5 ms·

Paradox Interactive is right there and thriving? They’re like the next step into the 4x rabbit hole and their fanbase is pretty loyal.

mcmoor 2y ago
It also sucks that all the Paradox competitors seemed to have failed so far. The genre really needs some innovation.
- AnotherGoodName 2y ago
  Yep and paradox 4x games honestly take a brute force approach by adding too many limits of various kinds to ensure you don’t break the game. Eg. fleet cap, star base cap, empire size, new systems requires spending influence that ticks over slowly, leader caps, etc. Yes there’s ways you can increase things like influence 25% faster but that means you’re only 25% larger in size (and you’ll then be hit by the empire cap). In general I just don’t think paradox makes great 4x games compared to what I’ve played in the past. There must be a smarter way to have a fun 4x without resorting to a ton of different types of caps to stop you getting too far ahead. I will definitely +1 that the genre needs a shakeup.
  - bee_rider 2y ago
    Crusader Kings and Stellaris always felt more like… story-generation games than strategy games, to me. Sorta like Dwarf Fortress or Rimworld at a different scale.
    - izacus 2y ago
      Yep, which makes them so amazing after Civ decided to abandon that approach and heavily push into trying to be a static boardgame.
      - dragonwriter 2y ago
        How could Civ abandon that? Civ never was a story-generation game (arguably, VII is a very slight move toward that, but Civ I was pretty much Empire with a tech tree, more varied terrain, a more detailed (terrain-based) production system, and founding/growing cities replacing conquering independents.
        bee_rider 2y ago
        I’m not sure I disagree. Civ certainly doesn’t have a lot of “flavor” events or characters. The standards of the era were pretty low for this kind of stuff though, so there was a little bit of a feeling of building a story, for me at least. As a sidenote, somehow the setting, leaders, and tech blurbs in Alpha Centauri managed to construct a much better facade of a story generation game, IMO. Despite being very similar mechanically. The system allowed a lot more customization… even if it was just a bunch of little +1 bonuses here and there, it made it feel like “your” faction. Anyway, it’s all a facade. Other than dwarf fortress. I’m sure those dwarfs will achieve sentience soon.
acdha 2y ago
I really wish they believed in UX, though. Going from Civ to EU4 is like going from one of those meal kit recipes to someone handing you some raw olives, grain, and a live chickens and expecting you to figure out the details.
- ethbr1 2y ago
  You chose your path poorly. The correct order is Civ to classic Dwarf Fortress to EU4.
dgrin91 2y ago
I'm a big paradox fan, especially eu4 and hoi4, but their dlc policy is downright toxic. There are tons of dlcs, they are all overpriced and they all break the base game in their own ways, and the only way to "fix" it is to buy the dlc. Oh and often time the quality of their dlcs is shit because it's all outsourced to other firms who don't know the game, or the code and are stuck with tight deadlines and budgets
- ecshafer 2y ago
  Once a year paradox releases a dlc. Its pretty reasonable. It only seems unreasonable if you jump in 15 years after.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    I honestly like the Paradox model, game mechanics breaking until patches aside. Give a chunk of new base functionality as a free update. Charge for a more expanded form of that functionality as a DLC. We can quibble over whether this DLC or that DLC was worth the price, and there are certainly balance issues that are patch resolved, but it keeps expanding their games for years with pretty serious new stuff. That's more than you can say for other publishers' post-release behavior. EU4: 11 years HOI4: 8 years Stellaris: 8 years How many games that old are still getting major feature patches/DLC?
    - krige 2y ago
      How about we don't drip feed content over the years, causing problems and then graciously fixing them?
      - Apocryphon 2y ago
        I mean, do you expect them to have created these massive games with multiple expansions’ worth of content at the beginning? Hasn’t Stellaris been essentially rebuilt over the years with DLC?

mcmoor 2y ago

It also sucks that all the Paradox competitors seemed to have failed so far. The genre really needs some innovation.

AnotherGoodName 2y ago
Yep and paradox 4x games honestly take a brute force approach by adding too many limits of various kinds to ensure you don’t break the game. Eg. fleet cap, star base cap, empire size, new systems requires spending influence that ticks over slowly, leader caps, etc. Yes there’s ways you can increase things like influence 25% faster but that means you’re only 25% larger in size (and you’ll then be hit by the empire cap). In general I just don’t think paradox makes great 4x games compared to what I’ve played in the past. There must be a smarter way to have a fun 4x without resorting to a ton of different types of caps to stop you getting too far ahead. I will definitely +1 that the genre needs a shakeup.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  Crusader Kings and Stellaris always felt more like… story-generation games than strategy games, to me. Sorta like Dwarf Fortress or Rimworld at a different scale.
  - izacus 2y ago
    Yep, which makes them so amazing after Civ decided to abandon that approach and heavily push into trying to be a static boardgame.
    - dragonwriter 2y ago
      How could Civ abandon that? Civ never was a story-generation game (arguably, VII is a very slight move toward that, but Civ I was pretty much Empire with a tech tree, more varied terrain, a more detailed (terrain-based) production system, and founding/growing cities replacing conquering independents.
      - bee_rider 2y ago
        I’m not sure I disagree. Civ certainly doesn’t have a lot of “flavor” events or characters. The standards of the era were pretty low for this kind of stuff though, so there was a little bit of a feeling of building a story, for me at least. As a sidenote, somehow the setting, leaders, and tech blurbs in Alpha Centauri managed to construct a much better facade of a story generation game, IMO. Despite being very similar mechanically. The system allowed a lot more customization… even if it was just a bunch of little +1 bonuses here and there, it made it feel like “your” faction. Anyway, it’s all a facade. Other than dwarf fortress. I’m sure those dwarfs will achieve sentience soon.

acdha 2y ago

I really wish they believed in UX, though. Going from Civ to EU4 is like going from one of those meal kit recipes to someone handing you some raw olives, grain, and a live chickens and expecting you to figure out the details.

ethbr1 2y ago
You chose your path poorly. The correct order is Civ to classic Dwarf Fortress to EU4.

dgrin91 2y ago

I'm a big paradox fan, especially eu4 and hoi4, but their dlc policy is downright toxic. There are tons of dlcs, they are all overpriced and they all break the base game in their own ways, and the only way to "fix" it is to buy the dlc. Oh and often time the quality of their dlcs is shit because it's all outsourced to other firms who don't know the game, or the code and are stuck with tight deadlines and budgets

ecshafer 2y ago
Once a year paradox releases a dlc. Its pretty reasonable. It only seems unreasonable if you jump in 15 years after.
- ethbr1 2y ago
  I honestly like the Paradox model, game mechanics breaking until patches aside. Give a chunk of new base functionality as a free update. Charge for a more expanded form of that functionality as a DLC. We can quibble over whether this DLC or that DLC was worth the price, and there are certainly balance issues that are patch resolved, but it keeps expanding their games for years with pretty serious new stuff. That's more than you can say for other publishers' post-release behavior. EU4: 11 years HOI4: 8 years Stellaris: 8 years How many games that old are still getting major feature patches/DLC?
  - krige 2y ago
    How about we don't drip feed content over the years, causing problems and then graciously fixing them?
    - Apocryphon 2y ago
      I mean, do you expect them to have created these massive games with multiple expansions’ worth of content at the beginning? Hasn’t Stellaris been essentially rebuilt over the years with DLC?