New Dev Diary and notice that it's delayed until Q2, 2015
Quote:
On to other important matters. As some of you on the forum have already guessed, we have decided to move the original Q1 2015 release target to late Q2 2015. Hearts of Iron IV is a very ambitious undertaking and we might have been a tad optimistic with the original date that was communicated.
HoI 3 sucked for me for the following reasons:
-Shit way to create functional armies. I don't want to spend 2 hours finetuning and micro-managing armies, it's clunky and messy.
-The research, for obvious reasons (a broken maze that is way too fastidious to sort out).
-The event management system
-The look (that Clausewitz engine S.U.C.K.S. IMO).
-Poor visibility overall
+Custom-built divisions thanks to the branching tech possibilities, like in HoI1.
+The possibilities that the military engine MIGHT offer if done properly.
Hope they won't , as usual, release a quite empty game, hoping that the (incredible, btw) modding community picks up the pieces and fix their game for them.
"Music washes away from the soul the dust of everyday life." ~Berthold Auerbach
I'll probably try to play both sides again while I try to conquer Africa as Belgium.
Has so much potential to pissing one or everyone of in the end which makes it quite fun.
HOI IV is gonna be ok, paradox stopped releasing games in beta state since crusader kings 2and they know what there doing with Hoi after 3 games.
Don't know about stelaris though, it's new ground for the studio and there track record with new ip's is terrible.
What new ip's have been terrible?
Are you sure you are not confusing Paradox Interactive (aka publisher) with a Paradox Development Studio
Alle there new games sucked at first, only eu1 and crusader kings 1 were decent.
I couldn't enjoy any one of these games:
Victoria 1
Hearts of iron 1
Sengoku
Diplomacy
March of the eagles
Well, to defend them:
Diplomacy -> They're just the publisher, not the dev, March of the Eagles -> same (though it uses their engine)
Vic 1 and HOI 1 -> first of the series -> prone to have some issues (though I like Vic 1 a lot)
Sengoku was a horrible mistake :/ It seemed like they just needed money and pushed out a piece of crap.
Oh and now I noticed you were talking about exactly the 'new', first of the series games.
Well, still stands I liked Vic, Hoi 1 I have not played.
EU4 is more about managing a country, with warfare being just a minor aspect of it, just one way to succeed. HOI is all about warfare and the different country-management aspects of the game are all about supporting the military part of your nation.
For example, in EU4 you can research all sorts of peaceful tech (like increasing your colonial range, which results in expanded borders, but in a peaceful way), while in HOI, every tech is in some way there to help out the military (like even if you research some domestic stuff that makes the population happy, it's ultimately only about making more people available for drafting into the army).
Basically, EU4 is about coming out on top of the colonial era, HOI is about coming out on top during WW2.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
