I Don't Want To Be That Guy But...

[KingHoot]

I've read all of the development diaries for Utopia and it looks promising. Normally this would be cause for a joyous feeling of anticipation but shortly after Leviathans I began to feel burned by my purchase of Stellaris and it's DLC.

The reason was that each new feature seemed to be broken and awaiting either several patches or further DLC to sort it out.

I mean they have gutted so much of what the original Stellaris was and rightly so (this is a good thing) but as of now things like purging, sectors and slavery are still threadbare and in some cases outright broken. I know Utopia is being developed to address these things as well as add new features but man...these are CORE systems that shipped with the original game.

Patch after patch after patch after iteration after iteration. My worry is that all Utopia will do is introduce a new broken gamestate which will need to have a further 4 or 5 patches and a follow-up DLC to fix.

CK2 and EUIV are some of my favourite games but they just feel like they are in a different league to Stellaris. With the recent DLC pricehike from Paradox and the way the development of the game has gone up to this point...it's not really worth throwing anymore money at it if I'm not gonna get a "feature complete, bug free" game.

EDIT :- Please don't take this post as vitriol. I so very much WANT the Utopia expansion to make the Stellaris on my hard-drive the same as the Stellaris in my mind (which kinda formed during the first livestreams of the games on Twitch, Blorg ♥) I'm just not convinced given the developmental track record.

 

[Fourthspartan56]

The reason was that each new feature seemed to be broken and awaiting either several patches or further DLC to sort it out.

In a game the size of Stellaris bugs are inevitable, either accept it or find a much smaller game.

I mean they have gutted so much of what the original Stellaris was and rightly so (this is a good thing) but as of now things like purging, sectors and slavery are still threadbare and in some cases outright broken. I know Utopia is being developed to address these things as well as add new features but man...these are CORE systems that shipped with the original game.

Calling improvement gutted is very strange turn of phrase, furthermore these core systems are being changed in Banks the free update. You pay money simply to expand them in Utopia.

Patch after patch after patch after iteration after iteration. My worry is that all Utopia will do is introduce a new broken gamestate which will need to have a further 4 or 5 patches and a follow-up DLC to fix.

See above on bugs/glitches.

CK2 and EUIV are some of my favourite games but they just feel like they are in a different league to Stellaris. With the recent DLC pricehike from Paradox and the way the development of the game has gone up to this point...it's not really worth throwing anymore money at it if I'm not gonna get a "feature complete, bug free" game.

They have been out for years more than Stellaris so obviously they are in a different league and what DLC pricehikes are you talking about?

EDIT :- Please don't take this post as vitriol. I so very much WANT the Utopia expansion to make the Stellaris on my hard-drive the same as the Stellaris in my mind (which kinda formed during the first livestreams of the games on Twitch, Blorg ♥) I'm just not convinced given the developmental track record.

I cannot speak for others but I disagreed with your post because I consider it fractally wrong, not because I sensed any vitriol.

 

[KingHoot]

To say "bugs are inevitable - accept it" is such a cop out. This may be true in the first instance, but the game has been out for nearly a year. If we talking minor bugs then of course, I accept this. But Stellaris to this day has major, major bugs that render certain play-styles defunct.

Your whole "size" argument is also flawed. Stellaris is not THAT big of a game given that it's a simulation. There are bigger games with less bugs.

Also, it seems there is no place left for a simple voiced opinion without drawing collective passive-aggressive ire from over-committed fans. Remember, I too am a fan. My opinion, however, may not be the same as yours, however wrong you may think it.

 

[EU3NOOB]

To say "bugs are inevitable - accept it" is such a cop out. This may be true in the first instance, but the game has been out for nearly a year. If we talking minor bugs then of course, I accept this. But Stellaris to this day has major, major bugs that render certain play-styles defunct.

Your whole "size" argument is also flawed. Stellaris is not THAT big of a game given that it's a simulation. There are bigger games with less bugs.

Also, it seems there is no place left for a simple voiced opinion without drawing collective passive-aggressive ire from over-committed fans. Remember, I too am a fan. My opinion, however, may not be the same as yours, however wrong you may think it.

I don't think he was being passive-aggressive, mate...


As to the OP: Don't care either way. I find the game to be fun and that's all I need.

 

[Magnificent Genius]

They have been out for years more than Stellaris so obviously they are in a different league and what DLC pricehikes are you talking about?

I believe he is referring to the fact that now(as of HoI and Stellaris) that Paradox is packaging the cosmetics with the content, each dlc is 5 usd more expensive than they were before. Which means very little if you were going to buy that anyway, but if you aren't interested in the bells and whistles...well, it is the reason that TfV has such terrible reviews on Steam, at least partly.

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

I feel like I got my 40 dollars worth of gameplay out of Stellaris. I actually feel like I got well over my 40 dollars, and while I don't intend to just throw money at Paradox until I think I've given them a competitive price for the hours of enjoyment I got out of the game, I will give them the benefit of the doubt and trust that I'm likely to get 20 dollars worth of enjoyment out of the expansion.

 

[Sinister2202]

I don't like the game in current state at all, and don't even feel like playing it. It's like I'm back to square one, when Stellaris was first announced. The hype is making me incapable of playing the current version of the game, mostly because I know Utopia and Banks is coming to save us all.

 

[Alblaka]

CK2 and EUIV are some of my favourite games but they just feel like they are in a different league to Stellaris.

Yeah, they don't have any QA to speak off, whilst Stellaris, so far, only has seen major design flaws revealed after weeks of play (i.e. the famous invulnerable Corvette combo, which was then promptly fixed).
Sure, there are a lot more mechanics that need a lot of work, i.e. diplomacy or warfare, but we're getting there.

(Following paragraph isn't technically aimed at OP, but I feel like ranting about it anyways
Always keep in mind: Yes, after reading what the devs envision for the DLC's, your first thought will be "That's awesome! Why didn't we have that in the base game?" (and a couple of, apologize the rudeness, idiots will go and rant about how Paradox makes half-finished game to force people into buying said DLC).
But if you were to only take Stellaris, without any DLCs, it's still a fine game with the necessary amount of work and content put into it to warrant it's 'full price' (and, mind you, that's still less then what current AAA titles demand). The DLC'S are, for exactly that reason, ADDITIONAL content. Not 'must have features sold seperately'.
And that's not even considering that you could stick with no DLC's and still get regular updates of new mechanics and content in the free patches alongside the DLC.
In all fairness, and trying to avoid the obvious fan-bias I have for Stellaris, I think Paradox is the best example of DLC done right.

Patch after patch after patch after iteration after iteration. My worry is that all Utopia will do is introduce a new broken gamestate which will need to have a further 4 or 5 patches and a follow-up DLC to fix.

To reference with the first sentence of this post, this is something I'm half-worried, half-hopeful about, too.
So far, Stellaris did not commit any QA flukes (whereas they're, to me, a running gag in CKII and EUIV). I feel like the size and content of the Utopia update will make it especially vulnerable to this issue, and whether it is dealt with accordingly will be a major mark on Stellaris developement history.

If they run into the same issues and mistakes as the other two games, they'll never hear the end of it (including from me) and this may impact the life length of Stellaris significantly (we're talking +- a few years here). But if they do it right, they might be able to dispell the missturst into Paradox QA some people have started to build up.

For our all enjoyment, I hope it's the latter.

 

[Elimdur]

Yeah, they don't have any QA to speak off, whilst Stellaris, so far, only has seen major design flaws revealed after weeks of play (i.e. the famous invulnerable Corvette combo, which was then promptly fixed).
Sure, there are a lot more mechanics that need a lot of work, i.e. diplomacy or warfare, but we're getting there.

(Following paragraph isn't technically aimed at OP, but I feel like ranting about it anyways
Always keep in mind: Yes, after reading what the devs envision for the DLC's, your first thought will be "That's awesome! Why didn't we have that in the base game?" (and a couple of, apologize the rudeness, idiots will go and rant about how Paradox makes half-finished game to force people into buying said DLC).
But if you were to only take Stellaris, without any DLCs, it's still a fine game with the necessary amount of work and content put into it to warrant it's 'full price' (and, mind you, that's still less then what current AAA titles demand). The DLC'S are, for exactly that reason, ADDITIONAL content. Not 'must have features sold seperately'.
And that's not even considering that you could stick with no DLC's and still get regular updates of new mechanics and content in the free patches alongside the DLC.
In all fairness, and trying to avoid the obvious fan-bias I have for Stellaris, I think Paradox is the best example of DLC done right.


To reference with the first sentence of this post, this is something I'm half-worried, half-hopeful about, too.
So far, Stellaris did not commit any QA flukes (whereas they're, to me, a running gag in CKII and EUIV). I feel like the size and content of the Utopia update will make it especially vulnerable to this issue, and whether it is dealt with accordingly will be a major mark on Stellaris developement history.

If they run into the same issues and mistakes as the other two games, they'll never hear the end of it (including from me) and this may impact the life length of Stellaris significantly (we're talking +- a few years here). But if they do it right, they might be able to dispell the missturst into Paradox QA some people have started to build up.

For our all enjoyment, I hope it's the latter.

They are doing a good job improving the game. Telling something else would be an outright lie. On the other hand there are still problems, that are around since release. Many of which could have been easily fixed by just incorporating fix-mods that are around for a long time too. If you do not know what I am speaking about, take a look of the state of the precursor quests (so many wrong set flags that break the event chains...) or the problem with hostile factions occupying your planets and you being unable to bombard the planet to win the fight on the ground. Both problems are easy to solve and have been reported repeatedly in the bug report forum together with directly pointing out the mistakes in the code/working solutions for the problems. I can only hope especially these two things also get finally fixed with banks.

 

[Adamsrealm]

In a game the size of Stellaris bugs are inevitable, either accept it or find a much smaller game.

Stellaris is not a big game, it's really not. The only big thing about it is the number of operations your system has to undergo in late game scenarios.

The amount of content is relatively small compared to other games. Additionally it's only 32bit which is an insane thing to do in this age of 64bit, and although optimisation can solve late game lag without any need for 64bit it is the 32bit engine that will ultimately limit the amount they can expand the game over its life time.

The max RAM usage for stellaris is 4GB, 2 of which are currently taken up by visual assets alone, and thats not even considering the system RAM usage which increases as a game session progresses.

 

[spartansociety]

Stellaris is not a big game, it's really not. The only big thing about it is the number of operations your system has to undergo in late game scenarios.

The amount of content is relatively small compared to other games. Additionally it's only 32bit which is an insane thing to do in this age of 64bit, and although optimisation can solve late game lag without any need for 64bit it is the 32bit engine that will ultimately limit the amount they can expand the game over its life time.

The max RAM usage for stellaris is 4GB, 2 of which are currently taken up by visual assets alone, and thats not even considering the system RAM usage which increases as a game session progresses.

Do you ever hit 4gb in Stellaris? We have been through this many times before in this forum, Stellaris can use 4gb and your windows/other programs can use the rest, even in 32bit windows.

Yes, they should switch eventually, but it also comes at a cost for the company as it limits the audience. The paradox forums are full of people playing on old systems with (presumebly) 32bit windows.

 

[Alblaka]

They are doing a good job improving the game. Telling something else would be an outright lie. On the other hand there are still problems, that are around since release. Many of which could have been easily fixed by just incorporating fix-mods that are around for a long time too.

I'm not sure whether you are referring to my statements here, but since you quoted my post, I assume you do.

I'm not a 100% sure as to whether any of us can truly rate how 'good' of a job they are doing.
If I were to assume Stellaris was developed by a single person, he/she/it would be doing an outstanding job, regardless of the issues that are still in the game. If I were to assume Stellaris had a supposedly coordinated 8-man-scrum, then the performance we can perceive is outstandingly horrible (for exactly the issues you mentioned).
Since I have no actual idea on how many developers Stellaris actually has (I only know, for certain, that it's more then just Wiz), I can't truly rate whether the rate of improvement is 'good' and won't be tempted to act as if I could precisely do that, and then proclaim anyone saying differently a liar.

 

[Elimdur]

I'm not sure whether you are referring to my statements here, but since you quoted my post, I assume you do.

I'm not a 100% sure as to whether any of us can truly rate how 'good' of a job they are doing.
If I were to assume Stellaris was developed by a single person, he/she/it would be doing an outstanding job, regardless of the issues that are still in the game. If I were to assume Stellaris had a supposedly coordinated 8-man-scrum, then the performance we can perceive is outstandingly horrible (for exactly the issues you mentioned).
Since I have no actual idea on how many developers Stellaris actually has (I only know, for certain, that it's more then just Wiz), I can't truly rate whether the rate of improvement is 'good' and won't be tempted to act as if I could precisely do that, and then proclaim anyone saying differently a liar.

I was not referring on the speed but more on the direction the development takes. You can make changes that try to make the game better but result in the opposit and you can make changes that improve the game. In my opinion Stellaris is going in the right direction hence I said they are doing good. I cannot say anything about their performance in how they reach this destination (finished update) for the same reasons you just mentioned. My statement was goal oriented. I couldn´t care less how they reach it, if the result is good. So far it was for me even despite the problems i have mentioned. This being said I am neither a fanboy nor a naysayer.

 

[Alblaka]

I was not referring on the speed but more on the direction the development takes.

That is, of course, a very reasonable statement. I think noone in a sane mind will claim that Utopia is heading into a bad direction of content. Stellaris' core is the variance in species and the interaction in between them. And Utopia is going for exactly that.
And whilst some might have preferred a diplomacy or warfare oriented patch, I would argue those are solely based in the fact the systems require patching, not necessarily content right now. And hey, at least we're getting a buff to missiles.

I couldn´t care less how they reach it, if the result is good.

This is where I disagree though, because, in my oppinion, a part of the result is determined by the way they reached it.
I.e. if they release completely broken patches, they will lose customers, and even if they then come back to a high level of quality, the damage will already be done, sales will decrease and the developement of Stellaris will stop due to budget concerns, thus reaching a 'goal' that is much less then what they could have achieved with a more steady, even if slower, approach (aka, less wide-reaching content (promises) per patch, but solid, bug-free ("bug-free") small batches of content and improvements).
Of course, this still correlates with you saying 'the result matters', but I just felt like pointing out that 'the way' will have a potentially large impact on said result and therefore shouldn't be ignored, even if your original interest is the result only.

 

[Elimdur]

This is where I disagree though, because, in my oppinion, a part of the result is determined by the way they reached it.
I.e. if they release completely broken patches, they will lose customers, and even if they then come back to a high level of quality, the damage will already be done, sales will decrease and the developement of Stellaris will stop due to budget concerns, thus reaching a 'goal' that is much less then what they could have achieved with a more steady, even if slower, approach (aka, less wide-reaching content (promises) per patch, but solid, bug-free ("bug-free") small batches of content and improvements).
Of course, this still correlates with you saying 'the result matters', but I just felt like pointing out that 'the way' will have a potentially large impact on said result and therefore shouldn't be ignored, even if your original interest is the result only.

I should have been more clearly as I fully agree with you on this. I meant that I do not care how they acchieve the fully working update as long as they do (So without the need to bugfix said update again and again afterwards). And yes of course who wants to wait longer because they struggle on their way to get there? So all you have said is true.

 

[AndragonLea]

Frankly, I can see both sides of the argument (despicable neutral incoming). On the one hand I've been very satisfied with Leviathans, War in Heaven, Lost Horizon and what I've so far seen of Utopia - all of those things did or sound to be doing stuff I absolutely love playing around with.

On the other hand there are still bugs around that HAVE been around for almost as long as the game exists, some of which (according to modders that fixed them) required just a few adjustments of code or a work-around that would presumably be much easier if you had access to developer resources.

One can't help but suspect that some of the resources that are currently used to introduce, balance and fix NEW content for the upcoming release would have been put to good use fixing some of those legacy bugs. I can therefore understand some of the anger I've seen (more on the steam forums, admittedly) from players that stopped playing months ago to wait for fixes, only to return and find many of those same bugs still present.



On the gripping hand we have the fact that the DLC sales are one of the main reasons Paradox can (and should) continue to work on old titles for a long time. This comes both with advantages and with drawbacks, of course. The advantage is that I can look forwards to years of enjoying Stellaris and to a product that will end up incredibly more polished than most AAA fire-and-forget titles you can buy for the same money. (I usually play those once or twice but then move on because there simply isn't anything new to see)
The disadvantage is that all of this developement and all of these additions come with price tags that make Stellaris likely to be much more expensive than any of those same fire-and-forget titles would be.

In conclusion I do have to say that, overall, I agree to their decision to focus on new content to keep players engaged - bug fixes are not as likely to keep the community alive and playing than a new update with ascendancy and massive space structures, sadly.
The whole business model relies on attracting and keeping a big target audience so that there will be people to buy the DLC - if everybody moved on to other games, only a small number of them would likely return to Stellaris on release of the DLC, where Paradox is expected to make most of their money.
They need to put out DLC to keep people with their nose to the grind stone.

I do think that they should set aside a couple of hours a week for coders to just unhook from the Utopia (and further) DLC to just pursue and eliminate some of those old bugs. For example: there is a event chain that is supposed to spawn drones but the ID referenced in the code leads to an entity that doesn't exist, so no drones are spawned and the event chain breaks.
One should think that either there IS a correct entity (stock drones or something else, I do not know) in which case you'd only need to correct the ID, or there ISN'T a correct entity, in which case you could nap the stock drone entity, make a copy with the ID currently found in the code, hook the quest chain up to it (presumably killing the drones advances the quest, so they need to have a "player killed entity X yes" flag or some such) and this quest would be done and dusted.

This process would probably take less time for the coders who actually know where to look for it and how to do stuff than it took me to reason this out and type it down.

Maybe they could even use it like they currently do with the new features: have a section now and then where they detail the bugs they have squashed or showcase a small ist of bugs that have priority for fixing or that have been put to the back because they just need more work than they have work hours available in this DLC crunch cycle.

This would let people see that all work is NOT just going towards viciously attacking their wallets with new DLC and provide valid, provable fixes for people to keep track of.

 

[LiberiusX]

@KingHoot I feel much the same way, but I'm a bit more optimistic. I don't know at what stage of development you bought EUIV, but it was a mess until Art of War was released. In other words, it took almost 14 months for PDS to get on the correct track, but it's been mostly improving ever since.

Stellaris has a lot of problems but I'm sure they'll be addressed in the not so distant future. Until they are, I don't plan on buying any DLC.

 

[GamerSteve]

In a game the size of Stellaris bugs are inevitable, either accept it or find a much smaller game.

Actually that's not the real issue behind what the OP is saying. I think the real issue here is that Utopia is not simply an add-on; it is going to fundamentally change a very large number of core game mechanics, including how the basic political alignments of empires work. These very basic, core systems are integral -- key to how the game works. It's not like they're adding a 2nd galaxy with new Empire types here. They are fundamentally and extensively changing how the core game mechanics work. And when you do that, there is the very real risk that, in fixing all the many bugs and gameplay issues of the original launch version of the game, they will introduce a horde of new, unanticipated issues, conflicts, and gameplay balance discrepancies. That is, there is the very high risk that they will just replace one set of problems with another set of problems.

I'm encouraged that they seem to be taking their time to test a lot of this stuff, but presumably they took their time to test these things before the game launched, and (although they launched in a different state), they got them wrong then, too. And that's because no amount of play-testing by a relatively small group of alpha or beta testers can possibly put a game through the kind of wringer that thousands of players can do live. Many of the more severe core gameplay problems with Stellaris only became known after launch for just this reason. It is not unreasonable to expect that a similar array of major, core game-play issues that cause balance problems and potentially a broken or near-broken gameplay experience could arise when this new DLC is launched as well.

Note: I am not saying 'this game is doomed to suck after Utopia.' Not at all. I am looking forward to it. My friend and I play co-op and we are literally counting the days till we can start our next game. But I think that the OP is not wrong to be concerned that this new update is going to break as much as it fixes, because it is so big, and because it is messing around with a whole variety of core game-play issues all at the same time.

 

[KingHoot]

Actually that's not the real issue behind what the OP is saying. I think the real issue here is that Utopia is not simply an add-on; it is going to fundamentally change a very large number of core game mechanics, including how the basic political alignments of empires work. These very basic, core systems are integral -- key to how the game works. It's not like they're adding a 2nd galaxy with new Empire types here. They are fundamentally and extensively changing how the core game mechanics work. And when you do that, there is the very real risk that, in fixing all the many bugs and gameplay issues of the original launch version of the game, they will introduce a horde of new, unanticipated issues, conflicts, and gameplay balance discrepancies. That is, there is the very high risk that they will just replace one set of problems with another set of problems.

I'm encouraged that they seem to be taking their time to test a lot of this stuff, but presumably they took their time to test these things before the game launched, and (although they launched in a different state), they got them wrong then, too. And that's because no amount of play-testing by a relatively small group of alpha or beta testers can possibly put a game through the kind of wringer that thousands of players can do live. Many of the more severe core gameplay problems with Stellaris only became known after launch for just this reason. It is not unreasonable to expect that a similar array of major, core game-play issues that cause balance problems and potentially a broken or near-broken gameplay experience could arise when this new DLC is launched as well.

Note: I am not saying 'this game is doomed to suck after Utopia.' Not at all. I am looking forward to it. My friend and I play co-op and we are literally counting the days till we can start our next game. But I think that the OP is not wrong to be concerned that this new update is going to break as much as it fixes, because it is so big, and because it is messing around with a whole variety of core game-play issues all at the same time.

You have encapsulated exactly how I feel much more adroitly than I did Thank you.

I just hope my concerns are unfounded. A few daft bugs I can live with, but any bugs that either break the narrative by leaving open unresolveable quest chains or cause entire systems to simply not funcion (I'm looking at you, Sector AI + Slavery) are gonna be a major fucking bummer for me. I guess I am going to be resolved to either waiting for a sale or keeping a close eye on these forums to see how the release of Utopia goes.

 

[Fourthspartan56]

To say "bugs are inevitable - accept it" is such a cop out. This may be true in the first instance, but the game has been out for nearly a year. If we talking minor bugs then of course, I accept this. But Stellaris to this day has major, major bugs that render certain play-styles defunct.

What major bugs? Anyway what I said is absolutely not a cop out, Banks will be changing the game massively so if you expect a completely bug free experience you will be sorely disappointed.

Your whole "size" argument is also flawed. Stellaris is not THAT big of a game given that it's a simulation. There are bigger games with less bugs.

I disagree, what larger games are you referring to? Furthermore Stellaris absolutely is a large game that is being changed massively in Banks, you cannot reasonably expect there not be some bugs.

Also, it seems there is no place left for a simple voiced opinion without drawing collective passive-aggressive ire from over-committed fans. Remember, I too am a fan. My opinion, however, may not be the same as yours, however wrong you may think it.

What exactly are you talking about? You made a post voicing your opinion, so I made a post voicing my opinion. If you did not want others to form an opinion of what you type perhaps you should not type it in the first place. I was in no way being passive aggressive, merely criticizing your argument.