This OP is kinda disheartening, tbh. I feel like I'm being bamboozled with this "innovation means bugs" talk.
[Dev Team] We're back.
- Thread starter Jamor
- Start date
-
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.
- Status
One way of looking at this matter is to ask if there was sufficient QA; another, perhaps more helpful, is to ask if the dev team were perhaps too ambitious in this patch and DLC given the operational constraints that the game is developed under (i.e. capacity of different roles, and the need to release at key points in the year).
I think Le Guin and Megacorp probably were over-ambitious, and yet I certainly feel this is the side that I personally would like to see the dev team err on. Though the implementation is definitely shaky in places, and I can understand why some people feel upset, the core concepts underlying the game are now far stronger in my view, and for me seeing this game develop and transform in this way is why I am still interested in Stellaris.
Which is to say - I wish the team good luck with fixing things up in the post-release stage, and I look forward to what comes next.
I think Le Guin and Megacorp probably were over-ambitious, and yet I certainly feel this is the side that I personally would like to see the dev team err on. Though the implementation is definitely shaky in places, and I can understand why some people feel upset, the core concepts underlying the game are now far stronger in my view, and for me seeing this game develop and transform in this way is why I am still interested in Stellaris.
Which is to say - I wish the team good luck with fixing things up in the post-release stage, and I look forward to what comes next.
This version really give me a big surprise, I can't stop playing it since Dec.7. New systems are fantastic!
Although many players are dissatisfied because of the bugs, as a whole, we like this version.
Just like this version has many bugs, but overall it's a great progress.
Not a native speaker of English, please forgive my grammar.
Although many players are dissatisfied because of the bugs, as a whole, we like this version.
Just like this version has many bugs, but overall it's a great progress.
Not a native speaker of English, please forgive my grammar.
Nobody said that they don't do any QA testing, and I'm not blaming the devs, I'm blaming Paradox for slowly evolving into just another money-grabbing game studio that's more interested in microtransactions and rushing out products than providing quality.
But don't lie to the community about QA testing where you can fire up the game and instantly uncover treasure troves of bugs. Tell the community that you screwed up, and it won't happen again. And then quit doing it.
The way you word it makes it sound as if you believe the people working on the game do not know what they are doing and fail horribly at it.
Count the following as my speculation based on personal experiences working in a completely unrelated company. While my work is not producing video games I still assume a lot of similarities regarding management of resources (workforce as well as money) and marketing decisions apply here as well.
I work in the IT department of our company and if things went my way, something would be done once it is done. Now comes the big BUT. While those above sometimes listen to our concerns, this isn't how things normally work. Often times deadlines are being pushed with little regard of what those who do the work can achieve in the given time frame. The result is neither good for the customer nor the programmer as shortcuts have to be taken.
The QA surely does a good job, I believe him when he says that. The problem is most likely that they were forced to release anyway, despite having a stunning list of known issues. Yes this is pure speculation but still an educated guess based on my personal experience and reports from the gaming industry as a whole. Good work takes time, unfortunately those in the higher up positions do often have other priorities than quality products.
Having reflected some more I will say I do appreciate the fact that Jamor and his team spent right up until their break actually started working on fixes and even set up the test branch to get as many fixes as possible out before the holidays. We don't know who makes exactly what decisions so its entirely probable to me they knew the game was in rough shape and were simply ordered to get it out fore the holidays no matter what. They can obviously never comment on that publicly but that doesn't mean we don't know it's more likely than not.
And I do like the design direction they have gone with Stellaris since 2.0. The game is infinitely better and the 2.2 design changes, once properly balanced, debugged, and integrated will make the game by far the best we have seen.
All in all it probably is best to not endlessly rehash 2.2s release and focus on best practices moving forward. I do feel the game is in need a bit of a pause from piling endless new systems and innovations until they are able to go with a pretty thorough balance/bugfix/quality of life sweep through all the changes and get 2.0 and 2.2 working fully integrated with each other. The foundation has been laid, so I'm fine with setting the art team busy working on race packs or what not to pay for it all while the rest of the dev team deep dives into some long standing issues that have piled up.
And I do like the design direction they have gone with Stellaris since 2.0. The game is infinitely better and the 2.2 design changes, once properly balanced, debugged, and integrated will make the game by far the best we have seen.
All in all it probably is best to not endlessly rehash 2.2s release and focus on best practices moving forward. I do feel the game is in need a bit of a pause from piling endless new systems and innovations until they are able to go with a pretty thorough balance/bugfix/quality of life sweep through all the changes and get 2.0 and 2.2 working fully integrated with each other. The foundation has been laid, so I'm fine with setting the art team busy working on race packs or what not to pay for it all while the rest of the dev team deep dives into some long standing issues that have piled up.
Shaky is a way too gentle word in this case. Just call a cat a cat : this patch break the game to the point it becames unplayable and that's not acceptable from any perspective. 2.0 was shaky, 2.2 is far worse.
As for the game evolution, if I agree that's what makes the game still interesting, I do not really know if you can tell the core concepts are stronger as there was some fundamental core concepts lost in the way.
All in all I do not think that's how a game should evolve. Worst thing is PDS is the absolute exemple of HOW to evolve and improve a game as they proved it again and again with titles like CK2 and EUIV, so they internally know very well what work and what does not.
I just want to put my two cents in.
I more or less like Megacorp, and I don't feel 'robbed' of the $20 that I put into it Day One. Compared to a lot of video game companies I really like Paradox's business model, and I wish that more companies would adopt it. I like how games are continuously developed and constantly iterated upon, so the game you bought five years ago is vastly improved from its day one state. I don't mind the $15-$20 DLCs because they seem more or less like the $15 a month World of Warcraft Subscription I once had, a continual fee to support the maintenance and improvement of the game. And while I cannot load up and play, say the Burning Crusade and do a Zul'Aman run, since my subscription is long lapsed, I can load up Crusader Kings 2 or Stellaris or Hearts of Iron, or anything else Paradox, and still play more or less what I paid for, if not an improved version. This is so much better than other, more exploitative models. My only problem with it is the huge on-boarding cost someone has to pick up the current, complete version of the game from nothing but that's a bit ameliorated by Steam Sales so its not that bad if you have a little bit of patience.
Also, I didn't mind the $20 Megacorp DLC purchase, because I know, in a way, I'm not really purchasing Megacorp, but I'm purchasing the next one or two DLCs, because if Stellaris continues to be successful, then more and more content will come out for it, and ball will keep rolling and the game will keep improving. I like that Stellaris continues to innovate and isn't afraid to completely revolutionize its game mechanics trying to become a better game. That kind of ambition should be rewarded, and I'm looking forward to the future with Diplomacy, and whatever else comes after it. And I know that that ambition is inherently risky, and that bugs and growing pains can be expected. Normally, the patches come out promptly, and feedback is at least acknowledged consistently.
I just think that the virtuous cycle of continual release and patch got interrupted by the holidays, and considering the 100 MPH hype train rolling into the station for Megacorp's launch, lots of people where disappointed when patches weren't forthcoming and feedback wasn't being acknowledged. It doesn't matter that that silence was for the perfectly good reason that even game developers deserve holidays, the silence stung. The Active Community of feedback and critic that Paradox has wisely cultivated just got to shout into the void for a month, and it started to get a bit bitter that the void wasn't noticing it. I noticed in lots of threads the commenters turning on each other out of frustration, and I'm glad that at least the mothership has signaled they are still here. Hopefully everything can get on track quickly, and the iteration cycle can start back up in earnest.
I more or less like Megacorp, and I don't feel 'robbed' of the $20 that I put into it Day One. Compared to a lot of video game companies I really like Paradox's business model, and I wish that more companies would adopt it. I like how games are continuously developed and constantly iterated upon, so the game you bought five years ago is vastly improved from its day one state. I don't mind the $15-$20 DLCs because they seem more or less like the $15 a month World of Warcraft Subscription I once had, a continual fee to support the maintenance and improvement of the game. And while I cannot load up and play, say the Burning Crusade and do a Zul'Aman run, since my subscription is long lapsed, I can load up Crusader Kings 2 or Stellaris or Hearts of Iron, or anything else Paradox, and still play more or less what I paid for, if not an improved version. This is so much better than other, more exploitative models. My only problem with it is the huge on-boarding cost someone has to pick up the current, complete version of the game from nothing but that's a bit ameliorated by Steam Sales so its not that bad if you have a little bit of patience.
Also, I didn't mind the $20 Megacorp DLC purchase, because I know, in a way, I'm not really purchasing Megacorp, but I'm purchasing the next one or two DLCs, because if Stellaris continues to be successful, then more and more content will come out for it, and ball will keep rolling and the game will keep improving. I like that Stellaris continues to innovate and isn't afraid to completely revolutionize its game mechanics trying to become a better game. That kind of ambition should be rewarded, and I'm looking forward to the future with Diplomacy, and whatever else comes after it. And I know that that ambition is inherently risky, and that bugs and growing pains can be expected. Normally, the patches come out promptly, and feedback is at least acknowledged consistently.
I just think that the virtuous cycle of continual release and patch got interrupted by the holidays, and considering the 100 MPH hype train rolling into the station for Megacorp's launch, lots of people where disappointed when patches weren't forthcoming and feedback wasn't being acknowledged. It doesn't matter that that silence was for the perfectly good reason that even game developers deserve holidays, the silence stung. The Active Community of feedback and critic that Paradox has wisely cultivated just got to shout into the void for a month, and it started to get a bit bitter that the void wasn't noticing it. I noticed in lots of threads the commenters turning on each other out of frustration, and I'm glad that at least the mothership has signaled they are still here. Hopefully everything can get on track quickly, and the iteration cycle can start back up in earnest.
And that's where the problem is. And, based on the way Paradox is moving forward with several of their titles, it doesn't seem like they're becoming more interested in releasing a quality product. It seems like they're looking for a quick buck wherever they can get it, and then fixing their issues later.
that's great, but tell us, if your company released a product that didnt work, would you all go on holiday? or would they get people to fix it first, and who would be in trouble over the complete mess of a release?
it is always interesting when someone in a similar field wants to compare notes on process, but doesn't want to say what would happen to them if they released a product in such a state at their company... because we all know heads would roll.
Interestingly enough, I work in the Medicare/Medicaid insurance industry, where our biggest enrollment season ends on December 7th. Which means right after we spend 2 months enrolling every senior citizen in America in new plans, which they then get drop-shipped a ton of paperwork on that they invariably have piles of questions on... my entire industry, including private companies, state-run Medicaid agencies (like Departments of Health and Human Services) and the Federal Department of Health and Human Services... literally shut down for the holidays and we all go on vacation until January 2nd. We do it every year. And the world doesn't end.
I like to think our industry is more important than a video game.
I am unsure where the comparison comes in? do people not get any medical services for that time? does most of the system not work while you are gone? your analogy has nothing to do with this release.
Earth to Paradox : Most of your players play singleplayer DON'T TEST YOUR GAME IN MULTIPLAYER!
Last edited:
Actually that would mean overtime for me. Which can also not be the solution for a failed policy in the first place. I thought my post made it very clear where I assume the cause of the problems. You are asking me how a situation should be handled, that shouldn't exist in the first place. What has to change in the long run is how such releases are treated. Either by allocating more time for polishing before release or releasing the content as well as the DLC as officially declared beta (which means - for those who are unfamiliar with the term - a feature complete but unpolished version) on an opt in experimental branch. The latter would be basically the same thing that happens anyway right now but would be more upfront with the consumer. I think I could live very well with it if I am informed correctly about what I am in for if I buy in at that point in time.
You're the one making wild analogies and comparing a video game to earth shattering consequences. If one of my carriers shipped a "buggy product" (which, ironically, both Humana and Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Michigan did this year) it would and could cause hundreds of thousands of people to have incorrect coverages that could LITERALLY cause life threatening coverage issues. Unlike Megacorp causing LITERALLY UNPLAYABLE stuttering.
I kid thee not: Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Michigan shipped an explanation of benefits book this year that had 2 pages with a line crossed out with a black sharpie. You want to talk about a "day one patch". I died laughing when I saw it.
please point to where i made such a claim, don't hyperbole what I wrote and make things up... and your analogy is still asinine.
While I agree that things need to change, the problem is, when even the devs say, "there is no issues with our process", nothing will change, and the reason is simple, no one is getting into trouble for doing a bad job, part of fixing a policy is also having consequences.
so until they admit it is an issue and start holding people accountable, nothing will change.
There just doesn't seem to be anyone being held responsible for this release.
.png){kind=avatar}
I am unhappy too as the update 2.2 has brought so many problems
till now i think maybe it should have been an entirely new stellaris and not a patch, but anyway
what i read in most posts are asumptions what they are missing in departments and what they should have done and so on.
in no situation or company i was where asumptions helpfull, when did they more harm then anything
they wrote they are back and working on fixes, so why not wait and see
if nothing happens or gets better in days or weeks we have fakts and no wild guesses how things will go on .
but if it gets better maybe we all can play the game again and have fun
till then i will wait and hope for the best, if not then they just one happy gamer
there are so many games out there
till now i think maybe it should have been an entirely new stellaris and not a patch, but anyway
what i read in most posts are asumptions what they are missing in departments and what they should have done and so on.
in no situation or company i was where asumptions helpfull, when did they more harm then anything
they wrote they are back and working on fixes, so why not wait and see
if nothing happens or gets better in days or weeks we have fakts and no wild guesses how things will go on .
but if it gets better maybe we all can play the game again and have fun
till then i will wait and hope for the best, if not then they just one happy gamer
there are so many games out there
- Status