Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

How's Paradox relationship with Creative Assembly(Total war) and Firaxis(Civ V)?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Show only dev responses
WeissRaben said:
Actually, I find that BNW brought much of what was lost to CiV. But yeah, up to G&K it couldn't hold a candle to CIV+BtS. Now it's evenly matched.
Click to expand...

My main gripe with Civ5 is it's state on release (here Paradox and Firaxis are evenly matched :p ), then the failure to make Multi-Player work. They never fixed MP, it's still broken. And they never will. You can't even use mods to make it work because... Well reasons! Letting one of the biggest strategy franchises suffer like that is in my opinion unforgivable.

Also the AI is atrocious. They never taught it how to handle one unit per tile. And using a one unit per tile without implementing things like covering fire and suppression is just bad game design and/or lazy. Argh, I need to stop now. This is making me more angry than it should :p

That said: I still love Civ4 (with DLC).
 
Alech said:
My main gripe with Civ5 is it's state on release (here Paradox and Firaxis are evenly matched :p ), then the failure to make Multi-Player work. They never fixed MP, it's still broken. And they never will. You can't even use mods to make it work because... Well reasons! Letting one of the biggest strategy franchises suffer like that is in my opinion unforgivable.

Also the AI is atrocious. They never taught it how to handle one unit per tile. And using a one unit per tile without implementing things like covering fire and suppression is just bad game design and/or lazy. Argh, I need to stop now. This is making me more angry than it should :p

That said: I still love Civ4 (with DLC).
Click to expand...

Let's be fair, lots of games are terrible on release these days. :p
 
soda7777777 said:
Let's be fair, lots of games are terrible on release these days. :p
Click to expand...

Yes, but some actually get fixed. And even though I may not agree with all the design decisions Paradox make when patching their games, at least they appear to give a damn. Customer support from Firaxis (and to a lesser degree CA) is laughable.
 
Alech said:
Yes, but some actually get fixed. And even though I may not agree with all the design decisions Paradox make when patching their games, at least they appear to give a damn. Customer support from Firaxis (and to a lesser degree CA) is laughable.
Click to expand...

I still can't forgive Creative Assembly to how they dealt with Empire: Total War. I also dislike the franchise name order change.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
They all sort of fill different niches. Civilization is more "casual" (I don't mean that negatively), Total War tries to be more of a battle game, and Paradox is more of a nation/dynasty level game.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
TheArkayn said:
They all sort of fill different niches. Civilization is more "casual" (I don't mean that negatively), Total War tries to be more of a battle game, and Paradox is more of a nation/dynasty level game.
Click to expand...

The perception that Civilization is more "casual" is completely wrong. There is a way larger and more active competitive community in Civilization than any Paradox game. And that's true in both single player and multiplayer.
 
grisamentum said:
The perception that Civilization is more "casual" is completely wrong. There is a way larger and more active competitive community in Civilization than any Paradox game. And that's true in both single player and multiplayer.
Click to expand...

He means "casual" in that it's easier to get into. Which is very much the case.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Alech said:
Considering the downward spiral the games from CA/Firaxis are in, I hope Paradox stays well clear of what I consider to be the companies responsible for ruining two of my favorite franchises (TW and Civ).

While CA/Firaxis are in no way as bad as UbiSoft and EA, they have caused irreparable damage to some of the games that drew me to PC gaming in the first place (esp Civ). And worse, they seem to be getting away with it.
Click to expand...

Frankly it's quite the opposite for me, Civ 5 and TW Rome 2 were horrible at launch but have been vastly improved and polished. I wish I could say the same thing about CK2 and EU 4.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
I personally find Total War games boring due to the battles. I find them really boring. As for Civ they are good with the exception of Civ 5 because it's terrible.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Alech said:
My main gripe with Civ5 is it's state on release (here Paradox and Firaxis are evenly matched :p ), then the failure to make Multi-Player work. They never fixed MP, it's still broken. And they never will. You can't even use mods to make it work because... Well reasons! Letting one of the biggest strategy franchises suffer like that is in my opinion unforgivable.

Also the AI is atrocious. They never taught it how to handle one unit per tile. And using a one unit per tile without implementing things like covering fire and suppression is just bad game design and/or lazy. Argh, I need to stop now. This is making me more angry than it should :p

That said: I still love Civ4 (with DLC).
Click to expand...

+1. This was even after CIV.IV had arguably the best MP of any strategy game ever - the pitboss system was awesome.

Then Civ.V... ugh. So many steps backward in so many ways, but to fail to architect the game properly so that it can never have viable MP or headless pitboss is a crime.
 
My main problem with Civ V is that it feels like a game about filling buckets and as a reward you get bigger buckets to fill. Repeat. It starts to almost become work after a little while. It's not very fun. The expansions helped a little but this structural issue is still there.
 
I play Civ 5 when I want a simple no-to-much-thinking game of empire building in a well balanced environment.

I play EU4/CK2 when I want to rp during renaissance or when I want to have hilarious narratives during the middle ages.

And I play Shogun 2 when I want to be really immersed as a feudal japan daimyo, for me the great thing with CA's games was that they managed to get the immersion right to a point where the bad ai and lack of depth (Shogun 2 was clearly a gem compared to napoleon and empire, never played rome 2). Paradoxes game have always this feeling of playing history which makes the play interesting, but I need to rp to really get the most out of it (and that's what i expect of the game). Civ games (I've played from the first) have always got me tearing my hairs out when I tried to think about history so much that I just stopped thinking about it, also the decisions when you know the game are pretty straightforward.

Overall I've played 500 hours of EU4 since it's release, and maybe a few more hours of Civ 5 even though it came out 2 years earlier, Shogun 2 in comparison never passed the 400 hours mark.
 
the cool guy said:
My main problem with Civ V is that it feels like a game about filling buckets and as a reward you get bigger buckets to fill. Repeat. It starts to almost become work after a little while. It's not very fun. The expansions helped a little but this structural issue is still there.
Click to expand...

Weirdly enough, I think I have the opposite feeling. It's boring to me to be stuck with having just 4-5 cities to manage. I was a huge city spammer in Civ 1-3 and I really liked managing them all.
 
I've tried out the TW series with Rome 2, but I have to admit I find the none-military aspects a little tedious... esp Food and Public Order that constantly seem to crash to negatives once you've reached a certain size and forget which buildings are in the queue across your empire.
 
heliostellar said:
I've tried out the TW series with Rome 2, but I have to admit I find the none-military aspects a little tedious... esp Food and Public Order that constantly seem to crash to negatives once you've reached a certain size and forget which buildings are in the queue across your empire.
Click to expand...

Personally I'm a fan of both CA and Paradox, which actually leads to problems sometimes. I'll be playing a Paradox game and start thinking that I want to play battles, and then load up a Total War game and get really frustrated because the non-battle spects are so superficial compared to Paradox games (and the battle AI isn't too great either).

That said, if I had to choose one or the other I'd definitely choose Paradox, and these days Mount and Blade covers the desire to command actual
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Raph said:
Weirdly enough, I think I have the opposite feeling. It's boring to me to be stuck with having just 4-5 cities to manage. I was a huge city spammer in Civ 1-3 and I really liked managing them all.
Click to expand...

How is that opposite? I was talking about how the game felt repetitive and the game rewarded you with more repetitiveness for doing repetitive things and the older Civ games did not do this and were much more fun.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
EU3NOOB said:
PDS could be the vassal of EA.
Click to expand...

We do not mention of that place. Though once upon a time, Creative Assembly used to be a vassal of them too until they switched to Activision.
 
CA: Rivals set at Firaxis, PDS and Activision.
Fabricating claim on EU: Rome.
Firaxis: Rivals set at PDS, CA and EA.
Fabricating claim on Alpha Centauri.
PDS: Rivals set at Firaxis, CA and (idonthaveanyideaspleasesuggest)
Fabricating claim on (idonthaveanyideaforthiseither)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back