PDXCON Historian Panel

Рет қаралды 8,976

Жыл бұрын

At PdxCon 2022, we invited two historians who play our games to talk about how history is reflected in Paradox titles.
Moderator: Troy Goodfellow (PR Manager for Historical Grand Strategy)
Panelist: Dr. Bret Devereaux, University of North Carolina (acoup.blog/)
Panelist: Dr. Eleanor Janega, London School of Economics (going-medieval.com/)
Paradox on KZfaq:
---------------------------------
ParadoxInteractive - / paradoxinteractive
Home of all our games on KZfaq!
Paradox Grand Strategy - / paradoxgrandstrategy
Grand Strategy specific content (Hearts of Iron, Stellaris, Europa Universalis and Crusader Kings)!

Пікірлер: 24

@mrachwal Жыл бұрын

I’m going to school for game design for the purpose of teaching history through video games. Watching this panel makes me so happy, as it shows the benefits that come from games teaching history! Thank you PDX for giving historians a chance to talk about how these games have expanded on their teaching and thoughts on the industry. This is why PDX games are so awesome!

@foswa6335 Жыл бұрын

Is there a reason you chose game design over studying history?

@francescodanieli8996 Жыл бұрын

I am finishing my master in history and I would really like to start studying game design for the same reason. Good luck with your quest!

@iuriepripa3171 Жыл бұрын

Bret and Eleanor were amazing!!!

@BlarryOfficial Жыл бұрын

Having Dr Janega and Dr Deveraux talk video games together was something I was craving for a while. Great to see it finally happen!

@RomanGods1 Жыл бұрын

This is really great! I hope you do more of these

@SL128 Жыл бұрын

I really hope you do this again!

@TNM001 Жыл бұрын

hm...i expected the question to come up how in game we have perfect knowledge about everything and everyone while in history that was of course not the case, so desicions came about very differently. i always wondered how a game mode would be with more "fog of war" on other kingdoms and ppl, even maybe wrong information (you have to send ppl to other courts to find things out, but they could be wrong).

@iuriepripa3171 Жыл бұрын

I know that Bret once wrote about this on his blog.

@trioptimum9027 Жыл бұрын

I think this is, in general, a pretty trivial history question: yeah, obviously nobody had a god's-eye view. It's a very thorny *game design* problem, but it's probably more interesting to discuss at a panel of game designers, not historians. (As noted, Bret did write a post about this, but it's mostly about game design, contrasting different games.)

@alvinseah5423 Жыл бұрын

I just love Prof D.

@baneandeddu8115 Жыл бұрын

LOVE IT

@GuileMike Жыл бұрын

I have shown some of my AARs to my history classes just for some giggles for alt history.

@Snow_Fire_Flame Жыл бұрын

1:11:29 On the "not enough hats" issue, in the realm of weird historical hats... this may be more of an EU4 event than a CK3 event, but en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolt_of_the_Barretinas has one of the ways the government rewarded its faithful supporters in Barcelona was that they could keep their hats on in the presence of the king. And this was a Big Deal for them!

@aboeckmann Жыл бұрын

That is so randomly obscure and I love it. Hats!

@williambrennan104 Жыл бұрын

The big exception to the logic of conquering being supremely important is being in a place with natural defenses that allow a much smaller military to defend against a large one. Countries in this situation given technology available at the time tended to become powerful, because they could invest in economic growth instead of having to pour resources into a military that "brings no material benefit to anybody". Examples include Venice, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Britain, and the United States, in chronological order. Of course, technology marches on, so when your natural defenses cease to be as useful, you have to either use your wealth to build a big military or get run over, as we have seen with most of those examples.

@greenclock7152 Жыл бұрын

That is largely a post industrialization phenomenon though.

@williambrennan104 Жыл бұрын

@@greenclock7152 No. Venetian and Dutch preeminence was well before industrializaiton

@greenclock7152 Жыл бұрын

Sure, both of those absolutely did invest in military power to secure external ressources. The point he made here is that pre industrialization there is just not a lot to do with the money.

@williambrennan104 Жыл бұрын

@@greenclock7152 True. Maybe a better way to put it is that when you don't have to spend so much on avoiding being conquered all the time, you can use your military to secure trade opportunities instead.

@BlueHawkPictures17 10 ай бұрын

Britain was famously conquered repeatedly