-
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.
Sengoku II is likelier for all those players from Asia and the manga/anime lovers in America and Europe.
- 1
Stellaris isn't going to be it, as they're working on version 3.
Most likely Vicky 3 or a brand new IP (perhaps fantasy-related?).
And to be honest, i think i'll play Vicky III if done right even more than EU, Stellaris, Hoi and CK together, as that is my most favourite time period, as it mixes what makes Hoi and EUIV fun and include new things like "issues / policies".
Most likely Vicky 3 or a brand new IP (perhaps fantasy-related?).
And to be honest, i think i'll play Vicky III if done right even more than EU, Stellaris, Hoi and CK together, as that is my most favourite time period, as it mixes what makes Hoi and EUIV fun and include new things like "issues / policies".
- 1
To be honest, Vicky was disrespected so much because it was considered niche and a risk. Especially after the recent events it seems that Vicky would be a far more secure bet than EUV, Stellaris 2 or an unexpected, new game which does not have a fanbase at all. It has a solid playerbase, is regarded as a "myth" by Paradoxians and also would be considered a "new beginning" after some unpolished or disappointing releases - simply because Victoria is still considered "clean" and associated with huge nostalgia. In fact, from the retrospective, Vicky III would have been a far better investment than Imperator back then (if Imperator was released in the actual state it would have been a whole different story, however).
Not only from the perspective of a huge Vicky-fan, but also regarding the whole status of affairs, the announcement of Vicky would be the best what could happen to Paradox at this moment.
Not only from the perspective of a huge Vicky-fan, but also regarding the whole status of affairs, the announcement of Vicky would be the best what could happen to Paradox at this moment.
- 10
- 2
The annoucnement is probably whatever game Wiz has been directing for the last two years. It is certainly possible that is Stellaris 2, but hopefully it is a Victoria 3 project that Chris King started in 2016 and was passed off to Wiz in 2018.
- 4
People usually assume Chris King's project was the one that got cancelled some time ago.
- 2
One of the reasons why I think Vicky 2 sales is underwhelming compared to other ones is of course that right now PI recent games are more popular. All popular iterations got a new version (EUIII -> EUIV, CKII -> CKIII, Hoi3 -> Hoi4), and on top of that they have a new succesful IP Stellaris and also gave new life to the Rome iteration. Vicky II is graphically already a dated game. But the most important reason is that Vicky II is incredibly complex and hard to learn as well as hard to master, even compared to other PI games. It's the one game i haven't been able to have a grasp on, because it is so hard (similar to Kerbal Space Program-difficulty). One of the very few games that are way too hard for me personally even after hours of dedication. PI has made their games more accessible. It's what HoI quite succesful, on top of offering more "alternative historical possibilities", whereas HoI2 was more realistic and had less options. I'm not saying Vicky has to follow that route or that it has to be a hard game, but if done in a similar way as EUIV, it could be a top game seller i believe.
If i never knew about Paradox Interactive or their games, and you told me there were strategy games about the second world war (more focused on warfare), the medieval ages (but more focused on family), one about Rome, one about the Victorian age, one space grand strategy game and one centered in the era EUIV covers, i would guess EUIV would be the least popular one honestly followed by perhaps the medieval age, while I would think the Rome, the WWII and the Space grand strategy game would be the most popular. It still stuns me that the EU IP is the most popular one, but it is one incredibly well made (even if you disagree with their post-content or marketing strategies, the end product while very expensive, even though during sales it's less expensive but the end product is fantastic). I believe they can do that for Vicky too.
And EUV would be a risk or Stellaris II since i'm unable to see what they could improve in EUV what they couldn't do in EUIV. CKIII had the benefit that CKII perhaps was graphically dated, and that indeed it seems things could indeed slightly be improved but the graphical change is a notable change. But for a possible EUV i'm unable to see what could persuade players to jump to the next game. Civ V is still at times more popular than Civ VI, and that could be the case for EU for a long time, especially given people are gonna wait to buy it given they're now familiar with the post-content strategy of Paradox Interactive.
Vicky III is one that would be able to improve on Vicky II (graphically, gameplay, accessibility), add new ideas to it but more importantly significantly widen their base if done right, and i'm unable to see how other iterations at this time could do that to a similar extent (and no, vicky II is not a bad game, it's just that it has much more potential than it has right now, and why it's the game i want to see announced most right now).
Modern era GSG have a few problems that I don't think could be overcome, and as no-one has been able to produce a qualitative game, i don't think it will happen.
1. It's gonna be way too controversial to depict certain countries. Some countries will be upset, banning the game in their country, and it's hard to be neutral as a game publisher. In historical games, it's less difficult, since what happened did happen.
2. The modern era isn't just that interesting, as there is often no "real goal" in the game, if you wanna go realistic. If you want the same intensity of war and things like that, it's gonna be over the top and not interest anyone, while if you go realistic, it might feel way too boring for a large part of the potential userbase, since warfare on a large scale is less common than it was centuries ago. Few countries have a standing army that large.
If they wanna take the risk, you're gonna need to overhaul the GSG system to make it interesting, and perhaps make it more of a political simulator focused on issues and elections, dealing with domestic problems as well as geopolitical conflicts or issues like climate change, nuclear proliferation or things like pandemic response, but less on actual warfare, except for some proxy conflicts, but conquer the world and paint your map in your nation's colour would just not be that interesting i think. They'll have to look more into how Democracy 4 and stuff like that works, than to their own games, because otherwise it's not going to work.
A fantasy IP could work (Total War also went with Warhammer for fantasy). It's possible to do. Alternate history is also an option if they run out of ideas, as Kaiserreich has shown that it could be popular if done right.
If i never knew about Paradox Interactive or their games, and you told me there were strategy games about the second world war (more focused on warfare), the medieval ages (but more focused on family), one about Rome, one about the Victorian age, one space grand strategy game and one centered in the era EUIV covers, i would guess EUIV would be the least popular one honestly followed by perhaps the medieval age, while I would think the Rome, the WWII and the Space grand strategy game would be the most popular. It still stuns me that the EU IP is the most popular one, but it is one incredibly well made (even if you disagree with their post-content or marketing strategies, the end product while very expensive, even though during sales it's less expensive but the end product is fantastic). I believe they can do that for Vicky too.
And EUV would be a risk or Stellaris II since i'm unable to see what they could improve in EUV what they couldn't do in EUIV. CKIII had the benefit that CKII perhaps was graphically dated, and that indeed it seems things could indeed slightly be improved but the graphical change is a notable change. But for a possible EUV i'm unable to see what could persuade players to jump to the next game. Civ V is still at times more popular than Civ VI, and that could be the case for EU for a long time, especially given people are gonna wait to buy it given they're now familiar with the post-content strategy of Paradox Interactive.
Vicky III is one that would be able to improve on Vicky II (graphically, gameplay, accessibility), add new ideas to it but more importantly significantly widen their base if done right, and i'm unable to see how other iterations at this time could do that to a similar extent (and no, vicky II is not a bad game, it's just that it has much more potential than it has right now, and why it's the game i want to see announced most right now).
Modern era GSG have a few problems that I don't think could be overcome, and as no-one has been able to produce a qualitative game, i don't think it will happen.
1. It's gonna be way too controversial to depict certain countries. Some countries will be upset, banning the game in their country, and it's hard to be neutral as a game publisher. In historical games, it's less difficult, since what happened did happen.
2. The modern era isn't just that interesting, as there is often no "real goal" in the game, if you wanna go realistic. If you want the same intensity of war and things like that, it's gonna be over the top and not interest anyone, while if you go realistic, it might feel way too boring for a large part of the potential userbase, since warfare on a large scale is less common than it was centuries ago. Few countries have a standing army that large.
If they wanna take the risk, you're gonna need to overhaul the GSG system to make it interesting, and perhaps make it more of a political simulator focused on issues and elections, dealing with domestic problems as well as geopolitical conflicts or issues like climate change, nuclear proliferation or things like pandemic response, but less on actual warfare, except for some proxy conflicts, but conquer the world and paint your map in your nation's colour would just not be that interesting i think. They'll have to look more into how Democracy 4 and stuff like that works, than to their own games, because otherwise it's not going to work.
A fantasy IP could work (Total War also went with Warhammer for fantasy). It's possible to do. Alternate history is also an option if they run out of ideas, as Kaiserreich has shown that it could be popular if done right.
Last edited:
- 4
Which is the big unknown. We don't know exactly how long there was between Chris leaving and Wiz changing projects.
Chris left for Romero games sometime in the Fall of that year.
Wiz left Stellaris to head some other game also sometime in the Fall of that year.
Realistically there are only two likely scenarios.
- Chris left PDS because his design work was done and PDS moved Wiz over to complete development on the game.
or
- Chris left PDS because his project was canceled. PDS took some time to figure out what to do, and then greenlit a new project and moved Wiz from Stelarris to head design/development of it.
The first one is the Victoria III scenario.
The second is a Stellaris II scenario.
- 3
- 2
Yes but why work on Stellaris patch 3.0 and additional DLC if they are going to announce Stellaris 3.
Unless the new proposed fantasy GGS IP will be similar to that of Stellaris, which is where Wiz got moved to.
Unless the new proposed fantasy GGS IP will be similar to that of Stellaris, which is where Wiz got moved to.
- 2
- 1
To be fair, the steep learning curve Vic2 has compared to other PDX games is mostly due to its UX, information just isn't displayed on a very accessible way at all.
Once you do hold a grasp of the game however, you realize it isn't that monster most people make it out to be.
Having a handle over the basic and mid level mechanics of the game is already more than enough to finish many successful campaigns.
The advanced stuff is quite difficult indeed, needing you in many cases to dive deep into the bowels of this simulation, but not something players need to do at all to play the game.
So just overhauling the entire UX would already go miles into making the game more accessible.
- 8
They were already developing CK3 while they were also working on Holy Fury.
It is likely that design work on CK3 occurred even a year before that - PDS full development cycle is now 4-5 years per title.
- 2
Well before the last PDXcon they already said it wouldn't be Victoria III. So maybe that's the surprise and they dont give hints as it would be to obvious.
But maybe thats just wishful thinking from my side. Lets just hope for the best (which is Vic 3)
- 3
- 1
It´s a bit sad that we moved away from forum teasers like HOI4 and Imperator Rome into a very short video in Instagram for CK3 into nothing for the next game.
- 3
For me, it should be either Vic3 or new IP (historical or fantasy GSG).
Not interested much in continuation of current IPs (e.g EU5 or Stellaris2). I'd save those for next year.
Not interested much in continuation of current IPs (e.g EU5 or Stellaris2). I'd save those for next year.
- 4
No. The game is 5 years old at this point. There are games older than it that are either in active development (EUIV) or have just left active development (CKII). Don't expect a sequel for another few years for Stellaris.
It wasn't cancelled. He just left.
That was only for that particular PDXCon. They have already stated that Vicky 3 has been in discussions.
- 1
I think you misunderstand. I'm referring to two things here. We know Chris King left a project and we know a project got cancelled. Hence, people assume it's his project that got cancelled.
- 1