A glance at HoI3

[Neil]

Johan, why don't you care about navies?  If you don't care about navies, why is Japan in the game?  Why not just focus on your mediocre Barbarossa-simulator?

The Wasa disaster scarred the Swedish psyche.

[Syt]

http://www.wargamer.com/article/2769/hearts-of-iron-iii-state-of-the-game

A patch is never late! Nor is it ever early. It arrives precisely when I mean it to do.
- Johan Andersson, Wizard

The State of the Hearts of Iron Union (Or Should We Say Disunion?)

First off, we love the Hearts of Iron series. One of us went so far as to sink a full week of man hours into Hearts of Iron II compressed into a long weekend. The resulting binge netted him conquering the entire WORLD with the US just for the hell of it – that's right every province in the game. Some of our friends even explored some "alternative" methods of dominating the globe with varying levels of success. Naturally, when the review copy of Hearts of Iron III came up on the staff board at The Wargamer a fairly significant bar fight ensued, complete with sharp objects, office furniture, and one guy even trying to deploy a trebuchet loaded with a Coke machine.  Make no mistake – we're big Paradox fans around these parts.  But Hearts of Iron III has some issues that deserve a critical examination, and love affair with the series or no, someone has to step in and call it like they see it.   In the end it was decided that we'd need a group effort – not because the boss was indecisive in who would get the review, but because the issues being experience were so significant that we wanted multiple systems, users, and viewpoints to help establish a baseline.

Unfortunately with both the review build and commercially purchased versions installed and ready to run things began going amiss rather quickly. For starters, the game out of the box is in essence unplayable.  Even after the v1.2 patch just being released there are still significant issues, not the least of which is the lag we still experience even when switching between simple user interface screens. We'll be the first to admit that our systems are not the fastest rigs out there. But we still meet or exceed the minimum requirements and should therefore be able to play the game – at least that's the expectation. Here's one machine's profile – our weakest one and the game's minimum requirements:

Reviewer System Specs
   
    * Operating system: Windows XP
    * Processor: AMD FX 55
    * Memory: 2Gb RAM
    * Hard disk space: 2.5 TB over 4 HDD
    * Vide NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX
    * Sound: Karajan Integrated Audio Chip


Minimum Requirements   

    * Operating system: Windows 2000/XP/Vista
    * Processor: Intel® Pentium® IV 2.4 GHz or AMD 3500+
    * Memory: 2Gb RAM
    * Hard disk space: 2 GB Available HDD Space
    * Vide NVIDIA® GeForce 8800 or ATI Radeon® X1900
    * Sound: Direct X-compatible sound card
    * DirectX®: DirectX 9

But before we get too much further into this discussion it's worth noting that the minimum system requirements aren't clear – even on Paradox's own forums.  Note the screenshot below.

Click for full image

These discrepancies are not cosmetic.  If we look at the two "minimum" video cards, there is a significant difference between them - the 8800 is a fairly mid-high range card while the 6800 is low-mid range.  All of which is just details...unless you're as big a fan of Hearts of Iron as we are, in which case it's a life-altering decision whether or not your rig can run the game.  These discrepancies run deeper than just the forums – the printed manuals list lower system requirements, too, making it unclear as to when or why the minimum specs may have changed.

The fact that our systems meet the minimum requirements – regardless of which ones are used – but the game is still unplayable is significant. A mistake in estimation like this can have a big impact since many people trust this laundry list of computer hardware as an important litmus test before they open their wallets to purchase the game. Our reports of lag issues are far from an isolated incident. A quick trip to the Paradox forums will show that many people with machines far more powerful than ours experience similar troubles.

Additionally, the game also frequently freezes either due to software bugs or just general system overload. It's hard to tell exactly why the game locks up and requires a CTRL+ALT+DEL and "End Process" routine because, again, the game is not very playable in its current state.

Of course it's very important to note that Paradox has release two updates and a hotfix. But the updates are also rife with issues. For starters, in one case we didn't install Hearts of Iron III into the default directory because the reviewer likes to keep his games in a particular part of his hard drive – not an unreasonable or uncommon practice. This unfortunately throws the game's auto update feature for a loop. Every time the button is clicked to check for and install updates the auto updater says that he doesn't have Hearts of Iron III installed. To make things worse, there's no feature that allows the player to point the auto updater in the right direction – it just says the game isn't installed. This isn't necessarily a big deal as it is possible to download the update separately and then install it – but it is a minor annoyance and it shows a lack of polish.

Despite the three updates offered by Paradox, the game still remains unplayable – and unreviewable - for us. A few minor issues seemed to be resolved (we had a one-time event pop up every 30 seconds for about 5 minutes – that's fixed!) – but there are still many outstanding problems that render the game more or less useless even for people with machines powerful enough to run the game "properly". Once again, we've only been able to confirm the existence of many outstanding post-patch bugs in the most rudimentary sense since the game runs at a crawl for us. However, the take-home point from this is that there are severe issues, many of which we can say are not just minor complaints trumpeted above their worth, that remain as of the writing of this article.

Other issues include, but are not limited to, problems with the weather.  Some gamers have noted that it has rained daily over Poland for over a year without interruption.  That might be something which could be overlooked in the ETO as a comical glitch, but in the PTO, where the weather can sock in all carrier flights, the result is one of a carrier-less (or at least a grounded air force) conflict that is decidedly ahistoric.  Such issues are reminiscent of Europa Universalis III being released with core functions like spy creation being absent from the central nation of the era:  France. What is curious about these issues isn't the fact that there are bugs in the game – all games have bugs – but rather that they are so glaringly obvious and obviously unacceptable that one wonders if the QA team signed off on them after an evening overindulging in Aqvavit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akvavit).
A Communal Conflagration

Further adding to the Hearts of Iron III release muddle is the ensuing community disgust and infighting taking place at a variety of wargaming boards. It would seem that the Hearts of Iron game engine is the last place people turn to do battle; the forum post is the weapon of choice these days. We'll decline to take a side in the "debate" between Paradox fans and detractors as we think strapping on a helmet and starting to shoot in one direction or the other is counterproductive to The Wargamer's standing and a disservice to you, the reader.

It should be noted, however, that foul play is being alleged by both sides and more than a few credible reports of over aggressive administrating and other maladies are surfacing in other forums (not least of which The Wargamer forums), and in other cases it appears as though Paradox detractors are clearly trolling.  We've seen instances in our own forums where gamers have sounded off in the negative but after being pressed for details haven't ever seen the actual game. Again, we have no idea as to the validity of some of claims that people are banned from some forums or otherwise mistreated – we're simply stating that reports are surfacing and any prospective Hearts of Iron III customer should know that the community waters both in official and unofficial channels are anything but tranquil.   
The Greatest Strength and the Greatest Weakness

Paradox's track record on the initial status of major title releases is, well, not great. Europa Universalis III was a hotly anticipated launch which many considered to be equally buggy after the initial excitement settled. Suffice to say, the Hearts of Iron III debacle is not an isolated incident even despite its magnitude.

The community seems to be divided into three camps.  In one camp are the die-hard fans who will buy any game on release day, and will persevere through a series of patches until a game reaches its full potential.  In a second camp are gamers who will sit on the sidelines fully confident that a flurry of patches will be issued over the months and years after a Paradox game is released, and will eventually buy a game at a discounted price once enough patches have been released that stabilize and perfect a game.  In the third camp are those detractors who won't buy into the process at all, disparaging the dynamic of releasing a game before it is free of most significant flaws.

Clearly, we fall in the first camp.  We prefer to buy games when they're released hoping for the best but expecting a flurry of patches to improve and ultimately fix any issues of significance.

It is in that light that it should be noted, and probably celebrated, that Paradox has a positively awesome track record of supporting and patching their games. It is not at all uncommon for a patch to be released several years after a game first hit the shelves, with it addressing nothing more than game additions and improvements – operational bugs having long since been resolved.  Regardless of how one stands on the practice of releasing games knowing that significant patches will need to follow, the balance of fixes and the dedication to improving games long past their expected retail "shelf life" is a practice that should be lauded.  Kudos to Paradox for their diligent efforts.

We have no doubt at all that Hearts of Iron III will shine beautifully once the Paradox crew have had a crack at patching and patching and patching some more.... Our point here is that although the game's appeal is a little murky given the significant technical difficulties we're seeing – we have no doubt that Paradox will pull through and support this title through its entire life cycle. Anyone who really wants to buy this game but is worried that Paradox will just let the title die and move on to the next big release need not worry – their record more than speaks for itself: sit tight, comrade, help will be on the way.

Gamers who are on the fence owe it to themselves to take a look at the demo.  The demo was released before any patches, and to our knowledge still contains the original code.  It should be a reliable indicator of the game's UI and whether you'll like it.  It should also give a fairly good indication as to any lag/performance/optimization issues as well as some other significant bugs that might be experienced on your gaming rig.  Anyone still waiting to see how the game evolves should continue to follow developments – constant evolution of a game is a hallmark of Paradox titles.

It's for these two reasons that we think that Paradox's track record is both its greatest strength (patch support) and its greatest weakness (initial releases).  Regardless of what "camp" you may reside in; there can be little doubt that given the time to work out the bugs, Hearts of Iron III will eventually become the game everyone is expecting it to be.  It won't be long before every moment of the weekend will be dedicated to trying to best our record of conquering every province in the game.  In the mean time, love it or hate it, the game may have been released too early for our machines, but the patches will arrive exactly as intended.

[garbon]

Ouch. We wanted to review the came but couldn't run the game so we talked about P'dox forums and support instead.

[Kleves]

It runs pretty well for me, at least.

Thanks MBM & ulmont, I'm starting the figure out the HQs. I still don't really like the system, but at least it makes more sense. What level do you guys usually let the AI run things?

[Ideologue]

At no level whatsoever.

[Ideologue]

Johan, why don't you care about navies?  If you don't care about navies, why is Japan in the game?  Why not just focus on your mediocre Barbarossa-simulator?

The Wasa disaster scarred the Swedish psyche.

I wasn't familiar with this, so I looked it up.

The ship foundered and sank after sailing less than a nautical mile (ca 2 km) into her maiden voyage on 10 August 1628.

If that's not a metaphor for something, I don't know what is.

[MadBurgerMaker]

Thanks MBM & ulmont, I'm starting the figure out the HQs. I still don't really like the system, but at least it makes more sense. What level do you guys usually let the AI run things?

Depends on which theaters I have, and how lazy I'm feeling.    Usually, just out of convenience when the army starts to get really huge, if it leaves the theater HQ with enough to do it's job, I'll just detach a corps and micro that while setting overall objectives for the theater, etc.  Or just build my own personal corps and roll with that (not always possible). 

From what I've noticed, when you're doing this, the theater AI will support you with airstrikes and units and such if it can, so it's kinda cool.  It really helps with the whole micromanagement thing too, since you can really pile up the units in this one.

[Neil]

Johan, why don't you care about navies?  If you don't care about navies, why is Japan in the game?  Why not just focus on your mediocre Barbarossa-simulator?

The Wasa disaster scarred the Swedish psyche.

I wasn't familiar with this, so I looked it up.

The ship foundered and sank after sailing less than a nautical mile (ca 2 km) into her maiden voyage on 10 August 1628.

If that's not a metaphor for something, I don't know what is.

They raised it and built a large museum around the hulk.  It's a nice museum of that period of naval history, but it also represents a great wound in the Swedish mind.

[frunk]

Of course it’s very important to note that Paradox has release two updates and a hotfix. But the updates are also rife with issues. For starters, in one case we didn’t install Hearts of Iron III into the default directory because the reviewer likes to keep his games in a particular part of his hard drive – not an unreasonable or uncommon practice. This unfortunately throws the game’s auto update feature for a loop. Every time the button is clicked to check for and install updates the auto updater says that he doesn’t have Hearts of Iron III installed. To make things worse, there’s no feature that allows the player to point the auto updater in the right direction – it just says the game isn’t installed. This isn’t necessarily a big deal as it is possible to download the update separately and then install it – but it is a minor annoyance and it shows a lack of polish.

I installed it on an external hard drive and I didn't encounter any such problem.

[Alcibiades]

It's interesting and pretty good... trying to play a game as Germany now.  Slowly getting down the organization of the chains of command, which is kinda neat.  Not going too terribly a-historical except for republican Spain joined the allies.  Having a hard time getting any of the axis besides italy and slovakia to join me...

[Agelastus]

It runs pretty well for me, at least.

Other than being slow enough that I am playing it in Windowed mode while I type this (clicking over to check what's happening whenever I hear a "ping") I consider the game to be extremely stable, without a single crash since I purchased it.

On the other hand, it has caused my graphics card to crash and be recovered at least four times, which is a worry.

[MadImmortalMan]

It's interesting and pretty good... trying to play a game as Germany now.  Slowly getting down the organization of the chains of command, which is kinda neat.  Not going too terribly a-historical except for republican Spain joined the allies.  Having a hard time getting any of the axis besides italy and slovakia to join me...

Spending points on diplomacy and espionage helps a ton. The single best thing you can do from day one is increase the threat on Britain and France. That will keep people from joining the Allies and make them more amenable to Germany. You have to offset the inevitable threat from the Anschluss and Czech events. I haven't played as Germany yet. But when I start off, even as a minor, I will put my spies to work increasing the Allies' threat level. Usually Italy is in the Axis sometime in '37.

[ulmont]

Thanks MBM & ulmont, I'm starting the figure out the HQs. I still don't really like the system, but at least it makes more sense. What level do you guys usually let the AI run things?

Honestly, I ran the demo with the AI running things from the top down.  But the performance was so bad I put HoI3 on the "after next computer upgrade" list.   

[Alcibiades]

Spending points on diplomacy and espionage helps a ton. The single best thing you can do from day one is increase the threat on Britain and France. That will keep people from joining the Allies and make them more amenable to Germany. You have to offset the inevitable threat from the Anschluss and Czech events. I haven't played as Germany yet. But when I start off, even as a minor, I will put my spies to work increasing the Allies' threat level. Usually Italy is in the Axis sometime in '37.

Yeah, that's what I did.  Still having problems getting the Axis minors to form.

[Ideologue]

Romania is a dick in HoI3.