Is there a reason Paradox did not do a MDS?

[unmerged(134714)]

I agree that creating a modern day version would not be feasable. One of Paradox's goals with espescially the HOI series is realism. Not to say always historical (you can indeed go ahistorical like a communist USA) but always as real as possible. To create a realistic modern scenario and still keep it playable and enjoyable would be very difficult if not close to impossible. Nuclear standoffs and power projection via these weapons has replaced so much of the standing armies. International pressure, underground warfare and various other reasons have made it nearly impossible for any country to really fully commit to war and then succeed in their goals. Examples include the Bush war (Angola, not the previous president), Afghanistan, Korea, Vietnam, Bosnia, Sudan and the list goes on.

Also there is games like Superpower that focusses on modern times and I really enjoy the awesome gameply and historical accuracy regarding the units, ministers etc. that HOI provides.

 

[Danielefc]

Setting aside the partisan side of me - namely I haaaate "modern combat"

The Hoi2 (and from what i can see of Hoi3) system is only suited for the type of warfare that existed between 1910'ish-1950'ish.

A few of the major problems with a modern scenario:
-Only two factions and only a maximum of 5 nations with any real power - all of which are completely dwarfed by the US (and SU).

-Fighting formations composition is no longer a generic division.

-US or Soviets say: Obey me or face Nuclear armageddon - game over.

-Aircraft range and speed: oh look at my new beautifull CV - 4 hours later its
bombed to a pulp by aircraft that took off from halfway around the globe and flew at Mach2 getting there.

-Naval warfare is now done by misiles with humungus range when comparing to hoi2 gun/carrier battles.

-Exploits in the making: Stealth bombers

Finally: Modern Combat may be a big selling thing on the regular games market, but in the Hoi series I'm pretty sure that the overwhelming majority of the fanbase is ww2 buffs.

If paradox decides to make a strategy game set in a modern era - okay. But using the HoI brand to make it would be a complete deal braker for me personally.

 

[The Valkyrier]

Vicky 2 - Modern day scenario. I think if they evolved the vicky concept a little it would fit very well for a game starting in say 1950.

 

[Delor]

I would love to see a modern-warfare or cold-war-game! Although, i think the HoI-Game-Mechanic is not made for simulating modern Warfare. You would need a new enginge capable of simulating SAM's or Missile-Strikes (for example) more accurate.

But i can absolutely NOT agree with some other People here in the Forum, that Modern Warfare is boring or something like that.

Maybe they should play a couple of Hours Games like Jane's Fleet Command or Harpoon. I'm sure they would change their opinion about Modern Warfare

btw: I really enjoy the WW2-Scenario. But after so many Panzer Generals, Hearts of Irons, RTS-Games based upon WW2 it would be great to build a couple of SA-2s or MiG-23s instead of T-34s or Me-109s for a change

 

[WarDog]

Not my thing. WarGame was a fun movie, but how boring it would be to rely play a Global Nuclear War.

IMO any full scale confrontation between NATO and WP would have gone rely bad as soon as one of the parties made any real progress...

 

[Eöl]

Honestly I would hope that we see a game that covers the entirety of human civilisation from its first few settlements along the West African coast and its development from a hunter gatherer society to organised farming competing with other types of human like Neanderthals and beyond.
All the way to present day and into the far future.
Doubt it would happen but one can dream.

 

[WarDog]

Honestly I would hope that we see a game that covers the entirety of human civilisation from its first few settlements along the West African coast and its development from a hunter gatherer society to organised farming competing with other types of human like Neanderthals and beyond.
All the way to present day and into the far future.
Doubt it would happen but one can dream.

It's called Civilization and is for sale already. If you talk about a HOI style detailed game... That's just not doable.

 

[Eöl]

It's called Civilization and is for sale already. If you talk about a HOI style detailed game... That's just not doable.

Why not? We've already done the complicated bit (modern civilisation) then its just a question of moving backwards from there.
Its been a while since I've played civilisation but is still possible to play as Chief George Washington of the United States of America during the Bronze Age and do a World Conquest?

 

[WarDog]

Why not? We've already done the complicated bit (modern civilisation) then its just a question of moving backwards from there.
Its been a while since I've played civilisation but is still possible to play as Chief George Washington of the United States of America during the Bronze Age and do a World Conquest?

Well, yeah. Civ is the same as before basically. But it already takes longer to play 10 years in HOI then the 5000 year span in Civ.
To keep the complexity that makes HOI such a great game would make it ridiculously long. IMO a game that takes something like 5000 hours to play is pretty pointless.

Just researching and adding the compleate list of ministers for all the nations in the world would take years of Paradox dev time. Nobody would pay the money this would require.

Making an AI for such a timespan would make it as dull as the Civ AI.

You would have to reduce the depth and time of the game so much to make it doable it would just be another Civ clone.

Back to MDS...

 

[Delor]

Not my thing. WarGame was a fun movie, but how boring it would be to rely play a Global Nuclear War.

IMO any full scale confrontation between NATO and WP would have gone rely bad as soon as one of the parties made any real progress...

In Reality it sure would have been like that. But this shouldn't be any problem in a fictional game. Just turn off the Nuclear Function

But i'm sure, that a strategy Game NATO vs. WP would be great with many new elements and Units. For example some kind of special-techs like researching GBUs to improve the tactical strike-values of your F-16s or MiGs. Or the strategic Decision which way you go: Strong Airforce vs. Strong SAM-Defence and and and ... so many possibilities

 

[vertinox]

I wouldn't be surprised if this has been raised before, but I was wondering if Paradox has ever given an official reason as to why they haven't released HOI in a modern day scenario format?

I would have thought it would be something they could do fairly quickly, and I mean quickly relative to developing a whole new game, and thus capitalise on its popularity and make some easy money?

Maybe its just me, but a full blown MDS version of HOI would be wicked, so curious what news others have?

The problem with modern warfare is there isn't any front lines anymore. With asymmetric warfare and air transport, province level fighting doesn't happen anymore.

The last WWII-esque battle probably Operation Desert Storm simply because of the terrain.

Vietnam, the current US conflict, and the Soviet Afghan wars really didn't have front lines since the fighting was everywhere and at random.

 

[RedRalphWiggum]

I'd prefer Vicky 2, but a XP for HoI3 could be a MDS, maybe a mod is more liely though

 

[Chairman Yang]

A Paradox grand strategy game with a modern-day setting is a great idea, but if it was based closely on any of their existing series (including HoI) it would be a failure. It would have to be designed carefully from the ground up, with a minimal focus on warfare.

It would be controversial, no doubt. But that controversy could be harnessed and actually work to Paradox's favour.

 

[SuperKyle]

They shouldn't do a modern game, it'd be too retarded with the nukes and all and instant destruction (See Superpower 1 & 2)

They should do a future warfare game. With limited nuke capability at best, world in ruin already, battles everywhere. like a 2245 game or something.
That way you could focus less on economy than a Superpower-ish game.

Unless, they wanted to build a good economy/diplo/trade system, in which case a modern day strategy game would turn out good. But, Superpower tried it and failed.

 

[RHALX]

Modern day settings wouldn't be a very good idea. It would be much more complex than a WW2 game, I don't think there would be any real "front" in the battle.

It would mainly focus on atomic and air warfare. The only "serious" modern settings strategy game I know is world in conflict. I know it's not like hearts of iron, but I wouldn't expect more without it ending up in some kind of weird and too complex game.

And well, what would be the end result? A devastated world without any economy, winner, or anything like that.