-
Crusader Kings III Available Now!
The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
- Status
I was talking a few days ago with a person I know who said that Rome could have been a great game, it was just executed quite badly. I share that sentiment. A sequel will give the developers a chance to make the greatness of the concept shine through.
Now clearly, there are better things to pray to God about. But feel free to hope and wish..
Who said anything about God? We're praying to the Holy Johan, praise be, to bless us with plentiful of new toys.
Edit: And thus manna rained from the clouds and all was well.
Maybe they're actually making Ancient Greece 1. *insert trollface from paradox*We can pray to God and Johan, but PI already made it clear they have no intentions to make Rome 2 for foreseeable future
They didn't say ever, just wasn't soon. But an announcement could be for two years from now. So, who knows. Besides, it could also be something that encompasses the time period but is far more than that, and therefore is not a remake of Rome.We can pray to God and Johan, but PI already made it clear they have no intentions to make Rome 2 for foreseeable future
Of course, they might have changed their opinion but I am not optimistic... maybe a few more years?
not realy i mean there is also an project called "Augustus". I dont think they would develop Rome II and Rome III at the same time XD.
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...x-Development-Studio-Advent-Calendar-19-Zoft&
Neither did I say 'eve'r ^^; Foreseeable future means near future.
Their latest declaration that they won't make Rome 2 happened not long ago (after EU4 was released) so I doubt either of the two new games are Rome 2.
... mmm, put me in the "just hoping and wishing" camp although it is abundantly clear to me, an owner of the five actually historical grand strategy games, that Rome is clearly the one that needs a sequel most desperately.
Smaller world map (not the world in real but the game world) means more detail per region. Also in Roman times world is not connected, I prefer this map for Rome II:
Original size: http://s1.directupload.net/images/140115/tpwfhcpi.jpg
Original size: http://s1.directupload.net/images/140115/tpwfhcpi.jpg
Out of interest, what software is that?Smaller world map (not the world in real but the game world) means more detail per region. Also in Roman times world is not connected, I prefer this map for Rome II:
Original size: http://s1.directupload.net/images/140115/tpwfhcpi.jpg
Actually, they didn't make it "clear", not exactly. Making something like that clear would be to announce it during a stockholders meeting and having it made clear to the press in no ambiguous manner. Instead what we have is a post by Shams (Who I understand is a PI employee) saying, in a non-binding manner, that Rome 2 was a no-go in the foreseeable future and a follow-up stream explaining why (bottom line: he doesn't believe it can be sucessful, if not absolutely then in terms of cost of opportunity). Now, first and foremost, do note PDS/PI has shown itself to be very democratic in what game gets done (see VicII) so even if Shams and others don't believe in the project, all it takes is a majority within the voting group for the game to get made, also note that on that same thread Johan also came on, seemingly throwing some cold water in the burn by noting that "Shams is young and has a small view of "foreseeable future", maybe (or maybe not) hinting that the matter is not so one sided at the office.We can pray to God and Johan, but PI already made it clear they have no intentions to make Rome 2 for foreseeable future
Of course, they might have changed their opinion but I am not optimistic... maybe a few more years?
Also note that Shams reasoning, while fully valid, rest squarely on market analysis and product expectations, which can be adjusted over time. It's entirely possible that at time of that post Shams was speaking with a certain analysis in hand, but further analysis suggested the previous held belief that Rome 2 might not be a successful product to the company could actually be wrong. At that point, any company would go back on its previous statements, specially the ones on a forum.
Finally, even Shams himself sorta left an open door for Rome 2, mentioning he could picture it going the Kickstarter route. Now while I dont believe they'll actually do a kickstarter out of it, it still goes to show that the matter isn't as set in stone as one might assume.
All and all, I sure as heck don't know if this is indeed Rome II or an obvious trolling attempt (btw, how exactly cant Shams be trolling the community by saying no Rome II and then announcing Rome II, but PI can troll the community by using a project name that obviously references a Rome game? Either trolling is allowed or it's not), but it's wrong to say Rome II is not gonna happen and that's that. You'd be surprised how often companies say no to a product only to latter receive better market data that dispels previous held beliefs that then makes them go back on their word. Of course you never hear about it save decades later in biography books and movies, since you only ever hear a project even exists when it's already announced, but the difference is that PDS actively talks to the community and keeps people on the loop and, while that's great, some misinformation can sometimes happen.
So TL;DR: Just remember Crusader Kings I wasn't exactly the most successful game ever
Now why are you looking at me like that? The thread said speculate, I speculate! :ninja:
Yes, Shams seemed to be trying to stir up the pot a little to see if people really had an interest. I hated the Kickstarter reference, as Paradox is no startup needing that kind of cash injection to start a game, but I saw the reasoning. Obviously they want to put their money where they can get a return. That said, I wonder if perhaps they might wish for a later start so as to connect with Crusader Kings, like they have with the Crusader kings and EU via converter, which obviously is another way to add revenue. Perhaps 2nd cent Empire through dark ages, lots of possible intrigue, invasions, etc. But what do I know, they can do whatever they want, and more likely than not, I will do what I have always done: buy it.Actually, they didn't make it "clear", not exactly. Making something like that clear would be to announce it during a stockholders meeting and having it made clear to the press in no ambiguous manner. Instead what we have is a post by Shams (Who I understand is a PI employee) saying, in a non-binding manner, that Rome 2 was a no-go in the foreseeable future and a follow-up stream explaining why (bottom line: he doesn't believe it can be sucessful, if not absolutely then in terms of cost of opportunity). Now, first and foremost, do note PDS/PI has shown itself to be very democratic in what game gets done (see VicII) so even if Shams and others don't believe in the project, all it takes is a majority within the voting group for the game to get made, also note that on that same thread Johan also came on, seemingly throwing some cold water in the burn by noting that "Shams is young and has a small view of "foreseeable future", maybe (or maybe not) hinting that the matter is not so one sided at the office.
Also note that Shams reasoning, while fully valid, rest squarely on market analysis and product expectations, which can be adjusted over time. It's entirely possible that at time of that post Shams was speaking with a certain analysis in hand, but further analysis suggested the previous held belief that Rome 2 might not be a successful product to the company could actually be wrong. At that point, any company would go back on its previous statements, specially the ones on a forum.
Finally, even Shams himself sorta left an open door for Rome 2, mentioning he could picture it going the Kickstarter route. Now while I dont believe they'll actually do a kickstarter out of it, it still goes to show that the matter isn't as set in stone as one might assume.
All and all, I sure as heck don't know if this is indeed Rome II or an obvious trolling attempt (btw, how exactly cant Shams be trolling the community by saying no Rome II and then announcing Rome II, but PI can troll the community by using a project name that obviously references a Rome game? Either trolling is allowed or it's not), but it's wrong to say Rome II is not gonna happen and that's that. You'd be surprised how often companies say no to a product only to latter receive better market data that dispels previous held beliefs that then makes them go back on their word. Of course you never hear about it save decades later in biography books and movies, since you only ever hear a project even exists when it's already announced, but the difference is that PDS actively talks to the community and keeps people on the loop and, while that's great, some misinformation can sometimes happen.
So TL;DR: Just remember Crusader Kings I wasn't exactly the most successful game ever
Now why are you looking at me like that? The thread said speculate, I speculate! :ninja:
Ha, developers are consistent about misinformation to keep players on edge till official announcements are made. Unofficial declarations are typically false herrings.
- Status
STOP! COOKIE TIME