Why a Modern Day Paradox Game is more important than Victoria 3

[fredinno]

As I was posting on this thread: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...he-eu-an-empire.1044852/page-14#post-23390356

I realized something- why a Modern Day Paradox game would be one of the best ideas ever- better than Vichy 3:
War isn't a good way to expand your borders and influence anymore.

This would make a Modern Day game a completely different kind of Grand Strategy game- more akin to say, CK2.

If this was merged with Vicky 2 POPs, and a EU HRE-style system (Trying to win the 3 seats of the EU, while trying to centralize the empire and beat back- or embrace American influence...)

Not to mention the quickly changing world requires constantly changing your strategy. Politics in 1950 USA is nothing like 2017 USA, for example. (though I doubt the game would last to the Modern Day- 2000AD is a pretty good place to stop )


Why is it more important than Vicky 3? ...Vicky had a bit of a problem with differentiation, in my opinion. It felt a lot like a slower EU3- which is possibly why Vicky 3 is on the backburner in Paradox Interactive- especially when HOI4 and Stellaris are completely broken at the moment.

A Modern Day GSG has the potential to be an incredibly deep and challenging game, without becoming HOI3- just because of the nature of Modern Day politics alone.

 

[Kovax]

I would suspect that there are several modern issues which are a bit too sensitive to tackle, as their game representation would almost inevitably alienate one segment of their fan base or another. Even WWII needs to be handled carefully due to ongoing cultural, religious, and ethnic issues. Not to say that it can't be done, but I have my doubts about the relative merits of the game versus the virtual minefield that it could become.

Maybe something set in the "cold war" era.....? It's still well within living memory for a lot of people, but far enough back that one can at least view it with some detachment. Personally, I'd rather see a revised and debugged Vicky game.

 

[fredinno]

I would suspect that there are several modern issues which are a bit too sensitive to tackle, as their game representation would almost inevitably alienate one segment of their fan base or another. Even WWII needs to be handled carefully due to ongoing cultural, religious, and ethnic issues. Not to say that it can't be done, but I have my doubts about the relative merits of the game versus the virtual minefield that it could become.

Maybe something set in the "cold war" era.....? It's still well within living memory for a lot of people, but far enough back that one can at least view it with some detachment. Personally, I'd rather see a revised and debugged Vicky game.

1945-2000 is still "Cold War Era". The only years that weren't, were 1945-1950, to 1985-2000. My worry is that without the extra 15-20 years, the game is simply too short. The end of the Soviet Union was a pretty optimistic time overall, anyways.

And in any case, you can just go Kaiserreich, and just do an alternate history if it's too touchy.

 

[Ezumiyr]

War isn't a good way to expand your borders and influence anymore.

CK2.

Pick one.

A Modern Day GSG has the potential to be an incredibly deep and challenging game, without becoming HOI3- just because of the nature of Modern Day politics alone.

Could you give examples? Because, afaik, Stellaris could also be deep and about complex political decisions - but the thing is that Paradox makes wargames and has always made wargames (even if we want to call that "grand strategy"). War and ressource management are the core of their games. If you want a game about modern-day politics, I'd advise you to play Democracy 3.

 

[henzington]

Even eu4 abstracts slavery, only Stellaris really has genocide or slavery as it is on safer grounds as its sci fi