Well, to be fair, part of what makes these games center on Europe outside of Money is the amount of history recorded that are still relatively well preserved and well recorded, and had been known by more people. For sure, other well developed nations have very well preserved history as well outside of Europe, largest of them is probably China, it makes sense to me from the amount of information we have on history that Sino-centric games would also come outside of monetary reasons as there are many interesting periods that can be explored throughout its history, however, China did suffer on this front by a lot due to how the Communists destroyed a lot of historical artifacts and historical sites during their uprising and in their victory, as they link this to the imperialist past. Of course, other nations with deep history also exist such as Japan, Korea, Iran, Egypt, Turkey, etc. But the thing is, there are many places where even the local people know very little of their history prior to the colonization of the Europeans, either due to simply a lack of record, or the predecessor of colonial era was simply fragmented tribal period where there is no central power or state entity that even existed on those lands. Another reason is probably, Europeans had the earliest influential tangible global presence, sure the Huns might have hailed from the steppes of central Asia, but prior to their settlement in Europe, their history is very blurry at best even as you try to look them up. The Mongol Empire made it all the way to Eastern Europe all the way from Mongolia and honestly I am baffled why there hasn't been a Mongol Empire title yet from Total War. The Chinese silk road also reached far and I can definitely see how a game centered on commerce of the silk road can play out. But none had the reach like the European powers that sailed all the way to America, as well as Asia and colonized Africa, I am rather fond of going wide on the map, of these games, the map is the game! And so far the events that have spun the whole world in the effect they have so far really has "It's Europe's fault" stamped all over it except for the most recent years.
Like I said in the video, it is completely natural for European game makers to create games about Europe. But that doesn’t mean they should completely forget or worse - misrepresent the non-European cultures also inherently present in the game, and the bigger the game, the bigger the risk of this becomes. I believe this may result in bigger ramifications in people’s minds than we might think.
Let's not forget that a lot of these countries don't have well-documented history because Europeans burned it down. The Spanish tried to desecrate every bit of Mayan culture they came across, for instance, leading to us losing a lot of their writing and language.
@@Crazy_Diamond_75and that's exactly why Europe is the most interesting region - because it was the only time a single region DOMINATED the World. The British Empire alone not only controlled more land, but also more people (and a higher % of the world population) than the Mongols did. Heck, even Russia is about on par with the Mongols in land and pop %. The British, Russians, French, and Spanish controlled over HALF of the entire world.
@@Ekaustonian It's only the most interesting if your only interest in history is domination. Some of us enjoy learning about other cultures and ways of life, but we won't be able to because Europeans destroyed the evidence.
one example is the literacy rate in Victoria 3. Irl before the british conquest, Burma had a literacy rate of 62.5% because of the public monestary schools, in Vicky 3 however it's only at 9%. Another example are the provinces, in VIcky 3 there are just 5 with very little to no natural resources even thou Myanmar is probably one of the richest countries in terms of natural resources and it's area is bigger than any european nation aside from Russia.
Were those resources discovered and usable by 1936 though? I don't think so. And Burma is an exceptional case, with how the game works, giving it 62.5% literacy would make it too strong for how it historically was. They'll correct it later down the line if appropriate mechanics are added. Also, don't forget that europe typically has a lot more info and historical sources to go by, which usually gives it an edge.
Yeah, I understand why they did it. I just wished my country was represented well. I mean in every game from ck3 to eu4 they fucked it up, I don’t blame them thou my country is not really well known. Just tired of seeing it get butchered everytime tbh.
@@ellidominusser1138 I think something like 30%~40% literacy would be balanced, definitely it would need to start with religious schools (Edited, checked and they already have 20%, still low compared to historical) They should also give a bit more power to the clergy
Somehow I both get the video and don't. I'm not quite sure what the main argument, if any, are you presenting? is it about TW vs PDX? or the general philosophy of history games? Many of the "issues" you bring up you end up talking about how non-issues are they soon after. I'm not quite sure what to make of it. Anyway, for me I enjoy both titles for different reasons, but overall PDX more precisely for the opposite aspects that you've mentioned. I find way more instant gratification in pdx than in TW.
I’m kinda just trying to ask questions and try to come to some conclusions, it’s a philosophical and somewhat philanthropic question after all - is eurocenteism in these okay, when is it not, and which developer does deep historical diversity and inclusivity and realism better?
@@AndysParadox 'historical diversity and inclusivity' ha! typical brain dead Woke-cult indoctrination mantras; there is nothing 'philosophical' in history. history is all about facts not Woke-cult fantasies. and the fact is: France was stronger than Sokoto. Cope 😀😀
Hmm, I don't think you review the illusion of a "Historical Mindset" correctly here. For example all Paradox games - maybe outside of Victoria 3 - are structured in a way, which invalitates "peaceful or non-agressive" gameplay as an option...something which makes only very little sense in the context of creating a "historical mindset". Sure, for a powerful nation like France war and expansion might be the quickest road to power, but no ruler of - idk - Frankfurt thought in 1444 "okay, the only way I can secure this realm in the long term is by conquering all my neighbours, blobbing massively in the HRE and than going on to form Germany" - but this is exactly the mindset EU IV puts you into. Paradox games also usally fail to account for the real cost of war - both in terms what it costs to operate an army and in the destruction war inflicts on the economy, trade and so on - and this further invalidates the "historical mindset" since it takes away from the "weight" of the decision to go to war... In general all Paradox (and total war) games make it far to easy for the player to overcome historical and/ or structural problems, which nations faced, since their core mechanics allow for every nation to "win the game". Also since TW came of a bit worse in your initial comparision of the way they handle historical attoricties/ challenges/ mindsets whatever, I like to remind you that Victoria 3 is a game, in which colonialism RAISES the standard of living in the colonies and that HoI IV made the Sowjet purges into a "fun, little mini-game"...and there is much more of cause. PDX certainly has it strenghts, but they also play very fast and loose/ meme-like with the history.
You make some good points, and these are points very closely related to ones I made in my previous video actually, on HOI4 being very meme-y in comparison to say EU4 or Vicky 3. That being said, like I kind of mentioned, Paradox tends to stray away from those actual social conditions that involve the darker parts of our histories, even though in Vicky 3 it's technically there. But regarding the colonies, is it not a thing that you can choose whether to make them settler colonies or resource-exploitation colonies? Certainly in the latter the living conditions are not nearly as good as in the former?
To add to this, I disagree with the video's perspective that "eurocentrism is ok" because Europe was historically relevant. In fact, I'd personally say the examples given in the video aren't really eurocentrism. I'd call EU4 eurocentric if it portrayed all its European countries in great detail but made the rest of the world unplayable and devoid of flavour. What attracts me to the game in its more recent state is precisely that you can have fun playing anywhere in the world. It's not that eurocentrism is ok, but rather that portraying European success in the early modern world isn't itself eurocentric, so long as the rest of the world is not unfairly ignored or stereotyped in order to glorify Europe. It'd be eurocentric, for instance, if Ming started the game weaker than England or something.
I have never really seen colonialism raise the standard of living for the colonized populace, at least the un accepted cultures when you’re doing colonial exploitation which was one of the most common ways of colonialism. Though I could definitely see how it struggles to simulate that.. because of how pop acceptance works, it’s fairly easy to have a multi-culturally accepting colonizer that raises the standard of living in their colonies, it’s fairly weird. Though I do disagree with the whole blob mindset, since playing tall is a strong strategy in a lot of paradox games (Crusader Kings II and III for example, EUIV to a lesser extent in my opinion, the most blob focused paradox game is Hoi4 which is understandable)
Also the thing with the staling mini-gam is… well for one is not really fun(? And secondly, well, it was the only way they could really implement it. Think about it, if they start going into grueling detail of the horros of the purge then that brings out an elephant into the room; do we then start making realistic events and depictions of the H*locaust in Germany? Do we portray the famines in India? The Nanjing massacre? The US “interment” camps? The main reason Hoi4 doesn’t go full serious on this topics is because that was never really the vision of the game, the developers themselves have already expressed this many times, only mods try and go that extra mile. Hoi4 is a strategy game first after all, not a historical visual novel, though it could be a little more realistic like the black ice mod for sure
The problem with using non-european settings is the quality of the sources in these places. A lot of the events are a mystery because the sources were aboe to make outrageous claims for a long long time. Look at even massive archaeological structures like borabodur in java. It was missing a for a few hundred years. Its literally a massive pyramid fairly close to a major city. There just arent enough texts and evidence for a lot of cultures. Look at 3 kingdoms. Its not a historical game, its a childish fantasy of 1 hero taking on 1000s of troops. Completely pointless Loo
@@arcane_luzion the old ones were pretty bad, but there has been some historical method in the last 70 years or so. You just don't get the same historical method and level of research in other places unfortunately
@@johnnicholas1657 so you mean modern research, not sources from the actual period? Your response to „PDX games might be eurocentric“ is „well research is eurocentric“? I guess thats a valid point then
@@arcane_luzion well in half. I mean in non European stuff there is basically no written sources that aren't completely out of this world in terms of information, I mean China is a bizarre example. It had an amazing administrative system and wrote down loads, but when it came to stuff about warfare etc you are left with little. It was fairly uncommon for tropical cultures to write down stuff (if they indeed had a written language system) partly due to their cultures being less seasonal, so the concept of keeping records wasn't as necessary as in other climates. Similarly in areas of southern Africa the climate led to a more nomadic existence which delayed the foundation of cities etc.
province size in paradox games is a great metric for measuring eurocentrism (i. e. where did they make smaller and where bigger provinces). I hope one day the province sizes are going to be the same across the whole map
Yeah I can't wait to play as sand in the sahara... the reason paradox games are eurocentric is because european history is more interesting than most other places
Dude its EUROPA universalis,its VICTORIA 3,its imperator ROME,its CRUSADER kings 😂its supposed to be eurocentric. If you dont like it,dont buy it simple
Who said they don't like it? I'm probably one of the most Eurocentric people in terms of personal taste there is, doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about the representation of the peoples who are IN the game. It's not like Europa Universalis only features England, France and Germany now, is it? Or Victoria is not only Britain and America? Reminds me of that scene in Anchorman; "It's AnchorMAN, not AnchorLADY and that is a scientific fact!"
@@AndysParadox They are fully represented. You are merely echoing a constant critcism against paradox in order to stir up drama when their is none. Your entire channel contradicts itself at every turn. I used to love your content, now you've turned into a living article and a content mill.
Your one of the many "intellectual" youtubers who constantly call eurocentric. The games are built and designed with europe in mind. You would never call an asian game "AsianCentric" so why you claim paradox is? Stop stifling creativity and focus on original critique that has a point. Paradox itself has developed content outside of europe, do not turn this into an issue for views because it is the opposite of an issue.
This comment is wild man, this is like the first time I mention "eurocentric" on the entire channel. Get yourself together, man. Of course I would call an asian game asian centric if it featured parts of non-asia but did not represent them well, which was my exact point in Victoria 2, and the first few years of CK2, which is just an objective fact
Maybe if you only know about European history. Perhaps you might want to learn about Mansa Musa, his epic Hajj and how he came to power in the first place
A single guy and a small region compared to thousands of years of cultures clashing, since "Europe" frequently also involves Middle Eastern powers such as the Persians, Abbayids, and Ottomans. Not to mention the European dominance of the pre-modern world. Rome, the Frank's, the Habsburg's, Napoleon - no one ever came close to taming the area, whereas the Middle East, India, and China consolidated frequently historically. While other regions have their interesting kingdoms, cultures, and people, none compare to Europe's consistently glorious, chaotic, mess.
@ again, actually learn about world history. In that same region you have The Great Walls of Benin, read about its descriptions, measurements and period it was built over. Read what the Portuguese explorers said about the Kingdom if Benin and their comparisons to Lisbon. Europeans only “dominated” after they had millions of people working for free for centuries. Before that they weren’t anything special at all. Learn world history
Who gives a shit if a european company makes video games that focus primarily around europe, which has had some of the richest history in the world. If all media is eurocentric than perhaps history itself is simply eurocentric. Stop crying
damn did you really wake up crying? I'm just asking questions and trying to have a nuanced discussion about an interesting topic, I'm not accusing anyone or anything of bad faith or bad actions in any way at all
Some people just don’t wanna even try to understand or engage fairly because they’re afraid of critical thinking and perhaps *gasp* examine some of their ideas in a new light
Intelligent, level-headed and history knowing people are urgently needed. The fact that you know the ins and outs of what makes a game fun yet realistic also helps. (If you need some extra incentive, other content creators, less knowledgeable but wayy more arrogant than you, are already (way too) active over there).
I really appreciate your thoughts on this and I think I agree with most of your takes. When considering the quality of your content i am honestly surprised that your subcriber count isnt in the ten or hundred thousands. You seem like a really likeable person and I like your way of presenting your thoughts. Unrelated, but I wondered, what do you think about Hoi4esque mission trees, particularly in regards to EU5?
Thank you so much, that’s so kind of you! In terms of HOI4, as the first PDX to actually introduce those trees, I really liked them. I like their artworks, they feel good to complete, and they were fairly innovative for their time. I think they’re even better in EU4 though, and I hope if we see them in EU5, that they stay branch-based and offer a healthy mix of historical versus alternate. My problem with HOI4 is that compared to every other PDX, it appears too railroaded to me inherently - you just have a few years of peace and uninterrupted internal development, often playing on like speed 5, and then there’s basically only war. Perhaps I’ve forgotten a lot, haven’t kept up, or was just never the best at the game, but HOI4 despite its insane complexity, feels to me like the least open and the least sandboxy and immersive of the games. That’s not to say it’s not fantastic - it is. Just my least favorite PDX experience at this point in time.
@@AndysParadox fair enough. I also think Paradox did a better job with the newer EU4 mission trees, but even they are a but too railroaded I think. Especially when it comes to conquest missions that are locked behind each other. I hope that EU5 will hit that sweet spot between historical flavour and alternate history in regards to the missions but also in general. I also had a Hoi4 phase but in retrospect I don't really like it that much. EU4 is way better in my opinion.
I also find it remarkable that you answer nearly every comment and really think about what your viewers say, I hope someday your channel will grow so much that you simply don't have the capacity to do that anymore.
I liked your video My favorite nation to play in Victoria 3 is Sokoto, with the goal of uniting as much as possible of the african continent before the europeans (protip : the malaria debuffs apply only to non-homelands regions, which means that if one of your primary cultures is present in a state you will colonize it at full speed, much faster than the europeans before they research Quinine (after 30ish years)) and become a socialist or anarchist utopia with cooperative ownership, and maybe unite the continent (never succeded so far) Sokoto is the easiest country in Africa to do that imo, because you can secure Sulfur quite easily (quite rare in the continent) and you have a big army Also formables can be quite powerful if they add primary cultures to your country ( see protip ^ ) I find Total War games quite shallow now, even though Rome TW and Medieval 2 TW were my favorite games for quite some time, I prefer Paradox, especially Vic 3 Both Paradox and CA have in common a disgusting way with DLCs and paywalls
You’re going to trigger so many people for making such a valid video with well rounded opinions
Well, to be fair, part of what makes these games center on Europe outside of Money is the amount of history recorded that are still relatively well preserved and well recorded, and had been known by more people.
For sure, other well developed nations have very well preserved history as well outside of Europe, largest of them is probably China, it makes sense to me from the amount of information we have on history that Sino-centric games would also come outside of monetary reasons as there are many interesting periods that can be explored throughout its history, however, China did suffer on this front by a lot due to how the Communists destroyed a lot of historical artifacts and historical sites during their uprising and in their victory, as they link this to the imperialist past. Of course, other nations with deep history also exist such as Japan, Korea, Iran, Egypt, Turkey, etc. But the thing is, there are many places where even the local people know very little of their history prior to the colonization of the Europeans, either due to simply a lack of record, or the predecessor of colonial era was simply fragmented tribal period where there is no central power or state entity that even existed on those lands.
Another reason is probably, Europeans had the earliest influential tangible global presence, sure the Huns might have hailed from the steppes of central Asia, but prior to their settlement in Europe, their history is very blurry at best even as you try to look them up. The Mongol Empire made it all the way to Eastern Europe all the way from Mongolia and honestly I am baffled why there hasn't been a Mongol Empire title yet from Total War. The Chinese silk road also reached far and I can definitely see how a game centered on commerce of the silk road can play out. But none had the reach like the European powers that sailed all the way to America, as well as Asia and colonized Africa, I am rather fond of going wide on the map, of these games, the map is the game! And so far the events that have spun the whole world in the effect they have so far really has "It's Europe's fault" stamped all over it except for the most recent years.
Like I said in the video, it is completely natural for European game makers to create games about Europe. But that doesn’t mean they should completely forget or worse - misrepresent the non-European cultures also inherently present in the game, and the bigger the game, the bigger the risk of this becomes. I believe this may result in bigger ramifications in people’s minds than we might think.
Let's not forget that a lot of these countries don't have well-documented history because Europeans burned it down. The Spanish tried to desecrate every bit of Mayan culture they came across, for instance, leading to us losing a lot of their writing and language.
@@Crazy_Diamond_75and that's exactly why Europe is the most interesting region - because it was the only time a single region DOMINATED the World. The British Empire alone not only controlled more land, but also more people (and a higher % of the world population) than the Mongols did. Heck, even Russia is about on par with the Mongols in land and pop %. The British, Russians, French, and Spanish controlled over HALF of the entire world.
@@Ekaustonian It's only the most interesting if your only interest in history is domination. Some of us enjoy learning about other cultures and ways of life, but we won't be able to because Europeans destroyed the evidence.
one example is the literacy rate in Victoria 3. Irl before the british conquest, Burma had a literacy rate of 62.5% because of the public monestary schools, in Vicky 3 however it's only at 9%. Another example are the provinces, in VIcky 3 there are just 5 with very little to no natural resources even thou Myanmar is probably one of the richest countries in terms of natural resources and it's area is bigger than any european nation aside from Russia.
Yeah, even the most modest estimation is 30% (when looking at only men)
Were those resources discovered and usable by 1936 though? I don't think so. And Burma is an exceptional case, with how the game works, giving it 62.5% literacy would make it too strong for how it historically was. They'll correct it later down the line if appropriate mechanics are added. Also, don't forget that europe typically has a lot more info and historical sources to go by, which usually gives it an edge.
very interesting observation!
Yeah, I understand why they did it. I just wished my country was represented well. I mean in every game from ck3 to eu4 they fucked it up, I don’t blame them thou my country is not really well known. Just tired of seeing it get butchered everytime tbh.
@@ellidominusser1138 I think something like 30%~40% literacy would be balanced, definitely it would need to start with religious schools
(Edited, checked and they already have 20%, still low compared to historical)
They should also give a bit more power to the clergy
4:35 pretty sure it was coined after ww1 by a polish to describe what the turks were doing to the armenians.
Came here to say this.
If you use the amazing "crusader wars' mod for ck3 you can get the best of both total war and crusader kings
I know, it's fantastic!
Unplayable shite that doesn’t actually play in a fun way for a campaign
@@jacob6672 on what basis dare you utter this shambolic string of words
@@jacob6672:(
@@jacob6672 The fuck are you talking. The thing works pretty well. You must have followed every single step of the installation wrong.
Somehow I both get the video and don't. I'm not quite sure what the main argument, if any, are you presenting? is it about TW vs PDX? or the general philosophy of history games? Many of the "issues" you bring up you end up talking about how non-issues are they soon after. I'm not quite sure what to make of it.
Anyway, for me I enjoy both titles for different reasons, but overall PDX more precisely for the opposite aspects that you've mentioned. I find way more instant gratification in pdx than in TW.
I’m kinda just trying to ask questions and try to come to some conclusions, it’s a philosophical and somewhat philanthropic question after all - is eurocenteism in these okay, when is it not, and which developer does deep historical diversity and inclusivity and realism better?
@@AndysParadox 'historical diversity and inclusivity' ha! typical brain dead Woke-cult indoctrination mantras; there is nothing 'philosophical' in history. history is all about facts not Woke-cult fantasies. and the fact is: France was stronger than Sokoto.
Cope 😀😀
Hmm, I don't think you review the illusion of a "Historical Mindset" correctly here. For example all Paradox games - maybe outside of Victoria 3 - are structured in a way, which invalitates "peaceful or non-agressive" gameplay as an option...something which makes only very little sense in the context of creating a "historical mindset". Sure, for a powerful nation like France war and expansion might be the quickest road to power, but no ruler of - idk - Frankfurt thought in 1444 "okay, the only way I can secure this realm in the long term is by conquering all my neighbours, blobbing massively in the HRE and than going on to form Germany" - but this is exactly the mindset EU IV puts you into.
Paradox games also usally fail to account for the real cost of war - both in terms what it costs to operate an army and in the destruction war inflicts on the economy, trade and so on - and this further invalidates the "historical mindset" since it takes away from the "weight" of the decision to go to war...
In general all Paradox (and total war) games make it far to easy for the player to overcome historical and/ or structural problems, which nations faced, since their core mechanics allow for every nation to "win the game".
Also since TW came of a bit worse in your initial comparision of the way they handle historical attoricties/ challenges/ mindsets whatever, I like to remind you that Victoria 3 is a game, in which colonialism RAISES the standard of living in the colonies and that HoI IV made the Sowjet purges into a "fun, little mini-game"...and there is much more of cause. PDX certainly has it strenghts, but they also play very fast and loose/ meme-like with the history.
You make some good points, and these are points very closely related to ones I made in my previous video actually, on HOI4 being very meme-y in comparison to say EU4 or Vicky 3. That being said, like I kind of mentioned, Paradox tends to stray away from those actual social conditions that involve the darker parts of our histories, even though in Vicky 3 it's technically there. But regarding the colonies, is it not a thing that you can choose whether to make them settler colonies or resource-exploitation colonies? Certainly in the latter the living conditions are not nearly as good as in the former?
To add to this, I disagree with the video's perspective that "eurocentrism is ok" because Europe was historically relevant. In fact, I'd personally say the examples given in the video aren't really eurocentrism.
I'd call EU4 eurocentric if it portrayed all its European countries in great detail but made the rest of the world unplayable and devoid of flavour. What attracts me to the game in its more recent state is precisely that you can have fun playing anywhere in the world. It's not that eurocentrism is ok, but rather that portraying European success in the early modern world isn't itself eurocentric, so long as the rest of the world is not unfairly ignored or stereotyped in order to glorify Europe.
It'd be eurocentric, for instance, if Ming started the game weaker than England or something.
I have never really seen colonialism raise the standard of living for the colonized populace, at least the un accepted cultures when you’re doing colonial exploitation which was one of the most common ways of colonialism. Though I could definitely see how it struggles to simulate that.. because of how pop acceptance works, it’s fairly easy to have a multi-culturally accepting colonizer that raises the standard of living in their colonies, it’s fairly weird.
Though I do disagree with the whole blob mindset, since playing tall is a strong strategy in a lot of paradox games (Crusader Kings II and III for example, EUIV to a lesser extent in my opinion, the most blob focused paradox game is Hoi4 which is understandable)
Also the thing with the staling mini-gam is… well for one is not really fun(?
And secondly, well, it was the only way they could really implement it. Think about it, if they start going into grueling detail of the horros of the purge then that brings out an elephant into the room; do we then start making realistic events and depictions of the H*locaust in Germany? Do we portray the famines in India? The Nanjing massacre? The US “interment” camps?
The main reason Hoi4 doesn’t go full serious on this topics is because that was never really the vision of the game, the developers themselves have already expressed this many times, only mods try and go that extra mile. Hoi4 is a strategy game first after all, not a historical visual novel, though it could be a little more realistic like the black ice mod for sure
@@newguy8288I actually think paradox adding a persecuted minority mechanic would be interesting and add to the strategy of the game
The problem with using non-european settings is the quality of the sources in these places. A lot of the events are a mystery because the sources were aboe to make outrageous claims for a long long time.
Look at even massive archaeological structures like borabodur in java. It was missing a for a few hundred years.
Its literally a massive pyramid fairly close to a major city. There just arent enough texts and evidence for a lot of cultures.
Look at 3 kingdoms. Its not a historical game, its a childish fantasy of 1 hero taking on 1000s of troops. Completely pointless
Loo
and european sources arent known for being totally overblown, straight up lies or just plainly wrong?
@@arcane_luzion the old ones were pretty bad, but there has been some historical method in the last 70 years or so. You just don't get the same historical method and level of research in other places unfortunately
@@johnnicholas1657 so you mean modern research, not sources from the actual period? Your response to „PDX games might be eurocentric“ is „well research is eurocentric“? I guess thats a valid point then
@@arcane_luzion well in half. I mean in non European stuff there is basically no written sources that aren't completely out of this world in terms of information, I mean China is a bizarre example. It had an amazing administrative system and wrote down loads, but when it came to stuff about warfare etc you are left with little. It was fairly uncommon for tropical cultures to write down stuff (if they indeed had a written language system) partly due to their cultures being less seasonal, so the concept of keeping records wasn't as necessary as in other climates. Similarly in areas of southern Africa the climate led to a more nomadic existence which delayed the foundation of cities etc.
@@arcane_luzion no.
The European archive isnt at fault for being by far the most reliable and competent one. Keep crying.
province size in paradox games is a great metric for measuring eurocentrism (i. e. where did they make smaller and where bigger provinces). I hope one day the province sizes are going to be the same across the whole map
Are provinces not different sizes in real life, often based on geographical location and population density?
Stop crying about eurocentrism its called crusader kings for a reason
Yeah I can't wait to play as sand in the sahara... the reason paradox games are eurocentric is because european history is more interesting than most other places
@@jonasastrom7422 It's only more interesting because it is more familiar and you know more of European figures and history as a whole.
@@jonasastrom7422 who would've thought that people tend to find media in their own language from their own culture more engaging.
Dude its EUROPA universalis,its VICTORIA 3,its imperator ROME,its CRUSADER kings 😂its supposed to be eurocentric. If you dont like it,dont buy it simple
Who said they don't like it? I'm probably one of the most Eurocentric people in terms of personal taste there is, doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about the representation of the peoples who are IN the game. It's not like Europa Universalis only features England, France and Germany now, is it? Or Victoria is not only Britain and America? Reminds me of that scene in Anchorman; "It's AnchorMAN, not AnchorLADY and that is a scientific fact!"
Galaxy brained response. I can believe no one has ever thought of that argument before
@@AndysParadox They are fully represented. You are merely echoing a constant critcism against paradox in order to stir up drama when their is none. Your entire channel contradicts itself at every turn. I used to love your content, now you've turned into a living article and a content mill.
Did you watch the video?
@@XXman23 thank god, we have a historian
Paradox doesnt spend money on graphics, only in marketing,
huh?
what? visuals in Paradox games are literally some of the best in the strategy genre
Your one of the many "intellectual" youtubers who constantly call eurocentric. The games are built and designed with europe in mind. You would never call an asian game "AsianCentric" so why you claim paradox is? Stop stifling creativity and focus on original critique that has a point. Paradox itself has developed content outside of europe, do not turn this into an issue for views because it is the opposite of an issue.
This comment is wild man, this is like the first time I mention "eurocentric" on the entire channel. Get yourself together, man. Of course I would call an asian game asian centric if it featured parts of non-asia but did not represent them well, which was my exact point in Victoria 2, and the first few years of CK2, which is just an objective fact
Eurocentrism is a feature not a bug.
To be fair, Europe is the coolest continent there is, but it is quiet lonely at the top of History...
Maybe if you only know about European history. Perhaps you might want to learn about Mansa Musa, his epic Hajj and how he came to power in the first place
A single guy and a small region compared to thousands of years of cultures clashing, since "Europe" frequently also involves Middle Eastern powers such as the Persians, Abbayids, and Ottomans. Not to mention the European dominance of the pre-modern world.
Rome, the Frank's, the Habsburg's, Napoleon - no one ever came close to taming the area, whereas the Middle East, India, and China consolidated frequently historically.
While other regions have their interesting kingdoms, cultures, and people, none compare to Europe's consistently glorious, chaotic, mess.
@ again, actually learn about world history. In that same region you have The Great Walls of Benin, read about its descriptions, measurements and period it was built over. Read what the Portuguese explorers said about the Kingdom if Benin and their comparisons to Lisbon.
Europeans only “dominated” after they had millions of people working for free for centuries. Before that they weren’t anything special at all. Learn world history
Based, total wars are too boring comparing to Paradox Games
Who gives a shit if a european company makes video games that focus primarily around europe, which has had some of the richest history in the world. If all media is eurocentric than perhaps history itself is simply eurocentric. Stop crying
Sounds like your the one who is crying 😂
damn did you really wake up crying? I'm just asking questions and trying to have a nuanced discussion about an interesting topic, I'm not accusing anyone or anything of bad faith or bad actions in any way at all
@@unreliablenarratorz2772 I don't make half an hour videos that probably took a day or two to edit about "eurocentrism" so no
@@AndysParadox Yeahyeah my ass
Umm Europe has the richest history, what about all those who had been dominated by the Europeans, those histories are boring?
53 dislikes lol.....time to get into Paradox money too.
huh?
wtf is this salty comment section, he just explain eurocentrism as an approach to game design
They salty cuz they be unironic western chauvinists
Some people just don’t wanna even try to understand or engage fairly because they’re afraid of critical thinking and perhaps *gasp* examine some of their ideas in a new light
My man, you're needed at the tinto talks forum (if you're not already there, that is)!
Why am I needed? :)
@@AndysParadox EU5 is being developed and Paradox is asking for advice
@@vlad1mir5726 I know haha, happy to hear my thoughts are valued!
Intelligent, level-headed and history knowing people are urgently needed. The fact that you know the ins and outs of what makes a game fun yet realistic also helps.
(If you need some extra incentive, other content creators, less knowledgeable but wayy more arrogant than you, are already (way too) active over there).
I really appreciate your thoughts on this and I think I agree with most of your takes. When considering the quality of your content i am honestly surprised that your subcriber count isnt in the ten or hundred thousands. You seem like a really likeable person and I like your way of presenting your thoughts. Unrelated, but I wondered, what do you think about Hoi4esque mission trees, particularly in regards to EU5?
Thank you so much, that’s so kind of you! In terms of HOI4, as the first PDX to actually introduce those trees, I really liked them. I like their artworks, they feel good to complete, and they were fairly innovative for their time. I think they’re even better in EU4 though, and I hope if we see them in EU5, that they stay branch-based and offer a healthy mix of historical versus alternate.
My problem with HOI4 is that compared to every other PDX, it appears too railroaded to me inherently - you just have a few years of peace and uninterrupted internal development, often playing on like speed 5, and then there’s basically only war. Perhaps I’ve forgotten a lot, haven’t kept up, or was just never the best at the game, but HOI4 despite its insane complexity, feels to me like the least open and the least sandboxy and immersive of the games. That’s not to say it’s not fantastic - it is. Just my least favorite PDX experience at this point in time.
@@AndysParadox fair enough. I also think Paradox did a better job with the newer EU4 mission trees, but even they are a but too railroaded I think. Especially when it comes to conquest missions that are locked behind each other. I hope that EU5 will hit that sweet spot between historical flavour and alternate history in regards to the missions but also in general. I also had a Hoi4 phase but in retrospect I don't really like it that much. EU4 is way better in my opinion.
I also find it remarkable that you answer nearly every comment and really think about what your viewers say, I hope someday your channel will grow so much that you simply don't have the capacity to do that anymore.
@@TheStoicSage9907 luxury problems are the best to have, thank you so much again!
Looks like some right wing misunderstood the video.They may not even understand the game he's talking about. XD
Oh right wingers will always “misunderstand” what I say :)
Right wingers make up the majority of pdx costumers XD. Have you even interacted with the HOI4/EU4 community?
@@hopeundertheblacksun That's just absolutely not true. Are they loud? Certainly. The majority? Hell no.
@@AndysParadox dude,you should've understood what kind of audience you have from the reaction this video got
I have a great audience, the video has an almost 87% like to dislike ratio.
i live on the absolute opposite side of the globe as europe. nice vid
thank you!
I liked your video
My favorite nation to play in Victoria 3 is Sokoto, with the goal of uniting as much as possible of the african continent before the europeans (protip : the malaria debuffs apply only to non-homelands regions, which means that if one of your primary cultures is present in a state you will colonize it at full speed, much faster than the europeans before they research Quinine (after 30ish years)) and become a socialist or anarchist utopia with cooperative ownership, and maybe unite the continent (never succeded so far)
Sokoto is the easiest country in Africa to do that imo, because you can secure Sulfur quite easily (quite rare in the continent) and you have a big army
Also formables can be quite powerful if they add primary cultures to your country ( see protip ^ )
I find Total War games quite shallow now, even though Rome TW and Medieval 2 TW were my favorite games for quite some time, I prefer Paradox, especially Vic 3
Both Paradox and CA have in common a disgusting way with DLCs and paywalls