-
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.
In a perfect world, no, because everyone will find the Grand Campaign of the official release perfect.
Sadly, it is not a perfect world and so I suspect, eventually, an IGC will emerge. However, the better the GC, probably the fewer the people involved in the effort and the less quickly it comes to pass.
Sadly, it is not a perfect world and so I suspect, eventually, an IGC will emerge. However, the better the GC, probably the fewer the people involved in the effort and the less quickly it comes to pass.
Who knows?
I have read between the lines of earlier IGC discussions (to which I was two or three monthes after the fact) that Paradox did not want the game to be too historical, since there are lots of gamers that liked the general "historicity", but wanted to do their own thing without too much historical constraint. IGC came about because of gamers that were much more interested in history, than game play (crudely put).
Assuming there is any merit to my interpretation, the same is likely to be true for EU II. And I applaud it. If good gaming fun can be provided for the "masses", while allowing the historical "wonks" to have their fun, too - perfect. Paradox is enriched to continue to develop wonderful games, while all the gamers are happy with their version of the game.
I have read between the lines of earlier IGC discussions (to which I was two or three monthes after the fact) that Paradox did not want the game to be too historical, since there are lots of gamers that liked the general "historicity", but wanted to do their own thing without too much historical constraint. IGC came about because of gamers that were much more interested in history, than game play (crudely put).
Assuming there is any merit to my interpretation, the same is likely to be true for EU II. And I applaud it. If good gaming fun can be provided for the "masses", while allowing the historical "wonks" to have their fun, too - perfect. Paradox is enriched to continue to develop wonderful games, while all the gamers are happy with their version of the game.
I agree, playing a game and knowing what will happen, is not exactly what I describe as exciting. So as long as the start is historically correct (whatever time the campaign starts in) I'm happy!
Frankly, I just love the game's playability... and I (not being a historian of any sort as far as the time period goes) wouldn't know if the starting point were historically accurate or not...
The Black Adder
The Black Adder
It's also worth noting, though, that the IGC isn't just for histoy-oriented players... the options listed with the IGC allow players to tinker with what the "starting positions" are... for instance the Austrian lowlands or Spanish lowlands... it could only be one, but they allow you to play both... I like the IGC, even though I'm NOT a gamer that wants historical accuracy in any way shape or form... I want historicity... that is, the same pressures, variables, and general climate that caused nations to act the way they did, and fight to "change" history from one country's perspective....
Okay... I just stepped down off the soap box.
The Black Adder
Okay... I just stepped down off the soap box.
The Black Adder
You probably will react if invaded by the united states of america in 1500, would you not?
That is what I mean by historically correct. Not that my historical knowledge should be uses as a guide...
That is what I mean by historically correct. Not that my historical knowledge should be uses as a guide...
With a scenario editor I assume that there will be plenty of IGCs and user created scenarios. I do hope that if there is a need for it that the original IGC team will do their thing again - they are marvelous!
I would like a completely historical hands-off game as an extra scenario. Would have been educating, ya know.
Well I am betting on a EUII IGC, because no game can make everyone happy! Eventually someone will take the initiative to make theirselves happy, and so it will begin....
With the scenario editor, there could be several "IGC"s...... But I'd except for their to be made one "standard" IGC, so that people could be playing the same thing other people are playing to compare their games too, and to have a standard for multiplayer as well.
And yes, I appreciate the increased historical accuracy the IGC brings. I want to face generally the same challenges the real leaders faced, and not face some mushy result that occurs from letting everything loose in 1419....
And yes, I appreciate the increased historical accuracy the IGC brings. I want to face generally the same challenges the real leaders faced, and not face some mushy result that occurs from letting everything loose in 1419....
When I look at the detail and effort that went into the IGC, I am disinclined to simply say that a scenario editor assures us of IGC II. I believe that it is important to realize and acknowledge that the IGC was a collaborative effort by a number of people to both understand the game engine, and utilize that understanding to extend its historical accuracy. Indeed, reading the threads on IGC development provides one an impressive, refreshing, and encouraging demonstration of human cooperation at its best. These people were very successful because they spent the time to test ideas carefully and recurrently, and to look far afield in their research.
A scenario editor merely dumps into the hand of the novice what the IGC developers learned through hard work, minus the historical insight - and obvious respect for history - which the IGC crew brought to the project. I give great credit to Paradox for designing a open system for the game, but even greater credit to the IGC team for sacrificing their time to enhance the EU1 game. We, as game players, would be very fortunate if such a collaboration were to happen in EU2 - however, it will be an issue of people rather than software.
A scenario editor merely dumps into the hand of the novice what the IGC developers learned through hard work, minus the historical insight - and obvious respect for history - which the IGC crew brought to the project. I give great credit to Paradox for designing a open system for the game, but even greater credit to the IGC team for sacrificing their time to enhance the EU1 game. We, as game players, would be very fortunate if such a collaboration were to happen in EU2 - however, it will be an issue of people rather than software.
If there seems to be a need and I have the time to spare, I will gladly help out with an IGC for EU 2. However, at this point I think that EU 2 will correct many of the historical mistakes made in the original GC, thus making the need for an IGC somewhat less pressing.
Well, Paradox made several Grand Campaigns themselves, IE, a Grand Campaign where Denmark was controlable in Denmark / Norway, a Grand Campaign with Sweden in Sweden and so on...
But the main game was the same I guess, except for the LOUSY Norwegian translation. My 6 year old sister could have done a better job.
But the main game was the same I guess, except for the LOUSY Norwegian translation. My 6 year old sister could have done a better job.