Outlook for the future of Paradox games

[dankirkham]

I've been a fan of Paradox games since the pre-history of computer games: you know, back when people bought these things called "Compact Discs" for computer games and not steam codes.

During the early 2000s, Paradox, to me, built a reputation of having these niche games meant for grand strategy, micro-management. But in the past decade, I've noticed they've put out more games besides this genre, and thus have diversified its consumer base, which at this point I consider toxic.

I know Paradox, and I know some people will disagre with this statement, but I'll offer an explanation as for why you may disagree. Ok, perhaps my most controvercial view of of Paradox is that they are the most consumer friendly pc gaming company I've encountered. Before thinking me crazy, let me explain my reasoning since I've been a fan of Paradox almost since they first started selling games.

In its early days, I alluded to this: they focused on one niche of people. Being consumer friendly when you focus on one niche, is an absolute positive. Here are some ways they were/are consumer friendly: everything was actually of interest to most of its consumers and I found it rare for anyone to consider any content over-priced(not anymore though, lots of complaints happen complaining about over-priced content nowadays, which I don't think has to do with them being over-priced objectively, but that the base has changed and people of other opinions in the consumer base will not consider some DLC worth it, while others will). Additionally, Paradox has maintained a very mod-friendly environment, to where they even implement user interfaces in their games specifically for modders(there's actually not a ton of gaming companies that do this).

Anyways, here is why I think people no longer see them as consumer friendly. It's not that they aren't, but being consumer friendly when you've switched from catering to one niche of people, to idk, probably now they attempt to(without success) cater to 5 or more, is a very bad thing. Now this means that the consumer base is full of differing opinions, and Paradox is literally incapable of catering to its whole consumer base now. Some evidence of this is games like Magicka, Tyranny, and (to some extent) stellaris prior to version 2.2, were vastly different from titles they had in the early days and what imo, they became famous for. All of these games came out just in the past 10 years too.

So, when one niche in the consumer base gets a game that they totally didn't expect, i.e stellaris which was extremely simplistic (at first) in comparison to what us old-timers are used to for Paradox Grand Strategy games, leaves a sour taste in our mouth.

I had bought the game when it first came out. I played it for maybe a week, and decided it was too boring for me, but it was too late for a steam refund as I put too many hours on it. I never touched it again for years until update 2.2 came out that added the micro-managing their games are usually known for, and this sparked my interest again.

The problem is, consumers in the niche for simple, story-based games(which appeared to be a niche Paradox decided to expand to some 10 years ago with certain games) got pissed off due to the update that essentially drastically changed their game.

I've already made this post longer than intended, but this pattern of acquiring more and more niches and going mainstream has me worried for paradox games. I'm now having to be skeptical of when I buy grand strategy games from them, where previously I didn't have to be. Paradox is expanding too much, imo; they are trying to cater to all consumers, but as a result, I feel like it's just resulting in a large chunk of people who are angry.

I know personally for me, as a 20-year-long fan of Paradox, if this trend continues, I fear I would end up discontinuing buying from them ever again. As it is I probably only own 10% of their games made in the last 10 years, where in the 2000s, I owned practically every title.

Anyone else agree, and see where I'm coming from that they are becoming too consumer-friendly? Paradox should return to its former past of catering to one niche of people, imo. But maybe they are finding it more profitable to go this route, so I imagine it's out of the question for them to return to former reputations.

 

[rustic]

To me it seems that the sens morale of your post is that the consumer, before forking out for a game, ought to properly inform him-/herself as to be somewhat sure that it caters to interests at hand, instead of just buying "blindly" when his/her favourite developer releases something new.

 

[starkwolf]

To be clear, are you opposed to the UI changes as well or just the mechanics changes?

It seems to me that at the end of the day, there is a reason micromanagement has fallen out of favor: it ruins pacing. The more that a game can streamline the strategy without actually making it less intellectual seems to me to always be a good thing, and the easier find the important controls the better. Struggling against the controls, for most people, is less enjoyable then struggling against the puzzle itself. Unless I completely misunderstand your complaint.

For the other part (I think), while expanding into other genres might delay the release of games in your favorite genre from what would otherwise be possible, it isn't going to cause a drop in overall quality. The quality is mostly going to be a matter of good staff, healthy work environment (which from what I have heard Paradox offers an amazing work environment for their employees compared to most large gaming companies, AAA or near AAA), and funding/tech to work with, which has only gone up.

 

[Dnote]

Its a challenge, but a game can be accessible and complex, it all comes down to the presentation to the user and the control methods used.

When looking at our Grand Strategy games, they kind of fall on a spectrum, at one end we have what we consider the entry titles, those that have a broader appeal and will bring people into the genre, then at the other end we have those with a more focused appeal, perhaps with a steeper learning curve or more specific/less popular theme.

Throughout the spectrum we're interested in keeping gameplay/system complexity, but we are trying to get better about how we present it and how we let the player engage with it. It is also our intention that people who come into GSGs through one of the more accessible games, like Stellaris, will over time convert to enjoying more complex experiences and try out our other GSGs.

So, maybe not every GSG will appeal to every GSG player, but there should always be something that does. Also, our Game Directors aren't really interested in simplifying the game designs, so we're never really going to get broader than Stellaris is, it just isn't how they work.

Also, keep in mind that GSGs are made by PDS, and we have other people developing other types of games, what Publishing does isn't a reflection on what we're capable of doing, it is largely driven by the developers we work with and what they are interested in doing. PDS will always, at least as far as I have planned, only make GSGs.

 

[magriboy0750]

However,you have also tried the RPG genre with Runemaster.It's too bad that it was cancelled.It was sound like a really great game.Also,are you interested by a Cold War or a Modern GSG in the future?
Cordially.

 

[starkwolf]

Throughout the spectrum we're interested in keeping gameplay/system complexity, but we are trying to get better about how we present it and how we let the player engage with it.

In that regard I feel that as a company Paradox has come a really long way, it's amazing how much information and how many options the player can be presented with while keeping the number of things to manage and puzzle solve through high!

 

[dankirkham]

To me it seems that the sens morale of your post is that the consumer, before forking out for a game, ought to properly inform him-/herself as to be somewhat sure that it caters to interests at hand, instead of just buying "blindly" when his/her favourite developer releases something new.

No, I definitely do research regardless. Stellaris prior to V2.0 was the only game paradox made I was disappointed in at first, since the research I did do at the time made it seem like it would be something interesting to me. Either way, I'm not complaining about Stellaris anymore, particularly since I like it now with v2.2. But, I definitely can normally tell which games I'd want to buy from paradox and which ones I don't, hence why I've only boughten maybe 10% of their games over the past decade.

 

[dankirkham]

However,you have also tried the RPG genre with Runemaster.It's too bad that it was cancelled.It was sound like a really great game.Also,are you interested by a Cold War or a Modern GSG in the future?
Cordially.

Runemaster? The only RPG I have from Paradox is Tyranny(as is shown under my name). I don't have complaints about that one, it was more of a test to see if I'd enjoy an RPG on the computer(which I suppose I don't enjoy them nearly as much as Grand Strategy games, but I'm not complaining about having purchased that since it was an experiment I was doing to begin with to see If I'd enjoy such an RPG).

 

[dankirkham]

To be clear, are you opposed to the UI changes as well or just the mechanics changes?

Oh, I definitely think the UI should be simplified. I'm definitely only referring to mechanic changes. To me, early Stellaris pretty much had 1 or 2 go-to strategies, which was a little lame to me. Newer versions seem like there is a more diverse set of strategies one can go with. To me, the more viable strategies there are, the better the strategy game is.

 

[magriboy0750]

Runemaster? The only RPG I have from Paradox is Tyranny(as is shown under my name). I don't have complaints about that one, it was more of a test to see if I'd enjoy an RPG on the computer(which I suppose I don't enjoy them nearly as much as Grand Strategy games, but I'm not complaining about having purchased that since it was an experiment I was doing to begin with to see If I'd enjoy such an RPG).

Read my post again.It was a try for a Paradox Development Studio RPG Game.It has been canceled in 2014.
Source:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-information-the-future-of-runemaster.821164/
Cordially.

 

[starkwolf]

Oh, I definitely think the UI should be simplified. I'm definitely only referring to mechanic changes. To me, early Stellaris pretty much had 1 or 2 go-to strategies, which was a little lame to me. Newer versions seem like there is a more diverse set of strategies one can go with. To me, the more viable strategies there are, the better the strategy game is.

Okay, well that I agree with entirely. I am just used to that with a lot of games and use a degree of active ignorance to keep the game engaging (by this I mean basically I won't look up what the strategies are, I just limit my learning to what I personally experience to make it interesting longer).