From the impression I've gotten, although I've only been aware of EU for a little over a year now, it seems to be a question of ego or something akin to it.
Paradox AFAIK came out of pretty much nowhere and built something with much assistance from and interaction with, their fan base which they seem to duly credit.
Civ3, although ostensibly taking ideas from the "List of civ3 ideas for developers" on apolyton, was much more closed about the actual development process, and, although they can take more credit for its successes, they also have to take more of the blame for its failures.
Both seem to have been rushed out the door by their publishers/distributors/financiers but it seems that even though Civ3 was a little more finished at the time (although missing scenarios/tools :doitnow: ), Paradox has since been far more responsive and effective at fixing any shortcomings.
This is all IMO of course which could be completely and totally wrong (Not like thats happened before ).
Paradox AFAIK came out of pretty much nowhere and built something with much assistance from and interaction with, their fan base which they seem to duly credit.
Civ3, although ostensibly taking ideas from the "List of civ3 ideas for developers" on apolyton, was much more closed about the actual development process, and, although they can take more credit for its successes, they also have to take more of the blame for its failures.
Both seem to have been rushed out the door by their publishers/distributors/financiers but it seems that even though Civ3 was a little more finished at the time (although missing scenarios/tools :doitnow: ), Paradox has since been far more responsive and effective at fixing any shortcomings.
This is all IMO of course which could be completely and totally wrong (Not like thats happened before ).
Comment