A plea about how paradox is dumbing down the games.

[Tronjer]

They cannot make a game "for their fans", because at some point, if Paradox wants to stay alive, the game has to turn a profit. And while the 100 000 members of the Paradox forums might sound impressive, you have to keep in mind that most of them are not current "PAradox fans" - that 100 000 includes people who are here for just one game and couldn't care about the others, people who registered only to report a bug, people who have lost interest in Paradox games or don't have the time for gaming anymore...

And you also should take into account that not everybody who purchases a game will register and sign up at boards. Actually this is rather a minority. Pd brings like 2 titles (including expansions) a year and probably has the largest community considering small indie publishers So if they can't earn their livings, who else could ?

 

[Rompa]

Paradox should of course release the game that the majority wants, not according to what some guy on a forum wants. It's a business, not a social worker. And the "fan-base" is probably larger than those that frequent these forums

 

[Evie HJ]

And you also should take into account that not everybody who purchases a game will register and sign up at boards. Actually this is rather a minority. Pd brings like 2 titles (including expansions) a year and probably has the largest community considering small indie publishers So if they can't earn their livings, who else could ?

People who have the sense to make games for the larger market, not for a segment of their existing fanbase.

Again, that's what it all boils down to. EVEN assuming a large portion of dedicated fanbase isn't registered here, they still remain a small group. It's also a small group that will LOSE members. People stop playing Paradox games, because they lose interest, because they don't have time anymore, because they die.

In order to continue making a profit, Paradox needs to lure new players to replace the players it lose. That means making the game attractive to newcomers.

Now, you could say "well, they could rely on word of mouth among established strategy communities". But that's a dicey proposal at best, because it's entirely dependant on how your fanbase react to the game.

At this point, I simply refer you back to the first, oh, six months of posts on the Europa III forums. Or the Rome forums. Or...well, pretty much every Paradox game under the sun. The reaction are almost always overwhelmingly negative, because Paradox fans expect so much more than they get - always.

Trying to satisfy this sort of fanbase is an exercise in futility - because the more time and money you spend on the game, the more their expectations mount, much faster than what you can add to the game. Relying on them for word-of-mouth publicity, in the critical first few months of the game, is an exercise in economic suicide.

So Paradox has to make a game that's likely to look interesting to new players, to garner good ratings in the gaming press (and that REQUIRES a tolerable learning curve). In short, a game that's likely to bring in new players all by itself.

Then, once the game has sold (very) well, they can turn back to the fanbase for that new game, see what they want, and put it (if its economically reasonable) in expansions. That's because only fans buy expansions anyway (because, you know, they have to already own the original game already)

 

[Driggsd]

And you guys are making my point for me. Paradox has not before had to dumb down its games. The fan base is there becuase these are games that chalenge you to think. Making games for the "massess" means competing with hundreds of other publishers in a broad market. If you check on the company they have made a tidy sum by locking up thier niche market. And more to the point they are a premier publisher now becuase of thier inovations such as gamers gate and no disk required play.

Some of you act like if they dont make what every one else is making then they will go to the wayside. PLEASE!!!!!!!!!! If that was the case Apple computers would have shut down in the early 90's. Punk, heavy metal, ska, hell even country music would not make money. Instead we would all be Chavs running around listening to ganster rap and drinkng lager! Do you see how superfelous your "if they dont do what ever one else does they will shut down" agrument is?

 

[Piggy]

Considering Paradox's games are, for the most part, very in depth compared to 95% of the games out there, even a little "dumbing down" (if you want to call it that) isnt going to turn it into an arcade game for mindless teenagers.

In fact I'm willing to bet that Paradox has turned more potential players/customers away (in the past) because their games are so in depth then they would lose by making them more appealing to above said players.

I know where the OP is coming from, but in order for Paradox to keep making profits so they can make more games they have to make the games appealing to a larger audience.

Edit: This doesnt mean appealing to "the masses", thats not P'dox. It means making it appealing to a slightly larger audience then the existing die hard fan base.

In the end any paradox games of today and tomorrow will still be far more detailed and in depth then the vast majority of whats on store shelves.

 

[Evie HJ]

Quoting myself:

In order to continue making a profit, Paradox needs to lure new players to replace the players it lose. That means making the game attractive to newcomers.

Now, you could say "well, they could rely on word of mouth among established strategy communities". But that's a dicey proposal at best, because it's entirely dependant on how your fanbase react to the game.

At this point, I simply refer you back to the first, oh, six months of posts on the Europa III forums. Or the Rome forums. Or...well, pretty much every Paradox game under the sun. The reaction are almost always overwhelmingly negative, because Paradox fans expect so much more than they get - always.

Trying to satisfy this sort of fanbase is an exercise in futility - because the more time and money you spend on the game, the more their expectations mount, much faster than what you can add to the game. Relying on them for word-of-mouth publicity, in the critical first few months of the game, is an exercise in economic suicide.

So Paradox has to make a game that's likely to look interesting to new players, to garner good ratings in the gaming press (and that REQUIRES a tolerable learning curve). In short, a game that's likely to bring in new players all by itself.

Then, once the game has sold (very) well, they can turn back to the fanbase for that new game, see what they want, and put it (if its economically reasonable) in expansions. That's because only fans buy expansions anyway (because, you know, they have to already own the original game already)

Now, that doesn't mean Paradox should just dumb down the game. (And I have yet to see ANY indication that PAradox is dumbing down Hearts III). Take Europa II to Europa III as a case in point - hardly any DUMBING DOWN going on there.

Heck, Europa III added a more complex government system, recruiting leaders, national advisors, national ideas, what have you. That's hardly "dumbing down". Europa III *also* added several hundred useful tooltips and a more intuitive interface to make learning the game easier.

What Paradox did not do with EU III, and should not do with HOI III, is add extra features that have little to no retail value - IE, details that don't help sell the game. Vickynomics are one example. Aside from a few vicky hardcore fans, people just won't look at a game in a story and say "Ohhhh, a game that let me sell 1000 guns on the world market and later purchase 850 machine parts!". "Build coal plants and machine plants and then automobile plants and small arms plant and an artillery factory and a tank factory so you can finally have a tank!" is not good advertising. In fact, it's more likely to keep someone from buying the game (and that includes prior Paradox fans, as a good deal of them seems to intensely dislike Vicky, too) than to get them to buy it.

So you need to spend your development time on (mostly) adding new features that are likely to attract a good number of players to the game. Taking away or replacing features that turned players off previous versions of the game is also something you need to do.

Using any significant amount of your resources on features that are likely to please a small handful of players, most of whom would have likely bought the game anyway, is not wise use of resources.

Using those same resources on features that are as likely to turn people of as to attract them (and likely to attract people who were already pretty likely to buy the game) is very unwise use of ressources.

 

[TheCrimsonMajor]

Look, I've seen alot of developers ruin series I love by dumbing them down, and you could say many studios are guilty of selling out and dumbing down games, but Paradox is most definitely not one of them. I just don't think the charge is justified or fair, and I don't see the basis for it.

 

[Merrivale]

At this point, I simply refer you back to the first, oh, six months of posts on the Europa III forums. Or the Rome forums. Or...well, pretty much every Paradox game under the sun. The reaction are almost always overwhelmingly negative, because Paradox fans expect so much more than they get - always.

Trying to satisfy this sort of fanbase is an exercise in futility - because the more time and money you spend on the game, the more their expectations mount, much faster than what you can add to the game. Relying on them for word-of-mouth publicity, in the critical first few months of the game, is an exercise in economic suicide.

I would venture to make the prediction that the initial reaction to HOI3 from some on the forums will be the same: why has Paradox destroyed my favorite franchise/I'm going to keep playing HOI2. Which means we'll get the usual thread wars from those defending the game and those opposed. And some people who forget that every game is like this will react in shock and claim that Paradox is losing its touch. Just use the following to pick your side ahead of time:

<snark>Back in the good old days, we didn't have your processor saving and market required/ugly and completely unnecessary 3D graphics and streamlined/dumbed-down interfaces. We didn't have your time-saving/game destroying automated process to cut down on micro-management. No sir, we had to WORK to play the games (after the first five patches, which rendered them playable). You can keep your contextualized events that don't straightjacket the game and make the player play the events rather than the game/randomized Risk. I'll go back to playing the user-created mod that I somehow expected Paradox was going to change the game to/what I now think the game really was.</snark>

 

[Evie HJ]

I would venture to make the additional prediction that if you're wrong, it won't be because the fans are pleasantly surprising you.

 

[unmerged(62241)]

I'm dumb, so a bit of dumbing down is fine. I want some new things to learn, and some new twists. Other than that, I don't need or want to micromanage. Even when I played Total War, I let the computer resove all the battles.

And Driggsy-we don't have to hear how you are a professional military man every time you post-the first 5 times was enough.

 

[Tronjer]

At this point, I simply refer you back to the first, oh, six months of posts on the Europa III forums. Or the Rome forums. Or...well, pretty much every Paradox game under the sun. The reaction are almost always overwhelmingly negative, because Paradox fans expect so much more than they get - always.

Considering forum activities of EU:Rome, simplifying mechanics doesn't have necessarily to bring more customers. So if a company wants to target a broader audience, they better license a decent graphic engine for another Shooter, RTS or Action-RPG and port it on console.

However, serious strategy was never meant to attract the mass market and frankly, I hate 'casual' players for their influence on gaming industry.

 

[Lloyien]

I'm not sure it's justified to say that Hearts III is dumbed down (or is going to be dumbed down) when compared to Hearts II. Rather, I think this may be more of a subconscious feeling due in part to Paradox's other titles, which are more complex, and it isn't necessarily fair to judge this series against Europa Universalis or Victoria.

 

[Piggy]

And you guys are making my point for me. Paradox has not before had to dumb down its games. The fan base is there becuase these are games that chalenge you to think. Making games for the "massess" means competing with hundreds of other publishers in a broad market. If you check on the company they have made a tidy sum by locking up thier niche market. And more to the point they are a premier publisher now becuase of thier inovations such as gamers gate and no disk required play.

Then can you explain to us exactly how HOI3 is being dumbed down because I havent seen any indication that they're suddenly changing their tactis to appeal to the masses. In fact, from what Ive read they're adding alot more options to the game.

Streamlining and improving the interface to lesson micro management is not dumbing down. Its making the game more enjoyable to play, which allows the player to concentrate on his/her strategy instead of having to click a mouse button a hundred times/hour. I would agree that HOI2's tech system was a little bland, especially compared to HOI1, but the latter was just silly, it really was a whole game in of itself. They've already stated that there will be more options for country specific units in the tech department, isnt this the opposite of dumbing down?

I just dont understand what you think has/is being dumbed down, considering how little we know about the game at this early stage.

This isnt a flame at all, Im just curious where you got the idea that the game is being dumbed down?

 

[Naga Niome]

I have always agreed with Food as a resource, however, the Hearts Of Iron series has been a purely military/political game and the many features in the game reflect that.

I felt Paradox Interactive removing Rubber from the first HoI game didn't necessarily dumb down, but reduce the competitiveness and larger role the economy model in HoI deserves to have.

But I gotta agree with many posters here, I do not understand how Paradox is dumbing down Hearts Of Iron. Many parts of HoI2 need a lot of improvement, of them all Supporting Attack and Support Defense as Attacking is immediate, Defense is long and tedious.

 

[Driggsd]

Then can you explain to us exactly how HOI3 is being dumbed down because I havent seen any indication that they're suddenly changing their tactis to appeal to the masses. In fact, from what Ive read they're adding alot more options to the game.

Streamlining and improving the interface to lesson micro management is not dumbing down. Its making the game more enjoyable to play, which allows the player to concentrate on his/her strategy instead of having to click a mouse button a hundred times/hour. I would agree that HOI2's tech system was a little bland, especially compared to HOI1, but the latter was just silly, it really was a whole game in of itself. They've already stated that there will be more options for country specific units in the tech department, isnt this the opposite of dumbing down?

I just dont understand what you think has/is being dumbed down, considering how little we know about the game at this early stage.

This isnt a flame at all, Im just curious where you got the idea that the game is being dumbed down?

When you read in the forum people asking for less interaction in Logistics and Resourses. Well doing that is DUMBING THE GAME DOWN! One of the beautiful things about HOI was you had driving economic reasons behind the warfare. BECAUSE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. They got rid of rubber in HOI2 as a comprimise to improve game play. But in doing so they removed a economic drive.

Some people dont want to manage an economy or deal with little things like how to feed your troops. Becuase some people dont want to deal with that much detail....... That is dumbing the game down.

I do understand that PD wants to reach a broader market. The earlier post about about die hard fans dieing was just dumb! Lord Of the Rings has been a historicaly "nerd" passion, until there was an action movie made out of the series. But even though some old die hard fans died more kids picked it up and loved it.

But back to the issue at hand. Paradox made it name by being SO detail orriented. Not generalizing. Managinging convoys, unit tactics, tech trees, resource managemnet, inteligance and spying, and diplomatic actions are thing central to HOI. I am not accusing them of Dumbing Down HOI3 I am asking them not to becuase of the post I am seeing asking for what I consider dumbed down things.

From What I understand HOI3 will have an expanded techtree and division set-up system. Which means that PD is listening to some of the things asked for in this forum. I am asking that they dont listen to the request to do away with alot of makes HOI HOI.

mlipo check the posts where I threw out my millitary experiance. It was to establish my bona fides on what we were talking about. I did not bring it up here you did.

 

[henryjai]

for a pure WW2 game the game should have no built ups, you should only start in 1939, japan in 1937(sino-japanese war), US in 1941, ....etc.

currently in HOI 2 the start of WW2 is just a pop up box saying "Hitler is crazy and want war" and then suddenly you are fighting in a world war, and occasionally click declare war on someone because you want more IC and perhaps some "bases" which you have quite a lot of them already.

i mean if you have a built-up you should have some "driving force" for war rather than having it purely event-driven or randomly decided by human.

 

[juv95hrn]

To me it seems like everyone in this thread basically agrees;

We want improvements in HOI 3 over earlier titles when it comes to things that didn't work so great (tech teams, ASW campaign, supply system, naval combat system, overly complicated and repetitive UI with some functions etc etc) and maintainment of things that did work great without sacrifice of already existing level of detail.

 

[unmerged(62241)]

mlipo check the posts where I threw out my millitary experiance. It was to establish my bona fides on what we were talking about. I did not bring it up here you did.

"The debates on armor and infantry by the men that have used these in war, and have lived the doctrine and matenance of such units. Not just watched a history chanel show about them." You also mentioned seeing mass graves and mass starvation.

It's great that you have experience. I just don't like the way you imply that people who aren't military can't have opinions as worthy as yours. If you think Paradox is dumbing down HOI, then fine. But when others don't agree with you, it's not because they aren't battle hardened vets-it's because they don't think the game is being dumbed down.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

When you read in the forum people asking for less interaction in Logistics and Resourses. Well doing that is DUMBING THE GAME DOWN! One of the beautiful things about HOI was you had driving economic reasons behind the warfare. BECAUSE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. They got rid of rubber in HOI2 as a comprimise to improve game play. But in doing so they removed a economic drive.

AFAIK, only the name of the resource is changed in HoI2, its called 'rare materials' now. From a gameplay point of view nothing has changed in that respect.

 

[Driggsd]

"The debates on armor and infantry by the men that have used these in war, and have lived the doctrine and matenance of such units. Not just watched a history chanel show about them." You also mentioned seeing mass graves and mass starvation.

And those 2 quotes you strung together directly aplied to what was being talked about in those threads.
If you want to talk about automotive repair should listen to someone who has seen a show about cars on TV or a mechanic.

It's great that you have experience. I just don't like the way you imply that people who aren't military can't have opinions as worthy as yours. If you think Paradox is dumbing down HOI, then fine. But when others don't agree with you, it's not because they aren't battle hardened vets-it's because they don't think the game is being dumbed down.

At no point in this thread did I imply that my military experiance gave me any kind of expert status here in this thread of discusion.

As to opions. Those are all well and good. But the point you are so upset about is that alot of those opinions can be disproved as frivilous by people like myself and a few others on here who have directy experiance in the matter. If I come across as condescending then oh well. Not my intent but I cant change your mind.

If your agruements fail the test of reality then maybe you should check what you believe.

As to dumbing down the game. Yes I miss-spoke by saying Pardox was dumbing down HOI. But I do stand by what I have said in here that it is the attention to detail and intracacies of the time periods that has made all the Pardox games so supperior. And I would hate to see them dumbed down just to reach a broader audiance.