Hearts of Iron 4 - The Ultimate WWII Strategy Game

The UK certainly went away from GBP as soon as France fell, and in fact the UK was much more motorized before the war than Germany ever was. Japan is kind of an oddball because a mobile doctrine wasn't really applicable, and they didn't have the production for SFP, so you could throw them into GBP as the odd way out.

It's funny because if someone asked me to explain what Shock and Awe was, I'd literally use the words "A Modern Blitzkrieg".

 

That is very true, so I wonder if they will add the post-WW2/ Cold War extra techs that everyone could research.

 

Yes, for example, I can now continue to be a filthy pirate and download mods from steam communities. Take that, Johan!

 

There's not really any compelling reason to want a non-Steam version outside of a physical release.

 

Not wanting to have to run a third party program(which collects data on you BTW, not the main point just a aside) to be able to play a game you have payed for. Wanting to be able to just run the actual program that you want to and not be required to run another program that takes control away from you regarding how you can use your legally purchased program. You know, consumer rights in general. That is the core thing that people don't like about steam. Do you really not understand that?

I love digital distribution. That is just about the only way I get my PC games, and has been for more than 5 years. I can't stand steam because it takes more control out of the users hands than other options more respectful of consumer rights, and then you get fellows like you who come along and the proclaim how they can't understand how someone wouldn't like having that control being taken away from them.

 

You can always pirate the game and buy a copy on Steam. Steam at this point is a lot more than a draconian DRM system, case in point EA's Origin. It has many advantages that Paradox likes and players like too.

 

It has no unique advantages that I particularly like or consider worth the trade off.

I understand that the steam model is successful. Add in features like achievements, social media functions, built in multiplayer support(to draw developers in), cloud, auto-updates(Which causes it's own problems), and many(If not most) people will ignore the fact that it is DRM. You will even get cases of people commenting how they don't like DRM and that they hope the game will be available on steam so that they won't have to deal with DRM.

Almost all of the advantages can be(and often are) offered by services that do not use the steam model. All of the major benefits of Digital distribution are available through services like GamersGate and GOG without the need for a third party program.

Which is ultimately why I actively despise steam instead of simply preferring something else. The steam model is so successful that it has eclipsed better models and game developers are catering to the steam market while increasingly ignoring the non-steam market.

edit: I don't approve of piracy except for in a few very specific cases. The fact that you would suggest that as a morally acceptable alternative does not reflect well on you. Also purchasing something on steam is counterproductive as it makes steam money. I want them to lose money and be forced to change their business model.

 

But it is a morally acceptable alternative, you ARE buying the product except you're not interacting with the DRM.

 

And when you pirate you are almost certainly using a torrent which better enables other people to pirate it as well who have most likely not paid for it. And even if you are using FTP or some other alternative you are better enabling those who run that alternative to provide the ability to pirate to others(either through ad revenue of increased prestige for them).

Not that I claim to be perfect. I am currently pirating this season's game of thrones(the only show I don't wait for it to come out on DVD). I do not have cable and as a result no HBO. I have no TV service at all, relying on DVDs for things that I am interested in watching. I definitely make sure to buy the DVDs when they come out for sale and wish that HBO made HBO GO available in some format without requiring a cable subscription. I do have qualms about this and it is one of the few exceptions I make. I would prefer a better alternative.

 

Yeah no. I don't want Steam and I certainly won't buy any game that requires steam. Maybe I'll pirate it, maybe not, but Johan explicitly stated that they won't miss the 5% of customers that bought a non-Steam version of CK2 - which is pretty shitty logic, as I'm certain that percentage is much higher for EU3, HoI3 and Vicky2 - clearly meaning me. So fuck that and them. And the excuse of not having to make two different executables and patches is bullshit as well. The only difference, AFAIK, between Steam game and non-Steam game is the steam.dll file added and a number of hooks/calls in the executable for that. It's not like the entire patch/game has to be modified.

EDIT: don't get too hungup on the doctrine names. The tree system does not really reflect reality, so the names are only somesort of weak guidelines. Air-Land Battle was NATO doctrine invented in 1970's and 80's, Shock & Awe is an American "doctrine" from 1990's and 2000's and indeed is modern "blitzkrieg", which was never a formal name or doctrine anyway and so on.

 

Once they incorporate Steamworks for use as the multiplayer service(As they are for all their games now) a non-steam version is not realistically possible. They could make a SP only non-steam version but that involves a significant use of manpower for a small number of potential users which is almost certainly not worth it from a financial angle. That is the real reason Paradox made the switch to steam. Not because updating different digital distribution portals was too much work, but so that they could incorporate the Steamworks multiplayer service/code.

Which is why Valve offers Steamworks to developers. To force them into being steam exclusive as the cost for saving time implementing their own multiplayer.

 

Well then, that's no wonder. Pdox has got a lot of flak over the years for their shitty MP. Now it makes sense.

Still won't buy their Steamworks-exclusive game, though, but at least I can understand it. Why the fuck didn't Johan explain that, instead of whining about patching? And of course non-Steam customers being a tiny slice of the pie.

 

I didn't understand that either. Perhaps they are a bit embarrassed that they could never quite get MP working well on their own.

 

I am almost certain Hearts of Iron 3 was the rough peak of the series. I expect nothing good from EA Grand Strategy.

 

Steam could go way of dodo any minute. What would you use for archiving?

 

Given Steam's market share, it's actually more likely that the alternatives go way of the dodo.

 

It's not something that depends on market share. Big companies can go under easily as small.

 

I don't pdox is that bad yet, but it really needs to realize popamole is inexcusable for a niche company that's becoming more popular everyday. CK2 is the perfect example of why nobody wants Paradox to go popamole, people want MORE complexity and fun stuff to do in Paradox games.

Also better optimization.

 

I don't really see reason to start worrying about popamole just yet. At least so far most of the changes they've talked about have been pretty logical and ones that do improve things. And of course, in terms of released games EU4 was still a LOT less popamole than EU3, not just feeling like Baby's First Pdox Vidya Gaem but a game that could actually stand on its own two feet. Speaking of which, has anyone checked if CK2 still brings in more cash than EU4 (my wager is yes)?

 

I really like what this company has done, I mean they are basically the only grandstrategy game company left which is GOOOOOOOOOOD for someone like me, but for god's sake I'm sure HoI3 is a great game but anytime I fancy playing a WW2 grancampaign I still roll out HoI2, I don't need anything more for my strategy needs.

Can't paradox widen their grand strategy scope and do something new?
For example:
Sengoku Jidai Japan
A "CKish" Mongol Expansion centered game.
A CK in space seting inspired or based on the Dune universe by Frank Herbert.
A dawn of civilization game.
A Modern world grand strategy "ala" Superpower (but well done )

There is just so much more to explore than HoI FOUR

 

They could get down to the business of making the Supreme Ruler series actual games.

But no. Innovation is paramount to treason. Johan will be sent to diversity camp.


At least I am somewhat positive about Hearts of Iron 4. The Division Commander mechanic worries me a bit but, as a modder, having to put in 1000 commanders per faction is such a big chore that it sometimes destroys all entusiasm.

 

They already made Sengoku, but it plays like CK2 without the interesting bits.

 

It shouldn't come as a surprise to you that he hasn't heart of it. It's one of those pre alpha test games about one of the main series, ie. Sengoku -> CK2, March of the Eagles -> EU4

 

Paradox makes HoI4 and EU4 for the same reason Activision makes CoD 14. Shit sells, and offering minor incremental improvements when you have a lock on the market is far more profitable and reliable than making entirely new games that don't have a proven audience.

I wish EU4 had taken after MotE. MotE had some great combat mechanics, while EU4 did basically nothing to improve on the same EU3/V2 combat which was painfully thin and boring.