• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Stellaris Dev Diary #186: Necroid Ships & the Art process

Hello everyone!

My name is Fredrik Toll, and I am the Art Director for Stellaris. For this week's dev diary, we wanted to give you an insight into the development process of creating the ships for the Necroids Species Pack.

Let’s dig right into it!

Designing a new Ship Set
After settling on the theme, the first thing we do when embarking on designing a new ship-set for a species pack, is going through the core ideas of the species pack with our internal team of concept artists. In this case it was centered around the theme of death, and the various species who have cheated it. After the brief, we had everyone write down their association and ideas for this theme to know what everyone is thinking. This allows us to align more what it’s all about, share ideas, and inspire each other. By doing that we are able to highlight what is more important and what does not fit with the theme.

After this we do a search for visual reference to use in the concept process. These can be anything from patterns, statues, tiny objects, to buildings, whatever inspires us visually in connection to the theme. We look mostly for shapes, but also materials. Architecture is usually a great source of inspiration, they have great shapes, and a scale suitable for ship details. We try to avoid using other existing ships as reference since we want to develop something original, not just a variant of others, though they can still be a reference, if only to show what we don't want.
For Necroids we looked a lot at Art Deco and brutalist architecture, tombs, pyramids, as well as skulls, fossils and many other things. After reviewing and discussing the references we start sketching, going wide, anything goes. Sometimes they align a lot with our references, other times ideas come from nowhere, it’s all part of the process. This leads to a whole lot of Ship designs ideas. Here are a handful of those.

01_initial_concepts.PNG


Ultimately we settled on these two references as our direction. They felt like something far away from existing ships, as well as fitting well with the theme.

02_chosen_direction_01.png


02_chosen_direction_02.jpg


Developing the Style
These ships are only the start though. Once we have chosen one of the styles we did in our initial look development. We have to flesh out what those mean. These are just side-views, they do not tell you everything you know, in fact, opinions of how to interpret it can differ significantly. So we need to figure that out, as well as adapting it for the demands of the game, such as having sections, having turrets etc.

Usually we start with the Cruiser, since it’s a good mid-size ship close enough to all ships sizes that it’s relevant for all designs. You also have a fallback option, if it turns out that it looks too big, you can just use it for the battleship. If it turns out too small it will be the destroyer or corvette. Here you can see a few of the concepts from the process. It looks pretty straightforward, but it takes a lot of back and forward before we nail it down.

03_refinement.PNG


Creating the Concepts
Once you have the style narrowed down, it’s time to make all the actual concepts for each and every ship. Even though the style is figured out, each ship is a bit unique and each of them present new challenges, and new parts of the style to figure out. The civilian ships are different from the military ships. Each of the military types ships has a different size, and the style differs significantly from the corvette to the juggernaut. Each of the civilian ships has a very unique design and they have more in common with some stations than they do with each other. The construction ship and the mining station often share traits, as do the science ship and the research station.

Here are two different examples.
The science ship for instance, has a much more high tech appearance than the other ships. The process is made easier though from the work we have done on previous shipsets. Some standards have been set, the science ship for instance usually has a more “cool” appearance with a more streamline almost racing type ship. This helps us know where to aim, and apply the style on that.
Sometimes it's pretty straightforward – Let’s take the example of the Science Ship. First we start by making a couple of rough versions, then choose one of those versions, then make some more versions based on that one. We then continue the process by once again choosing one of them, refining the details to finish the design, and in the end we create an asset sheet. The asset sheet is for the 3D artist to model, and know where to apply which material. It speeds up their work a lot and makes sure everything is consistent.

04_science_ship.PNG


05_science_ship_result.PNG



Another example would be the construction ship. They are very bulky, usually described as a cargo hold with engines, and a bridge. Here we made some initial concepts. One of them we felt looked like a good idea for a transport so we got that idea for free.

06_contruction_and_transport_ship.PNG


There are so much more we would like to show. But as you can see here, there are several hundred images in this process.

07_all concepts.png


Ship modelling
After we are done with the concept art for all the assets, they are sent to the 3D artists. Figuring out a design in 3D while you are building the ships is very time consuming, so the idea is that the concepts are clear enough that the 3D artists can mostly trace the concept. There is still a fair bit that needs figuring out as you are building the ships, but the concept art does save an enormous amount of time.

That being said, sometimes the concept artist uses quick 3D models in the concept art phase. Figuring out a design purely in your head is very hard. So making a rough model of your idea, then doing some paint-over on top a screenshot can save a lot of time. The difference is that these models are not fit to use in game, since they are not modelled properly or economically.

Usually we have a 3D artist join the team in the concept phase though. As soon the first ship concept is finalized and the style is set we build that ship, and start working on the materials. We do some concept work for the materials as well, but you only really get a feel for it when you can move the camera around, and see how the lighting moves across the hull of the ship.

The Final Results
Then follows several months of 3D modeling, once done, we rig them for animation, export them to the game, and add particle effects. And finally, here are some examples of the finished ships:

08_necroid_station.png


09_necroid_cruiser.png


10_necroid_juggernaut.png
 
  • 152Like
  • 97Love
  • 48
  • 9
  • 8
Reactions:
is it just me or are paradox utterly clueless about the current state of the forums? you guys leave your game a broken mess for two years and then expect people to be happy about more stuff being added without fixing the game? seriously the forum is in a worse state than America right now and that is truly saying something.

there was a dev response about how the game is being worked on, but the way it is written and the utter lack of meaningful information reeks of a marketing team member writing it, not a dev. although if i am right about that this post will probably be taken down
 
  • 25
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
And yet youtubers like Lathland are able to release constant interesting content revolving around early high crisis playthroughs. Hmm.

"This isn't hard enough for me." Is not the same thing as, "Literally nonfunctional."
dude the ai is pathetic by year 2250 on ga if you know what you are doing, even playing with a really poorly optimized empire(fan spiritualist pacifist who sucks at tech and war, which are the two best ways to win at the moment). in my book an ai for a grand strategy game that can't keep up with a mediocre player on the highest difficulty is a joke.

i watch lathland too and while his stellaris videos are amazing, they are amazing because he edits out all the micro hell and highlights the best parts of the game, of course the game looks good when you cut out most of the bad parts. the only thing he can't cut is how bad the ai is, as it is always pathetic by year 2250 and he plays on ga, he always plays on 25x crisis and usually sets it as early as possible, and he still always wins. every game plays practically the same, the only reason i still watch is for the rp and how he has recently started going mod-crazy.
 
Last edited:
  • 22
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
And yet youtubers like Lathland are able to release constant interesting content revolving around early high crisis playthroughs. Hmm.

"This isn't hard enough for me." Is not the same thing as, "Literally nonfunctional."
Did YOU watch those videos? Because in those videos, the 'early high crisis' never becomes more than a blip on the map. Nobody, not even someone as skilled at the game as Lathland should be able to do that.

Nevermind what happens if you don't rush down the crisis and just let it sit. Want to know what happens if you let it sit?

Nothing.

It spreads out a bit, then completely stalls. 5x crisis, completely unchallenged for 50 years, and it didn't spread to more than 60 systems in that time for me - out of a 1000 star map. And it's the same story in all my games. Tell me that's a 'crisis'. Tell me that's functional. Go on.
 
  • 29
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I seldom come as far as playing the end crisis, but when I do, it's broken. It doesn't spread at all, or only a little bit. I have written forum entries by that time, wondering if that is random luck or normal ai behaviour of the game. The fleet manager thingie is broken since at least two years, revealing ghost ships when rebuilding my fleets for whatever reason, and guess what, happens in _every game_ for me. It's not that these problems haven't been reported. And that's me, a player who doesn't have the time to play Stellaris all the time, only occasionally on weekends. Nothing against great arts (and it is great art!), but I fail to understand how Paradox is leaving their customers in the rain by totally ignoring well known issues over years. I was expecting at least some communication in the direction of "we are working on the bugs". I will not buy this DLC, I am totally disappointed by the communication blindness shown by Paradox in this forum. I bought a lot of Stellaris DLCs because I wanted to support Paradox, believed in them making _the_ space 4x, and it has so much potential. It took a lot for me to come to that decision, because I was really loyal, but in the end I will not invest in a broken game anymore, and my fear is that the game is beyond repair, too many issues are on the stake meanwhile.
 
Last edited:
  • 29
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Except this same story has ALSO been told, over and over. "Just wait to see what the patch has, they'll probably have fixes." And yet...

Then be mad then, not before everything’s been revealed. Paradox knows people aren’t satisfied with the AI, constantly complaining isn’t going to make them change their mind between patches. Seriously, it’d be like getting mad that the opening act of a movie doesn’t have the climax in it.
 
  • 15
  • 3
Reactions:
I have no idea how anyone who plays the game can not notice these issues. That is not me being dismissive of those fellow players, I'm genuinely puzzled by it.

As far as free updates go, the last playable version has not been updated in two years.

And asking to fix the broken product we've got is not acting entitled. It would be if I hadn't paid money for Megacorp and Relics, but I have.
Because said issues don't affect/affect much less people who, like me:
  • Aren't very good at the game
  • Enjoy being able to roll AI players
  • Restart games constantly due to new mods or empire switches
  • Play on small galaxies for shorter games
 
  • 5Like
  • 4
  • 2
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
It has been 22 months since the Megacorp debacle. 22 months. There have been hundreds of threads with thousands of very different ideas to improve performance, AI, micromanagement, etc. Many of those have been layed out in a positive, thorough and well written manner.

I am sorry but at this point, a standard response like this is rather insulting.

Btw, very nice art on those ships. A shame we can't have some for Machine Empires too.
I use Reptilian ships for Machines since they look kind of blocky and give a retro style to me.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Guys, every game has bugs, broken features, or other sorts of issues, it all depends on who you ask and the viewpoint of who is answering.

If you do not like the game, then do not play the game.

And to those complaining that the Dev Diary is not a Dev Diary. Development Diary is literally the name of the thing, and working on the Art and the process for choosing the inspiration for the art is all part of the development process.

Feel free to disagree, downvote, express your displeasure, I have said my piece.
 
  • 33
  • 4Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Late crisis I have not known this concept for two years. I use Stellaris to boil water for tea.
This game is completely unsuccessful in terms of performance. With EU4, CK2, Vik2 they work without any problems and can be played to the end.

DD on Ship Graphics. Great job everyone wants it.

Although it should be possible to switch to full 2d in the options. Flat map, Ships could be squares (as it was in HoI2), without these lighting effects and graphic goodies ... 30/40 Fps maybe I would gain from the action. And then I would play to the late crisis.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Read my lips. Non. Functional.

Saying that again doesn't magically make all the people enjoying the game's functionality vanish into thin air. And claiming that anyone who disagrees is just willfully ignoring the "truth" doesn't magically make us retroactively not be enjoying the game.

Insisting that those of us who disagree with you on a subjective topic like the enjoyment of a game are somehow objectively wrong isn't going to make us spontaneously rewrite our experiences for your benefit. The silent majority isn't going to stop funding something they enjoy because someone they don't know exists made a post on a forum they're barely aware of claiming that their enjoyment is objectively impossible.
 
  • 11
  • 3
Reactions:
Guys, every game has bugs, broken features, or other sorts of issues, it all depends on who you ask and the viewpoint of who is answering.

If you do not like the game, then do not play the game.

And to those complaining that the Dev Diary is not a Dev Diary. Development Diary is literally the name of the thing, and working on the Art and the process for choosing the inspiration for the art is all part of the development process.

Feel free to disagree, downvote, express your displeasure, I have said my piece.

On the one hand, I will disagree with your assessment that is about people not liking the game. All things considered, it is my favourite space strategy game in terms of look, simplicity, and layout. Most games do have bugs, but generally not ones of the extent or duration Stellaris has at the moment. Most people here are complaining about not being able to play one of their favourite games. Most of the people are dissatisfied by the Dev Diary because it does not give them any confidence that these problems will be addressed after being very patient for a long time. Most here would like nothing better than to sing Paradox's praises.

On the other hand, I do agree with the premise that there is no point to complain about this anymore because Paradox has stated its position crystal clear; they are aware of what's going on, they aren't promising to necessarily do anything about it, and please buy the new DLC. With that said, there really is no point to say anything further. The possibilities include sticking with the current state of the game (somehow), modding the hell out of it, reverting to 2.1.3 or 1.9.1, or playing Distant Worlds and other titles. Personally, I am taking the two latter options and intend to stick with them until the live game is playable again (maybe never).

You may rest assured that others and I are indeed operating in accordance with your advised parameters, just don't expect us to bankroll the company. I feel like enough of an idiot for buying Federations and Lithoids on the confidence that the game would be fixed. As things stand, I can't use the additional content I got if I also want to make the game challenging and actually manage to finish it. Until my prior purchase is vindicated, further ones serve no constructive purpose. I would also argue that so long people worry about a game that has problems it means they still care. Its when they stop doing that Paradox has more reason to worry.
 
Last edited:
  • 24
  • 1Like
Reactions:
"Game is unplayable."

Meanwhile the game continues to hit ~14-20k peak players every day which is pretty decent for the gaps between updates compared to the past few years.

The game has issues, but the ~30-50 of you obsessed with those issues that go around upvoting each other and downvoting everyone else while posting the same messages over and over need to get off your hyperbole. They aren't releasing dev diary after dev diary about your perceived problems because they aren't widespread issues that most of the playerbase cares about or wants to hear about compared to actual new content. Most of us want to see stuff like this, the reveal of an amazing new ship set, PDX knows that. Not be depressed about how Bobby can't play his 3000 star modded game because his FPS drops to 30 and what the devs are doing to try to fix that awful gamebreaking problem.
I guess me, the hundreds of people lamenting the state of the game, and the devs themself are all smoking crack and seeing things. Clearly we got nothing better to do that to ask the devs for fixes for non existant bugs and the devs are so kind to actually go work for those non existant bugs(in fact they work so hard they create more game breaking bugs). After all if you personally havent experience said gamebreaking bugs, they clearly dont exists( and tbh i dont know how do you manage, dont you go throught to the same micro hell of planets?).
 
Last edited:
  • 28
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Haven't seen the ships go in a loop? Sure. Nor have I. You know what I've seen? Crisis constructors wandering back and forth across their territory rather than building to the next system over. AE whose awakening used to bring them from Superior to Overwhelming now merely going from Pathetic to Inferior, maybe Equivalent if they go War in Heaven... and unless they do, they just sit around twiddling their thumbs and pick almost exclusively on fallen empires. 25x Crisis, at 2250 endgame date, being stomped like they're nothing.
Actually you known what are common in all things that you mentioned? They are all late game, I would wager that a lot of people who play Stellaris right now don't even play it long enough to reach that, players usually hit critical mass and streamroll everyone before late game even come around (probably around mid game) or they got lag to death lmao

So if you looking from the perspective that only minority of players use/reach the non functional features of game, everything start making sense why it's still not fix.
 
  • 20
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Sweet! I can finally make an empire based off the Hive in Destiny! :D
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Because said issues don't affect/affect much less people who, like me:
...
Restart games constantly due to new mods or empire switches
I think that’s the main issue, in addition to players who actually like roflstomping the poor AI; indeed, every 4X or GS game has a large number of players who never go beyond early mid-game, constantly restarting, and yet still enjoying the process. This makes even a totally broken late game far less of an issue from the financial point of view.

Naturally, it isn’t much of a consolation for people who finish their games; plus even some “leavers” would probably actually finish a game, had it been better.
 
  • 9
Reactions:
Feel free to disagree, downvote, express your displeasure, I have said my piece.
Thanks for the permission, I surely will.

It is genuinely curious for me how some people are defending something that is literally undefendable. Sure, some of the issues might be pet peeves, some of the issues might be rare enough that they don't warrant a quick fix, but how people defend the performance and the state of AI is beyond me - you *will* suffer from those by...just playing the game.

It might be considered "toxic" by some of you, but then again no one forces you to get into ridiculous arguments, so let me explain how you might not encounter most of the issues peope have outlined here:
1) You don't play the game. Either straight up or past the first 100 years. Performance halts to a crawl *every* game, AI breaks to various extent *every* game. And that's coming from someone who runs dozens of test games: it happens in every single one of them - you can't miss it.
2) You are blind or a very new/casual player. In the first case you shouldn't even get into the argument in the first place since you'll just be talking out of your ass. Same as if you're a new player, you can't argue over a content if you don't know how it works. And if you're playing casually/RPing, consider this - I also don't like if the AI is rabid and attacks everyone on sight/tries to be a min/maxer. I want AI to help me create an enjoable experience for myself, and to do that it has to atleast *seem* like its competent. As of now it is not even good enough to serve as a background for the story I'm trying to create.
3) You have lower standards relative to other players. No one argues that you are not entitled to have a different opinion. And no one argues that you should be able to breeze though the game at max speed in 3 hours or that the AI should be some sort of unbeatable genius. But there has to be some sort of threshold, some minimal acceptable level - right now I'm using a 7600K, which should definitely be pretty good for playing Stellaris since it has a very good single-core performance, and after disabling half the game I can barely get lower than 15s per month in lategame. Most of people *will* play on older hardware, most people *will not* be OK with disabling half the game and playing on tiny galaxies with 25% habitable worlds - they *will* stuggle to even reach 30 seconds per months, which is more than a second per day. Same story with the AI, I'm not asking for it to be exceptional, I'm asking for it to be able to build their planets even remotely properly, I'm asking for it to not constantly end up in a death spiral. I'm asking it to be able to move their fleets around and not have dozens of unemployed pops on every planet. If you are fine with AI being in this state - you do objectively have low standards and shouldn't be arguing for others to have them.
4) And lastly, you are annoyed by people "whining" and are just lying to try and shut people up. Pretty much self-explanatory. If you don't agree with the lying part - see what I wrote about some of the issues popping up *every* game.

If you are someone who wants to argue with people who are complaining about the state of AI, performance and the game in general - for pete's sake at least chose something that you can even argue about.
 
Last edited:
  • 31
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Thanks for the permission, I surely will.

It is genuinely curious for me how some people are defending something that is literally undefendable. Sure, some of the issues might be pet peeves, some of the issues might be rare enough that they don't warrant a quick fix, but how people defend the performance and the state of AI is beyond me - you *will* suffer from those by...just playing the game.

It might be considered "toxic" by some of you, but then again no one forces you to get into ridiculous arguments, so let me explain how you might not encounter most of the issues peope have outlined here:
1) You don't play the game. Either straight up or past the first 100 years. Performance halts to a crawl *every* game, AI breaks to various extent *every* game. And that's coming from someone who runs dozens of test games: it happens in every single one of them - you can't miss it.
2) You are blind or a very new/casual player. In the first case you shouldn't even get into the argument in the first place since you'll just be talking out of your ass. Same as if you're a new player, you can't argue over a content if you don't know how it works. And if you're playing casually/RPing, consider this - I also don't like if the AI is rabid and attacks everyone on sight/tries to be a min/maxer. I want AI to help me create an enjoing experience for myself, and to do that it has to atleast *seem* like its competent. As of now it is not even good enough to serve as a background for the story I'm trying to create.
3) You have lower standards relative to other players. No one argues that you are not entitled to have a different opinion. And no one argues that you should be able to breeze though the game at max speed in 3 hours or that the AI should be some sort of unbeatable genius. But there has to be some sort of threshold, some minimal acceptable level - right now I'm using a 7600K, which should definitely be pretty good for playing Stellaris since it has a very good single-core performance, and after disabling half the game I can barely get lower than 15s per month in lategame. Most of people *will* play on older hardware, most people *will not* be OK with disabling half the game and playing on tiny galaxies with 25% habitable worlds - they *will* stuggle to even reach 30 seconds per months, which is more than a second per day. Same story with the AI, I'm not asking for it to be exceptional, I'm asking for it to be able to build their planets even remotely properly, I'm asking for it to not constantly end up in a death spiral. I'm asking it to be able to move their fleets around and not have dozens of unemployed pops on every planet. If you are fine with AI being in this state - you do objectively have low standards and shouldn't be arguing for others to have them.
4) And lastly, you are annoyed by people "whining" and are just lying to try and shut people up. Pretty much self-explanatory. If you don't agree with the lying part - see what I wrote about some of the issues popping up *every* game.

If you are someone who wants to argue with people who are complaining the state of AI, performance and game in general - for pete's sake at least chose something that you can even argue about.
Based
 
  • 6
Reactions:
After being part of the, lets call it protest last week I only will give my praise for the art itself. i like it.


And i like the designs that were not chosen also. But for the theme I also think that's the best one. Maybe you can use some other drafts for something else. But I guess no fit for aquatics... ^^
 
  • 5
Reactions: