Well, consider EU4 vs GalCiv2. Is there really any meaningful vassalizing or diplomatic integration or is GalCiv2 just allying or conquering? I mean EU4 is not exactly deep in the inter or intrastate interactions but its certainly ahead of most 4x games. Or consider Vicky2 with POPs and industry and shit. Plus I’m sure Paradox will add some sort of new space specific features.
I’m not sure if those differences meet the criteria of fundamental, but if they don’t its not any more or less than the difference between grand strategy and non space 4x games either.
Is this your first day on the internet? Nobody plays games anymore, they just bitch about them. Its like the internet has finally gotten big enough to fold back in on itself and turn back into Usenet.
This is something I’m interested in- and I thought I was done with Paradox games after EU4. I’d probably wait for some impressions first, and it will be coming out right as I truly am going to be grinding something very hard for the next four-five months.
It all comes down to how you define sub-genres. Let’s not forget that the term “4X” was created (by a game journalist) specifically to describe MoO and has since then be used for a lot of very similar and also not THAT similar games.
In the end the core ingredients of a 4X “explore, expand, exploit, exterminate” can be found in most strategy games in general and will certainly be part of Paradox new game just like in their previous games without those being called 4X games.
In my opinion the difference between grand strategy games and 4X games is the scope and the depth of the underlying systems. Grand strategy games are to 4X what 4X games are to RTS.
That’s why I hope that Paradox is doing a REAL grand strategy game and doesn’t take too much inspiration from MoO and its ilk. I would love to get a game with the complexity of EU4, HoI or CK in space.
Yeah there is a point to be made for Distant Worlds being more a Grand Strategy game than a 4X (with “real time” there is also the obvious parallel to paradox games). What Distant Worlds lacks are the production values (it’s still amazing what it achives considering that) and that also means that some systems are not as deep/relevant as they could/should be. In that way it’s similar to Paradox’s early games which had the same issues and why CK2 and EU3/4 were such huge steps/improvements (the HoI series is a bit of a different beast with its very clear focus and more linear evolution).
So I guess what I’m saying is that I’m very curious to see what a Paradox made “Distant Worlds” would look like.
Will you guys kindly shut up about Distant Worlds, you’re going to make me fire up the game yet again and this time you’ll be responsible for my crushing disappointment as I enviously wonder how on earth people can enjoy themselves while playing that game.
He is not exactly a designer, but he helps in design often, I think. I’m certain he contributed to Stellaris to some capacity, but I don’t know the extent of his contribution.
