McNaughton wrote:I would assume that having playable nations in scenarios is more viable than having them playable for the grand campaign. One thing about 'VgN' is that it is not like 'Victoria' in terms of ability to create a major power out of a tiny nation, or to act willy-nilly as to how the player wants to play over the nation (i.e., Mexico was signifiantly more pro-Union than pro-Confederate). I would rate it more of a historic simulator than a sandbox game.
alexander seil wrote:Not to get all technical, but it is Victoria which is the simulator (well, the second one, in theory), since it relies on clear models to produce outcomes that are supposed to approach the historical ones. A game that relies on events and scripting (in order to produce historical or plausible outcomes without having an underlying model) is not a simulator.
alexander seil wrote:Given what we know about VGN, and its focus on warfare rather than economic and political modeling, it's safe to say that it will have to rely on events, scripting and hard rules to preclude certain undesirable behaviors.
alexander seil wrote:And you are basing that on your entire experience with V2?
There are different kinds of constraints, in any case. There are constraints that just say "don't do that" and constraints that arise organically from the way the system functions. Given what we know about VGN, and its focus on warfare rather than economic and political modeling, it's safe to say that it will have to rely on events, scripting and hard rules to preclude certain undesirable behaviors. One obvious way to restrict players from conquering the world as a minor faction, is to make minor factions unplayable, for example
alexander seil wrote:And you are basing that on your entire experience with V2?
alexander seil wrote:There are different kinds of constraints, in any case. There are constraints that just say "don't do that" and constraints that arise organically from the way the system functions. Given what we know about VGN, and its focus on warfare rather than economic and political modeling, it's safe to say that it will have to rely on events, scripting and hard rules to preclude certain undesirable behaviors. One obvious way to restrict players from conquering the world as a minor faction, is to make minor factions unplayable, for example
Generalisimo wrote:I wonder where did I ever talk about Victoria 2...
By the way, neither McNaughton talks specifically about Victoria 2...
After reading this, I really think you do not know what you are talking about... the focus of the VGN Grand Campaign is NOT warfare.
Please, check the thread about VGN details and you will see that.
alexander seil wrote:Victoria is mentioned, and VGN's competitor is Victoria 2, not some game from 6 years ago.
alexander seil wrote:... Maybe it's time for a dev. diary.
alexander seil wrote:Victoria is mentioned, and VGN's competitor is Victoria 2, not some game from 6 years ago.
The absence of any meaningful information about anything (other than the assurances that it will be, and I paraphrase, "more awesome than Victoria") and the focus of most screenshots suggests otherwise? Maybe it's time for a dev. diary.
alexander seil wrote:Victoria is mentioned, and VGN's competitor is Victoria 2, not some game from 6 years ago.
The absence of any meaningful information about anything (other than the assurances that it will be, and I paraphrase, "more awesome than Victoria") and the focus of most screenshots suggests otherwise? Maybe it's time for a dev. diary.
alexander seil wrote:And you are basing that on your entire experience with V2?
There are different kinds of constraints, in any case. There are constraints that just say "don't do that" and constraints that arise organically from the way the system functions. Given what we know about VGN, and its focus on warfare rather than economic and political modeling, it's safe to say that it will have to rely on events, scripting and hard rules to preclude certain undesirable behaviors. One obvious way to restrict players from conquering the world as a minor faction, is to make minor factions unplayable, for example
Le Ricain wrote:Competitor ? You are aware that AGEOD is owned by Paradox? I think that it is fair to say that VGN will be more awesome than Victoria. Also Victoria2 should be better than Victoria. If these two are not better, then what is the point in developing them? But somehow I think that you are trying to compare VGN with Vicky2. If so, then you do talk some rubbish as you can not have any real knowledge of both games.
Hohenlohe wrote:Will you offer us some advice how to modify certain files after the games' release??
Hohenlohe wrote:Will you offer us some advice how to modify certain files after the games' release??
McNaughton wrote:I would assume that having playable nations in scenarios is more viable than having them playable for the grand campaign. One thing about 'VgN' is that it is not like 'Victoria' in terms of ability to create a major power out of a tiny nation, or to act willy-nilly as to how the player wants to play over the nation (i.e., Mexico was signifiantly more pro-Union than pro-Confederate). I would rate it more of a historic simulator than a sandbox game.
McNaughton wrote:As Generalissimo said, this is not a sandbox game (i.e., do as you please), but more of a how can you function within the limitations of that particular nation (culture, economy, geography, demographics, industrialization, etc.). Do not expect to change Russia into a new-Great Britain, or to conquer the world as Luxembourg .
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests