups describing their perspective of a changing Japan. You could see how displeased the Samurai's are getting with each event, how they feel about losing their privileges while for the Peasantry you feel their sweeping optimism as they went from the bottom of the hierarchy to a respected group. Ultimately this is a huge missed potential that is also surprisingly not alot talked about in the community.

heres a lot more to say and criticize but I've reached my steam word limit... yeah that one sentence sums up the vicky 3 experience.

All in all this game just quite frankly sucks due to a lack of polish. Usually mod's fix this in other games but it is to severe in this game to fix. You need different major mods for every single aspect. I personally run the entire 5 or so Ultra Historical mods to fix research, combat and the lack of a historical ai. The better politics mod to make politics slightly less repetitive (they still are). Various Quality of life UI mods, performance improving mods, Event and Flavour mods. And always 1 Flavour mod for the nation Im planning to play.

And this won't be fixed within one update or a dlc, this will take a lot which is why I don't recommend it. If they keep the progress up, in 2 years I'd say this game enters a "releasable bare bones" state. As it is, you get a few hundred hours out of playing different nations and getting familiar with the game mechanics until you realize its all the same.

[tl:dr historical economic politics simulator that isn't historical, repetetive and boring, no variation.]

2 years later the warfare is absolutely unplayable. Extremely bugged, ruins runs and immersion - makes me want to uninstall. Until Paradox completely revamps it - don't give them a cent.

This game has come a long, long way and it's never been better. Still prone to border gore and ahistorical scenarios sans mods, but the big bugs have been squashed and a much wider variety of countries and approaches are now viable.

Wow! I didn't know what to expect when I bought this game. I love civ and I'd describe this game as the lovechild between civ and a Paradox game. Super fun synergies in the game just like a civ classic along with a tech tree and civ like warfare. This can make it hard for smaller nations, however given the style of combat and the prevalence of snowballing. Nevertheless, more than worth a buy.

Games alright i guess, managing the army is cancer but the navy is less cancer tho. The game is hard at the start but when you learn what to build in what order and what to research it gets boring after a while. I only bought the game becouse off market version was a alot slower. This game will definitely improve with time and becouse of that I do recommend this game

This is more of a poorly executed simulation of 19th century geopolitical landscape than a fully-fletched "game". It does get better with every DLC but these improvements should be in the base game already. The only way this "game" is remotely fun is with having all the DLC's and it gets tiring to have to pay for the stuff that should have been present at the release. It's also ill-optimized and several stuff aren't very well balanced. You have to be a paradox veteran to like this game. I know this game will get better as time goes on but it has already been several years since its release and you still can't call this a proper game.

I had high hopes for this game. It was fun to learn it from when it first launched, but every change they made just made the game more tedious and annoying. There was a lot of potential. It just feels like it makes me micro-manage everything I don't want to micro-manage and doesn't let me focus on the stuff I actually find fun.

My experience with this game makes me hesitant to try any other Paradox game. I wonder if they've lost it.

Flawed, but enjoyable

armys teleport around the world mid war. units are totally unresponsive and will do completely computer glitch level of actions. this is on vanilla. only with mods is this even playable. i can not recommend this game at this time until this issue is resolved

This game has a steep learning curve so it may take time toget used to it but once u start getting the momentum then only u can truly get the feel of the game. Recmanded for players looking for detailed games

very deep and complex game with many moving parts. If you wanted a game where war is economy, politics is economy, diplomacy is economy, then this game is economy

DISCLAIMER IF THE MULTIPLAYER WASNT SHIT THIS WOULD BE A POSITIVE REVIEW
the game is really good and fun HOWEVER the multiplayer is completely FUCKED and my friends never have the same checksum as me

FIX YOUR GODDAMN GAME PARADOX!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!1!!!one!!! WHY IS MY CHECKSUM NEVER THE SAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!

Victoria 3 could have been a great game, but it feels bland and incomplete without additional (and expensive) DLCs. The lack of depth in the base game makes it hard to enjoy without spending more money.

I bought most of the initial DLCs, hoping they would improve the experience, but I gave up with the Indian Pivot of the Empire DLC. Even the DLCs now feel raw and rushed — more like blatant cash grabs than meaningful expansions.

It breaks my heart to see the path Paradox Interactive has chosen, prioritising DLC monetisation over delivering a fully fleshed-out experience at launch. It’s truly disheartening.

Very strategic game particularly if economics is of interest to you. Devs are constantly releasing amazing updates time and time again so its worth it in the long run.

This game is bad for multiple reasons:

- This is a paradox game and as such expect to make extra payments in order to keep up to date with the latest version of the game. The initial price is not the final price, you will be expected to pay more to receive the full game.

- The AI, like most paradox games is terrible. It can hardly industrialise and compete with the player.

- Every nation kinda plays the same. You are pushed to create an autarky because of how trade works which is annoying. You are always pushed to eventually become a commune because it is always the most optimal? The way policies work is weird that doesent actually support the actions you have made previously.

- The game is prone to having saves just ceaselessly crash. Sometimes you can get lucky by loading an old autosave but this of course isnt always the case. And these are old bugs that haven't been fixed for years but instead of putting a focus on fixing them the dev team seems to just add new stuff for you to pay for.

- The combat is pretty bad because supply lines don't actually matter when your armies apparently need a number of complex goods but you don't need to protect those supply lines and they will fight just fine. Additionally, front lines split which is a problem cause is kind of ruins the good point I'm putting later about micro.

- The way diplomatic plays work is kind of bad, with other nations only being able to join for one thing which sucks a bit.

Now the good:

- The combat system is good because instead of controlling units you control armies which (should) eliminate micro allowing focusing on economy (if it worked)

- The internal economy is good and has an in depth supply and demand which unfortunately becomes a bit irrelevant due to the fact caring about it isnt too important, you just gotta even things out rather than carefully plan unless you're spending a few years as a minor nation

- The political party system is good as it's kind fun to wrestle power from parties and watch your nation develop through reforms.

All in all, it's pretty bad with no signs of improving. Might end up abandoned. It had it's chance at fixing itself through extra attention. Might be time to give up on it, we will see.

Even with recommended specs the game still lags and crashes my PC constantly on medium settings.

The military access system punishes you for winning wars too effectively if one of the nations you're at war with capitulates early and deletes your frontline. Paradox have said they'll fix this in a later patch though. Military supply is also a pain. The game could benefit from a stockpile system like in Hearts of Iron.

There's also million little bugs that detract from the game like Frontier Colonization being broken, interest groups in foreign nations not displaying their preferences properly, frequent notifications about "NULL_STATE", etc.

Honestly, it's STILL unfinished, with bugs and glitches at every turn. It's a disappointment and even after however many dlc worth almost 100$ it STILL FEELS LIKE A RUSHED PILE OF GARBAGE.

Inferior product to Victoria II, the war system is terribly designed and there is so much missing. Victoria II with a graphic overhaul and an economic rework to fix how spheres work and add more depth to the factories to be more in like with Victoria 3 would be a far superior game to what Victoria 3 has produced, but even without such changes I would prefer what Victoria II has accomplished

Victoria 3, like almost all core Paradox Games (HoI4, CK3, Stellaris, etc.) is ocean-wide, but puddle-deep. There is also sadly not much else out there like it. It's a bit of a hate-play for me.

A simple example of puddle-deep: trade is fully manually, even if you enact free trade. Fully manual, and extremely annoying to implement.

At its core, Vic3 seems to be an "autarky simulator", rather than international trade/production simulator.

Amazing Game. Awful Monetization scheme. I buy the Expansion Pass (note it is not called a 'Season' Pass) to get all the DLC a few months ago, then they drop Victoria 3: Pivot of Empire, and its not included. Feels like a scam, scummy business practice borderline false advertising.

The game is one of the best economic simulators out there and deserves a better score and more effort from Paradox.

I am a Paradox veteran with >2000h combined in Imperator Rome, CK, EU, HoI and Stellaris. In my opinion, Victoria 3 is way deeper than all these titles regarding economics and society simulation. Supply/demand curve, market competitiiveness, literacy, discrimination, life standard expectancy - it's just a small portion of factors you have to deal with here.

There is a number of issues with this game:
- The launch in 2022 has been faulty and pushed players away. The game has improved a lot since then.
- War may feel too simple in contrast to other Paradox games. However, it is not a big issue. The primary focus of all Paradox games is to colorize the map. All except Vic3: developing tall and growing soft power is possible and sometimes even more profitable than mindless expansion here, just like in real life.
- Learning curve is a bit sharp. Sometimes strange things will happen that can be thought of as bugs. E. g. a profitable building reduces its workforce. However, most often it is not bugs, but tooltips not being descriptive or accurate enough. A new player has to read a couple of wiki pages to comprehend all mechanics.

By writing this review I hope to improve it's reputation a bit so that Paradox may put more effort into this game, as its economics simulation foundation has huge potential no other modern Paradox game can offer.

Its very difficult to learn, but once you've it, its really fun to play. The economic system is very detailed and fun, the overall game play is really fun

Game launched good but lackluster for me. Still has some issues surrounding flavor, but honestly I think people want this game to be vic2 pt2 too much.

This game is a classic example of Paradox being a company that doesn't give a crap about updating someone out of being able to enjoy the game. I liked it when it started, but they've made it so damn complex for obtuse and stupid reasons. It presents a lot of fun ideas, but pushes so much bull-crap on your plate that you can't help but think that it could have been designed much more elegantly and still given you access to those ideas. In a land of grand strategy games this one is the worst I've played. And maybe it's because I'm stupid, and I'll freaking live with that, but it doesn't mean I don't want my money back and I feel like got scammed by Paradox. I'll never touch anything but Stellaris. I think that game set me up for failure. The updates and DLC for that are so good overall but Victoria 3 is the average modern Cities Skylines 2 modern Paradox experience.

You know the more and more I play it the more I enjoy this game. Its considerably less war-oriented than Paradox's other games. But its a satisfying game play loop and time period for all that.

After 1000+ hours i REALLY wanted to recommend it.

And i plan to after these Conditions are met:

1. The military game must be fixed.

There needs to be a way to fight off colonial powers. There needs to be a clear path towards punching above your weight. currently war is entirely tech and size. For the record i like the direction the game is taking compared to other paradox titles. But for this mechanic to work it has to be more like a HoI4 lite. I am talking microing tactics, choke point planning(forts, mountains, rivers, crossings) and asymmetrical warfare.

At the current stage the military game feels broken at worst, unfinished at best.

2. Economy and politics need to run themselves.

The game at its core is supposed to be a simulation that allows the player to mould or shape a country into whatever they want. At the current state of the game if you don't build it, it basically does not get built. The game does have a private construction mechanic but this is often gamey and unreliable. The economy should pump out buildings and you shape what gets built through cheapening of resources or increasing demand. I should reliably be able to jump start a steel industry either by cheapening coal and iron AND/OR switching to Steel demanding production methods. In the current state of the game you have to build steel first or else you simply crash the economy.

To that point. The politics continues to be esoteric and law depended rather then economy or situation depended. While the game is heading in the right direction with recent improvements. It fundamentally feels like politics are these annoying things that either pop up to stop reforms or ask for incremental improvements after decades. Politics never feels like the pulse of the nation. The game needs a way to visualise the shifting attitudes that seem to appear with the discovery of techs on a more logical and materially relevant way. Plus It often feels like i cant predict which region will become dominated by an interest group even though it should be fairly deterministic. If you don't get certain techs and don't change specific laws you can easily create highly educated stable slave states very late into the game. To that point Slaves don't produce enough instability to feel like they make an impact, multiculturalism is too hard to create and RNG depended, social instability doesn't make sense and neither does elections. Honestly the politics needs as much of a overhaul as the military. My recommendation is make a map layer that shows a visual change in attitudes, one that can be used in elections to track the political parties support in various regions. I would also like to officially request the end of point systems for elections. (unless you are doing a electoral college thing) and only use percent of votes or total number of votes. 1000 hours in and i still don't understand what political power means. (i don't want to)

The way it is now the only way to change the political landscape is to either build enough buildings fast enough (cheese), through corn laws (more on this later), and RNG. This brings me to my next point.

3. There needs to be more to do.

I actually like corn laws and think we need more similar style options to nudge our country in the direction we want it to go. There should be a corn laws equivalent for every possible economic and political system. A republican movement that can be triggered by bringing in a interest group for example.

Another consideration is increasing building speed. For some reason the devs are trying to slow the game down but in reality there is barely enough time to do all the things you want, especially for non-European states. so much so this game can often feel like a rush. I find myself in certain metas for certain countries. Must have this amount of construction by this decade for example. Due to the speed of each game it quickly becomes impossible to catch up if you don't start in very specific ways. locking players into very unfun path ways. Speeding up construction (2-3 weeks for primary industries and 5-6 weeks for factories) would allow for quick development projects (Such as Edo period japan) and punish over building as expensive endeavours. Allowing these buildings to then hire and fire and if unproductive close outright gives the player a element of control over how to handle economic stagnation. Such as letting a industry close to free up workforce for a more modern industry. or Nationalising the last few industry buildings to save a domestic industry. The current set up has buildings take so long to build that losing levels is never worth it and private construction and privatisation's biggest risks include the loss of industry size. With there being no real reason to ever nationalise buildings except for role play or imperialism reasons. There is no point where the game doesn't feel like its only goal is to build as many buildings as possible in as little time as possible.

The game needs to feel like a simulation, but right now it doesn't. Until then I cant recommend it. I don't plan to put it down however. I'm sticking through to the end. If the devs want me to change this review to positive and talk about all the reasons i played this game for 1000 hours. Then they need to do for Victoria what they did for Stellaris.

This game is good (C+), but still needs a lot of work. I would recommend it for those who already enjoy the genre or who have a particular affinity for the time period. Otherwise, Paradox's other games are far more developed and enjoyable in a traditional sense.

Its a sandbox. Lacks content. And has many broken system. Notoriously its battle/warefare systems. Quite often the frontlines dissapear for no good reasons.

Do not let the negative reviews of this game sway you. 80% of them fall into two categories and both are illegitimate. Unfortunately, these negative reviews kept me from buying the game until I got to try it for myself on a free weekend.

1. I'm mad because this game isn't an exact copy of Vic 2 with updated graphics.
2. Economy/Pops/Wars/Laws/Diplomacy insert game system here, doesn't work/is bad.

I played plenty of Vic 2. Vic 3 is better or at least different, but not in a bad way. None of the game systems are broken or poorly thought out (not to say they are perfect), people just don't know how to play this game. Which leads me to what you need to know about this game when determining whether or not you will have fun playing it.

1. I'm no stranger to paradox strategy games and it took me a solid 50 hours of game play before I got a decent handle on all the game systems. The tutorials, if you want to call them that, will teach you the basics, but you are intended to experiment and learn by doing. At about 200 hours I now feel in complete control of about 90% of the game. You might catch on a bit quicker than me, but the point is that game is deep. Learn the systems, then learn how to manipulate the system.
2. This game is not about direct control and certainly not about immediate action/reaction. You truly are an invisible hand guiding the economy and government.
3. This game is NOT about micromanagement. You are playing the game wrong if you find your self micromanaging unless you are going for a very specific experience and play style.
4. The strategies and play styles are endless. Don't want wait 80 years to transform your landed aristocracy/peasant based economy? Do it in 10 years by fomenting an industrialist revolution and then switching to the industrialist side when the actual fighting takes place.

The game is a slow burn with lots of depth. You don't directly control anything and if waiting decades to get your preferred government/economy in place by making subtle tweaks here and there sounds like your nightmare as opposed your idea of a good time, then dont buy the game. Otherwise have fun!

It's somewhat baffling that Paradox made a sequel to Victoria 2 and didn't even attempt to simulate a global market - instead, the player is saddled with micromanaging every single balance of trade between their own country and every other state in the world,,,for every individual good. As if the trade simulation wasn't enough of a step backward, warfare has gone from janky but functional to opaque at best and lobotomized at worst.

Crashes as soon as I press something. 1/10 unplayable scam.

I hate this format of buying a bare bones game and then paying full price for DLC's to essentially have the game fleshed out.

I really like this game but it's unplayable. The UI keeps getting unresponsive after showing OsX's beach ball.

not a fucking clue how this works and not a fucking tutorial that works. Its great to see how the average person has no fucking clue about how economics works, really explains the crisis we have every 5 years...

i love this game, it's more fun way to learn how society and economics work than whatever they teach you at econ class shit

The developers barely put effort in any step of production, from planning out its foundations to delivering content post release (i.e. dlcs)

The Pop System is inherently wasteful, the computer is forced to calculate the state of every fragment of population, no matter how small, for the same amount of cost. Only State of the Art computers can keep up with increasing number of population fragments which are separated by religions/cultures/states/buildings/occupations.
Market and supply chain system is laughable for a game labeled as "economic".
Diplomacy is barebone.
Other complaints I have are well elaborated by other reviews.
This is just a brick sprinkled with icing that is extravagant graphics nobody asked for, posing as a cake.

This game *is* fun, but only if you already bought it. I'd rather not buy this game if I could go back in time, despite the fact I'm still playing it over with my friends every Tuesday. So actually the game is only fun and meaningful if you play multiplayer (which the devs don't care about obviously since you don't even have in-game chat). Singleplayer vanilla playing with impotent AI is empty, unless you benefits from mods which are basically Paradox exploiting free labor from devoted gamers.

We should really fund a legitimate competition to beat up this company.

So much good in this game, but so much bad too. The interface is completely miserable, you get a lot of information you don't need, while what you do need you have to search through complicated menus for. The game provides a lot of information, but is bad at explaining what it actually informs about. This game could have been absolutely brilliant, but it has simply become a "mess". I hope some other developers see this game and think "we can do better like that" and make a game like that, I would love it. But for Victoria 3, BLAH! Steer away

Decent game Idea poor execution, seems like many balancing and functional issues still.

victoria 3 is a hard game to recommend.
its a good game, its a fun game, but its only fun when you play with the countries they want to. and thats coherent and strange.
its in the middle ground between an economy and a role playing game, but i can't after 200 hours understand what i'm role playing?
as an economy game, its linear, there is only a good way of playing it and 30 bad ones.
as a strategy game its really hard to understand why you are winning or losing, the interface its muddy at best.
as a roleplaying game, you don't roleplay. you are the holy embodiment of a nation, taking shadow decisions about what will a government look like, but it has 0 simulation of a congress, passing laws is at the mercy of the random event generator. so as a political game it gets stale really fast.
it's, maybe, the best "paint the map simulator" that paradox had produced. but is that enough?
idk, for a war game, hearts of iron is better, for a role playing game, crusader kings is better, and for an economy game, its so linear that it gets boring.
maybe if you could role play as a political figure, maybe it would be a better game, but you role play as the nation itself, which has no sense in a political simulator way.
after so many patches, everything i had learned changed at least 2 times, and after all this time, the only emotion i get from victoria 3 is boredom.
and the worst part is that cheating is always the better way to enjoy the game.
so, this is a lukewarm review. yes i got the 200 hours from my product, but would i recommend it? nah. imperator rome was more fun. this would be a "meh" review if steam allowed them