If they offered their own distribution, then it would be much more difficult, if not impossible, to reach agreements with publishers. Although this would allow Paradox to sell their games directly, thus eliminating the intermediaries of publishers and distributors, this would also mean that their games would not be sold in stores and that they would need to do all marketing themselves.
The difficulty settings in EUII affected both the player and the AI. In Civ II, however, high difficulty levels simply resulted in massive AI cheating, which naturally made the game far more difficult to win.Originally posted by M@ni@c
christianx:
Really?IIRC it took me some four years of civing before I dared play on the highest difficulty level. EU2 I played on Very Hard my second game, after in my first game I easily ruled half the world with Denmark on normal difficulty level. Though of course that may simply be because I'm better at any kind of strategy game right now.
Originally posted by Derek Pullem
I'm not knocking Paradox - it's just that I'm not sure that mainstream publishers will ever look at Paradox games with eager anticipation. Strategy First is unusual in maintaining an interest in "difficult" games. I'd argue that the Matrix Games / Shrapnel Games model is a more likely outcome for Paradox. After all many people will not want to sit through the 3 hour wait for a full CD and will buy the retail package if it is available in the shops.
Just how many impulse buys are there for Paradox games
