A French creation in video games that could interest you in multiplayers

[Edouard 121]

Hello!

Since 10 years Eversim a small company has develloped a political simulation of real rulers.

And even more, a simulation of the current geopolitcal world with all indicators, or at least the most.

They started in 2007 with Mission President, a game really bugged because it was quite too ambitious, but since they pulled out many improvements and their last game is really not bad according to the ambition of the enterprise.

They added for their last game the opportuny to play the ruler of the opposition or one of the main parties, which is very interesting.

They also include a better simulation of election for America, based on one of their game. (for the map of the result with the great electors, only available with America).

Even if I have to admit the games of 270 are really better for elections and obviously :p. Their elections are quite less develloped than 270 which is the expert in it but the geopolitical simulation can interest some.

[vcczar 1,224]

This game gets incredibly mixed reviews. If you read some of them, it makes me very wary about buying it. 

[Edouard 121]

Yes!

To be sincerely neutral, for the elections it is a bit less develloped and less precise than the 270 which is the most precise we know, but it is the greatest geopolitcal game we do have because of the ambition of such a project at a mondial level. I try to stay quite neutral on the game because there are elements pro and against.

I learned a bit the economical logic in playing to this game, they are able to use many indicators, such as the influence of deficit and debts, inflation and its impacts on economy or the currency change, maybe even it is a bit hard when we discover it.

If it could interest some, there are parties in english which are available to have an opinion:

(I tried to find a good english speaking gameplay to give an opinion)

[Guest]

I played 3 and 4 and in my opinion they are garbage. The developers clearly spent most of their time on these cheap-looking and unnecessary cutscenes that add nothing to the gameplay. I wrote a rather lengthy review of the third one and another for the fourth one. These are games priced like triple A titles but are full of bugs and unnecessary DLC. Not to mention they all seem to run on the same engine probably made in 1998. 

[Guest]

That came out rather aggressive, sorry

[Patine 470]

1 hour ago, SirLagsalott said:

That came out rather aggressive, sorry

Ah, don't worry, professional game reviewers and critics (and movie, TV show, etc., ones) are often a lot meaner in their analyses, and they get paid for it.

[jvikings1 40]

4 is a step in the right direction, but there is a ways to go

[ThePotatoWalrus 471]

 How much did they pay you to say this?

It'd be nice if you could actually play past one month without the game lagging like shit. Or going to war etc.

The game has an extreme left wing bias. One social conservative move and you're impeached.

Elections are horrendous. All you have to do is win the debate and you're guaranteed to win. You don't have to campaign.

Thanks but no thanks. This is barely scratching the surface. 

[Edouard 121]

Nothing!

I just check the others geopolitical games and I do not see any real concurrence (due to the domain surely).

I played untill 25 years with David Cameron but indeed I got a lag, after 25 years.

It depends of the computer too but their last game have really improved since 2007 and the last is a big improvement since their first.

Otherwise there are some popular promises you can do in playing as Trump to this game like Build the Wall, I did it in a debate against Hillary and it works.

You can also offer to raise the military number and this is popular, to raise the drive limits, to limit the immigration and normally this is popular.

There are also umpopular left things in the game like the promises about marijuana, or a free liberty in education, be too nice with immigration or limit too much the gun liberties or imput too much control on pipelines within the US.

But indeed if you touch to the works promises (like the unemployments rights) there it is totally umpopular in the game.

To the argument about the campain this is false since their last update which is recent and I still play to this game, it is really more difficult today, I already did 15 big meetings with more than 100% of popularity in winning the debate with 100% of popularity to my program and I lost in Israel, they changed the electoral calculator in their last modding, it is even harder to play as a third party and they're trying to fix it to make it more easier.

[Mrdie 2]

As a note, there's a forum area (that just got started) made specifically for English-speaking Power & Revolution players: http://eregime.org/index.php?showforum=12

[RI Democrat 39]

I've been playing these games for a while. I think they're fun, but it seems like it's too easy for something completely batshit crazy to happen.

For starters, protests have often seemed to have an outsize influence in the game. A single unpopular policy could completely destroy a government due to protests getting out of hand in the previous versions, and in the newer one, there's this new minigame where protesters take over part of a city and, assuming you don't just turn the military loose on them, you have to maneuver your police forces around in the right ways to arrest people and end the protest. These seem to pop up all the time too.

There are a lot of international organizations, but only a few of them actually seem to do much of anything in terms of enacting programs and policies. Maybe there are some socioeconomic effects of belonging to, say, the Black Sea Economic Cooperation group that you just don't see directly. 

The new opposition and revolution modes can be fun, though they both suffer from not having a whole lot to do at times (at least if your revolutionary group is underground or holding a small piece of territory, as opposed to engaged in an all-out conflict).

The weirdest and most prone to batshit craziness is probably the foreign policy system. In one game, I was playing as Spain, and Poland and Belarus got into a war. Russia intervened on behalf of Belarus, and then France intervened on behalf of Poland. But here's where things got really weird - while deploying to Poland, France's forces crossed Germany and Denmark, and in return Germany and Denmark both declared war on France, with the game reporting multiple engagements and tens of thousands of casualties. That was the point at which I just said "uh...no" and turned it off. (There was also a time when Italy somehow got drawn into Libya's internal conflicts and ended up taking over the entire country.)

For me, the most fun way to play is to pick a country with some authoritarian tendencies or just a very right-wing set of polices in place, then gradually try to transform it into my kind of social democracy without all hell breaking loose in the meantime. It's also sometimes more interesting if your party doesn't have an outright majority in parliament so you have to calibrate your polices in a way that gets some other parties on board. I've tried some other types of scenarios, and I think I even managed to steer Greece out of its debt/austerity quagmire once, but then the government fell over some other controversy that popped up.

[populist86 7]

I haven't tried this game (though from most accounts it seems buggy), but I think there is a real niche for a game focusing on governing. PI and the like are the class of election games. But there doesn't seem to be an equivalent product for passing legislation, or engaging in foreign policy (aside from war games/RTS).

Democracy 3 (I never played the first two) is the closest thing, but everything comes down to political capital. There are no legislative bodies, and there is are no negotiations or whipping of the vote. Everything is unilaterally handled by the executive (and the 'cabinet' is unrealistic, with morale collapsing and shakeups all too commonplace). Further, the elections are terrible (even with the newest electioneering mod), and really detract from the immersion. That doesn't mean it's not a fun game, but it's a lot more limited than something like PI, which has much deeper gameplay.

I think I read that Anthony might be introducing governing features into future editions of PI, which would be fun. It seems like it might be a challenge to implement, but if executed properly, would fill a massive gap.

[Guest]

Just now, thr33 said:

I haven't tried this game (though from most accounts it seems buggy), but I think there is a real niche for a game focusing on governing. PI and the like are the class of election games. But there doesn't seem to be an equivalent product for passing legislation, or engaging in foreign policy (aside from war games/RTS).

Democracy 3 (I never played the first two) is the closest thing, but everything comes down to political capital. There are no legislative bodies, and there is are no negotiations or whipping of the vote. Everything is unilaterally handled by the executive (and the 'cabinet' is unrealistic, with morale collapsing and shakeups all too commonplace). Further, the elections are terrible (even with the newest electioneering mod), and really detract from the immersion. That doesn't mean it's not a fun game, but it's a lot more limited than something like PI, which has much deeper gameplay.

I think I read that Anthony might be introducing governing features into future editions of PI, which would be fun. It seems like it might be a challenge to implement, but if executed properly, would fill a massive gap.

Right now he's implementing a negotiations system which I hope will come extremely soon.

[populist86 7]

1 hour ago, NYrepublican said:

Right now he's implementing a negotiations system which I hope will come extremely soon.

Yep read about it on the blog. Seems like it will be a tremendous addition. Looking forward to playing around with it.