|
Widell -> RE: Victoria 2 demo (8/13/2010 3:20:02 PM)
|
Without going into the discussion about who's who on the forum, it seems as if PI has developed a beast of a game engine. The so called "complaint thread" (and not all posters in that thread seems to agree on anything!) talks about "unhistorical" and other strange behaviors. Also that it's too easy to "win" (whatever that means in these kind of games!) etc.
Now, keep in mind, I'm a HOI player and not a EU or Vicky player, but still..... To me it feels like PI got lost after HOI I and II. The engine is way to flexible and has so many moddable parameters it seems almost impossible to create grand scenarios which does not seem to deviate in very, very unhistorical ways. Now, I'm a friend of games that allow the player, aka me, to influence the game in a way that create a new, alternate history, specially with this type of epic, grand scale games, but when the whole engine/scenario design is so unpredictable, it feels like the possibilities in the software has taken over from the player and history is shaped by the randomness in the parameters rather than by the actions of the player.
This type of game would probably be better in a CIV-setting with random maps, as there is no need for historic settings in that context with the exception of technology and research, and I assume Vicky is as good as HOI in that respect.
My 2 cents. PI should maybe benefit from creating more historic games like the previous versions of HOI and maybe Vicky, and possibly develop a "random map/nations" game based on their current philosophy.
|
|
|
|
