So we got CK2 and now we almost got EU4, is the plan that gonna get Victoria 3 or is the next Hearts of Irons game?
-
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.
Frankly I'd rather Paradox didn't just turn out endless sequels from the same 3-4 franchises, but business is business.
I prefer a company with 4-5 franchises who constantly improve them instead of a studio with 14 franchises who never stop to pop new mediocre products.
I really want to see a new EU:Rome. Antiquity really need some love from Para
I really want to see a new EU:Rome. Antiquity really need some love from Para
A Rome game which is more like Crusader Kings than Europa Universalis. Character driven first and foremost.
It has prob already been decided what game is next, but i hope it is rome2. Al the other major title candidates would, to me, feel too early.
Trust me, I talked to Johan and convinced him to do a game based on the board game "Freedom in the Galaxy".
Victoria 3 would be nice.
Missed out on EU: Rome but i'll most likely enjoy a sequel anyway.. I did with CK2
Missed out on EU: Rome but i'll most likely enjoy a sequel anyway.. I did with CK2
I'd like to nominate EU or prehaps a CK (may be more fitting than EU) Rome II aswell.
There is as of now ,enough dlcmaterial for ck2 that is coming out in the next two years. So ck3 is still a loooong way off, but we cant complain about that.
My problem with this is that a Rome 2 might be made better by opting for CK-style gameplay over that of the EU series.
So calling it EU:Rome 2 would be inaccurate if they did that.
Perhaps they could come up with a new name for a Rome-based game?
I don't mind the EU gameplay, but IMO it isn't as fun as that in CK2 and is an unfortunate necessity of the late Middle Ages onwards.
I would rather see a V3 game which starts where EU4 ends. That way they could make a converter for that and you could play from 867 all the way to 1936. Rome is defiantly the oldest, however the CK2-V2 era appear to be the most popular. Given, this might be due to the fact that Eu: Rome and HOI are older, but they are also more rigid in terms of game play. With Rome you're limiting yourself to a small part of the world where only 2 or 3 major powers will be playable. Hearts of iron is just such a small time frame that you really can't develop your nation unless you're a major power.
In short Ck2, EU, and V2 are really the only games where you can start out as a small country and grow into an Empire. If Paradox wants to make money off a cold war or roman era game they would be better off making one focused more on the politics of the era and playing as a politician who has to deal with internal strife.
In short Ck2, EU, and V2 are really the only games where you can start out as a small country and grow into an Empire. If Paradox wants to make money off a cold war or roman era game they would be better off making one focused more on the politics of the era and playing as a politician who has to deal with internal strife.
I wasn't suggesting a CKIII, I was suggesting that prehaps instead of calling it EU Rome II they call it CK Rome II. It's not a serious suggestion, just that I think the mechanics of ckII would fit better with a Rome II than EU mechanics would. It would sound pretty stupid to call it Crusader Kings Rome II but at the same time the mechanics for CKII would suit a Rome II better than EU mechanics in my opinion.There is as of now ,enough dlcmaterial for ck2 that is coming out in the next two years. So ck3 is still a loooong way off, but we cant complain about that.