The Banner Saga - Failed Publishing Deal

Digitalspy has information about why Paradox passed on publishing The Banner Saga.

Speaking at its annual Paradox Convention, vice president of acquisition Shams Jorjani revealed the core principles that "define the soul or character of a Paradox game", which include replayability, deep and demanding gameplay, allowing players to tell their own stories through their actions and offering modularity so the base game can be updated in future.

Jorjani pointed to its line of grand strategy games such as Crusader Kings 2 as examples that "perfectly embody" these elements, and said why games such as The Banner Saga, Xenonauts and Pid didn't make the cut.

"These games were essentially filtered out, in part, due to them not matching our pillars," he told attendees including Digital Spy.

"The Banner Saga is a wonderful game, I love it, it's one of the most gorgeous games I've ever seen, but it's not a Paradox game.

"It doesn't have the depth that we were looking for at the time. There's a lot of money to be made in a lot of games, but it's not always our money to make."

More information.

they sound so dumb its funny

I laugh at them, because Banner Sage was awesome. Too bad they passed on the deal. I will absolutely buy the sequel first day, should one ever be made.

Wow. That is some weapons-grade horseshit.

I agree with them. It is a simple game with bad mechanics both inside and outside combat and linear, boring progression. It is not a paradox game, all the games they offer are 5x more complex and 5x bigger.
Actually Xenonauts fits more into being a Paradox game, I am not sure why they passed that one.

There's probably some truth to what they say about it not being a Paradox game, but you could also probably translate this as: "We can't figure out a way to sell 96 different DLCs for this game."

If the game doesn't fit what they expect out of it and put their name on, then I can understand passing on it. They're not saying it's a bad game, it's just not a Paradox game.

I think it's a great way to deal with it.
The whole "game" around combat didn't work at all in Banner Saga and unfortunately this was tightly woven into the combat system.

I guess in Xenonauts the diversity was just too small to make a replay viable.

On the other hand I don't get how something like Magicka Wizard Wars fits in there.

Well i'm not sure after all they are handling POE; if I had to guess they just didn't see banner saga having the type of success it did have but maybe I am mistaken.

It didn't have enough abstraction sliders?

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
It didn't have enough abstraction sliders?

What are those sliders you're talking about? Haven't seen that since EU3.

As for The Banner Saga, it's definitely not a Paradox game. Paradox is focusing on games that you play for a looong time, typically simulations and strategy games. I'm guessing co-op games like Magica also fit in this, and I wouldn't be surprised if they added rogue-like games.

It was a cheap shot, sorry.

But I enjoyed myself

Originally Posted by Kordanor
On the other hand I don't get how something like Magicka Wizard Wars fits in there.

If something makes money, it fits everywhere.

Their loss is our gain. Glad they passed.

Originally Posted by wolfing
As for The Banner Saga, it's definitely not a Paradox game. Paradox is focusing on games that you play for a looong time, typically simulations and strategy games.

Well their publishing/distributing Pillars of Eternity, and last I checked its an RPG.

Originally Posted by Dean
Their loss is our gain. Glad they passed.

I agree apparently it's their loss as the game was a success.

Aren't games like this opportunities for them to expand upon what a Paradox game is? Some publishers get a bad reputation for only putting out certain types of games. Won't you want to expand your core base into other areas especially with a game that has already been well received?

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
Well their publishing/distributing Pillars of Eternity, and last I checked its an RPG.

Hmm… you got a point there, but that makes me think… maybe Pillars of Eternity has more than what we think… perhaps it's very easily modded, and/or comes with a campaign editor or the engine can be easily used to make more games. That would fit Paradox umbrella.

Well if you were Paradox who would you pick? A proven developer like Obsidian, or a studio releasing their first game like Stoic? I don't agree with them but I see the logic.

I just watched a video interview on Angry Joe where they admitted they rushed Sword of the Stars 2 , and ruined the game on launch. So maybe they were just cautious.

loading…

I'm probably just being to harsh on them.

Not buggy enough to be a paradox game. CK2 endgame is still pretty much unplayable - performance massively decreases the longer you play - if you start in the 800's by the 11th century the game runs at a complete crawl. Not only that but there is major bugs with every single significant DLC introduced - it always takes at least a month for them to fix the main issues.

On the other hand I don't think I found a single bug in Banner Saga. Looking forward to part 2.

Originally Posted by bjon045
Not buggy enough to be a paradox game. CK2 endgame is still pretty much unplayable - performance massively decreases the longer you play - if you start in the 800's by the 11th century the game runs at a complete crawl. Not only that but there is major bugs with every single significant DLC introduced - it always takes at least a month for them to fix the main issues.

On the other hand I don't think I found a single bug in Banner Saga. Looking forward to part 2.

They you didn't try to use up all your food and continue walking onwards until everyone died but the game kept going forward LOL (including giving you quests where you decided on lives of your 0 people HAHAHA or if you would be willing to sacrifice food for other things, I sacrificed my 0 food willingly ). It was the most stupid shit ever, 10/10 for funny moment, 1/10 game quality. I uninstalled the game soon afterwards.