Why is this game so addicting? How do you do it paradox, its not that i don't like the game, but it takes over my mind. Anyone else have addiction stories to share?
-
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.
It is oddly addicting. Even though the game, after all this time, is beginning to bore me, I'd sooner search for ways to keep it interesting than switch games.
White Daimon said:Obviously, this is the only paradox game you´ve ever played
invisible conquistador hats are quite nice, i suppose this should be moved because they have all been electronic crack to me, VIP:r is just my current blend
I totally agree with you...it is the most addicting game I've ever played. Heck, I find myself thinking about it when I'm bored. My plans for whatever country I'm playing and stuff :wacko:
EDIT: May I also add that this coming February marks the 3rd anniversary of the first time I booted up Vicky...and for a year and half of those 3 years, Vicky was literally the only game that I played, leaving Sim City and other assorted games that I have been addicted to previously, in the dust.
EDIT: May I also add that this coming February marks the 3rd anniversary of the first time I booted up Vicky...and for a year and half of those 3 years, Vicky was literally the only game that I played
, leaving Sim City and other assorted games that I have been addicted to previously, in the dust.
Last edited:
BinomistaR-G said:
You've come to the right place.
Here we don't put you down due to your addiction, we encourage you to express and enjoy it, while at the same time we try to help you moderate it.
noddy102 said:You've come to the right place.
Here we don't put you down due to your addiction, we encourage you to express and enjoy it, while at the same time we try to help you moderate it.
Yes, your addiction doesn't necessarily have to hurt the community. You can just as well give something back to it by for example updating the Vickywiki.
I find this game so endearing because it's the most detailed game Paradox has made. Industry is not some abstract number, and politics aren't just sliders but affected by POPs.
cheers
cheers
The addiction wore of after three years for me. I've been clean for over a year now!
One reason i think is because the game is very much 'open-ended' in terms of how the game involves. You can play the same nation, but can take it on different tracks depending on which ideologies you put into power, whether you focus on empire-building or creating an internal economic dynamo. In the end, the replay value of the game is high because there is no one "set" way to do things, but instead lots of different options one can try with each nation.
Applied Philsophy
As a philosopher, if someone is interested in, I can try to give you a short-bred-philosophical-version:
Being myself very fond of that game, i started to think about the addictive stuff maybe contained in such historical simulations. Besides the well-know "beeing god" feeling carried out by recent video games (eg the sims) where you control everything (perhaps not quite true in Ricky, when i read posts from people frustrated by election output..) and which caresses your ego, I think the POPs system associated with Historical Nations/Flag deserve a particular attention. Here's the result:
I think that all of us are building up their individuality on top of a collective consciousness. This may sound complicated, but is easy to experience every day, as you can call back the collective identity at any time; just have a look at football competitions, political meetings and churches - it's always tempting, "freeing" and good-feeling to "feel" a surrounding support from others, eg. to belong to somewhere. It takes you out of your everyday mind, and its related suffering/frustration. This works very simply by short-circuiting the rational though feeding that frustration; that's why the term "feel" so important in that the process uses a different language than your everyday one.
But this doesn't come without a cost; it's my believe that once you "sign up", once you enter that form of community, you not only put away a part of your personality (can be quite definitive in case you join emotionally strong linked communities like religious sects), but you also carry out all the pain/frustration which may be conveyed by the collective, such as past defeats, national pride suffering... everything that could endanger the collective identity. Quite simple contract: you get the collective support, which mays make you feel strong; and in exchange, you have to defend by all means the collective identity you joined. As the collective language is a heavy emotional one (see above), reactions can be quite impressive (angry mobs, riots, pogroms).
A this point the link to Vicky/Ricky becomes quite clear: the 19th century is the area of Nationalism par excellence in that most of todays collective identities called "Nations" emerged between the Revolutions and WWI. This means that many of the hits/frustration where also experienced during this period. Now, (nearly) everyone in here probably thinks he belongs to one of these nations, and thus has to confront himself with the very heart of that nation: its history. And so he has to face the whole thing, with its pride -and its pain. But the contract is clear: you get the collective if you defend it Again, notice the lack of clear defense objective: against Whom ? What? which leads to infinite possibilities. In terms of history, this can mean reviewing past actions and justifying/correcting them. It's not only true for paradoxians; everyone does so. Just have a look at the recent debate over the Armenian genocide. Collective identity is a burning hot issue, so that now politicians are voting out our "official" version of history (=if you still want to be considered american/armenian/turk and so on, you'd better accept it)...
And than comes Vicky/Ricky with the possibility to virtually correct one's history. Pure genious. You can work yourself through the whole period, facing each big event (thanks to VIP) AND giving your own solution, doing your job as defender of the collective identity. Your consciousness doesn't make the difference between simulation and reality dealing with past events. Things are really emphasized though the pop system, where you can nearly touch ethnic groups and "correct" their dispatching over the world; one must recall that our modern concept of nation is commonly associated with ethnicities, so that the "who (ethnicy)'s the right to be american/french/german..(nation) remains the biggest catalyst of collective frustration. Ethnic cleansing is probably as old as human collectives. And just like historical events, in Vicky/Ricky you get the possibility to fix/correct things according to your representation. Making Poland populated by Germans or Prussia by poles; emptying Ireland, Frenchising Rheinland and so on. IF you are strongly linked to any concerned collective identity, this makes you feel good in that is calms down some deeply burried crying part of your mind, and feel strong in that you excavate that part, and give it plenty of room. Since the possibilities are nearly infinite, as OHgamer just wrote, you can always do it better, finishing as a slave of a representation of collective greatness.
I would say, this is the negative part of playing Ricky, but, again, this is my personal point of view.
And then, once you start confronting yourself with others, playing the same game (on the forum or in history lesson), you get the possibility to confront your view with some others views and start a very interest process of dissociation. One must know that the collective identity is a very despotic master which cannot tolerate plurality, eg other points of view. If you listen to another version, you're doubting and unfaithful. But even if doubting makes you feel uncomfortable, it makes room again for your individuality and so for your personality. The more you digg into your collective history (eg supporting VIP, playing different nations in Ricky or reading/listening to historians in real life), the more that part becomes stronger and stronger until you can dissociate with the collective, beeing able to distinguish myths (collective believe) from history (skeptical analysis), and so what comes from "outside" from your personal point of view, eg yourself. The resulting individuality is much stronger than the starting one and less prone to sink again into the collective identity; and i would say everyone should undergo this process, although it requires time, energy and individual support (love), as you may feel quite lost at some time.
I would say this is the positive effect of paradox games.
In the very end, the "paradox effect" depends on each personality; i have no statistics underneath to prove it, but would say that if most of us first enjoy the "god mode", the above described process is a question of maturity and probably concerns older players which may experience it in more or less extend. But philosophy is never a finished science; so that this writing should be considered as an introduction to the much more important (hopefully) following discussion. A good place to start is doubting: "what qwerkus writes is just crap; let's tell him the truth.."
PS: If you find some language related errors, I would be happy to correct them.
As a philosopher, if someone is interested in, I can try to give you a short-bred-philosophical-version:
Being myself very fond of that game, i started to think about the addictive stuff maybe contained in such historical simulations. Besides the well-know "beeing god" feeling carried out by recent video games (eg the sims) where you control everything (perhaps not quite true in Ricky, when i read posts from people frustrated by election output..) and which caresses your ego, I think the POPs system associated with Historical Nations/Flag deserve a particular attention. Here's the result:
I think that all of us are building up their individuality on top of a collective consciousness. This may sound complicated, but is easy to experience every day, as you can call back the collective identity at any time; just have a look at football competitions, political meetings and churches - it's always tempting, "freeing" and good-feeling to "feel" a surrounding support from others, eg. to belong to somewhere. It takes you out of your everyday mind, and its related suffering/frustration. This works very simply by short-circuiting the rational though feeding that frustration; that's why the term "feel" so important in that the process uses a different language than your everyday one.
But this doesn't come without a cost; it's my believe that once you "sign up", once you enter that form of community, you not only put away a part of your personality (can be quite definitive in case you join emotionally strong linked communities like religious sects), but you also carry out all the pain/frustration which may be conveyed by the collective, such as past defeats, national pride suffering... everything that could endanger the collective identity. Quite simple contract: you get the collective support, which mays make you feel strong; and in exchange, you have to defend by all means the collective identity you joined. As the collective language is a heavy emotional one (see above), reactions can be quite impressive (angry mobs, riots, pogroms).
A this point the link to Vicky/Ricky becomes quite clear: the 19th century is the area of Nationalism par excellence in that most of todays collective identities called "Nations" emerged between the Revolutions and WWI. This means that many of the hits/frustration where also experienced during this period. Now, (nearly) everyone in here probably thinks he belongs to one of these nations, and thus has to confront himself with the very heart of that nation: its history. And so he has to face the whole thing, with its pride -and its pain. But the contract is clear: you get the collective if you defend it Again, notice the lack of clear defense objective: against Whom ? What? which leads to infinite possibilities. In terms of history, this can mean reviewing past actions and justifying/correcting them. It's not only true for paradoxians; everyone does so. Just have a look at the recent debate over the Armenian genocide. Collective identity is a burning hot issue, so that now politicians are voting out our "official" version of history (=if you still want to be considered american/armenian/turk and so on, you'd better accept it)...
And than comes Vicky/Ricky with the possibility to virtually correct one's history. Pure genious. You can work yourself through the whole period, facing each big event (thanks to VIP) AND giving your own solution, doing your job as defender of the collective identity. Your consciousness doesn't make the difference between simulation and reality dealing with past events. Things are really emphasized though the pop system, where you can nearly touch ethnic groups and "correct" their dispatching over the world; one must recall that our modern concept of nation is commonly associated with ethnicities, so that the "who (ethnicy)'s the right to be american/french/german..(nation) remains the biggest catalyst of collective frustration. Ethnic cleansing is probably as old as human collectives. And just like historical events, in Vicky/Ricky you get the possibility to fix/correct things according to your representation. Making Poland populated by Germans or Prussia by poles; emptying Ireland, Frenchising Rheinland and so on. IF you are strongly linked to any concerned collective identity, this makes you feel good in that is calms down some deeply burried crying part of your mind, and feel strong in that you excavate that part, and give it plenty of room. Since the possibilities are nearly infinite, as OHgamer just wrote, you can always do it better, finishing as a slave of a representation of collective greatness.
I would say, this is the negative part of playing Ricky, but, again, this is my personal point of view.
And then, once you start confronting yourself with others, playing the same game (on the forum or in history lesson), you get the possibility to confront your view with some others views and start a very interest process of dissociation. One must know that the collective identity is a very despotic master which cannot tolerate plurality, eg other points of view. If you listen to another version, you're doubting and unfaithful. But even if doubting makes you feel uncomfortable, it makes room again for your individuality and so for your personality. The more you digg into your collective history (eg supporting VIP, playing different nations in Ricky or reading/listening to historians in real life), the more that part becomes stronger and stronger until you can dissociate with the collective, beeing able to distinguish myths (collective believe) from history (skeptical analysis), and so what comes from "outside" from your personal point of view, eg yourself. The resulting individuality is much stronger than the starting one and less prone to sink again into the collective identity; and i would say everyone should undergo this process, although it requires time, energy and individual support (love), as you may feel quite lost at some time.
I would say this is the positive effect of paradox games.
In the very end, the "paradox effect" depends on each personality; i have no statistics underneath to prove it, but would say that if most of us first enjoy the "god mode", the above described process is a question of maturity and probably concerns older players which may experience it in more or less extend. But philosophy is never a finished science; so that this writing should be considered as an introduction to the much more important (hopefully) following discussion. A good place to start is doubting: "what qwerkus writes is just crap; let's tell him the truth.."
PS: If you find some language related errors, I would be happy to correct them.
Last edited:
That's a really interesting take querkus - I appreciate the time you took to write it. I have often wondered what it is in myself and others that makes so many of us want to play Germany in WWII? I am working on a PhD in sociology, and my background is in philosophy and theology. If I had never discovered these games, I probably would have spent more time studying, but I think my life would have ultimately been poorer as a result.
I can't take the time right now to really think about it, but I will add that I am seriously considering writing my dissertation on the sociological simulations evident in all these games. I'm interested in the people who play them, but I'm more interested in the games and the designers.
Anyway, there's definitely something here, that's for sure.
Jim
I can't take the time right now to really think about it, but I will add that I am seriously considering writing my dissertation on the sociological simulations evident in all these games. I'm interested in the people who play them, but I'm more interested in the games and the designers.
Anyway, there's definitely something here, that's for sure.
Jim
Interesting subject: there are certainly plenty of things to say about it, though i think you will need a life "demo" if you want to be understood by pre-video-games Professors.James Mason said:
You writing in english ? German ? If you want to dig in a little more, i can help you out. I'm currently working on my own philosophy thesis
qwerkus said:Interesting subject: there are certainly plenty of things to say about it, though i think you will need a life "demo" if you want to be understood by pre-video-games Professors.
You writing in english ? German ? If you want to dig in a little more, i can help you out. I'm currently working on my own philosophy thesis
Very interesting text, but I have a few question. Playing as your mothercountry is in my opinion the least fun part of the game. I started playing this game as Belgium and I think I've only played Sweden once. While I like to read up on the nations history and try to realise that nations claims wouldn't you say that it is more an effect of game mechanics and in game benefits rather than some (sub-?)conscious desire to crush/defeat other collective ideas of the world?
What about the time when I play the game like an a-hole and turn Italy into an oppressive Commie dictatorship and exterminate the populace by having 95% tax? Is that an effect of a subconscious hate for Italy/Italians or isn't it more of a love of exploring the game mechanics. I think that for your theory to be valid you have to consciously play as though you were doing it in real life.
Fascinating post, qwerkus. I almost exclusively play as the UK and have little interest in playing the supposedly most exciting nations, such as Prussia.
Dysken said:
As wrote above, my theory works only in case you identify with a collective identity. Besides this, I think there is a rejection-phase, where you deny any form of historical collective in favor of one-generation-collective (people of the same age). This is particularly true for teenagers, which tend to develop their own collective (new language); that why I spoke about older players.
I would say you're in the "god mode" phase of a Ricky player, but it's only a point of view. You're talking yourself of "game explor[ation]", which raises another question: We all learn, and than we play. Many games can be played, but which one do we consider as a "true" Ricky game, we're proud of, so that we would want to share it (AAR) ? Why do you use the expression "playing like a a-hole" ? Who would think so ?
Nothing more true. My starting point is a sort of "honest" simulation gaming.
Last edited:
qwerkus said:
haha, this one made me laugh. but you asked for it, so i tell you my truth. first off, very interesting text - thanks for sharing your thoughts!
qwerkus said:
qwerkus said:
i agree to the second statement, as an identification with one´s nationality is undoubtly necessary to be be motivated to "correct" the history of "one´s" nation. it would be interesting if players do prefer "their" nation over others in terms of played and enjoyed vicky games/written AARs/created satellites etc.
i know people are talking about how "we" did win this or that football game, and there are lots of more or less "official versions" of history (be it on state-tv, in school books, or in the club history of your local football club), and its popular to ask those "facts" in school and quiz shows.
however, i do question that anyone is building up his individuality on top of a so called "collective conciousness". does it really make much sense to construct such a thing like a "collective conciousness" if conciousness is located in the single individual? even though individuals feel they belong to the same group/nation/etc. and use similar terms of expressions, how could they possibly ever share the same thoughts, the same feelings and thus a common conciousness?
weird god said:
Think about that expression "building up on top of collective consciousness" referring it to children growing. You don't come in this world with a ready-to-use strong individual mind. You learn by mimesis, replicating behaviors you see/feel around yourself, and the feedback you earn from it (praising or punishment). I think you really incorporate a lot of very different behaviors during the whole life, which all make up parts of your mind/personality. This can be seen as a "collective consciousness", and thus yes, its pattern is located in each mind. That's why it's so easy to turn them on.
The Individuation (construction of your individuality) is a very complex process which (I think) is never completely finished, and can be subject to failures (hysteria, nevrosis, schizophrenia.. and so on) studied in Psychology/Psychotherapy.
If you wish more details about the "turning on" of the collective consciousness, I could write another (shorter) paragraph about it. As wrote in a previous reply, all this belongs to a very small part of a thesis I'm currently working out - consider it version alpha.