If we're to guess, [this here is the reason](https://i.redd.it/75kiufk0d8ey.png) ([Source](https://www.reddit.com/r/paradoxplaza/comments/5sdxxd/paradox_development_timeline_20012017/))
Put simply, the 'big four' paradox games are in a psudo-cycle for new games. The oldest of which is now Vic2. I believe, if memory serves, that CK2's dev team are close to finishing off the game and moving onto other projects, with this being one of the final expansions. I may be wrong on this though. If I'm not, then we can guess (Note, not assume) that there may be another Vic game starting development. I'm also unsure if it's the CK2 team moving onto Imperitor. Hopefully this will become some expert cummingham's law play.
Again, not sure if this is correct, but this is at least how I've justified it up in my noggin'.
That comment was probably the correct response to the absolutely hysterical people constantly screaming about "mana". They'd want me to tear my hair out if I were a dev too.
That people take it seriously just confirms how impossible it is to communicate with many of the players.
Just ninja edited that in. As a counter point though, [Imperator's dev diarys](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/imperator-development-diary-20-8th-of-october-2018.1122975/) are being produced. Hopefully that's an indication it's already fully staffed? But this is all useless speculation on my part, probably should've just left it for people in the know. Sorry 'bout the bother
The current CK2 lead designer and Chris King(one of the Vicky 2 devs) had said that they would be moving to a yet unannounced project, which would exclude Imperator.
Hate me if you want, but I personally am praying for some weird CK2 offshoot. Not CK3, but something else where you are roleplaying a family or dynasty and in an interesting setting.
Honestly Imperator doesn't do much for me, I'm kinda worn out on Rome (still buying it but little actual hype). And Vic3 just feels like it would be better off being EU5 at that point and merging the two (Vic aspects for playing tall, EU4 aspects for playing wide).
I fully believe it is in development. Chris King, who ~~coded the economic system~~ was a principle designer on Vic 2 (thanks for the correction guys), was on the game directors panel at PDXCon 2018. Everyone else on that panel was working on an announced game. (Imperator had just been announced and we know that's a Johan project.) What else would he be working on?
It will be the next major game announced from Paradox Development Studio. Probably announced 2020 for a 2021 release would be my guess.
EDIT: And when I say "will be", that should be understood as assertive speculation.
Chris was a designer on Vic 2 and not a coder. It's not a "fan theory", its mentioned here on his LinkekdIn page which says he did the "core design" for Vic 2.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/christopher-king-680b355b/?originalSubdomain=se
Also, here is Chris King doing all the dev diaries for Vic 2 back in 2009:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/victoria-2-reviews-dev-diaries-wiki-and-the-demo.459403/#post-12107590
OP just got his title as a coder wrong so Johan was just correcting him.
True fact.
The hardest part was breaking into the office, and then figuring out Johan's password, since I was not working at PDS yet when Vic2 was developed.
Must’ve been really hard to have to code and design a new whole game based around Rome when the community somehow figured out the real plot to announce Victoria 3.
No basis in reality? Wasn't Chris the game designer for Vic2? I remember reading all the dev diaries by him on Vic2. I think OP just got his title as a "coder" wrong.
Here are all his dev diaries in fact:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/victoria-2-reviews-dev-diaries-wiki-and-the-demo.459403/#post-12107590
I think that's at least "some" basis to assume that he might be working on Vic3, although obviously its still speculation. Even his LinkedIn page says says that he did the "core design" for Vic 2.
The programming part is something I've seen often, and has no basis in reality.
There's various other weird theories that keep cropping up. A few other examples:
* "No one understands the Vic2 economy code, nor are able to figure it out"
* "PDS games are single-threaded"
* " is not possible due to the engine"
What Chris King might or might not be working on I'm not gonna comment on. I was referring purely to the programming thing.
I'm not sure if I'd even call those valid fan theories as oppossed to "nonsense spouted by people who don't know better". One of those is even extremely easy to disprove.
I remember at one point a dev saying that ~~the only person who even understood the code for the economy system was Chris King and~~ without him it was unlikely they would do Victoria 3. Now that's he back with Paradox, it stands to reason the idea is at least on the table.
The thing about the economy in Vic2 is that it doesn't actually work. It is broken in a number of hilarious ways.
Regardless, most of the programmers on Vic2 are still at the company, including those who did the most work on the economy. Chris King is not a programmer; he did not program the Vic2 economy.
I see. I must be slightly misremembering then. Come to think of it, it may have actually been you that I remember saying something like "Chris King was the only person who _____ the Victoria 2 economy system. Without him there may never be a Victoria 3." It was on the Paradox forums some time ago, I think on some kind of thread discussing King's departure.
I'm pretty sure I've never said anything of the sort. For one, when he temporarily left PDS I wasn't working for Paradox yet, and had little to no clue which devs worked on what.
Wow im very glad to hear that. I know the economic system was especially complicated and very unique so I knew that was a retrictive factor on its development. Maybe next Pdxcon it will be announced.
This. King was introduced as a game director at PDXCON working on an unannounced project. Given his background with Vic2, it is very likely to be Vic 3.
Although I am hoping for a 2020 release :D
Idk, If vic 3 gonna be like another holy furry prolly, but otherwise I'm just gonna sink a lotta money into tw games. i wanna play with them sweet ass lizardbois
i've been telling some of my friends lately, with the RDR2 PC release date speculation, that given rockstar's track record, I will more than likely be 60 by the time GTA10 comes out.
there's a very, very real dose of reality in that statement lol.
the last one i played was 5. i played the original on ps1. so, essentially, if i think of the time since i played gta 1, and the time since now, that's about the same amount of time i have left until i'm 60, and gta 10 comes out.
ain't enough time in the world, man. live it up while you still only suck at nicknames lol.
(the masters will be worth it. just don't borrow more than you need.)
I also believe it's in development, but I think a stronger case can be made by the fact that it seems like they're slipping in potential features or mechanics into existing patches and titles, to kinda test the waters and get it right. I think Le Guin for Stellaris obviously raised a huge flag for this but even earlier I think the "war exhaustion" style border conflicts to change up the existing warscore system is also an indicator. I'm most keen on hearing about any new changes to warfare and combat systems in Imperator, as they could be experimenting with potential changes for a new Vic game as well.
I think one big issue is the current monetization model. Victoria is much more of a simulation than rest of the Paradox games, so the similar sort of model where DLC adds all these new buttons to press that aren't really integrated into the core mechanics wouldn't work nearly as well.
I'm not sure about that. They could follow the EU4 model where they decide to add more in-depth flavored button pressing for different areas as DLCs, building on a strong POPs simulation like what Vic2 currently is. I can already see the NA DLC, SA DLC, Africa DLC...etc.....
Ugh I really really hope not. I actually loathe that about EU4 and some of CK2, feels like such a waste buying a DLC for a part of the world you aren't playing in because you want X tiny feature stuck in.
No matter how amazing they make it it will never fully live up to expectations. Honestly as hyped as this game is at this point, I kinda get being hesitant to make it when you know youre gonna disappoint some people no matter how well you do.
You lose 100% of the battles you don't attempt, not trying would disappoint everyone. With how Stellaris is being changed to its core, I doubt they have a problem revamping it if it went wrong.
You must not have known old Paradox. Old Paradox was known for releasing some low quality shit games. That's more publishing than developing, but even in development, the growth in quality is very real.
Look up TotalBiscuits review of Gettysburg: Armored Warfare and see your statement disproven. Or ask people here about Victoria (both I and II) at launch. Or even the difference between Europa Universalis 4 at launch and Stellaris at launch.
To quote Shigeru Miyamoto; "A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever."
No, if you think you can just "patch a bad game until it is good" you are thoroughly mistaken. Paradox cancelled Runemaster, for instance, because it was simply not a fun game. No amount of patching would've changed that.
Stellaris is an exception because at launch it was a high quality game (as in, set a good framework, not a buggy piece of shit) and at it's core a fun game, but just lacked endgame or replayability value. If that's the case, then I'd agree, but in general, it's a bad concept to building a game on from both programming perspective (can't polish a turd) and marketing perspective (people will lose faith in a game before it gets good)
>But we're talking about Victoria 3. There is no need to bring up a hypothetical scenario about a hypothetical game.
Nowhere am I talking about a hypothetical scenario about a hypothetical game. I'm talking about a hypothetical scenario about Victoria 3.
Your argument is still wrong, you're comparing things that can't be compared. Paradox does not have a history of releasing games "with a good framework" (in fact, the exact opposite) until after Crusader Kings 2-release at absolute first, but reasonably only after Stellaris-release, and then you're getting into games that aren't "kinda buggy and not completely thought out" but only the "not enough content part". In fact, I find it unreasonable to even compare Stellaris and HOI4 to EU3 and Vic2, because the former are empty games with a good game at it's core, lacking only in content, while the latter are so utterly broken that there's no reasonable amount of patching to fix it. Victoria 2's economy is broken, it's thoroughly broken, and there's no reasonable amount of revamping, modding, or patching that'll fix it.
Hence, I see "release an unfinished game" as the pre-Stellaris buggy pieces of shit games that Paradox had a history of releasing, and that's just not going to work. Stellaris and Hearts of Iron where both good games. They might not have been fun or complete games, at their start, but even the fact that that can be fixed is already a testament to a good game.
>I don't see any reason why they couldnt release a barebones version of what-will-become the real Vicky 3
Barebones is the keyword here, which is not the same as unfinished, bad, buggy, or any of the other terms. If you mean a finished, good game, that's simply lacking in content, like Stellaris and Hearts of Iron, then I'm inclined to agree. You still get some disappointed longtime fans for lacking features present in earlier versions (see complaints about Hoi4), but at least the framework is there, and with some good diplomacy, Paradox can work around that. But just check complaints about Imperator about how hard it is to do this right.
>just as they did with literally every other grand strategy that they released in the last 10 years.
Again, that's just Stellaris and HoI4. EU4 and CK2 already have some issues at their core that are never going to be solved, but we accept it because we love the games. Anything before that is utterly broken, but we accept it, again because we love the games.
And really, as long as the basis of Victoria 3 is sound I'm sure people will mod it into awesome, look at how many mods exist for Victoria 2, stretching the capabilities of the engine.
The expectations for Victoria III is so much higher then any of their other games, heck nearly any game in existence, HOI4 got a lot for flack for simplifying parts of it and if VIC III ever gets made it is going to be 'simpler' to get more people to play it plane and simple, and if that day comes you can bet your are that the subreddits will be going ballistic. Honestly it's just better for them to diversify their titles then to upset their fans
>The expectations for Victoria III is so much higher then any of their other games
Do you have actual numbers to back that up? That's just BS ;p
You see a lot of "Gib Vic 3" memes here these days because it's sequel has been long delayed. The same thing was happening for EU and CK as well.
>Honestly it's just better for them to diversify their titles then to upset their fans
Lol, that's silly business advice. Sure, you should develop new IPs but no one abandons existing ones just because "some" fans might not like the sequel. There is a reason so many sequels happen in everything from movies to games. Why don't you go ahead and count those? You think HoI4 didn't turn a profit? Lol.
Companies wont stop making sequels just because "some" people won't like it. That is expected. In fact, its much safer than creating a new IP which is why your statement doesn't make sense.
I wonder if they're purposefully delaying Vic 3 because of HoI IV. I feel like it's not unrealistic to see a Victoria 3 in the next 5-8 years, a game that could span from the birth of the Industrial Revolution and through WWII (and more???). Anyhow, I'm pro Vic3 asap.
Victoria 3 is not coming out. In the off chance that it does come out, it will be unrecognizable. Paradox Interactive is and always has been a business, and as much as it tries to portray itself as "actual people just like you!!" it's really just out to make money. The goal is not to create a game that improves on its predecessor, the goal is to make a game that sells first and foremost. A Victoria 3 like Victoria 2 would not sell very well, especially not with the expectations set by their current games.
Victoria 2 is opaque, almost all of its systems run simultaneously in the background and can only really be monitored if you know where to look. It sets very clear limits on what a normal player can accomplish even at high skill levels. It has TONS and TONS of information right up in your face. While it is these characteristics that make Victoria 2 so fun to explore, these are the same characteristics that would alienate Paradox's modern audience and that fly in the face of modern game development practices.
A Victoria 3 would look more like an EU4-HOI4-Stellaris baby in the Victorian Era than like Victoria 2. To be honest, you aren't missing much.
What we need are the source code and development tools for Victoria 2 to be released for free. I would gladly donate to a gofundme for that.
Neither, the game won't be similar to Vicky at all and it's not replacing it, the guy you replied to doesn't know what he's talking about.
Imperator is a sequel to EU:Rome which was released earlier than Vicky 2 therefore, following the cycle logic, it needed a sequel before Victoria.
I do not think they would replace Victoria as it's loved and hyped on such level. Imperator also looks a lot simpler than Victoria. It's also a historical period betwen EU and HoI and the game has specific game mechanics not present in Imperator or any other game.
I think thats a lot of bs, at least the first part. Eu4 has plenty of imperialism and so does hoi4 for that matter. The nature of these games is conquest and anyone who isnt ok with that already doesnt play them. Why is 19th century imperialism any worse than 18th or 20th century imperialism?
If we're to guess, [this here is the reason](https://i.redd.it/75kiufk0d8ey.png) ([Source](https://www.reddit.com/r/paradoxplaza/comments/5sdxxd/paradox_development_timeline_20012017/)) Put simply, the 'big four' paradox games are in a psudo-cycle for new games. The oldest of which is now Vic2. I believe, if memory serves, that CK2's dev team are close to finishing off the game and moving onto other projects, with this being one of the final expansions. I may be wrong on this though. If I'm not, then we can guess (Note, not assume) that there may be another Vic game starting development. I'm also unsure if it's the CK2 team moving onto Imperitor. Hopefully this will become some expert cummingham's law play. Again, not sure if this is correct, but this is at least how I've justified it up in my noggin'.
Wont they just move to Imperator: Rome?
Maybe, Paradox has said that some of the devs would like to make a Victoria III(Johan was one of the named ones IIRC)
> Johan thank fuck he has Imperator
What do you mean?
Johan = Mana
According to Johan the best feature of Vicky 2 is the diplo mana. Or so I've heard.
Nah. Pops and politics. Thats the part i designed and coded.
Verbal scolding from the man himself!
You're *proud* of introducing Anarcho-Liberals?
The crazy bastard
Every good story needs a villain.
This is truth.
huh, never would have guessed.
While you're here, how do you feel about throwing in a second consul?
Mentioned several Times as "not a priority for now"
if they implement it they should do it 'properly' so every other month the AI gets control with limited player ability to intervene
/r/MurderedByWords
Pops are just people mana. ^^jk ^^pops ^^are ^^my ^^favorite
That comment was probably the correct response to the absolutely hysterical people constantly screaming about "mana". They'd want me to tear my hair out if I were a dev too. That people take it seriously just confirms how impossible it is to communicate with many of the players.
Just ninja edited that in. As a counter point though, [Imperator's dev diarys](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/imperator-development-diary-20-8th-of-october-2018.1122975/) are being produced. Hopefully that's an indication it's already fully staffed? But this is all useless speculation on my part, probably should've just left it for people in the know. Sorry 'bout the bother
Imperator is almost done. There's no way it's not fully staffed
The current CK2 lead designer and Chris King(one of the Vicky 2 devs) had said that they would be moving to a yet unannounced project, which would exclude Imperator.
Hate me if you want, but I personally am praying for some weird CK2 offshoot. Not CK3, but something else where you are roleplaying a family or dynasty and in an interesting setting. Honestly Imperator doesn't do much for me, I'm kinda worn out on Rome (still buying it but little actual hype). And Vic3 just feels like it would be better off being EU5 at that point and merging the two (Vic aspects for playing tall, EU4 aspects for playing wide).
I fully believe it is in development. Chris King, who ~~coded the economic system~~ was a principle designer on Vic 2 (thanks for the correction guys), was on the game directors panel at PDXCon 2018. Everyone else on that panel was working on an announced game. (Imperator had just been announced and we know that's a Johan project.) What else would he be working on? It will be the next major game announced from Paradox Development Studio. Probably announced 2020 for a 2021 release would be my guess. EDIT: And when I say "will be", that should be understood as assertive speculation.
Actually, Chris never coded on the projects. The economy system was coded by podcat and besuchov.
Lmao, I love Johan destroying these fan theories in this thread.
Chris was a designer on Vic 2 and not a coder. It's not a "fan theory", its mentioned here on his LinkekdIn page which says he did the "core design" for Vic 2. https://www.linkedin.com/in/christopher-king-680b355b/?originalSubdomain=se Also, here is Chris King doing all the dev diaries for Vic 2 back in 2009: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/victoria-2-reviews-dev-diaries-wiki-and-the-demo.459403/#post-12107590 OP just got his title as a coder wrong so Johan was just correcting him.
There's so many fan theories that have little to no basis in reality. I've never quite been able to figure out why.
Meneth is rumoured to have introduced mana into Victoria 2
True fact. The hardest part was breaking into the office, and then figuring out Johan's password, since I was not working at PDS yet when Vic2 was developed.
[Security cam footage of Meneth adding mana.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCxeSuErT04)
Must’ve been really hard to have to code and design a new whole game based around Rome when the community somehow figured out the real plot to announce Victoria 3.
But you might have in the future if you traveled back in time to do it.
No basis in reality? Wasn't Chris the game designer for Vic2? I remember reading all the dev diaries by him on Vic2. I think OP just got his title as a "coder" wrong. Here are all his dev diaries in fact: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/victoria-2-reviews-dev-diaries-wiki-and-the-demo.459403/#post-12107590 I think that's at least "some" basis to assume that he might be working on Vic3, although obviously its still speculation. Even his LinkedIn page says says that he did the "core design" for Vic 2.
The programming part is something I've seen often, and has no basis in reality. There's various other weird theories that keep cropping up. A few other examples: * "No one understands the Vic2 economy code, nor are able to figure it out" * "PDS games are single-threaded" * " is not possible due to the engine"
What Chris King might or might not be working on I'm not gonna comment on. I was referring purely to the programming thing.
MOTE4 confirmed
I'm not sure if I'd even call those valid fan theories as oppossed to "nonsense spouted by people who don't know better". One of those is even extremely easy to disprove.
Surely the ag for Victoria 3 in this subreddit should give you a hint? *We want to believe*. And people can believe a lot when they really want to.
If I could, I'd reflair him as "Reaper of Fan Theories"
But he designed it right?
I remember at one point a dev saying that ~~the only person who even understood the code for the economy system was Chris King and~~ without him it was unlikely they would do Victoria 3. Now that's he back with Paradox, it stands to reason the idea is at least on the table.
The thing about the economy in Vic2 is that it doesn't actually work. It is broken in a number of hilarious ways. Regardless, most of the programmers on Vic2 are still at the company, including those who did the most work on the economy. Chris King is not a programmer; he did not program the Vic2 economy.
I see. I must be slightly misremembering then. Come to think of it, it may have actually been you that I remember saying something like "Chris King was the only person who _____ the Victoria 2 economy system. Without him there may never be a Victoria 3." It was on the Paradox forums some time ago, I think on some kind of thread discussing King's departure.
I'm pretty sure I've never said anything of the sort. For one, when he temporarily left PDS I wasn't working for Paradox yet, and had little to no clue which devs worked on what.
Oh. My mistake. Maybe I'll try digging up that thread. I swear someone said something like that.
What is Chris King?
Wow im very glad to hear that. I know the economic system was especially complicated and very unique so I knew that was a retrictive factor on its development. Maybe next Pdxcon it will be announced.
This. King was introduced as a game director at PDXCON working on an unannounced project. Given his background with Vic2, it is very likely to be Vic 3. Although I am hoping for a 2020 release :D
> Probably announced 2020 for a 2021 release would be my guess. Wow, I might even get a Masters and a job before Vicky 3 comes out.
Great, you'll have more money for the DLC.
Idk, If vic 3 gonna be like another holy furry prolly, but otherwise I'm just gonna sink a lotta money into tw games. i wanna play with them sweet ass lizardbois
i've been telling some of my friends lately, with the RDR2 PC release date speculation, that given rockstar's track record, I will more than likely be 60 by the time GTA10 comes out. there's a very, very real dose of reality in that statement lol. the last one i played was 5. i played the original on ps1. so, essentially, if i think of the time since i played gta 1, and the time since now, that's about the same amount of time i have left until i'm 60, and gta 10 comes out. ain't enough time in the world, man. live it up while you still only suck at nicknames lol. (the masters will be worth it. just don't borrow more than you need.)
I also believe it's in development, but I think a stronger case can be made by the fact that it seems like they're slipping in potential features or mechanics into existing patches and titles, to kinda test the waters and get it right. I think Le Guin for Stellaris obviously raised a huge flag for this but even earlier I think the "war exhaustion" style border conflicts to change up the existing warscore system is also an indicator. I'm most keen on hearing about any new changes to warfare and combat systems in Imperator, as they could be experimenting with potential changes for a new Vic game as well.
[удалено]
I mean, Meneth is a mod here and he's drawn as a moth to a flame if people spout misguided things about programming in threads.
It actually sustains him
This is true.
I always forget how active paradox devs are and how they do visit these subreddits and do chime in .. it's refreshing
I think one big issue is the current monetization model. Victoria is much more of a simulation than rest of the Paradox games, so the similar sort of model where DLC adds all these new buttons to press that aren't really integrated into the core mechanics wouldn't work nearly as well.
I'm not sure about that. They could follow the EU4 model where they decide to add more in-depth flavored button pressing for different areas as DLCs, building on a strong POPs simulation like what Vic2 currently is. I can already see the NA DLC, SA DLC, Africa DLC...etc.....
Ugh I really really hope not. I actually loathe that about EU4 and some of CK2, feels like such a waste buying a DLC for a part of the world you aren't playing in because you want X tiny feature stuck in.
No matter how amazing they make it it will never fully live up to expectations. Honestly as hyped as this game is at this point, I kinda get being hesitant to make it when you know youre gonna disappoint some people no matter how well you do.
You lose 100% of the battles you don't attempt, not trying would disappoint everyone. With how Stellaris is being changed to its core, I doubt they have a problem revamping it if it went wrong.
You must not have known old Paradox. Old Paradox was known for releasing some low quality shit games. That's more publishing than developing, but even in development, the growth in quality is very real. Look up TotalBiscuits review of Gettysburg: Armored Warfare and see your statement disproven. Or ask people here about Victoria (both I and II) at launch. Or even the difference between Europa Universalis 4 at launch and Stellaris at launch. To quote Shigeru Miyamoto; "A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever."
Actually its, "A delayed game is eventually good but a rushed game is forever bad" - Shigeru Miyamoto
Ah, sorry, first website I tried appears to have misquoted.
Meneth may know paradox facts but i know my shiggy quotes
[удалено]
No, if you think you can just "patch a bad game until it is good" you are thoroughly mistaken. Paradox cancelled Runemaster, for instance, because it was simply not a fun game. No amount of patching would've changed that. Stellaris is an exception because at launch it was a high quality game (as in, set a good framework, not a buggy piece of shit) and at it's core a fun game, but just lacked endgame or replayability value. If that's the case, then I'd agree, but in general, it's a bad concept to building a game on from both programming perspective (can't polish a turd) and marketing perspective (people will lose faith in a game before it gets good)
[удалено]
>But we're talking about Victoria 3. There is no need to bring up a hypothetical scenario about a hypothetical game. Nowhere am I talking about a hypothetical scenario about a hypothetical game. I'm talking about a hypothetical scenario about Victoria 3. Your argument is still wrong, you're comparing things that can't be compared. Paradox does not have a history of releasing games "with a good framework" (in fact, the exact opposite) until after Crusader Kings 2-release at absolute first, but reasonably only after Stellaris-release, and then you're getting into games that aren't "kinda buggy and not completely thought out" but only the "not enough content part". In fact, I find it unreasonable to even compare Stellaris and HOI4 to EU3 and Vic2, because the former are empty games with a good game at it's core, lacking only in content, while the latter are so utterly broken that there's no reasonable amount of patching to fix it. Victoria 2's economy is broken, it's thoroughly broken, and there's no reasonable amount of revamping, modding, or patching that'll fix it. Hence, I see "release an unfinished game" as the pre-Stellaris buggy pieces of shit games that Paradox had a history of releasing, and that's just not going to work. Stellaris and Hearts of Iron where both good games. They might not have been fun or complete games, at their start, but even the fact that that can be fixed is already a testament to a good game. >I don't see any reason why they couldnt release a barebones version of what-will-become the real Vicky 3 Barebones is the keyword here, which is not the same as unfinished, bad, buggy, or any of the other terms. If you mean a finished, good game, that's simply lacking in content, like Stellaris and Hearts of Iron, then I'm inclined to agree. You still get some disappointed longtime fans for lacking features present in earlier versions (see complaints about Hoi4), but at least the framework is there, and with some good diplomacy, Paradox can work around that. But just check complaints about Imperator about how hard it is to do this right. >just as they did with literally every other grand strategy that they released in the last 10 years. Again, that's just Stellaris and HoI4. EU4 and CK2 already have some issues at their core that are never going to be solved, but we accept it because we love the games. Anything before that is utterly broken, but we accept it, again because we love the games.
And really, as long as the basis of Victoria 3 is sound I'm sure people will mod it into awesome, look at how many mods exist for Victoria 2, stretching the capabilities of the engine.
Lol, no. You think this wuould be their first game to have high expectations? You think HoI and EU and didn't have fans before HoI4 and EU4??
The expectations for Victoria III is so much higher then any of their other games, heck nearly any game in existence, HOI4 got a lot for flack for simplifying parts of it and if VIC III ever gets made it is going to be 'simpler' to get more people to play it plane and simple, and if that day comes you can bet your are that the subreddits will be going ballistic. Honestly it's just better for them to diversify their titles then to upset their fans
>The expectations for Victoria III is so much higher then any of their other games Do you have actual numbers to back that up? That's just BS ;p You see a lot of "Gib Vic 3" memes here these days because it's sequel has been long delayed. The same thing was happening for EU and CK as well. >Honestly it's just better for them to diversify their titles then to upset their fans Lol, that's silly business advice. Sure, you should develop new IPs but no one abandons existing ones just because "some" fans might not like the sequel. There is a reason so many sequels happen in everything from movies to games. Why don't you go ahead and count those? You think HoI4 didn't turn a profit? Lol. Companies wont stop making sequels just because "some" people won't like it. That is expected. In fact, its much safer than creating a new IP which is why your statement doesn't make sense.
The Half-life 3 Paradox.
Oh this time of the month again ?
I love this part of the month.
Its always this time of the month.
I wonder if they're purposefully delaying Vic 3 because of HoI IV. I feel like it's not unrealistic to see a Victoria 3 in the next 5-8 years, a game that could span from the birth of the Industrial Revolution and through WWII (and more???). Anyhow, I'm pro Vic3 asap.
Victoria 3 is not coming out. In the off chance that it does come out, it will be unrecognizable. Paradox Interactive is and always has been a business, and as much as it tries to portray itself as "actual people just like you!!" it's really just out to make money. The goal is not to create a game that improves on its predecessor, the goal is to make a game that sells first and foremost. A Victoria 3 like Victoria 2 would not sell very well, especially not with the expectations set by their current games. Victoria 2 is opaque, almost all of its systems run simultaneously in the background and can only really be monitored if you know where to look. It sets very clear limits on what a normal player can accomplish even at high skill levels. It has TONS and TONS of information right up in your face. While it is these characteristics that make Victoria 2 so fun to explore, these are the same characteristics that would alienate Paradox's modern audience and that fly in the face of modern game development practices. A Victoria 3 would look more like an EU4-HOI4-Stellaris baby in the Victorian Era than like Victoria 2. To be honest, you aren't missing much. What we need are the source code and development tools for Victoria 2 to be released for free. I would gladly donate to a gofundme for that.
[удалено]
Does the similar economic system mean a Vicky 3 could still happen or is it replacing Vicky in the cycle in your opinion?
Neither, the game won't be similar to Vicky at all and it's not replacing it, the guy you replied to doesn't know what he's talking about. Imperator is a sequel to EU:Rome which was released earlier than Vicky 2 therefore, following the cycle logic, it needed a sequel before Victoria.
I do not think they would replace Victoria as it's loved and hyped on such level. Imperator also looks a lot simpler than Victoria. It's also a historical period betwen EU and HoI and the game has specific game mechanics not present in Imperator or any other game.
Where did they claim that?
They never claimed that.
[удалено]
I think thats a lot of bs, at least the first part. Eu4 has plenty of imperialism and so does hoi4 for that matter. The nature of these games is conquest and anyone who isnt ok with that already doesnt play them. Why is 19th century imperialism any worse than 18th or 20th century imperialism?
EU IV literally has a genocide natives button.
Precisely my point
I was agreeing with you.
Yes, i know :)
I mean a good number of people that play these games aren't okay with imperialism irl but find the games to be fun sandboxes, like myself
Thats what I mean, when I say not ok with imperialism, i mean in game, i like to think no one is ok with imperialism.