The developers of Paradox Interactive are considered Swedish strategy geniuses in their own strategy games. But as a publisher, they seem to lack the touch. After the colossal flop Lamplighters League and the weak Star Trek Infinite, Millennia was supposed to make it right, a game in the vein of Humankind and Civilization 6. However, at its release on Steam on March 26, it received a barrage of negative reviews. The reviews on Metacritic are only mediocre as well.
This is why Paradox Interactive has such a good reputation: Paradox Interactive has been making essentially the same four games for 30 years. These are elaborate and highly complex strategy games set in a historical context. They have four game series that are regularly re-released and updated with content for 30 years:
- Crusader Kings takes place in the medieval period and has a strong role-playing focus. It gets down to business. We’re talking about murder, plague, intrigue, bastards, incestuous children, and splitting the skulls of infidel fools with a morning star
- Europa Universalis begins with the discovery of America and ends around 1800. This is closest to a clear “world conquest game” with many technical special rules and high gameplay depth. You can prevent the impending apocalypse with the Aztecs or rise to become the Tsar of Russia – the world is huge.
- Victoria starts around the time of the Civil War in the USA and lasts until World War II. This game focuses on economy, infrastructure, and politics – this is probably the “dryest and most technical” of their games
- Hearts of Iron is the great war simulation focused on military and strategy
In addition, Paradox has the sci-fi epic Stellaris and the underrated Imperator: Rome offering additional strategy gems.
With all these games and a strong community connection, the Swedes have built a strong reputation over 30 years. Fans rave about how difficult Paradox games are and how you never finish them. Although there is occasional complaining that Paradox now charges a decent amount for DLCs and support for their games and it takes years for new games to feature even close to what their predecessors had, fundamentally, everything is fine here.
A series of flops as a publisher weighs on Paradox
What is the problem? As a publisher, Paradox seems to be acting unlucky:
- Lamplighters League sounded like “What happens when we combine X-Com with Indiana Jones?” The result was producing a major flop
- The surefire idea “We’re making Stellaris with a Star Trek skin” also went awry
And now, on Steam, it is failing with “We’re making something like Civilization, but different” – although Millennia looked great in the demo at the Steam Next Festival and got some strategy experts excited in advance.
This is the new game: The new game Millennia, which Paradox is distributing, was supposed to be a clever variant of Civilization, with its own twists, such as different eras and a focus on territory improvements and production chains.
In press reviews, however, the game has only received mediocre scores. It stands at Metacritic with a score of 67%.
On Steam, there’s another dose: here too, Millennia only achieves “Mixed Reviews” with 62%.
Reviewers on Steam want to like Millennia, but simply cannot
What is the problem with Millennia? Even though many want to like the game and have credited Millennia with bringing some fresh ideas, the game is criticized for being unfinished and raw.
Most notably, the announcement of a multiplayer mode that is still missing has upset many. A similar problem was already attributed to Paradox with City Skylines 2. In the city-building game, the developers themselves warned about the state of the game at release.
For €40, Steam buyers expect a finished game when they purchase Millennia, many say. And not a game where essential features are missing and which feels so unpolished that it doesn’t even remember settings for a quick start.
The game is also hindered by the fact that some YouTubers hyped it beforehand and many in the genre expected an alternative to Civilization or Humankind.
3 months and 5 patches are needed to solve this mess
How do we see this? I, Schuhmann from MeinMMO, am a big fan of Paradox games. I have been playing their games for over 20 years, spending thousands of hours with Crusader Kings, Victoria, Europa Universalis, and Stellaris. I tested the recent Paradox “flops”, Lamplighters League and Star Trek Infinite for MeinMMO:
- I found the “Star Trek” thing really unsuccessful
- with Lamplighters League, it was simply the wrong game concept at the wrong time, even though the game was made with a lot of love.
Millennia is now a game clearly for “genre fans”, I immediately sunk 8 hours into it at release. I think Millennia has excellent approaches, especially in the production chains, making resources on the map important. I also like how cities grow and take up more space. The idea of different eras I find really well thought out and varied.
It is very unfortunate that such hope for the genre has such a rocky release and is being torn apart due to supposed minor issues. This is not a bad game – it just needs 3 more months of work, a better combat system, and 5 patches – then we’re talking about a game that doesn’t score 67%, but goes into the 90s.
I do not share IGN’s criticism, suggesting that after Humankind and Millennia, one only wants to “play Civilization V” again. Like many others, I’ve played Civilization to death and want something new in the genre. Humankind and Millennia are both legitimate alternatives to Civilization that the genre desperately needs.
The 4x genre suffers from the fact that everyone is still lamenting the 25-year-old “Alpha Centauri,” as it was the only 4x game to successfully tell a good story.
Millennia deserves the criticism, but it is still so unfortunate
Is Millennia being rightly criticized? Issues like “features that are not finished at release” have become unacceptable in strategy games and are rightly penalized. However, with Millennia and Paradox, it’s two targets that one wouldn’t wish such harsh criticism upon.
But ultimately, developers and publishers must know that a game in such a poor state at release will get a similar backlash, and they must willingly accept it.
These strategy geniuses may have gambled their strategy. With such mediocre reviews on Metacritic and Steam, the next flop seems to be programmed.
Even though I feel like many reviewers on Steam: The objective criticism of the game that one must express at the moment hurts oneself.
More on the topic: Steam: Swedish strategy geniuses are proud that hardly anyone understands their games and that no one ever finishes them
