Can we get a GTS Cold War game??? Pretty please.

[jmpveg22]

My only initial requests are:
1) Time period of 1950 to 2000
2) Three start dates, all highly researched. 1950, 1960, and 1970.
3) 40-50 Countries playable @ release
-USA
-USSR
-PRC
-United Kindom
-France
-FRG & GDR
-ROK & DPRK
-North Vietnam
-South Vietnam
-India
-Pakistan
-Japan
-Canada
-Czechoslovakia
-Poland
-Romania
-Hungary
-Bulgaria
-Albania
-Yugoslavia
-Spain
-Portugul
-Finland
-Norway
-Sweeden
-Italy
-Greece
-Turkey
-Australia
-Indonesia
-Brazil
-Mexico
-Cuba
-Argentina
-Iran
-South Africa
-Israel
-Egypt

Anything more than that would just be icing on then cake.

 

[awmobile367]

They tried, not likely they'll try again.

East vs. West – A Hearts of Iron Game - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[jmpveg22]

They tried, not likely they'll try again.

East vs. West – A Hearts of Iron Game - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Was a decade ago... dont be quitters!

 

[gigau]

It's been requested many times over the years, to no avail. I think that how controversial discussions would be with politics so close to modern day would not be appealing.

 

[jmpveg22]

It's been requested many times over the years, to no avail. I think that how controversial discussions would be with politics so close to modern day would not

It's been requested many times over the years, to no avail. I think that how controversial discussions would be with politics so close to modern day would not be appealing.

Considering what politics and stuff that is already present in HOI... that seems unlikely.

Plus we have slavery and genocide in the future with stellaris...

Seems like a lame excuse to me.

 

[gigau]

Considering what politics and stuff that is already present in HOI... that seems unlikely.

The closer we get to modern day, the worst it gets.

Plus we have slavery and genocide in the future with stellaris...

Stellaris is in a science-fiction setting, that's different.

Seems like a lame excuse to me.

Do note that it's my take... i'm not Paradox, so not talking on their behalf.

Seeing the heated discussions in OT forum, i'm not sure it would be a lame excuse.

 

[captainroot]

It's been requested many times over the years, to no avail. I think that how controversial discussions would be with politics so close to modern day would not be appealing.

The closer we get to modern day, the worst it gets.

This sure didn't stop the creators of Twilight Struggle and Labyrinth: The War on Terror and it sure isn't stopping the creators of SuperPower 3.

Do note that it's my take... i'm not Paradox, so not talking on their behalf.

Seeing the heated discussions in OT forum, i'm not sure it would be a lame excuse.

gigau, I understand you are not Paradox, but since you are in contact with them, please forward the following to them:
"Not making a Cold War GSG due to "controversy" IS a lame excuse, as evidenced by the upcoming Espiocracy. The very fact this game is being made speaks volumes how bizarre the current PDX policy regarding this subject matter is."

 

[jmpveg22]

This sure didn't stop the creators of Twilight Struggle and Labyrinth: The War on Terror and it sure isn't stopping the creators of SuperPower 3.


gigau, I understand you are not Paradox, but since you are in contact with them, please forward the following to them:
"Not making a Cold War GSG due to "controversy" IS a lame excuse, as evidenced by the upcoming Espiocracy. The very fact this game is being made speaks volumes how bizarre the current PDX policy regarding this subject matter is."

Mic drop...but seriously:


If paradox were to say "we dont do it bc we cannot create an impartial product of quality"... i would have way more respect for that excuse.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

Mic drop...but seriously:


If paradox were to say "we dont do it bc we cannot create an impartial product of quality"... i would have way more respect for that excuse.

I think, the main reason for dropping East vs West some years ago wasn't due to controverals topics but due to "we couldn't make it fun".

 

[captainroot]

A fair point considering part of that dev team ended up releasing a pretty unpopular game in the end.

Save 50% on Terminal Conflict on Steam

Touch the world with your fingertips! Your retro terminal awaits your command, for the balance of power, in this definitive Cold War strategy game. Here you belong; assert your leadership through turn based strategic tit-for-tat, on the brink of mutually assured destruction. Don't let it slip away!

store.steampowered.com

One team's failure doesn't automatically mean that the subject matter is "cursed."

 

[jmpveg22]

A fair point considering part of that dev team ended up releasing a pretty unpopular game in the end.

Save 50% on Terminal Conflict on Steam

Touch the world with your fingertips! Your retro terminal awaits your command, for the balance of power, in this definitive Cold War strategy game. Here you belong; assert your leadership through turn based strategic tit-for-tat, on the brink of mutually assured destruction. Don't let it slip away!

store.steampowered.com

Mostly positive reviews from what I can see...

 

[InvisibleBison]

This sure didn't stop the creators of Twilight Struggle and Labyrinth: The War on Terror and it sure isn't stopping the creators of SuperPower 3.


gigau, I understand you are not Paradox, but since you are in contact with them, please forward the following to them:
"Not making a Cold War GSG due to "controversy" IS a lame excuse, as evidenced by the upcoming Espiocracy. The very fact this game is being made speaks volumes how bizarre the current PDX policy regarding this subject matter is."

I don't understand your point here. Why does the fact that other people are making games set during the Cold War or today invalidate Paradox's disinclination to deal with the controversies that would be inevitably involved in making a Paradox game set in those times? They've never been saying it would be impossible for them to do so, only that they don't want to.

 

[jmpveg22]

I don't understand your point here. Why does the fact that other people are making games set during the Cold War or today invalidate Paradox's disinclination to deal with the controversies that would be inevitably involved in making a Paradox game set in those times? They've never been saying it would be impossible for them to do so, only that they don't want to.

They are not questioning the validity of paradox's desires... but he is saying that it is a lame reason to have that desire.

It's a fair assessment especially in light of others being able to step up to the challenge with a mere fraction of paradoxes resources.


Like the rich dude saying "I dont wanna do ________ because it's hard"... only to later see a bunch of impoverished ppl with much less experience and resources do ________.
It kinda just makes the rich dude look lame or any other appropriate adjective.

Especially if there is percieved need and public desire for whatever the _____ is.

I think their point was easy to track...

 

[captainroot]

They are not questioning the validity of paradox's desires... but he is saying that it is a lame reason to have that desire.

It's a fair assessment especially in light of others being able to step up to the challenge with a mere fraction of paradoxes resources.


Like the rich dude saying "I dont wanna do ________ because it's hard"... only to later see a bunch of impoverished ppl with much less experience and resources do ________.
It kinda just makes the rich dude look lame or any other appropriate adjective.

Especially if there is percieved need and public desire for whatever the _____ is.

I think their point was easy to track...

Exactly.

 

[Juanvito]

As long as they keep the Vicky 3 devs away from it.

 

[Premu]

The biggest problem for such a game is that it needed deviate significantly from one of the main focuses of most of PDXs GTS titles - warfare. In CK, EU, Victoria and HOI expadning via warfare is an essential part of game play. In most titles you have also some influence on the at least operational side of the war. That will change in Victoria 3, though.

In a cold war game that element must be completely overhauled. There were almost no wars of conquest, and these fews were mostly between smaller nations for rather limited goals. There was no direct wars between large nations due to MAD.

Instead the whole gameplay would need to rely plainly on the economic development and diplomatic means to increase influence. Politcíal constraints should also be a very important aspect as interest groups couldn't be ignored neither in the west nor in the east. War would be something rare and heavily restricted. The USA should not be able to deploy the whole US army in Vietnam to roflstomp the Vietcong, after all.

Espionage should be very important as well - that's actually the most "warlike" engagement between the great powers at that time.

So overall to make a game fitting to this time period it should be close to Victoria 3, but with even less emphasis on war. Instead a very well balanced spy system would have to be introduced. Especially espionage is difficult in that regard as in many games spies are either totally overpowered in the hand of the player or just some fluff without any major impact.

Also, another big difference to other titles would be that a cylindric world doesn't work anymore for the cold war period. It needs to be an actual globe as missiles don't mind flying above the north pole.

I can't say it's impossible to make a fun game out of that, but it is far more challenging than for the other time periods covered by PDX.

 

[jmpveg22]

Espionage should be very important as well - that's actually the most "warlike" engagement between the great powers at that time.

I would say proxy wars far out "warlike" espionage by a lot!!!

 

[monsterfurby]

It's certainly uncharted territory. Strategy games that create interesting gameplay around not overtly martial political processes and maneuvers are few and far between. 4X and GSG especially have been struggling to make a decent diplomacy system for ages.
The key issue isn't that it's not fun, though - it's just that any kind of single-player experience relies on AI, and simulation-style games like GSGs are notoriously complex. A cold war focused game, then, would require some really complex AI work since the AI needs to do more than just invest resources and move troops around. It would have to be able to recognize the long-term impact of decisions.
Now, Paradox AI - for all its flaws - is uniquely suited for its purpose in GSGs, but I don't think it would be enough for a convincing cold war experience at the level of detail we're used to just yet.

That said, learnings in AI development alone are why I would love Paradox to try their hand (and by that I mean PDS themselves developing it) at a cold war / modern political GSG. Like Stellaris was a huge testbed for a lot of mechanics, I feel like even if the first iteration of a modern GSG might flounder, it would still give rise to a multitude of interesting mechanics that could be implemented in future games. It would probably be an experiment similar to Crusader Kings, where the first game was left half-finished and only kinda functional but the sequels, building on its mechanics, knocked it out of the park.

 

[captainroot]

It's certainly uncharted territory. Strategy games that create interesting gameplay around not overtly martial political processes and maneuvers are few and far between. 4X and GSG especially have been struggling to make a decent diplomacy system for ages.
The key issue isn't that it's not fun, though - it's just that any kind of single-player experience relies on AI, and simulation-style games like GSGs are notoriously complex. A cold war focused game, then, would require some really complex AI work since the AI needs to do more than just invest resources and move troops around. It would have to be able to recognize the long-term impact of decisions.
Now, Paradox AI - for all its flaws - is uniquely suited for its purpose in GSGs, but I don't think it would be enough for a convincing cold war experience at the level of detail we're used to just yet.

That said, learnings in AI development alone are why I would love Paradox to try their hand (and by that I mean PDS themselves developing it) at a cold war / modern political GSG. Like Stellaris was a huge testbed for a lot of mechanics, I feel like even if the first iteration of a modern GSG might flounder, it would still give rise to a multitude of interesting mechanics that could be implemented in future games. It would probably be an experiment similar to Crusader Kings, where the first game was left half-finished and only kinda functional but the sequels, building on its mechanics, knocked it out of the park.

True, but in order to get to play "future games" someday we need the first iteration (no matter how imperfect it may be), hence forum threads requesting it, such as this one.

 

[ero_sk]

It's astonishing how easily people can misinterpret and create arguments out of thin air.

1. No, "they" did not try and fail with East vs West because the people behind the game weren't PDS developers but a group of modders, working under Paradox umbrella.
2. No, the game wasn't cancelled because the game would not be fun, but because it wasn't up to PDS standards technologically and performance wise.
3. No, it wouldn't be too controversial precisely because Paradox supported the development of cold war era GSG.

I'm definitely waiting for a cold war era GSG from Paradox, as frankly speaking I've started getting tired with the existing PDS games. I've just played it all- ancient times (Rome), medieval (CK), 2WW (HoI), the future (Stellaris) and ofc EU. I'd like something new settled in cold war era, and by coincidence I find that historical period very interesting (as well as post cold war history).