Ideas borrowed from Paradox Games?

[Matthew.]

I'm sure they have borrowed a few things from Paradox and that's a good thing.

If only Paradox would borrow the idea of having a game run from 4000 BC to 2000 AD.

Along with a couple thousand dollars worth of DLC. I mean they already pack in a couple hundred for each separate game

 

[isau]

If that happens, good bye Firaxis!

Psh. For that to happen Paradox would have to start designing their games in a way that is approachable. Paradox games are the dead opposite of what has come to be called "Human Centered Design." Half of learning to play a Paradox game is just figuring out where you are supposed to be looking versus what is just thrown on the screen just because. I always LOL when people say EU4 is "more accessible" than previous titles. That may be true, but when I think of all the things I could be doing besides figuring out how to play a video game, like, say learning a programing language, its impossible for it to hold my interest.

Firaxis is a lot of things, but what I will say for them is their games are "approachable." They start relatively simple and build up, and follow at least basic principles of keeping primary data front and center and secondary data in the background. Paradox games are just stressful to look at and almost hostile to new players, throwing everything at you right away with no build up. Firaxis games are often complex; Paradox games are often needlessly complicated.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Paradox games have about 10 times less audience than Firaxis and for good reasons. If Paradox try to compete with Firaxis directly, I don't think we'll see anything good.

 

[anandus]

If that happens, good bye Firaxis!

I don't think so. I mean, Paradox games are the prettiest spreadsheets I've ever seen and look a lot better than Excel, and I love those games, but it's a whole different ballpark than Firaxis games, which are easily approachable and doesn't require a "Paradox Ph.D" to even get through the tutorial

 

[Xen]

I don't think so. I mean, Paradox games are the prettiest spreadsheets I've ever seen and look a lot better than Excel, and I love those games, but it's a whole different ballpark than Firaxis games, which are easily approachable and doesn't require a "Paradox Ph.D" to even get through the tutorial

Paradox games are no more or less spreadsheets than the Civ franchise is, and to be honest Paradox when they reall try gives its game more character than the civ franchise ever has (in my eyes at least) with whats been done with CKII.

The primary difference is that Paradox games sometimes feel constrained because its always the real world, and usually focus on a specific time period.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Paradox games are no more or less spreadsheets than the Civ franchise is, and to be honest Paradox when they reall try gives its game more character than the civ franchise ever has (in my eyes at least) with whats been done with CKII.

The primary difference is that Paradox games sometimes feel constrained because its always the real world, and usually focus on a specific time period.

Civilization games try to focus on gameplay, Paradox games try to focus on historical accuracy (although since it's still a game there are still a lot of abstractions). This way, Civilization games are fun to play, although they are more abstract. Paradox games are usually boring. There's different kinds of fun, of course, not just strategy - seeing your enemies fall is fun, facing familiar historical elements and bending them to alternative history is fun, etc. But the amount of people willing to pay for that source of fun is quite small.

Also, when we speak about Paradox games, we usually mean EU and CK. There are other games, though, made under the hood of Paradox, some of them are more focused on gameplay, like Warlock. But their developers are way behind Firaxis in budget and experience.

 

[Xen]

Paradox games are usually boring.

That's pretty subjective, don't you think?

 

[stealth_nsk]

That's pretty subjective, don't you think?

Yes, let's use more politically correct "not focused on gameplay".

 

[Xen]

It's also worth noting that I dont think the population playing paradox games is that small- over a million people own CKII, for example.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/16/82/b4/1682b4f97917ad6070a70d3b28f56439.jpg

 

[stealth_nsk]

It's also worth noting that I dont think the population playing paradox games is that small- over a million people own CKII, for example.

And Civilization V has about 10 millions. That's what I meant by "10 times more"

 

[Xen]

And Civilization V has about 10 millions. That's what I meant by "10 times more"

source? the only source I can find says 5 million...

 

[stealth_nsk]

source? the only source I can find says 5 million...

Steamspy shows 9 millions at the moment. Wikipedia article (5.84M) is based on the same Steamspy data, but from more than 2 years ago. And since Steamspy doesn't analyze all the data, 10M is quite sure bet.

 

[Xen]

Thats great! Its annoying that Paradox just had all its info removed from that site in June.

But even so- it means that despite the reputation paradox games have as having a steep learning curve (sometimes deserved, sometimes not) a large number of strategy gamers play them. To me its only a good thing that the civ series is courting them bu being willing to marry the civ series a bit more to historical themes of gameplay by adopting some moves from paradoxs' gamebook!

 

[dturtle1]

+1 for evolution in the genre! Both publishers have some fantastic ideas.

Related topic, I hope to see influence from Endless Legend, some pretty awesome ideas there... Map is pre-sliced up into territories (only one city can be settled per territory, nicely balances ICS and makes placement ridiculously important), negotiations/quests with "barbarians," terrain elevation in tactical battles, elegant solution to stack of dooms (max stack size increases with tech), etc...

Not a big fan myself of the Endless Legend pre sliced Map, though i do like the game itself as a whole. It looks too much like patchwork and accentuates the random nature of the map. It also pretty much demands specialising based on the base terrain of the slice;. The 3rd dimension and the actual looks are pretty cool though as are a lot of other things in the game, just the pre sliced map is possibly the weakest feature IMO

 

[demidyad]

I have a passing interest in Paradox games, but it will remain nothing more than a passing interest until they make a game from 4000 BC to 2000 AD on randomly generated maps

(Also, agree with above poster that I really didn't like the "pre-sliced map" in Endless Legend - and so far I don't like the similar "continents" mechanic in Civ6 either)

 

[Thormodr]

There's an EU4 mod for that

Yes, I've played that before. It was called a Civilization Universalis, IIRC.

 

[rastak]

Yes, I've played that before. It was called a Civilization Universalis, IIRC.

Oh man, was it a 6000 year trudge across the map?

Grind grind, core core, grind grind, core core...rinse and repeat.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

In the case of Civ6, the game badly needed at least a simple casus belli system (which is all over Paradox games)

Is that borrowing from Paradox, or from real life? Honest question, I have not seen how paradox (or civ for that matter) present it.

 

[Thormodr]

Oh man, was it a 6000 year trudge across the map?

Grind grind, core core, grind grind, core core...rinse and repeat.

Well, it was just a mod, after all.

I do think if they made a fan based mega effort, they could come up with an excellent product. Civ really does need some competition. It'd be good for the franchise.

 

[WiseGreen]

There *was* something like a 4000 BC to 2000 AD grand strategy Pdox game, Magna Mundi, but it was cancelled by Paradox before launch. The developers claimed the game was ready and they would go to court to be able to launch the game themselves, but I don't know how that ended.