• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Tinto Talks #1 - February 28th 2024

Hello everyone and welcome to .. yeah, what is this really?

Is this a game called “Tinto Talks?” No.. not really.

First of all Tinto stands for “Paradox Tinto”, the studio which we founded in Sitges in 2020, with a few people moving down with me from PDS to Spain. We have now grown to be almost 30 people. Now, that is out of the way, what about the “Talks” part? Well…

j122b5kkSHre8fzThR98htcNObjdyIE_I7he5798iZFOOuPo_DwYgAodHjharr02DsYlnhUftqOgbEfAZoW_iY-pzeZJIPWn70nunrf_RxJCBOfzxMtk09O2bSLzbozxYV1pjagvDQcOdtwcRjfweW0


A long time ago, we started talking about a game as soon as we started working on it. Back in the long almost forgotten past we used to make games in about 8-9 months. I remember us announcing Vicky2 with just 2 mockup screenshots, and half a page of ideas.

This changed a bit over time, with first the rule of not announcing a game until it passed its alpha milestone, in case it would be canceled… as happened with Runemaster. And then when projects started going from an 18 month development cycle with games like EU4 to many years like our more recent games, the time from announcement to release became much closer to the release of the game.

Why does this matter?

Well, from a development perspective communicating with the players is extremely beneficial, as it provides us with feedback. But if it's so late in the development process that you can not adapt to the feedback, then a development diary is “just” a marketing tool. I think games like Imperator might have looked different if we had involved the community earlier and listened to the feedback.

If we look back at HoI4, this was from the first time we talked about Air Warfare, about 10 years ago, and it has not much in common with the release version..
u5Rmtyxo4wjnPOCck8qMkfdl0b3DNXg5mz-Hbf1J3ZnUctAnPqF8iGoRWjIQL_YlA_fXgwzZXAkH4urtPNzf3q1PxteO6p00HPyhNKLK4RBdp6CGq2bbsycQ-wSxMCf9poeXA8s7349vakEkGIFD9_A



However, talking about a game for a long long time is not great for building hype either, and to be able to make proper huge announcements is an important part as well.

So what is this then? Well, we call this sub-forum “Tinto Talks”. We will be talking about design aspects of the game we are working on. We will not tell you which game it is, nor be able to tell you when it will be announced, nor when it will be released.

We will be talking with you here, almost every week, because we need your input to be able to shape this game into a masterpiece.

Without you, and your input, that will not be possible.

So what about Project Caesar then?

Project Caesar? Yeah.. At PDS, which Tinto is a "child" of, we tend to use roman emperor/leader names for our games. Augustus was Stellaris, Titus was CK3, Sulla was Imperator, Nero was Runemaster, Caligula was V3 etc.. We even named our internal "empty project for clausewitz & jomini", that we base every new game on Marius.

In Q2 2020, I started writing code on a new game, prototyping new systems that I wanted to try out. Adapting the lessons learned from what had worked well, and what had not worked well. Plus, recruiting for a completely new studio in Paradox Tinto, training people on how to make these types of games, while also making some expansions for EU4.

Today though, even though we are a fair bit away from announcing our new game, we want to start talking weekly about the things we have worked on, to get your feedback on it, and adapt some of it to become even better.

However, we’ll start with the vision, which is not really something you do change at this stage.

Believable World

You should be able to play the game and feel like you are in a world that makes sense, and feels rich and realistic. While not making the gaming less accessible, features should be believable and plausible, and avoid abstraction unless necessary.

Setting Immersion

Our games thrive on player imagination and “what if” scenarios. We ensure both a high degree of faithfulness to the setting which will give a “special feel” to the game. We will strive to give this game the most in-depth feeling of flavor possible.

Replayability

There should be many ways to play different starts and reasons to replay them. Different mechanics in different parts of the world create a unique experience depending on what you choose to play. With a deep and complex game, there should be so many choices and paths that the player should feel they can always come back to get a new story with the same start.

Yeah, sounds ambitious right?

Which games do YOU think represent these pillars well?

75Gat6Ca0JARLF-eHpc0xp2z3YF0TVk52GfaumAeqLZ6P7oo6xgKIwUNNX9X39fYPtxhQEml5DbEwZNFnEb2S66M9BusrOI4iViiKiE8UzOx_TFSFyA4g2oWc2BC7bADhEKV1NPPQcwiFSchIt2z2mk


Cheers, and next week, we’ll talk about the most important things in the world.. Besides family, beer, friends, and the Great Lord of the Dark… MAPS!
 
  • 176Love
  • 136Like
  • 9
  • 2
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
So glad to see the vision.
Believability with a world that is realistic rather than abstract and simplified. Setting immersion with priority for "what if" over linear paths.
You are cooking.
 
I take an eight month break and find out that EUV a game led by Johan got announced two weeks ago, well, not what I expected. I have personally been hoping for EUV for years at this point as I have felt like EUIV needed to finally rest but after the releases of Crusader Kings III and Victoria III, I won't deny I was concerned on the direction of this hypothetical sequel. I am very pleased that Johan seems to be in charge of the ship and that Paradox Tinto seems to have stabilised after the disastrous Leviathan expansion which seriously crushed my trust. While I wouldn't call the DLC released by Tinto to be amazing, I usually attributed that to the development team being restrained by the ancient code of EUIV (the fact that its been admitted they can't fix the restart game when backing to menu bug without breaking everything shows just how prehistoric all the code is and working around it can be very limiting), so I am excited to see what can be done with a fresh sheet and with Jomini improvements to Clausewitz. I am also very pleased to see Paradox, or at least Johan here, is taking active interest in forum feedback on this game, especially earlier in development, as I have felt like more recent releases over the years have struggled with this and has led to instances where it is far too late for any major changes to design and content.


Now, onto the development part of the post, I am very pleased with the focus on authenticity, immersion, and replayability for this, presumably, new grand strategy game as they are some of my core desires in a historical Paradox RTS.

- Immersion in general is something I want from any game, I want to be sucked into the world, whatever it may be while playing. I've never been a fan of the whole world conquest, cheap exploits, minmaxing or whatever, usually in my Europa games I prefer playing slower, trying to roleplay as that country, focusing on taking a certain area in a war, pushing for a union, or whatever. I don't think world conquest should be viable, I don't think you should be able to stabilise a country from total collapse to maximum stability in one day, I don't think that Spanish conquerors would tolerate Japanese culture overnight after a conquest while despising Sicilians after 200 years of occupation. I am fully supportive of moving away from a board game mechanics foundation towards a proper historical sandbox simulation with more "realistic" mechanics that are dynamic and take time depending on many factors. There is also the event side of this and I think Europa can go much further, obviously I don't need an event popup saying the Hindenburg didn't crash but if I conquered some territory that has a religious minority but are a majority in that territory how are they taking the annexation or are how the local nobles in another realm that I have inherited in a union feeling about me. Obviously there should also be major historical events represented but that is already obvious and usually that is worked into the game, though how they are could always be improved, let a major historical civil war be more than just crush a few rebel stacks and boost stability overnight.

- Authenticity for any historical game, as a history enthusiast, for me is a must and my most important pillar, and ironically drives me nuts when playing other Paradox games (especially Hearts of Iron IV) for their lack of it, only really Imperator and Europa have satisfied me in this pillar though I still crave more ideally in each respectively. Obviously as a sandbox game primarily there should be the freedom to attempt most things, but the feasibility of certain things should entirely be restricted to what that country's starting situation was like at the starting year chosen and the player's actions from that point on. Japan should not be able to enter a giant civil war sparked by a communist uprising in 1936 out of no where, not because the Japanese couldn't possibly be communist, but if we start in 1936 it just doesn't make sense how they would get there after waiting 280 days. Alternate history in Paradox historic sandbox games isn't the problem, it's usually just that people want radical changes overnight that are unrealistic or are out of the time period. I thoroughly enjoyed the addition of the imperial incident mechanic which allowed numerous different solutions to many different topics for the Holy Roman Empire in EUIV. Developing onto these dynamic alternate history scenarios for major moments would be greatly appreciated in whatever game this is, allow these radical changes from our history the time to make logical sense and fit with the period.

- Replayability I'll admit is my least important of the three, not because I don't want to replay a country but because for me the replayability of the game comes from trying a different nation. Ironically by making all the countries playing the same and have the exact same options across the board, you lose even more replayability as what country you choose starts to lose importance and the different runs you have in the game all blend together and feel the same. For me the replayability of the game comes from different countries, regions, and continents feeling different. Sure there should be some similarities between playing France and Russia, both are Christian European feudal states, but one is large rich kingdom on the coast trying to reign in competing duchies and fight off an invading kingdom claiming your throne, the other is a poor fractured confederation dominated by an invader that has subjugated the land for centuries where you need to rally support across the region and build up strength to toss them out, one is Catholic and the other is Orthodox, one has a gateway to America, the other has a gateway to Asia. The replayability of the game should come from the uniqueness of nations, not by making everyone do anything for gameplay balance purposes. I personally just take breaks between certain countries after finishing a game with them, I don't want to play the Netherlands 20 different ways over and over, I want to bounce between different countries, in different regions, in different positions at the start.


Looking forward for more of these Tinto Talk posts going forward! I am very interested to see what this Project Caesar game is. Even if its not EUV, despite being pretty damn obvious it is, I am curious to see what setting of historical grand strategy game is being made with these pillars as the core foundation. Best of luck with development to Johan and the crew at Tinto.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Been some time since i could come on the forum due to work stuff... and i find out about this ? Why is the interesting stuff happening when i'm away ? :O

In any case, it sounds very promissing !
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Been some time since i could come on the forum due to work stuff... and i find out about this ? Why is the interesting stuff happening when i'm away ? :O

In any case, it sounds very promissing !
ahhhhh
 
I'm a bit late to the party here, but really like this idea - love your work Paradox Tinto, and looking forward to Caesar :)
 
Regarding replayability: do you interpret this as "playing the game again" or also "playing the same nation/ruler again"? Because in my opinion it's not only the former but also the latter. And some games do that much better (or worse) than other. HOI for instance does that quite well with the various alignments (but very inorganically so), other games offer little replayability other than min maxing
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Regarding replayability: do you interpret this as "playing the game again" or also "playing the same nation/ruler again"? Because in my opinion it's not only the former but also the latter. And some games do that much better (or worse) than other. HOI for instance does that quite well with the various alignments (but very inorganically so), other games offer little replayability other than min maxing

the latter for me.
 
  • 6Like
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Love
Reactions:
@Johan I need you to reassure me that paradox is not holding you at gunpoint to play 'good cop bad cop'
I just hope they're not making you sit on the forum replying to people when you'd rather like to spend your time just deving the actual game
Godspeed
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
@Johan I need you to reassure me that paradox is not holding you at gunpoint to play 'good cop bad cop'
I just hope they're not making you sit on the forum replying to people when you'd rather like to spend your time just deving the actual game
Godspeed
What makes you think Johan can't be "good cop bad cop" on his own? :p

More seriously, i can tell you that, about ninetee years ago, when i joined the forums, Johan was working on EUII AND being active on the forum. ;)
 
What makes you think Johan can't be "good cop bad cop" on his own? :p

More seriously, i can tell you that, about ninetee years ago, when i joined the forums, Johan was working on EUII AND being active on the forum. ;)
It's not that he can't be active on his own, I'm just really afraid of paradox using him as a last resort to build hype around the game is all. Paradox used some really underhanded marketing tactics for their latest releases so I'm just recognizing a pattern

But hearing that he likes sharing things he's passionate about and thinks are good is nice
 
@Feather Prince Will this game be absolutely perfect and include everything I ever dreamed about when thinking about GSG? No. But I bet it will be an improvement over EUIV.
 
It's not that he can't be active on his own, I'm just really afraid of paradox using him as a last resort to build hype around the game is all. Paradox used some really underhanded marketing tactics for their latest releases so I'm just recognizing a pattern

But hearing that he likes sharing things he's passionate about and thinks are good is nice
If we are talking about EUIV, i think PAradox may have asked him to make public statements as communication tactics, but i doubt they ever had to strong-arm him.

As for Project Caesar and the hype... Paradox Tinto and Project Caesar are his baby... he's passionate about it, he's the one sharing his love for the game he's builting with Tinto.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
@Feather Prince Will this game be absolutely perfect and include everything I ever dreamed about when thinking about GSG? No. But I bet it will be an improvement over EUIV.
Stop putting words in my mouth, it's not about making the strategy game to end all strategy games, it's about paradox using predatory and misleading marketing tactics with short term gain in mind, AKA throwing old and most importantly LOYAL fans under the bus in order to cater to the people who never cared about GSGs in the first place, but I digress

I don't mind upgrades, but since hoi4 we only had downgrades, with the exception of eu4; stellaris and imperator because they're new IPs

We can continue the conversation elsewhere, but this is not the place for it, bashing paradox on their own forum is just poor taste
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Stop putting words in my mouth, it's not about making the strategy game to end all strategy games, it's about paradox using predatory and misleading marketing tactics with short term gain in mind, AKA throwing old and most importantly LOYAL fans under the bus in order to cater to the people who never cared about GSGs in the first place, but I digress

I don't mind upgrades, but since hoi4 we only had downgrades, with the exception of eu4; stellaris and imperator because they're new IPs
I agree with you to a certain point. As always, I will decide whether or not to buy the game after it has come out, once plenty of reviews are in, and once I have watched enough gameplay and read enough about the game to feel rather secure in my purchase. As long as you do the same, what does it matter? Marketing is always going to work that way; just be prudent about your own final decision. At the end of the day the game will speak for itself.

And, in all honesty, it is not as though Johan can confirm or deny that he is "being held at gunpoint." He seems excited about the game; based on what we've seen I am too. But I'm not going to preorder it just because of that. Paradox is going to market it however they can, since they need to make money. But the choice of whether to give them your cash - that's always going to be yours.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: