Ask Paradox (almost) Anything Thread (no support/tech or code questions)

  • 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.
Ah I didn't know GG could do that. But in all fairness, GG will never, ever collect any data to that effect, since all they have is my credit card info (maybe not even that if I choose so) and a list of games/serials attached to my name. They never have a client running on computer for them to check for piracy, and certainly none ever running during games to check for hacks/cheats. So though you may be correct that GG can legally ban my account, limiting my access to games (something that is news to me btw), the fact is that by virtue of their unobtrusive system, they will never ever be in a position to make that judgement simply due to lack of data. Something which I think is a postive, because they're just retailers - they shouldn't have the right to judge anyone for anything, much less nose around to do it.

Well, GG will just prevent you from buying games via their services. But any service will close your account if they feel you are abusing it. I cannot think of one that would not do such a thing.

Moreover, while Steam does run a client on your system, Steam makes a point of requiring you to opt-in for a survey on what you run on your machine. Since GG requires you to download their download applications, you could argue that these small programs could even contain a hidden data collecting scheme themselves, although, I sincerely doubt that.

For that money, I trust GG the same amount as I trust Steam.

PS: That came off as pro-GG and anti-Steam, but it's not. It's just my present view, which I'm attempting to clarify here. At the moment, I see less risks with GG.

Or do you?

Sorry I actually meant Day 1 delivery of future patches post-release. So Patch #2,3,4,5...etc. Basically, if you never need Steam to run a game, that effectively means people won't (may not) use Steam at all post-install, meaning that they still won't get the patches until they check for updates themselves and then go reinstall/rerun steam with the particular goal of getting the patch. So essentially, you lose the auto-patch benefit if you allow non-steam execution to occur.

Well, obviously not. But that's the same issue with GG, I suppose. If you decide not to have automatic patch distribution, that's your choice. And while you will get the day 0/1 (whatever) patch, you can't be sure about any subsequent patches. Neither can the developers. But day 0 patches tend to be more important, anyway.

Q3) Has paradox given thought/made plans to make future games on Steam make expansions/patch levels optional? So that if I buy EU+NA+IN+HttT+DW, I can play with whichever form of the game I desire? With whatever patch I choose? So in the future, is paradox planning to make it possible for me to install only up to HttT 4.1, even though lets say a 4.2 is out, as well as DW 5.1? The reason I ask is because this very directly affects mod-friendliness. An example would be the general inability (or atleast difficulty) in playing MMtM for Steam DW purchasers.

Again, Steam allows you to disable auto-patching. But personally, I just make a copy of my EU3 directory, then patch that to whatever I like. Again, since EU3 works without Steam, you can do that, even if you purchased EU3 through Steam.

Johan, I've been reading up the forums quite a bit lately, and I realize you're very objective about Steam, and seriously consider it a very useful tool for future (& present) paradox games, and have been fairly vocal on the forums when people have spoken against their service. That's why I figured you would be the best person to ask to clarify these questions I have. Don't take any of it strongly - I'm trying to clear up my own presently outdated understanding of steam and also to reassess my position of their service - especially as it relates to Paradox. Thanks for your help.

Steam has gotten an unnecessary bad wrap in recent years. Perhaps from 'haters' as they are called, but Steam is actually one of the best digital distribution channels there is. Needless to say, I still get my Paradox games via GG, because I like that for its better integration with Paradox in general.
 
Honestly: how important is the appearance of the game to each individual PI staff?

What do you mean by appearance? graphics? how it's viewed by players? Journalists? industry peers?

Also - thanks for getting us off that Steam topic....

/s
 
Graphics.

I think a member of the dev team can give a more in depth answer for what the improvement of graphics for the internal games has meant for the, - considering that the graphic improvements are growing by leaps and bounds nowadays thanks to a concerted effort.

But for us generally - it's just a means to an end.

/s
 
This is for the producers, publishing team, and Fredrik:

How do you handle relations with a hypothetical external developer who appeared to have a great concept or prototype when you began your relationship, but who makes a fundamental, foundational mistake along the way? I'm not talking wanting a character renamed, but a truly game-destroying problem. Assume that the developer is unwilling to change the problem for whatever reason, or does not even agree that it is a problem.
 
This is for the producers, publishing team, and Fredrik:

How do you handle relations with a hypothetical external developer who appeared to have a great concept or prototype when you began your relationship, but who makes a fundamental, foundational mistake along the way? I'm not talking wanting a character renamed, but a truly game-destroying problem. Assume that the developer is unwilling to change the problem for whatever reason, or does not even agree that it is a problem.

Let's start off by saying that it almost never gets that far. But in the cases where it does we try to steer them back on the right track - first with kind words and then with stronger. Ultimately we're the ones deciding if the game gets released or not so we have the final say. There's a lot of compromising that needs to be done at times, but that's just part of the game. Often it's not the "game destroying" that's the problem - it's more about when problems arise that make our marketing or sales work incredibly hard. Like missing deadlines or not delivering on what was promised. Thats a bigger problem than having a broken economy in a game for instance.

There are at least a dozen steps between "first sign of trouble" and "we can't release this".

/s
 
Honestly: how important is the appearance of the game to each individual PI staff?

It's a tricky question. I think most of us care the most about their specific part of the game. For me, the lack of crashes and showstoppers is much more important than appearance of the game. So if I look at graphics through my "developer glasses", appearance is not that important (as long as it's not buggy).

On the other hand, I feel very strongly about Paradox as a company. I REALLY want us to continue delivering great games and constantly improving. I am sure that graphics matter a lot when it comes to selling many copies. So when i look through my "Paradox as a company glasses", I think appearance is very important.

Finally, when I play computer games during my spare time, I am not the kind of player that cares that much about appearance of any game. Gameplay, AI and challenge is much more important for me.
 
Honestly: how important is the appearance of the game to each individual PI staff?

For me personally, graphics is more important than I'd really like to admit. I try to play some really old games that are supposed to be good, but sometimes I just feel the graphics gets in the way. Embarrassing example: Grim Fandango, couldn't play it.
In our internal titles, I think it is important too. It is good to feel we are making progress in all areas for each new game, and graphics is a part of that. The older titles look really outdated by now, and I would not want it any other way.
 
Embarrassing example: Grim Fandango, couldn't play it.

:( so sad, they really need to re-release a high-res version. I tried playing Final Fantasy 7 the other day, but the old 3d was so terrible and immersion breaking I had to stop :(

Personally I think graphics are very important both in games I play in my free time, and our internal titles. Gameplay always comes first, but a great look adds a lot to the experience. For example, compare Divine Wind to older Eu3, it looks and feels so much nicer.
 
Hi. I hope what I'm going to ask for is relevant to this thread. It's game-related; however, as this is a publisher issue, I hope it's right to post it here.

Ok, here it goes: Please, Paradox, can you make SotS 2 truly DRM-free?

I've read that the justification is making patch distribution easier. Ok, let's say it's true. Is really that big the cost of a few, slightly different distributions? Anyway, DRM-free is a feature I would glady pay more for. In fact, one of the reasons I buy your in-house games (besides liking the genre, of course) is the honest DRM free thing.

I regret preordering SotS2 now. If you think I'm joking, I was decided to purchase Magicka when it was released... until I learnt it was DRM-ed. To date, I still haven't bought the game (nor all the DLCs, of course) for the exact same reason. That's some lost revenue :unsure:

So, to sum up: any form of DRM = no money from me. I hope you reckon this is an important issue for your user base (just take a look at the forums here and Kerberos) and change your mind (or convince Kerberos, whatever) on this SotS 2 issue!

Thank you!
 
Hi. I hope what I'm going to ask for is relevant to this thread. It's game-related; however, as this is a publisher issue, I hope it's right to post it here.

Ok, here it goes: Please, Paradox, can you make SotS 2 truly DRM-free?

I've read that the justification is making patch distribution easier. Ok, let's say it's true. Is really that big the cost of a few, slightly different distributions? Anyway, DRM-free is a feature I would glady pay more for. In fact, one of the reasons I buy your in-house games (besides liking the genre, of course) is the honest DRM free thing.

I regret preordering SotS2 now. If you think I'm joking, I was decided to purchase Magicka when it was released... until I learnt it was DRM-ed. To date, I still haven't bought the game (nor all the DLCs, of course) for the exact same reason. That's some lost revenue :unsure:

So, to sum up: any form of DRM = no money from me. I hope you reckon this is an important issue for your user base (just take a look at the forums here and Kerberos) and change your mind (or convince Kerberos, whatever) on this SotS 2 issue!

Thank you!

You do realise, you havent seen any reports of how the DRM will work for SotS2, and as you bring up a heavily multiplayer game (magicka) but you dont mention Victoria 2 or sengoku where you install with steam and from then on you dont need steam going unless you want to update or reinstall.

A note of consideration truly DRM free would mean that you dont get patches/beta patches as you are not linked to anybody

pro tip: if you regret preordering you can unpreorder.... shocking isnt it
 
I think a member of the dev team can give a more in depth answer for what the improvement of graphics for the internal games has meant for the, - considering that the graphic improvements are growing by leaps and bounds nowadays thanks to a concerted effort.

But for us generally - it's just a means to an end.

/s

Actually that gets to the root of what I was curious about - there were huge improvements made in the appearace of games after HoI3 and I wondered was this just part of the natural developments cycle of if a decision had been made to pout a lot more into graphics.

It's a tricky question. I think most of us care the most about their specific part of the game. For me, the lack of crashes and showstoppers is much more important than appearance of the game. So if I look at graphics through my "developer glasses", appearance is not that important (as long as it's not buggy).

On the other hand, I feel very strongly about Paradox as a company. I REALLY want us to continue delivering great games and constantly improving. I am sure that graphics matter a lot when it comes to selling many copies. So when i look through my "Paradox as a company glasses", I think appearance is very important.

Finally, when I play computer games during my spare time, I am not the kind of player that cares that much about appearance of any game. Gameplay, AI and challenge is much more important for me.

For me personally, graphics is more important than I'd really like to admit. I try to play some really old games that are supposed to be good, but sometimes I just feel the graphics gets in the way. Embarrassing example: Grim Fandango, couldn't play it.
In our internal titles, I think it is important too. It is good to feel we are making progress in all areas for each new game, and graphics is a part of that. The older titles look really outdated by now, and I would not want it any other way.

I'd like to have artforx's attitude, but TBH I have Kallocain's. Really bad graphics will put me off a game even though I know it shouldn't. Having said that, the best graphics in history wouldn't make me like a game with bad gameplay.

Personally I think graphics are very important both in games I play in my free time, and our internal titles. Gameplay always comes first, but a great look adds a lot to the experience. For example, compare Divine Wind to older Eu3, it looks and feels so much nicer.

A mate of mine said to me a while back that he liked Paradox games but he found the graphics off-putting. He had only ever played EU3 vanilla, so I sent him a screenshot of Sengoku and he was pretty impressed. The difference is enormous.
 
Actually that gets to the root of what I was curious about - there were huge improvements made in the appearace of games after HoI3 and I wondered was this just part of the natural developments cycle of if a decision had been made to pout a lot more into graphics.

We hired a few more people after hoi3 was released.. People like Tegus and Birken who have experience doing graphics programming for AAA games started about them.
 
We hired a few more people after hoi3 was released.. People like Tegus and Birken who have experience doing graphics programming for AAA games started about them.

<3 Tegus and Birken! The new map stuff from Sengoku/FtM is great.

Personally, I'm somewhere between artfox and Kallocain. Better graphics allow me to enjoy the game even more, the key word being even. I thoroughly enjoyed EU3, but I have to admit that with the DW facelift, I can't understand how I did any more. Just looking at a HttT screenshot sends shivers down my spine now...

But I still play lots of old, very old games. The graphics are terrible by today's standards. Still, they are nice and fitting. I just started a new MoM game last weekend, and I'm now super excited for Warlock! :)
 
You do realise, you havent seen any reports of how the DRM will work for SotS2, and as you bring up a heavily multiplayer game (magicka) but you dont mention Victoria 2 or sengoku where you install with steam and from then on you dont need steam going unless you want to update or reinstall.

A note of consideration truly DRM free would mean that you dont get patches/beta patches as you are not linked to anybody

pro tip: if you regret preordering you can unpreorder.... shocking isnt it

I've seen enough reports. Paradox and Cirulis himself have confirmed this. GG do say in their download page the same.

I don't remember being forced to validate my game online when I installed V2. Maybe you had to, because you purchased it from Steam? GG certainly doesn't.

Patches can be obtained easily: just go to the developer page and download the patch. You don't need a platform like Steam for that. It may be convenient but just that.

GG won't let me unpreorder (and now it's just released the game).
 
I've seen enough reports. Paradox and Cirulis himself have confirmed this. GG do say in their download page the same.

I don't remember being forced to validate my game online when I installed V2. Maybe you had to, because you purchased it from Steam? GG certainly doesn't.

Patches can be obtained easily: just go to the developer page and download the patch. You don't need a platform like Steam for that. It may be convenient but just that.

GG won't let me unpreorder (and now it's just released the game).
Try contacting GamersGate support. I have heard that they have been very helpful.
 
Honestly: how important is the appearance of the game to each individual PI staff?

I have trouble playing older games because of their graphics, when I tried Fallout 1 I gave up almost immediately. The graphics were so bad I couldn't see the rat attacking and eventually killing me. The only reason I know it was a rat is because I heard it squeaking.

If the graphics is as good (or as bad, I'd rather say) as Elder Scrolls: Morrowind, then I can play the game but even then I need a couple of minutes adjusting to the graphics to be able to see details and differences between a monster and the background, for example.

I find that if you have played the game when it came out or a year or two later, then you will be able to enjoy it again. That's the thing with me and Grim Fandango or Little Big Adventure 2, I can play those games and enjoy them despite the graphics because I remember how it felt when I first played them.
 
I've seen enough reports. Paradox and Cirulis himself have confirmed this. GG do say in their download page the same.

I don't remember being forced to validate my game online when I installed V2. Maybe you had to, because you purchased it from Steam? GG certainly doesn't.

Patches can be obtained easily: just go to the developer page and download the patch. You don't need a platform like Steam for that. It may be convenient but just that.

GG won't let me unpreorder (and now it's just released the game).

you mean install it? You had to hit download, both in steam and GG.
 
I have trouble playing older games because of their graphics, when I tried Fallout 1 I gave up almost immediately. The graphics were so bad I couldn't see the rat attacking and eventually killing me. The only reason I know it was a rat is because I heard it squeaking.

If the graphics is as good (or as bad, I'd rather say) as Elder Scrolls: Morrowind, then I can play the game but even then I need a couple of minutes adjusting to the graphics to be able to see details and differences between a monster and the background, for example.

I find that if you have played the game when it came out or a year or two later, then you will be able to enjoy it again. That's the thing with me and Grim Fandango or Little Big Adventure 2, I can play those games and enjoy them despite the graphics because I remember how it felt when I first played them.

Here is the gist; all graphics are limited to the technology available at the time. What makes it playable decades later is a great art department. Take The Secret of Monkey Island; it's pixelated and low-res (I know they have made a high-res version, but for the sake of this argument I am using the low-res as an example), yet I still find it very enjoyable and playable, because despite the limitations (both graphics and sound-wise) it's very well done.

Another great example is Caesar III, because despite the occasional graphics bug (I say occasional, even though they happen a lot), the graphics still look great. And it doesn't distract you. Moreover, it is not trying to be a technology it cannot handle. Caesar IV, for instance, just doesn't do it for me. The 3D doesn't work for me, neither does the changes to the gameplay. Even a stranger game like The Neverhood still works for me.

Some games try to attain a technology they cannot truly master, not because they necessarily are not good enough, but because the technology limits them.

Take EU1 vs EU2. To me, EU1 is a bit of a graphics disaster, while I can still enjoy EU2. Although, EU3 is certainly a much welcome upgrade both gameplay-wise and graphics-wise.