I have a dream
forgive me for breaking my lurking silence on these forums but...
I do come across this a lot in the course of my perusing these forums, what I wonder is why people believe this - CK is a game based on the same engine as EU/EU II, but it is doing something completely different - it is only one stage away from making the EU engine do completely different things in the same game, I will admit that this is a bit of a threshold which needs to be passed in gaming, however why can't it be done.
I did post a while ago, before EU was released, a suggestion that it is possible to have a game on the level of EU that could cope with 1066 to Stalin, it would merely require a system (far more advanced than the EU dp sliders) which actually changes the what you have control over, and what you don't - obviously this is a very complex problem, a system that takes you from feudal control of vassals, dynasties, and royal inheritances to 'Total War' and bi-polar cold-war strategy is an almost insurmountable task but could be split down through a system of plug-ins to the game engine.
The idea being to abstract the engine as much as possible and then build seperate modules that deal with different types of existance for a state, and cause the interaction between player and engine to be totally different dependant on the type of state they are running, but through the same abstracted engine that makes it possible for states running in different eras to interact. I am not saying this would be easy, easy to create, or easy to play, but 100% possible. I don't even think modern PC's could run it so well on the scale I have in my head, and the historical basis of the game could never be so precise to be an exact simulation, but it would be far better than what we have now...maybe in 10-15 years that is the kind of game we will be licking our lips waiting for, but it is still a dream - a possible one, but not a profitable one, not in the EU context anyway...
(sorry, not to coherent - but I think you'll get the idea...)
forgive me for breaking my lurking silence on these forums but...
I do come across this a lot in the course of my perusing these forums, what I wonder is why people believe this - CK is a game based on the same engine as EU/EU II, but it is doing something completely different - it is only one stage away from making the EU engine do completely different things in the same game, I will admit that this is a bit of a threshold which needs to be passed in gaming, however why can't it be done.
I did post a while ago, before EU was released, a suggestion that it is possible to have a game on the level of EU that could cope with 1066 to Stalin, it would merely require a system (far more advanced than the EU dp sliders) which actually changes the what you have control over, and what you don't - obviously this is a very complex problem, a system that takes you from feudal control of vassals, dynasties, and royal inheritances to 'Total War' and bi-polar cold-war strategy is an almost insurmountable task but could be split down through a system of plug-ins to the game engine.
The idea being to abstract the engine as much as possible and then build seperate modules that deal with different types of existance for a state, and cause the interaction between player and engine to be totally different dependant on the type of state they are running, but through the same abstracted engine that makes it possible for states running in different eras to interact. I am not saying this would be easy, easy to create, or easy to play, but 100% possible. I don't even think modern PC's could run it so well on the scale I have in my head, and the historical basis of the game could never be so precise to be an exact simulation, but it would be far better than what we have now...maybe in 10-15 years that is the kind of game we will be licking our lips waiting for, but it is still a dream - a possible one, but not a profitable one, not in the EU context anyway...
(sorry, not to coherent - but I think you'll get the idea...)
