-
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.
Ugh... I hope they don't have him working on Vicky after the mess he made of the Civ franchise. CiV was basically a phone app with higher resolution.
Vicky III would be
despite my meh-ish experiences with pre-ordering HoI IV.
Fantasy would be nice, too.
Everything else is more like
despite my meh-ish experiences with pre-ordering HoI IV.
Fantasy would be nice, too.
Everything else is more like
Chris King came back to PDS a few years ago. Considering he was a cornerstone of the Vicky 2 team, it makes sense that he would be working on Vicky 3. The rest of the old Vicky 2 team are mostly dispersed to other projects right now.
In theory, while not active team members, they could still be contributing their guidance to development.
On the flip side, the timing would have been perfect for them to announce whatever they're working on at PDXcon for a Christmas release, but that passed...so who know what kind of progress they've made.
I did expect a space game. So your statement is objectively false.
And CK2 will probably be finished this time next year, which frees up quite a few developers...
Are you sure? They said they were going to continue developing it until people quit buying DLC.
Or until they run out of workable and interesting ideas/it is no longer technically feasible.
Fantasy RPG.
Stellaris was an ambitious PDS design idea, stepping away from history and into the realms of sci-fi.
Armed with those experiences as well as what they remembered from Runemaster, maybe they can try their hand again at RPGs again? It is still a massive deviation from the studio's usual games but it would definitely be within the scope of what PI releases so I can't imagine there being any backlash etc from the consumers. Thus, I don't think it would be an issue at all unless if the question is the studio's capacity.
I think PDS can pull it off nicely though, knowing what they already know.
Stellaris was an ambitious PDS design idea, stepping away from history and into the realms of sci-fi.
Armed with those experiences as well as what they remembered from Runemaster, maybe they can try their hand again at RPGs again? It is still a massive deviation from the studio's usual games but it would definitely be within the scope of what PI releases so I can't imagine there being any backlash etc from the consumers. Thus, I don't think it would be an issue at all unless if the question is the studio's capacity.
I think PDS can pull it off nicely though, knowing what they already know.
Last edited:
Personally, I would prefer a Stellaris/Civilization style Grand Strategy than an RPG because while there are plenty of good fantasy RPG, there aren't many Grand Strategy (not turn-based nor real time) fantasy games out there, especially in the veins of which Paradox does things.
Before the controversial Civ 5, Shafer designed the Civ 4 Beyond the sword expansion wich was excellent.
Actually, Civ V was almost a very good game, it just had a few issues:
1) it cut core gameplay stuff from IV to add later as DLC (huge problem for many people)
2) AI was putrid at actually playing the game so the "difficulty" was all in how hard it cheated on everything
3) size of map scaling wasn't well balanced so playing on larger map sizes wasn't particularly fun, especially when coupled with issue #2, which pissed off a lot of people who enjoyed big, long games
Only the first of those can be laid solely on the designer and even then you may have bosses in the background pushing it.
To an extent, it was just so much more obvious in V than III or IV. The ai was completely clueless about how to move/fight with the one unit/tile restriction and it was blatantly obvious. It was also much more obvious how hard they cheated the mechanics with things like army sizes and speed building.
In Civ 4, the AI diplomacy made sense, your allies stood by your side and only betrayed you when they had good reason to do so (give them good reason and they would betray you)
In Civ 5 you could be best buddy with Gandhi for two millenia, share no borders or interest whatsoever, he would still backstab you and nuke you to the ground (them you roflstomped him because you are much more powerful and the AI is not very good at estimating power)
during the development of six the devs said that they removed features they didnt like or found bad (like UN) to improve them later on..... one can take that as they whished
It had more than a few issues. Everything could be bought with gold: borders (wtf?), city-states, units, buildings. Actually it was somewhat pointless to ever build anything. Also, the 1UPT was a disaster. Paradox does a much better job of dealing with doomstacks with unit supply and attrition. Yes, they also pruned major features to re-sell as DLC. Also the interface was clearly designed for a console and not a PC.
They basically made it a toy for filthy casuals. Vicky is one of the most hardcore games I've ever played and I don't want it dumbed down like CiV was.