• 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.
Started playing stellaris some weeks ago. The performance is so bad that I have yet to finish any game.
It's year 2453 and an in-game year takes more than 4 minutes. It's so discouraging that I literally don't even care about winning anymore, I just want it to end. It's going to hit some real fun levels of unplayability once the crisis starts.

How long has this issue been around for? I've seen a lot of negativity, is there realistically any hope?
 
This thread is literally a reservation for people that don't drink coolaid, welcome. Not a single dev's been sighted here, so you're safe.
And it's been years, so no, there's no hope.
 
  • 12
  • 3Haha
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Yeah I occasionally come to the stellaris forums to see if there is anything positive, but it seems it's never the case. I bought the game kinda early, enjoyed it kinda even tho I am not into sci-fi but I was hopeful to see what they would do with it in the future. However just like other paradox games some issues never get resolved and sometimes they do things like this thread which isn't censorship but not far from it. I mean this thread was made 1 year ago there are 73 pages of messages zero dev interaction not even an acknowledgement of the issue. But hey I am a sucker I guess keep coming back and looking if there are any positive news. 1 thing is for certain if they ever release a stellaris 2 without resolving the performance issues in stellaris I wont touch it no matter how good it is.
 
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Lmao Aspec is a Paradox sellout he'll say whatever it takes for you to buy their games.
 
  • 11
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I am starting to wonder what can we start to post here to finally make the devs notice this thread. Maybe links to shock sites?
 
  • 3Haha
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Considering he worked for paradox before, him being on paradox payroll isnt that far fetched
Didn't know he actually worked for paradox. Explains it a whole lot more.
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
Reactions:
It runs fine til late game then it slows down (the 6 cores go up to 4.5ghz!!) very significantly, there are loads of bugs, I gave up around the mongol empire stage. Oh... They are releasing more skins (DLC) for the completionist addicts. I have had enough of this.. No more.

I wish the best for the rest of you but when you are only trying to finish one buggy, unoptimised mess of a campaign simply because you feel embarrassed by how much money you have spent on it. Maybe it's time to cut your losses and move on.
 
Last edited:
  • 10
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Started playing stellaris some weeks ago. The performance is so bad that I have yet to finish any game.
It's year 2453 and an in-game year takes more than 4 minutes. It's so discouraging that I literally don't even care about winning anymore, I just want it to end. It's going to hit some real fun levels of unplayability once the crisis starts.

How long has this issue been around for? I've seen a lot of negativity, is there realistically any hope?

Congrats on getting that far! I tend to bail after about 100-150 years. Exploration is complete, colony count has grown to the point that managing population has become a massive chore, and the FE that might be a threat are quelled. Performance starts to fall through the floor because population growth keeps booming.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Considering he worked for paradox before, him being on paradox payroll isnt that far fetched
Yes, it is. If he was still an employee, he likely would not have the freedom he enjoys on his YouTube channel in discussing Stellaris due to conflict of interest clauses in the terms of his employment.

We've got enough conspiracy theories floating around social media today. We don't need one more.
 
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
Started playing stellaris some weeks ago. The performance is so bad that I have yet to finish any game.
It's year 2453 and an in-game year takes more than 4 minutes. It's so discouraging that I literally don't even care about winning anymore, I just want it to end. It's going to hit some real fun levels of unplayability once the crisis starts.

How long has this issue been around for? I've seen a lot of negativity, is there realistically any hope?
Sadly this has been the case since Megacorp, which is almost 2 years ago. The Federations update did make a tiny improvement to performance but only a tiny one. The few or the one dev diary (I can't remember for sure) about the tech debt of Stellaris and "the plan" is the only real acknoledgement of these big problems that have been plaguing the game for so long. People are getting more vocal because it takes them a very long time to do anything about it. Also the Federations update changed the path finding or the ai decision making on how and where to send fleets which resulted in fleets flying back and forth between systems. There's soo many core things that just don't work that not even mentioning the problems and release a new cosmetic dlc like it's business as usual kinda rubs people the wrong way. Sure there was that one recent dev diary about performance but it was all about boot up speed with no mention of the late game slowdown.
 
  • 7
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't think they will ever fix this especially not with parts of the fandom(reddit....) acting as it doesn't even exist or even claiming that they fixed it.It's far easier to just ignore everyone here and only listen to the fanboys that act as if there is no problem.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I don't think they will ever fix this especially not with parts of the fandom(reddit....) acting as it doesn't even exist or even claiming that they fixed it.It's far easier to just ignore everyone here and only listen to the fanboys that act as if there is no problem.
It's easier now but that will bite them in the end. Not actively listening and engaging in dialogue will actively harm any opportunity to improve their games. In the end there will be games by other developers that are better or offer a better deal.
 
Last edited:
  • 8
  • 1Like
Reactions:
All this talk about opening dialogue is starting to make me wonder if this is a game developer's forum or a hostage negotiation. One of the things people campaigning for the release of a long-held prisoner do is carry stickers noting the days of imprisonment and put them anywhere they can. For example:

Stellaris: 662 days since full playability.

Hear that thumping on your screen? Its the Stellaris AI trying to get out.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
  • 5Haha
Reactions:
Just got a new Alienware A-51m; i9-10900k processor, 32gb ram, SSD and Nvidia GTX 2070 Super.

Game is lagging and it's year 2390 or so. Playing a large galaxy with 16 other empires. Modded.

Considering that I have my i9 on 5ghz OC, the fact that this game is still lagging like hell is ridiculous.
 
  • 7
  • 4
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Just got a new Alienware A-51m; i9-10900k processor, 32gb ram, SSD and Nvidia GTX 2070 Super.

Game is lagging and it's year 2390 or so. Playing a large galaxy with 16 other empires. Modded.

Considering that I have my i9 on 5ghz OC, the fact that this game is still lagging like hell is ridiculous.
Obviously it's your fault, the devs cannot do no wrong and the game is clearly optimized, and if you dont think so you are salty and harassing the developers. Probably also an alt right troll
 
  • 11Haha
  • 4
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Started playing stellaris some weeks ago. The performance is so bad that I have yet to finish any game.
It's year 2453 and an in-game year takes more than 4 minutes. It's so discouraging that I literally don't even care about winning anymore, I just want it to end. It's going to hit some real fun levels of unplayability once the crisis starts.

How long has this issue been around for? I've seen a lot of negativity, is there realistically any hope?

The only 100% effective lag-reduction is pop-reduction.

So, what most people missed in the Necroids announcement, is that it's actually providing a solution to late game lag. If you kill everyone in your empire through new death cult mechanics ... presto, no more lag ;)

In all seriousness though, I've found that when I play as an exterminating empire (fanatic purifier, etc.), if I simply raze 1/2 the galaxy and leave it as a desolation within my borders, late game performance improves markedly. But, this is just a different way of playing on a small map, and IMHO no less irritating, since the game essentially punishes you for winning/playing well (the bigger your empire population, the worse the game performs). The game is demonstrably *incapable* of processing late game populations, even x.25 planets on 800 stars slows to a crawl by 2450. The current AI propensity to spam habitats just makes everything much, much worse.

I think there is legitimately *some* hope that they have realized the error of pops, and we might get a system that functions in Stellaris 2, which (given the commercial success of Stellaris is very likely to be made several years from now). But ... I'm not holding my breath. No one from PDX has (or likely will) ever admit on the forums (or anywhere) that they totally screwed up the game with 2.0 & 2.2, so there's really no way to know whether they understand the mistakes they've made and if they will avoid similar pitfalls in future projects.

I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but they learned nothing from the quagmire of EU4's mana systems & launched Imperator with similar systems that (almost) everyone hated, and vocally hated on the forums when they were announced during the first month of dev diaries for that game, but the lead designer just thought he knew better. To their credit, they worked really hard to try to salvage that game. I have no idea to what extent they've succeeded, but it's an interesting example of PDX both not listening to the community, and then listening *real* hard when a big, new IP completely tanked. So, they are clearly capable of totally failing to learn from their mistakes, and then admitting their mistake s& massively retooling a game, which is pretty incredible when you think about how much work got signed off on for which they just ate the cost. But, I'm sure that cost was nothing compared to the projected earnings on DLC on a "successful" Imperator, so it was probably very much worth the doubled-down investment.

It seems unlikely, though, this late in its life cycle, that Stellaris is "worth" the kind of re-investment it would take to really, genuinely fix---especially since that's what 2.0 was *supposed* to be. They already got the moneybags to fund a massive re-work of the game's core mechanics ... it just caused as many problems (or more) as it fixed.

It's really hard to imagine a 3rd iteration of core mechanics getting green-lit, unless that 3rd iteration is a full-on sequel which would then bring in a whole new 6-10 year cycle of DLC $$$.

But, hey ... prove me wrong, PDX. Prove me wrong. I can't imagine a better gaming-present for the holidays than a Stellaris 3.0 that fixes the economic & military AI, crisis AI, planetary automation, planetary management UI, pop-migration UI, late-game lag, and a partridge in a pear tree.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Well, I temporarily (who am I kidding) broke my vows and gave 1.9 a shot and in the context of our current troubles, this is what I have to say.

1.9 sucks, it's like half the game is missing, there are still a fair bit of small bugs, and without the market to compensate for shortfalls I actually have to manage my resources properly or go under. That being said, boy, performance shoots up by so much (for the early game at the moment) that I actually have to slow it down to normal to get on top of things. I don't even remember the last time I slowed the game outside of multiplayer even in early. The pop tile system is bare-bones min-max optimization and rather annoying in the sense I have to routinely inspect it because it won't tell me if anything needs to be done, but it gets the job done with a lot less game resources and gives planets a bit more of a personality (there's just something more personal about seeing the tiles and pops laid out)

All in all, while playing without all the 2X features is a major pain in the knee caps I'd rather avoid, in terms of actually getting out of the early game (assuming I survive the snore of 1.9's mid-game with podcasts), it's kind of worth it. No, I am not saying downgrading to 1.9 is a good idea, it isn't, and I expect I will go 2.1 eventually for added features, but in terms of actually having a workable crisis and good enough performance to complete the game, its frankly the only way I can do it. I hope that a big patch will eventually make the game workable on live, but as Bankipriel said since one of the major contributors to loss of performance are pops until that gets revamped I don't see how major improvements to performance will be possible, and I can't see this happening.

It's unfortunate, but the reality is that 2.2 onwards is virtually unplayable performance-wise. 1.9 for crisis and 2.1 for performance are therefore at least temporarily (if you call two years temporary) the best imperfect solution I can find to actually play the game as Spartakus said, it is a trade-off giving up on about half the newer features to make the other half work properly. The choices, as far as I can tell, are the live patch for a pretty good early game experience, 2.1 to keep going into mid-game with at least some of those features, and 1.9 to get to the finish line, each shedding more and more features I loath to part with. I am not the biggest gamer in the world, but I never encountered a game that forces me to make choices like that. I hope we get at least a minimal fix soon.

But I am not holding my breath.
 
Last edited:
  • 4Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
and without the market to compensate for shortfalls I actually have to manage my resources properly or go under.

This is a joke right?How is that a negativ?

I have to routinely inspect it because it won't tell me if anything needs to be done,

The game does tell you if you have pops without buildings or buildings without pops.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
This is a joke right?How is that a negativ?



The game does tell you if you have pops without buildings or buildings without pops.

Yes for the first question, I was being ironic in the sense that for all the complexity of new economic features, the market feature makes balancing the books a joke. It is in that sense a point to 1.9, and one which I wasn't ready for and caused me to crash my economy.

For the second question, it does not inform me for example when there are upgrades available and I haven't gotten a notification about pops not having buildings, though I might have missed it. At any rate, I do need to keep more of an eye on my planets in 1.9 (a few seconds or so), but not so much past the early game I expect while the functional sectors at least keep me out of the eventual micromanaging nightmare of 2.2.

In short, I think 1.9 has a lot of issues as to be expected from a much older version of the game that does not have a lot of features introduced in 2X. But in terms of performance, balance, and stability; I have to say it is a smoother experience.

FTL is also a bonus I missed more then I thought, but it isn't a performance related issue.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions: