Matrix Games Forums

I just came from the HOI2 forums and found a thread where they are bashing or at least a few, hehe, are bashing Gary Grigsby's games.

Someone brought up a post about what Trotter said in PCgamer that "IF" HOI2 does all they say it's going to do, then it MIGHT give Gary Grigsby's "World at War" some competition in the grand strategy department.

Here's the link if yah wanna go tell em whatcha think.

http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum ... p?t=152264

So whatchall think, who designs better games Grigsby(Matrix) or Johan(Paradox)?

Darn I wish LES were here, he always has fun things to say in a Paradox thread.

Well to me the funny thing is that most people over there agree Gary is better... and it's the Paradox website! Case closed. [:D]

Funny, two years ago a gamer couldn't rub two big strategy wargames together. Now we have them coming outta the woodwork (thank goodness).

Nothing like some healthy competition - heheh

Even though we know which will be the better games [;)]

Well to a degree it is akin to comparing apple pie to cherry?

Are they both pie?

Yeah but they are not really comprable other than the crust.

I know I can expect a LOT more and better detail from Grigsby, but I also know I can expect some nice bells and whistles from Johan....

like most things competition is "good" for the client....

ORIGINAL: .50Kerry

Well to a degree it is akin to comparing apple pie to cherry?

Are they both pie?

Yeah but they are not really comprable other than the crust.

I know I can expect a LOT more and better detail from Grigsby, but I also know I can expect some nice bells and whistles from Johan....

like most things competition is "good" for the client....

I agree that Paradox has done some unique games. I like EU2.

However, Paradox needs to find a suitable engine to do a grand WWII wargame.

ORIGINAL: Von Rom

ORIGINAL: .50Kerry

Well to a degree it is akin to comparing apple pie to cherry?

Are they both pie?

Yeah but they are not really comprable other than the crust.

I know I can expect a LOT more and better detail from Grigsby, but I also know I can expect some nice bells and whistles from Johan....

like most things competition is "good" for the client....

I agree that Paradox has done some unique games. I like EU2.

However, Paradox needs to find a suitable engine to do a grand WWII wargame.

Agreed.

I think Vicky really suffers from the same engine issues in spades and that game is heads and shoulders above HoI....


they could also use a good manual writer.

regards,
sven

Personally, I hated EU. Its another game gathering dust on the reject shelf.

Nice, idea ruined by unecessary use of real time programming and 3D animation that got in the way of gameplay.

I have no idea what HOI2 is so can't comment on the comparison but EU didn't even last to the end of a single campaign on my PC.

Heretics!

Oh, a heretic would suggest that they were once Grigsby followers. Yeah right! Don't diss the Grig!

I read that thread, and while the suggestion is made that the majority of the members don't like Gary's games,
the thread is more of adulation than contempt.

Hearts of Iron 2
World in Flames
GG World at War
War in the pacific
Strategic Command 2
Guns of August
Empires in Arms

****

As for grand strategy, I am not complaining![:D]

Played HOI for about 15 hours.

Thought it had great potential if it was 1. Turn Based and 2. Bug free (well at least a little bit).

Gary Grigsby makes wargames for old time/hardcore wargamers. Paradox makes games for RTS crowd who want to play a more serious wargame.

I am going to buy WITP as soon as it is downloadable AND I will buy HOI 2 ... and I believe we should be happy to have at least 2 companies designing complex WW II "grand-strategy" games instead of "Command & Conquer"-like RTS, FPS or "tactical"-only wargames.

Both games look like Risk++ though I would wager HOI will be a deeper game with more gameplay options and WaW will probably be more stable and a more accurate WW2 game.

ORIGINAL: Didz
Personally, I hated EU. Its another game gathering dust on the reject shelf.
Nice, idea ruined by unecessary use of real time programming and 3D animation that got in the way of gameplay.

How did the limited icon animation "get in the way" of gameplay? Do you think they could have squeezed out a new generation AI in the afternoon it took to animate the icons?

The game lasts 400 years and thankfully the continuous time design prevents pressing the next-turn button every week, this is one game the truly benefits from being RTS.

I'll maybe take Paradox serious when I don't have to buy the same game twice with different names with fixes then wait a year to collect all the required patches to actually be able to play once. Paradox is firmly on the "do not buy" list until such time as someone tells me they actually released a game that is functional out of the box. Everything has bugs, we accept that, but you have to draw the line at functional. I'm not paying for HOI2, I already paid for EU2 (the bug patch for EU).

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

I'll maybe take Paradox serious when I don't have to buy the same game twice with different names with fixes then wait a year to collect all the required patches to actually be able to play once. Paradox is firmly on the "do not buy" list until such time as someone tells me they actually released a game that is functional out of the box. Everything has bugs, we accept that, but you have to draw the line at functional. I'm not paying for HOI2, I already paid for EU2 (the bug patch for EU).

I agree with you about Paradox's horrendous release quality. However, it's hardly fair to call EU2 a bug fix. EU1 already had several patches which fixed almost all the bugs in the game, and EU2 added new features. Perhaps not enough to be a stand-alone game, but at least an add-on. Calling it a paid bug-fix is inappropriate.

Paradox should seek another publisher. Strategy first is well known for horrendous relieses.

Calling it a paid bug-fix is inappropriate.

If it had been a $20 addon, I wouldn't. If it had worked, I wouldn't.

Such was not the case. Twice burnt, twice as angry.

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

Paradox should seek another publisher. Strategy first is well known for horrendous relieses.

Paradox just dumped Strategy First for the "Crusader Kings" release in North America so I presume their relationship is over [:)]

ORIGINAL: Spooky

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

Paradox should seek another publisher. Strategy first is well known for horrendous relieses.

Paradox just dumped Strategy First for the "Crusader Kings" release in North America so I presume their relationship is over [:)]

THANK the maker.


Maybe Matrix could be their pal here...?

ORIGINAL: Spooky

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

Paradox should seek another publisher. Strategy first is well known for horrendous relieses.

Paradox just dumped Strategy First for the "Crusader Kings" release in North America so I presume their relationship is over [:)]

Why blame the publisher for shoddy development? They have nothing to do with the code.

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

ORIGINAL: Spooky

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

Paradox should seek another publisher. Strategy first is well known for horrendous relieses.

Paradox just dumped Strategy First for the "Crusader Kings" release in North America so I presume their relationship is over [:)]

Why blame the publisher for shoddy development? They have nothing to do with the code.

Well, the HOI 2 release will be a good test [8|]