Is there any evidence against the idea of this being a modern game?
- Thread starter Dremord
- Start date
-
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.
Is pedantic the Canadian word for know-it-all?It is going to be a modern game, it's going to be HoI4. HoI is set in the modern period just like EUIV and V2.
I'm always going to be correcting you on this mistake because I'm pedantic, as you can see.
Think of all of the events!
The Yugoslav wars... Russia could intervene.
9/11... We could blame Saudi.
NSA leaks... US loses prestige xD
Syrian civil war... Intervene.
There are now countless groups and insurgency organizations which countries could fund. It'd be the new mechanic.
The Yugoslav wars... Russia could intervene.
9/11... We could blame Saudi.
NSA leaks... US loses prestige xD
Syrian civil war... Intervene.
There are now countless groups and insurgency organizations which countries could fund. It'd be the new mechanic.
It means picky about small details, but I can't be a know-it-all if I'm correcting a basic fact, am I?
As I said before, it's like someone calling the Middle Ages the ancient era. To someone who knows that isn't true, it can be annoying. Especially in the context of a grand strategy forum and that you're advocating a modern era (somewhat agree with you there).
Better to learn than to continue repeating the same mistake on the grounds that you do not wish to be corrected.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_history
We're in the modern era. Get over it. the middle ages were the middle ages. The ancient era was the ancient era and WW1 was WW1.
However right you may be by modern people usually don't mean muskets or B-17s, but more of a closer to our current time(21st century). Simplification for the sake of discussion. Are you arguing for the sake of arguing?
Think of all of the events!
The Yugoslav wars... Russia could intervene.
9/11... We could blame Saudi.
NSA leaks... US loses prestige xD
Syrian civil war... Intervene.
There are now countless groups and insurgency organizations which countries could fund. It'd be the new mechanic.
Not to mention all terrorist activities that lead to further war! USA getting CB on Afghanistan after certain event? Uh oh.
Haha, whatever you say boss.
No I just find it annoying when someone says that, and I corrected that mistake, that's all. For whatever reason, he seems to be arguing that he is correct (and never explaining why, at least I did) rather than just being corrected, it's hilarious. In this type of situation, I could debate and make the other person look silly, but I won't (the job did itself because of his refusal to correct himself).
I get your point that it's for the sake of discussion, and in a normal everyday discussion, it wouldn't matter, but OP is specifically on the topic of a game based specifically on an era that is contemporary, rather than modern. I find my correction to be legitimate in this case.
If I seemed like I was arguing for the sake of it, then I do apologize, my intention was not such.
While I'd like a contemporary era game, I cannot see how the immense (even mind-boggling) level of complexity in our world can be simulated in a grand strategy game to a level that even closely resembles how it should be.
The world we live in is characterized by asymmetrical warfare (how would the Syrian Civil War be played out? It can't work like a regular rebel system), financial crises (how would a sub-prime mortgage market be simulated dynamically?) and information warfare (sorry, but US losing prestige because of NSA leak is a gross simplification of the political/diplomatic backlash).
In the example you said, it isn't even as simple as a CB on Afghanistan, there were factions in the country (Taliban, etc.) on both sides of the conflict.
I see the OP wanting this game (as much as I do, in fact) but making it seem like the final product would be too simplistic and dumbed down. I want this type of game and would shell out good $$$ for it, but I want it to be coherent and actually resemble the contemporary world.
1. Of course he's just arguing just to argue.
2. Yes! Just imagine how interesting that'd be in game ...
Because in an interview johan said it would be something everyone would be expecting. HoI3 is the next in line for a sequel.
Last edited:
Looking from military point of view only such game wouldn't be boring at all. We have different technologies, different balances of force in several regions etc. Following this there are many flashpoints and different types of conflicts. For me it would be just the best strategy ever as long as deep and complex diplomatic system follows.
Everything we see in paradox games have to be taken with a grain of salt like colonization of Africa in EUIV period of time why not in this case? Everything is a gross simplification. What I and the other poster given as examples were just quick ideas. I'm not a designer, but if given thought paradox could think of something clever or just simplify some of the aspects like they do in many of their games. As a developer they have ability to do everything and are limited only by their skills and creativity. Just look at Vicky 2 and how wonderfully convoluted and amazing at the same time it is. I'm pretty sure they can do even better.
I simply have a hard time believing that it's a Modern World Game.
It'd probably be released not long after East Versus West (no matter what Armstrong happens to be)... so would we really want to play through the Cold War just to go to the modern era and fight dirt poor middle eastern countries. It's basically the East vs West world just with less communists.
It'd probably be released not long after East Versus West (no matter what Armstrong happens to be)... so would we really want to play through the Cold War just to go to the modern era and fight dirt poor middle eastern countries. It's basically the East vs West world just with less communists.
Think of all of the events!
The Yugoslav wars... Russia could intervene.
9/11... We could blame Saudi.
NSA leaks... US loses prestige xD
Syrian civil war... Intervene.
There are now countless groups and insurgency organizations which countries could fund. It'd be the new mechanic.
To be honest, I'm not sure that PD would want to make a game that encompasses really politically charged issues like some of these. I mean, they've already left population exchanges and mass ethnic cleansing out of V2 and the Holocaust out of HoI - an event already 70 years in the past, I doubt they would come remotely close to engaging with charged issues/organizations/people of the present in a way that would need to be included to make the game plausible. The reasons they do so are perfectly understandable - no one wants to make the game that people play out racial/jingoistic fantasies in, but it does still hurt how much you can do with it.
What "post" modern era is literature in, anyway? Post-modern, post-post modern, or post-post-post modern? I loose track so easily these days...
This was the problem, if some people call there actual era "modernism"... They didn't keep in mind how the peroid after this will be called.
This always bothered me about the word "Modern".
I remember the first time I encountered the word post-modern, I was wondering why they didn't just call it futurism (which, of course, also existed... in the past... stuff's weird like that).
What's fun is how definitions change - in Italy, with "Modern Era" you mean between 1492 and 1815.
What's fun is how definitions change - in Italy, with "Modern Era" you mean between 1492 and 1815.
In France modern era is from 1453 to 1789/1792 and what come after is called contemporary era. But yeah, generally modern era start at the fall of Constantinople or the discovery of America and end by the French Revolution or the fall of Napoleon Empire. Though the French Revolution and formation of Napoleon Empire is what will lead to Nation State as we understand it and it seem more reasonable to incorporate those into the contemporary period rather than the modern one.