StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I'm playing the Majesty 2 demo and it's funny etc. But Majesty 2 is published by Paradox of 'not working shit games' fame. I remember reading many previews where it was called 'Paradox's Majesty 2' and including phrases like 'if Paradox can make this a winner' etc.

Is this normal? It's a 1C game. Paradox are the publisher. That's like me wondering if CDV can make Space Rangers 2 better; they aren't making it jack shit except profitable. On the load screen for Majesty 2, it even says 'copyright Paradox 2008' which is amusing on many levels. Does this mean they're like, second-party or something?

Paradox are a developer rather than a publisher, if I remember correctly. I think they do self-publish several things however.

Well that's it; I'm pretty sure they didn't develop this. I thnk 1C is generally a publisher too, although they may own a bunch of developers or something.

And holy shit, who remakes an old game with old features like 'can't place building here, no we won't show you the bounding boxes, just wave the picture around until you find a good spot'? If ever we needed a reason to get Tropico 3 instead, this was it.

Stark wrote:Well that's it; I'm pretty sure they didn't develop this. I thnk 1C is generally a publisher too, although they may own a bunch of developers or something.

1C pretty much just publish things in Russia, including Russian versions of games made elsewhere (something like 50% of software developed elsewhere is released through them in Russia), and get other people to publish things they make elsewhere.

Archaic` wrote:Paradox are a developer rather than a publisher, if I remember correctly. I think they do self-publish several things however.

They're both. They publish other games as well as their own, and they used to own GamersGate.

What's wierd is while I poked around about the 1C/Paradox relationship, I discovered Paradox has fans. Not fans of their niche games, but personally fans of their development team. It boggles the mind - people honestyl say 'Paradox are amazing and great at product support' and 'it's so awesome how they add features peopel expected in the game as paid expansions later'.

It's a common reaction when the people actually involved are accesible. Johan, the lead developer, is active on their messages boards and actually responds to people's posts/comments/questions. I think he even participated in some multiplayer matches years ago in Europa Universalis 2. People see that kind of thing and interpret it as the developers really caring about their fan base and what they think.

Which makes things like their announcement that Hearts of Iron III was what their "fans" wanted most (even though the forum-side vote put it in 3rd place behind Victoria II and Crusader Kings II) all the more hilarious.

TC Pilot wrote:It's a common reaction when the people actually involved are accesible. Johan, the lead developer, is active on their messages boards and actually responds to people's posts/comments/questions. I think he even participated in some multiplayer matches years ago in Europa Universalis 2. People see that kind of thing and interpret it as the developers really caring about their fan base and what they think.

Which makes things like their announcement that Hearts of Iron III was what their "fans" wanted most (even though the forum-side vote put it in 3rd place behind Victoria II and Crusader Kings II) all the more hilarious.

Supposedly the CEO was reticent about making Victoria because he doubts it will turn any profit. He's bet his hair it won't, in fact.

I wonder if the ransom model could be applied to electronic games. Fans often sign any useless online petitions- let them put their money where their mouths are.