Why not Vic2 in a modern setting?

[unmerged(71032)]

All I know is if Paradox ever do release a post-1945 game, I for one will not be a moderator for that forum.

We think the HoI3 forum is full of loons, a post-1945 forum would be a certifiable asylum. :wacko:

True. Compared to them, we are real XIX century gentlemen, after all.

To be fair though, Paradox would be most likely able to pull out decent Cold War game, possibly based on the idea of this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_Struggle . War is a loss, domination at the end of the game is a key. Although problems start to pile up right at the start - as Paradox players are used to play more then just one of 2 countries ("I want to play as Dominican Republic!") and all the sudden it would turn out that it was not cold war that people wanted, but full scale nuclear confrontation.

 

[telesien]

True. Compared to them, we are real XIX century gentlemen, after all.

Strange... I do have the same feeling with all new PI games. At least EU3 and HoI3. I didn't follow the Rome forum, but it will be interesting to watch Vicky 2 forum after release...

 

[unmerged(71032)]

Strange... I do have the same feeling with all new PI games. At least EU3 and HoI3. I didn't follow the Rome forum, but it will be interesting to watch Vicky 2 forum after release...

Rome forum is dead. Well, not entirely, but it's barely breathing.

HoI3 forum (and it was the case with HoI2 forum as well, minus constant bug rants, that were less frequent in previous title) is kinda special, because it's full of "experts" with their unique expertise on various equipment, strategies, characters of the period and such.

Needless to say, this expertise is usually based on Discovery Channel documentaries or some book (single, not plural) read by the "expert".

EU3... I have't visited this forum for a while, only MM mod subsection. It was rather nice place, but to be fair EU3 past IN got so decent that I rarely had a need to visit the forums at all.

So, in rating of civil and super-geeky forums Vicky is definetly very high - only more "hardcore" forum is CK one, full of comments on past glories and still waiting for a sign for "Return of the King" (in CK2, of course).

 

[ComradeOm]

A 'steam-punk' mod is what Victoria definetely needs.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Steamtop.jpg

:rofl:

Edit: too big image

I want that! It has to ship with the V2 Collector's Edition!

(If there is a CE of course)

 

[Autonomous]

We'd need a proper service economy system before we could make a proper MDS. And aircraft. And nukes.

I've been foaming at the mouth for a Middle Ages game since well before HOI3 was announced, so let's skip right on to the Stone Age concept. It's strangely appealing, isn't it? I wonder if it wouldn't work with a Dwarf Fortress-alike? You've dealing with a similar number of people, the average pack of wolves is a serious threat, etc.

 

[hamburgertrain]

Sounds like loads of fun to me. And instead of industrialization we would have agriculturization, for which we need to convert Caveman POP to Farmer POP.

But think of dealing with all those pop wants, like food, or living past the ripe old age of 23

(I actually have been dreaming of a stone age rpg/mmorpg for almost ever i think it'd be epic but thats besides the point)

 

[Susanna]

-1

I would love to see Paradox do a MDS based off of how thier games play.

I was looking forward to Super Power 1 & 2 but they are absolutely terrible. While SR is ok, it is still far from what a PI game would be with either the Cold War or MDS.

Don't get me wrong I love history but to make a honest to God good MDS would really be alot of fun. You can only rehash HOI and Vicky so many times before its,"Oh this again, well, do this again, and oh hey I remember this." Give us something new. I would love to have a MDS with events like Vicky and HOI have presenting a What If Conflict in the future with a rebel government or something.

Nay sayers are just way to set in their ways to appreciate how much fun it would be.

Some of us just don't like the modern period.

And why would modern-period rehashing not be as boring as rehashing in any period.

Besides, Paradox make historical games.

 

[wedgeskwalker9]

SupCom 2020 does make for a fun economic sim, best game I had in it was turning Cameroon into what I call an "African Lion" (like the Asian Tigers, but in Africa! Brilliant!). The few wars were even fun due to the smaller scale, as it seems like that is what the war engine was designed for.

So if you only want the industrialization aspect of Vicky, 2020 is a good choice. There isn't really a political system at all though, so you only get half the package.

 

[Noblejms]

Actually I did try SR2020, indeed it is very impressive, however the game lagged so much on my PC I had to uninstall it.

Last night I tried SuperPower2, but 10 minutes later I uninstalled the game; it's just way too shallow.

Democracy 2 has the best modern domestic political simulator I've ever seen, but it's very lacking in international relations.

I wanted to try Geo-Political Simulator 2009, but priced at $49 and with all the bad reviews (except for a few very good ones which I doubt are written by the developers), perhaps another time.

Look like I'm stuck with Vic for now

 

[Bezborg]

I still say steampunk expansion/scenario/mod!

 

[Sovereign]

I want to see Paradox do a "Future Age" game. At last they wouldn't be bound by the need for historical research. Well, at least not in the same way. Let them make a game based on Earth 2036 to 2125 or something (so kind of modern era but with plenty of space for creative speculation) and see where that goes.

 

[MadlockUK]

I think a modern setting would be brilliant. I think you could run the game from 1950 to 2010 or whenever oil runs out. It could be Globalisation: The Race For Resources with possible expansion packs emulating different scenarios like successfully configuring a way to solve climate change or somehow make one barrel last the US one day. That'd be outstanding . . . not very realistic but I'm only trying to help.

I think you could have different types of factories and the break down of education in the game could help tremendously. You could have stats like the Gini Coefficient and GDP. We'd need some sort of abstract of a capitalism bubble that can explode at any time with each nation having some sort of growth rate of the bubble and probability of it exploding along with an area of effect. So America bottles up sub-prime thingy then BOOM the past year, which was a bit anti-climatic, I was actually hoping that maybe it'd top the Victorian period in terms of mass action or something. Though we all probably blew steam by trolling on unsuspecting game forums . . . .

 

[Red_Communist]

I think a modern setting would be brilliant. I think you could run the game from 1950 to 2010 or whenever oil runs out. It could be Globalisation: The Race For Resources with possible expansion packs emulating different scenarios like successfully configuring a way to solve climate change or somehow make one barrel last the US one day. That'd be outstanding . . . not very realistic but I'm only trying to help.

I think you could have different types of factories and the break down of education in the game could help tremendously. You could have stats like the Gini Coefficient and GDP. We'd need some sort of abstract of a capitalism bubble that can explode at any time with each nation having some sort of growth rate of the bubble and probability of it exploding along with an area of effect. So America bottles up sub-prime thingy then BOOM the past year, which was a bit anti-climatic, I was actually hoping that maybe it'd top the Victorian period in terms of mass action or something. Though we all probably blew steam by trolling on unsuspecting game forums . . . .

I think a 1950-2001/2002 time frame would be better. Mainly because you could guide your nation through the cold war, and than the start of the War on Terror, since nothing really special has happened, besides the Iraq, and Afghan Wars. Than maybe an expansion pack can bring the date to maybe 2007? the start of the Global Financial Crisis.

But anyways, I think I'd wait about a month to buy a game like that, to see how Paradox does, and to see if the games worth it.

 

[Tigran08]

In my opinion, Victoria is perhaps the only PI game I've ever played which I believe will be even more awesome if it's set in the modern world. Why? Because in the 21st century we're faced with even greater uncertainties and interesting issues, such as the financial crisis, pollution/clean energy, rises of other potential superpowers, danger of WWIII(nuclear bombs), people who are more educated and thus more politically aware(higher CON ), and all other exciting stuffs which could be roughly modeled in Victoria's complex socioeconomic-political system.

Not to even mention how cool it would be if the United Nations, G6/G8, APEC, WTO are actually modeled in the game. That would be pure awesomness.

Hey,

This might not be Victoria II of the Modern Age for you, but it comes pretty close to simulating with various scenarios (the Economic crises of 2009, Opposition in power etc) in real time the Modern World, in geopolitical and geo-economic terms. In Geopolitical Simulator (GPS) you are the head of state of any of the 200 countries that exist and you have a multitude of realistic domestic and foreign policy choices and challenges you need to meet (within context of democratic and non democratic societies). As in Victoria and Victoria II, its really up to you how you govern, be the dictatorial tyrannt that uses the apparatus of the state to repress your opponents and surely everyone will loath you and eventually you will be dumped into the dustbin of history (esp in democratic countries where civil society groups-i.e associations, trade unions and parliament and political opposition oppose any drift towards authoritarianism fight against such moves) by the force of the people's unhappiness, or be the benevolent, charismatic leader that your country craves, build an economic powerhouse (sign foreign trade deals etc) bring in national prestige (via diplomacy) and your approval ratings will sky rocket ( this helps especially when you have to get re-elected and beat the other political parties in your country to a punch, feels like you are really in a electora lcampaign). Plus you got the UN, WTO,G7/G8, ASEAN, African Union, Europan Union, NAFTA, MERCOSUR Bodies etc to contend with and they are represented in the game and can intervene too, thus allowing or dissallowing memberships ( ie. when human rights abuses are apparent etc), plus the UN will review threats to international peace that do happen, and will upon voting on resolutions ,permit UN Security Council members to intervene against an agressor country by force. If you wanna know more I suggest you go to GPS's website at: http://www.geo-political-simulator.com/ you can read more and buy (download) the game online. GPS creators like Paradox are always patching up the game in order to make it as effective and relevant to our time as possible ( albeit the fact that some flaws still exist and need some ironing out, but their tech support team listens to feedback from GPS players and tries to build them into the updates).

 

[unmerged(71032)]

Sorry to be a party pooper here, but I don't think Vicky, or any of the Paradox titles is suitable as a base for modern day (or even Cold War) scenario. Paradox games are focused on war (sometimes in more, sometimes in less detailed) and conquest - which is something you won't see all that often in our times.

It's just a matter of goals and rewards. In classic strategy games, you win by defeating your enemy. It's usually solved in similarly classic way - warfare and conquest, taking over his land and such. In Cold War (and any realistic MDS game) it would have to be replaced by economical and cultural "domination" as well as plenty of elements that would dazzle player, replacing this all time great feeling when your tanks grind into dust enemy troops. Something to keep the player happy, even though war in such game would usually mean, that you have failed in achieving your goals in proper way.

Similarly, nukes would be much more worth as potential threat, diplomatic tool ("we will stop developing them for...", "we won't deploy mid range missiles if...") then actual weapon. Arm trade would be much more important not for rising your military potential, but for improving your economical standing, getting ties between corporations and satisfying various social groups in your country. Spy actions would be less focused on beloved black ops and more on general information, economics and such.

Oh, and that's even before we get to proper economical system, resources and such.

Basically WHOLE different game. I'm sure Paradox could do something like that, but it would be nothing like titles they have made before. Even Vicky, with all the social simulation detail, in its core is a conquest game. Cold War/MDS game would have to replace it with cultural/economical domination.

 

[MadlockUK]

Sorry to be a party pooper here, but I don't think Vicky, or any of the Paradox titles is suitable as a base for modern day (or even Cold War) scenario. Paradox games are focused on war (sometimes in more, sometimes in less detailed) and conquest - which is something you won't see all that often in our times.

It's just a matter of goals and rewards. In classic strategy games, you win by defeating your enemy. It's usually solved in similarly classic way - warfare and conquest, taking over his land and such. In Cold War (and any realistic MDS game) it would have to be replaced by economical and cultural "domination" as well as plenty of elements that would dazzle player, replacing this all time great feeling when your tanks grind into dust enemy troops. Something to keep the player happy, even though war in such game would usually mean, that you have failed in achieving your goals in proper way.

Similarly, nukes would be much more worth as potential threat, diplomatic tool ("we will stop developing them for...", "we won't deploy mid range missiles if...") then actual weapon. Arm trade would be much more important not for rising your military potential, but for improving your economical standing, getting ties between corporations and satisfying various social groups in your country. Spy actions would be less focused on beloved black ops and more on general information, economics and such.

Oh, and that's even before we get to proper economical system, resources and such.

Basically WHOLE different game. I'm sure Paradox could do something like that, but it would be nothing like titles they have made before. Even Vicky, with all the social simulation detail, in its core is a conquest game. Cold War/MDS game would have to replace it with cultural/economical domination.

Maybe we could have 'take faction by Proxy setting' So you can fight and your level of command is based on the number of 'advisors' you have. That could easily add up the level of combating on the ground. You can choose to do things unilaterally or have an appeals process to the UN or w.e is applicable. The EU could be set up in a similar fashion to how the Holy Roman Empire is simulated in EU III HTTT? Maybe we could have 'poles' in which different mindsets could appeal to the people.

The cultural affinity can make them more supportive of one nation (or collection of) to another. So you can have American-philes, Euro-philes, Africa-philes then a generic nationalist and secessionist (based on their nationality versus the nation-state's). So the UK can have a high American-phile rating amongst its political class yet maybe more nationalistic working and middle class then maybe a few Euro-philes scatter between them then have Taiwan be American-phile and some places in Africa be Sino-phile due to their financial support. Maybe the Ukraine can suddenly become Russia-philes over Euro-philes?

Maybe diplomacy could have the ability to fiddle numbers to allure the AI to agree with you so you can have Actual growth versus growth. This could easily be done through an abstraction like a transparency indicator. So you can make someone believe you have great growth by projecting that but then have a random ability of the market to catch you off-guard or something of that sort. An appeal to the IMF can give you a large loan but you're limited to the rate of tariffs, taxes and have an open market.

I'm curious how'd you do an economics simulation. Have factories be built by companies bound by one country in another, so Nike Apparel makes cloths in a factory in Indonesia but their profits get made by who they're sold to with the Indonesians either getting a minor cut and taxes raised from labour. This could be coupled with a rating of appeal by another abstraction like 'marketability' or something so they don't automatically raise wages in order to reap more profit and help capitalists choose were to place on. Then you have companies with a transnational index that would help the company decide if they were going to 'stay closer to home' or 'be fully globalised' so some companies will have a high loyalty to their nations will maybe have parts factories in Brazil but assembly in the US.

I think it could be very do-able. The issue would be trying to keep neutral and things of that nature as well as a potential nightmare for moderators. Though I'm sure its no better or worse than that stands. So I think you could easily make it into a game. I think a claims function would also be interesting to simulate the invasion of Kuwait, the Falklands War(s? with current events??), and the general grab for resources.

 

[alvaro]

The planet needs a good MD game not based in nuclear cucumbers flying at minimum opportunity.
where you can play (economic) expansionist china in africa, terrorists casus bellis, turkey in the UE, Gazpromination of the planet, unstruggle japan, venezuelan lebensraum,... so much fun to be be found!
he dicho.

i do understand that it might be controversial in some senses as well.

 

[Slyguy3129]

Some of us just don't like the modern period.

And why would modern-period rehashing not be as boring as rehashing in any period.

Besides, Paradox make historical games.

According to some of the post in this thread, Some of us do.

Since they haven't made any Modern Games, rehashing is entirely irrelevant. You can't rehash something you haven't done.

Technically unless you live in the past (which apparently alot of people do but none the less) everything that happened yesterday is history. Therefore you could make a "history" game out of say 1945-1995. Since the last time I checked it is 2010, that would be your basis for your idea that Paradox makes "only" historical games (because some can argue that HOI3 isn't all that historical. Just set in a historical setting.)

After all Vicky in and of itself is something of a clique game. Vicky wasn't what you would call a successful game, but it does have a dedicated following. You could even make the point in saying that making Vicky 2 over some other more successful games, is a mistake. So it was in fact a big surprise when they announced they would be making a sequel. Yet they are willing to make a sequel to an unsuccessful game to what, please a clique of their customers. It would appear that the clique of Vicky fans is about equal to the clique of fan who would appreciate and enjoy a MDS game. I can only hope that PI will see that there is a demand for a MDS game, and that they will attempt to make it so (Picard).

I stand by my point that some of us would love an MDS game, if you don't want it don't play it. I certainly wouldn't want it to be in a Vicky format though. Seeing as the WM that is modeled in Vicky wouldn't make any sense at all in a MDS game.

On a business note, if PI could pull it off they would be one of a few companies (if any) that have made a successful MDS game. That would certainly make them stand out more, making more people pay attention to them and add another "clique" of fans that follow their games. Currently was have Rome Fans, EU Fans, HOI Fans and Vicky Fans. It would be nice to have a MDS game to add to that list.

 

[Susanna]

According to some of the post in this thread, Some of us do.

And I don't. You're not the only person who knows how to underline.

I believe the point I was attempting to make was that repetitive gameplay internal to the game can happen in any game, and does not depend on the setting of said game. It has far more to do with game mechanics than game setting.

You might be thrilled with a modern game. I'm merely stating that I'd have no interest in either the concept or the proposed game.

I'm sure you didn't mean to insult all of us by calling us a "clique."

 

[unmerged(81228)]

...and your point is...?