Not just a rumor, they discussed it as a fact at PDXCon, during the "High Council of Grand Strategy".
V3 before CK3
- Thread starter Arthrodira
- Start date
-
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.
Not just a rumor, they discussed it as a fact at PDXCon, during the "High Council of Grand Strategy".
Oh, absolutely, I agree. Tyrant would be an endearing compliment to how I play CK2. And usually it's a point of praise by journalist.
I'll have to watch that. But honestly I have always found that a weak excuse for not doing it. That code didn't exist before they made Vic2 either after all. But thanks for the tip
Here's the link:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/496641130
The they start the panel at 07:17:00. There is also other relevant talk regarding Vicky 2 and how they view it as a similar game to HoI 3.
EDIT:
The most relevant Victoria bit starts around 07:42:00.
Last edited:
After listening to it I'm now totally on board with a Vicky 2: Two and just remastering Vicky
Like, what can you do in CK2 that is so horrible? Become a satanist for the lulz? Marry your family, castrate, blind rebellious nobles etc. But you can't enslave, or kill off large parts of a population. How is CK2 "bad stuff" compared to vic2's war crimes/crimes against humanity? I too think "political correctness" is a factor in not making another vicky.
If you think you can succeed at the problem that every moral philosopher in history, even utilitarian ones, have avoided like the plague and can quantify and compare the morality of different actions then by all means, have at it.
edit: Just so I'm clear, obviously 2 murders is worse than 1, and so on. The point is that by saying "How is X bad compared to..." you're implying that something bad can be made not bad by comparison, which is wrong.
Last edited:
Yes, I can quite confidently say that systematic extermination is different than murder. There are actually quite a few people who have spend countless hours quantifying those things. This is how there are trials of war crimes, distinctions made between racial cleansing and "normal war crimes" etc. Nonetheless, I think even a layman can recognize the difference between group murder of millions for racial/supremacy ideological reasons compared to murdering every noble in the realm for more money and power.
Different amounts of bad is not the same thing as bad vs. not bad because of a comparison, which is what you were saying initially. You argued X, I said people don't do X, now you're saying you can do Y. Good for you, that's not what you said before.
Logged in after many years to add to the rant. I really feel like PDX has given a middle finger to the core fans who have been waiting for V3 for years. Also agree that CK3 doesn't really make sense, for a game with a bazillion of DLCs, it never had a time to cool down. I'm just burned out by the contentious development model and lackluster releases of the recent games, I don't see myself paying for any PDX titles in near future.
Last edited:
Is it though? Vic2 is kind of like Ck1 was, a good game with a cult following but not loads of players and then ck2 came around and became the game that turned paradox gold. If done well by someone who cares I think vic3 could be another masterpiece.
Oh, we're getting into philosophy in this thread, oh yeah. Or at least that's how I'm gunna take it.
I would agree there is a distinction but both are equally wrong regardless of scale. To take the life of one individual is as terrible as taking the life of billions. The distinction is only for our own edification, so we can catagorize the act. It has nothing to do with how terrible it is.
But if we really want to talk about crimes against humanity in paradox games let's take a moment to talk about Stellaris
Hearts of Iron 5
March of the Eagles 2
Europa Universalis 5
Imperator 2
East vs West: For Real This Time
Arsenal of Democracy 2
before Victoria 3, looks like.
March of the Eagles 2
Europa Universalis 5
Imperator 2
East vs West: For Real This Time
Arsenal of Democracy 2
before Victoria 3, looks like.
Well, at least one game in this list won't appear from Paradox before Vicky 3. Terminal Conflict is in an early-release stage, and its being developed by at least one or two of the people who tried to do East vs. West.
http://terminalconflict.com/
Looks like a decent game, actually.
No one has pointed out in this thread yet that at PDXCon on the final day there was a Game Director's Council, or whatever they called it, where their five senior game designers sat down together and mostly talked nonsense. But at one point, Johan replied to a question by saying that he would very much like to make a game set between the end of the Napoleonic Wars and World War I. So that is about as clear an indication that we're going to have that Vicky 3 is indeed in development, and probably has been in development for some time. Chris King probably began work on it two or more years ago, then he left and now Wiz seems to be the project lead. (Wiz was introduced to this discussion without being specifically linked to any game, unlike the others.)
Why haven't they announced it? As someone said above, Vicky is by far their most complex game, and it's no surprise that it has taken a long time.
Why haven't they announced it? As someone said above, Vicky is by far their most complex game, and it's no surprise that it has taken a long time.
Pretty sure that was just to troll every Vicky supporter out there... It does not mean anything other than that Johan has a sense of humor.
No, I think otherwise. They would have seen how many people were surprised and disappointed by the announcement of CK3 and it makes sense to keep that part of the base interested in what happens next. Even if Johan likes playing those games at times, it's not good business to deliberately alienate and mislead the customers.
But obviously only time will tell.
Vicky 2 is a hella complicated game but I doubt Vicky 3 will be. They pretty much said it themselves in the "High Council of Grand Strategy" they design games based around systems players will have fun interacting with and not as simulations. At that time they commented on how Vicky 2 is very much a simulation and how that caused complaints from the players in terms of how the AI acted.
I doubt they would reverse their development trend to make something like Victoria 2 again. Especially since they claim people wouldn't like it.
I doubt they would reverse their development trend to make something like Victoria 2 again. Especially since they claim people wouldn't like it.
That amount that was disappointed by CK3 instead of V3 is a lot less than the I:R disappointment, I think. And since the statement "It's not Victoria 3" is taken as a confirmation that it is indeed V3... I think you are grasping at something Johan in no way tried to communicate.
Note: this does not mean that V3 is not in development - it simply means that Johan's statement doesn't offer any type of promise - simply a joke about the V3 now cries...