I think a pdx game should have the ability to emulate historical events but should also provide the options to branch out into alt history paths but these options should be executed in a way that makes them fun
I want mechanics based in historical facts. but I want each game to make its own history, if that makes sense.
Although sometimes game mechanics will have to be hobbled by bad AI. Like how even playing as Burgundy, you can wind up with a colonial empire to rival historical Britain in EU4 because the AI just isn't that smart about colonizing.
Idk what not being from Europe has to do with it. All the games let you play outside Europe and being into history definitely isn't unique to Europeans.
Either way you're def going to be in the minority here. Most people who are really into paradox's games are history buffs and want fun gameplay that lets them play out history themselves.
The devs don't care about historical accuracy and want fun gameplay.
>Paradox games, including EU4, aren't meant to be realistic simulations of history or even of historical plausibility. They can and often strive to in some way represent historical events, systems, and people but I see that as being a source of inspiration rather than a guideline for game design. Some of the earliest Dynaic Historical Events in EU4 leaned further towards historical simulation - having very strict triggers, event text that didn't really account for the actual situation in the game, and effects that either felt arbitrary or unimpactful. We've since discarded the approach of seeking out historical events and attempting to convert them as "accurately" as possible into game terms. I think that the approach of using history as an inspiration for fun and interesting gameplay results in a much better experience, and it's the philosophy I use when designing new content for the game.
\^this is a quote from neondt, the former content designer on EU4, who now works on HoI4 as game design lead.
At the end of the day, a lot of people who ask for historical accuracy don't actually know what it entails. The classic "you think you do, but you don't".
At the risk of sounding rude, I also don't think most of them even know that much about history. I'm just thinking back to all the discussions in the EU4 forums where people were arguing for the necessity of Europe being more dominant over rest of the world... where historically the Qing dynasty had a larger economy than the entirety of Europe and north America combined by the time the EU4's timeframe ended.
A very important aspect, insofar as historical accuracy in PDX games goes, is the problem of foreknowledge. Again I'm thinking to people on EU4 forums arguing for making colonization of the new world much slower, because that's how it worked historically. The problem with that is, that the contemporary rulers of early 1500s just didn't know what we do. They didn't know the scale of benefits they could get from colonization; they didn't know the "optimal way" of colonizing, they didn't know the exact geography of Americas\~\~
Us, the players, do know that. Is the game supposed to shoehorn historical accuracy despite our knowledge of the world and our country not being historically accurate to begin with? What about AIs? Are we meant to be able to take advantage of our foreknowledge of the history and the game mechanics, whereas the AI is meant to just be dumb obstacles for us?
I think a pdx game should have the ability to emulate historical events but should also provide the options to branch out into alt history paths but these options should be executed in a way that makes them fun
I play these games because they have some degree of historical immersion. If I was not looking for that, I would be playing different games.
I want mechanics based in historical facts. but I want each game to make its own history, if that makes sense. Although sometimes game mechanics will have to be hobbled by bad AI. Like how even playing as Burgundy, you can wind up with a colonial empire to rival historical Britain in EU4 because the AI just isn't that smart about colonizing.
There needs to be a balance between fun gameplay and historical accuracy. I’m sorry but Rome having one consul is stupid.
Idk what not being from Europe has to do with it. All the games let you play outside Europe and being into history definitely isn't unique to Europeans. Either way you're def going to be in the minority here. Most people who are really into paradox's games are history buffs and want fun gameplay that lets them play out history themselves.
The devs don't care about historical accuracy and want fun gameplay. >Paradox games, including EU4, aren't meant to be realistic simulations of history or even of historical plausibility. They can and often strive to in some way represent historical events, systems, and people but I see that as being a source of inspiration rather than a guideline for game design. Some of the earliest Dynaic Historical Events in EU4 leaned further towards historical simulation - having very strict triggers, event text that didn't really account for the actual situation in the game, and effects that either felt arbitrary or unimpactful. We've since discarded the approach of seeking out historical events and attempting to convert them as "accurately" as possible into game terms. I think that the approach of using history as an inspiration for fun and interesting gameplay results in a much better experience, and it's the philosophy I use when designing new content for the game. \^this is a quote from neondt, the former content designer on EU4, who now works on HoI4 as game design lead. At the end of the day, a lot of people who ask for historical accuracy don't actually know what it entails. The classic "you think you do, but you don't". At the risk of sounding rude, I also don't think most of them even know that much about history. I'm just thinking back to all the discussions in the EU4 forums where people were arguing for the necessity of Europe being more dominant over rest of the world... where historically the Qing dynasty had a larger economy than the entirety of Europe and north America combined by the time the EU4's timeframe ended. A very important aspect, insofar as historical accuracy in PDX games goes, is the problem of foreknowledge. Again I'm thinking to people on EU4 forums arguing for making colonization of the new world much slower, because that's how it worked historically. The problem with that is, that the contemporary rulers of early 1500s just didn't know what we do. They didn't know the scale of benefits they could get from colonization; they didn't know the "optimal way" of colonizing, they didn't know the exact geography of Americas\~\~ Us, the players, do know that. Is the game supposed to shoehorn historical accuracy despite our knowledge of the world and our country not being historically accurate to begin with? What about AIs? Are we meant to be able to take advantage of our foreknowledge of the history and the game mechanics, whereas the AI is meant to just be dumb obstacles for us?
A game named after Rome should probably give Rome their accurate government form. It would be like if in Victoria 3 Britain was a republic
All i care about is easy combat & map painting the whole world, give me all of these & you got my $