Beorn
Posts: 134
Joined: 6/24/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Uncle_Joe Well, IMO many historical events happened because the conditions were right for them to happen. If the game's conditions dont match those of history, then its quite possible for those events to never have happened. This is one of my problems with directly dropping historical events into a-historical games. There are some that might be required to keep the game in sync, but by and large adding scripted events is not a good idea IMO. An event system similar to EU2 might work, but I dont think that that is the direction CoG is intended to head. CoG is a much more open-ended game IMO. I agree with you. There are two entirely different kinds of historical accuracy. The first involves scripting all kinds of things to happen, on the dates they actually happened. The result is that the history feels correct in retropsect, but is overly predictable (and, as you say, often nonsensical) as it is occurring. The second involves probablities that kinds of things could happen, influenced to some extent by player decisions. The result is that history falls out differently (incorrectly), but portrays a more historically accurate experience to live through. An example would be playing through Paradox's Victoria as the USA. Knowing what is scripted to happen ahead of time takes away any accurate sense of leading in the 1850s, even while providing plenty of historically accurate events.
|