I think the real question is whether the final 1.6.x patch brings the game to the state that 1.6.0 was supposed to bring it, or whether problems introduced in 1.6.0 will remain until 1.7 or even beyond. 1.6.2 might well be on its way, but will it be the patch we're hoping for, or is it just another small hotfix like 1.6.1?
Losing confidence in the dev team
- Thread starter fadohacolu
- 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
After the outcry on this forum with topics like these I think that they're trying for the patch were hoping for.
I'm sure they were trying to do that with 1.6.0, but they ended up having to cut corners with playtesting. While it's pretty much expected that major patches that come with an expansion are buggy at launch, what happens when the following major bugfixing patch (like 1.6 Adams) fails to deliver? Paradox devs time and again tell us that they have to cut things and make compromises with their releases. That's why I fear they're going to have to move on to working on 1.7 and the accompanying expansion without finishing their work on 1.6 in a satisfying way.
Jamor stated this to not be the case. Team working on 1.7 multiplayer-tech and team working on bugfixes are different teams.
Probably this time they take the time to test every change throughoutly, even if this means that without defending armies in the forums unrest is gonna rise.
But they might have embraced the "bugfixerist"-faction. Will take a while to get the unity points stacking, but at some point the game will reach for ascencion pretty sure.
Probably this time they take the time to test every change throughoutly, even if this means that without defending armies in the forums unrest is gonna rise.
But they might have embraced the "bugfixerist"-faction. Will take a while to get the unity points stacking, but at some point the game will reach for ascencion pretty sure.
This looks to be a solid fix for terraforming ridiculousness:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=931342809
And this for a lot of other issues from 1.6 and earlier:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=803752381
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=931342809
And this for a lot of other issues from 1.6 and earlier:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=803752381
But they might have embraced the "bugfixerist"-faction. Will take a while to get the unity points stacking, but at some point the game will reach for ascencion pretty sure.
Great one, I almost pissed in my pants! Worth to be modded as a strange-fun-mod
This i disagree with in principal because in my experience when Paradox screws up (by the way this is NOT the first time a patch has been this broken) they do their damnedest to get us working again, and while it may not be "perfect" (really what is in video games today) it is working - as long as you don't use missiles
(which is unrelated to the patch and am glad they are working on it).Just look at EU4 and CK2 and even HoI4. If you want a buggy mess look to HoI 4 not Stelaris. Even then i still enjoy HoI 4 and it is getting better (as sometimes i miss the wars for Africa). Look at any game in the industry today.... ANY GAME. Especially newer games not games that were patched 40 times during its life cycle. Heck just compare a game of EU4 vanilla from launch and EU4 today.
As for cutting things for time... welcome to the creative process. For ANY industry. I am not joking. Things get cut for time (also budget - just look at the new King Arthur movie - WAY WAY over budget). They always will. There are great Youtube videos from many different people in the gaming industry alone trying to explain this to consumers not to mention the myriad of other industries doing the same thing and for exactly the reason you think : most people do not understand the larger issues concerning creating a video game (or the creative process in general) or even the economics of it and trying to bring it to market. It gets thrown around a lot but this is a company and they make games to make money. If they dont make money on a product they wont make a product or continue to support it. They make them for fun too or i dont think we would have Grand Strategy or other genres : we would only have Candy crush everywhere with the flavour of the month/quarter thrown in for good measure.
Even then it isn't new. Even great games of the past got things cut or released as a buggy mess (cough cough Bathesda) . Sometimes they are rushed out the door too soon (tabula Rasa, MoO 3....poor poor MoO 3), or something last minute happens (that's normally when the shit hits the fan btw) that screws stuff up and then has to be dealt with. Sometimes the logistics of a launch can be underestimated (Sim City, Diablo 3, etc...) This is still the nature of the creative process.
Shit will, i repeat WILL go wrong. No matter how hard you plan it will. It really is how a game developer handles the bad that shows the true character behind that studio.
As for releasing buggy patches...... The best and worst example is World of Warcraft. A game that made more money then anyone has any idea to do with , so there is " no excuse" for not being able to hire more staff to throw people at the product development. Shit still went wrong, or cut for time, or budget. Why... cause stuff happens and things take time if you want to have a vision get realized. We've seen this happen in real world issues too with bridges and tunnels and other large infrastructure projects whos budgets have exploded either to mismanagement, feature creep (yes that happens in the "real" world too), or quite frankly cause things happen that you didnt expect it and it takes more time - along of course with all the really bad stuff like curruption and bla bla bla.
Hell just look at Harmonics and the downfall of Madcat. I don't think anyone saw that happening and the product was still good just there was not enough interest for the scope they had planned.
At the end of the day we (the consumer) want it yesterday (even i do), but most (i stress this - as it is the minority who do) do not understand even the simple logistics or make it overly simplistic as to why things are not done. Things are rarely as simple as they seem and the resource that is most limited is time. Things take time. Good/Great things take A LOT of time. Every so often something magical happens, but those are the rarity - and even then an immense amount of time and effort was spent.
Sorry for the wall of text but i just saw Alien: Covenant this afternoon and needed to vent after seeing that craptastic movie. I chose that word specifically.
I'll admit I'm not very familiar with the 1.7 beta. From what I've gathered it's mostly about the under-the-hood multiplayer tech and not about bug fixes or changes to mechanics. Whatever the case may be regarding the beta, it doesn't change the fact that the whole Stellaris dev team will have to commit to 1.7 proper and the accompanying expansion sooner or later. My point is about the state of the main, non-beta version when that happens. It's something we'll have to wait and see.
I think I acknowledged past buggy patches in my post pretty unambiguously. And I know the devs are trying to fix bugs. What I'm talking about are the same realities of the industry that you yourself recognize and how they may or may not affect the state of the game for the foreseeable future. In other words, how will the team prioritize and allocate their resources between bug fixes and new features going forward.This i disagree with in principal because in my experience when Paradox screws up (by the way this is NOT the first time a patch has been this broken) they do their damnedest to get us working again, and while it may not be "perfect" (really what is in video games today) it is working - as long as you don't use missiles
I don't understand those people praising to PDX, defending them, disliking any critical posts... How does PDX achieved that fanbase? Do those people think that we have Stellaris ONLY because PDX did it? True, but if not PDX, smg similar would be published by some other dev studio - the gap in a market is a profit that would eventually be exploited by someone else. Modern studios produce all variety of games types, it could literally be any of them delivering Stellaris-like game to the market. The specific studio can only affect the quality. So before joining your holy crusade defending PDX, think of what Stellaris could be if it was made by some other game developer studio (each of us can provide some good examples, I am sure). We all may love this game (to be more precise, the general concept of it), but it does not mean that you have to love PDX as well. The great idea was put at the base of this game, but the quality of implementation is what PDX can be judged by. I see some degree of similarity between all PDX products and by that I judge this studio. And this directly impacts my desire to buy any more games or DLC from them. After the Stellaris experience I have 0 wish to buy any DLC for it, mainly not because it is too expensive (it is the case too, obviously), but because I feel robbered by PDX given what they delivered and the price I paid for it. I do want those DLC, but I already spend more than the game deserves, so I can not allow myself feeding more to those people.
If PDX is not going to change the quality of their products they should start selling their games for 10-20 bucks, no more than that. Otherwise it is abuse of the customers. The potential buyers need to know what to expect, because the PDX is good at showing shiny wrap hiding the crap. If I knew the studio market strategies before buying Stellaris, I would not do that mistake. But I did not know that paying a full-price for the PDX game practically means I have to wait for a year and pay double just to have what was expected initially.
If PDX is not going to change the quality of their products they should start selling their games for 10-20 bucks, no more than that. Otherwise it is abuse of the customers. The potential buyers need to know what to expect, because the PDX is good at showing shiny wrap hiding the crap. If I knew the studio market strategies before buying Stellaris, I would not do that mistake. But I did not know that paying a full-price for the PDX game practically means I have to wait for a year and pay double just to have what was expected initially.
Well I have many paradox games and enjoy them immensely. As a company they communicate very well with their fanbase. They listen and respond. That is why people like me praise paradox. There are no perfect games in this world, because we all have a different view of what is perfect.
My experience with paradox games is that I've time they become great. This means that I am willing to spend my money and I think it's worth it.
Stellaris as it is now is a fun game. I am sure it will be even better in time. And if you don't like it.. it's very moddable
My experience with paradox games is that I've time they become great. This means that I am willing to spend my money and I think it's worth it.
Stellaris as it is now is a fun game. I am sure it will be even better in time. And if you don't like it.. it's very moddable
Maybe the explanation is its not religious fervor but just opinions that amazingly are different from your own?
I think that making a huge deal of every little bug can be very detrimental to a game, ive seen it happen where a company has removed fun and interesting features all because of a couple loud whiners who couldnt figure out how to avoid the bugs involved. I would rather have a fun game that will crash sometimes than a game that works perfectly at being boring.
The critical posts I see that are respectful and constructive usually do not get the treatment you describe. Disrespectful posts are another matter. People often dislike rude and unhelpful posts because they are rude and unhelpful, not because they necessarily disagree with what is being said. I personally feel my disagree-finger twich whenever I see a boorish post, whether it goes along the lines of "PDX SUCX AND ALL FANBOIS ARE MORANS" or "PDX IS GOD UGYUS ALL HATERS KILL URSELF" or whatever, even if real issues are at the heart of the rant. Tone matters.
As for the rest of your post, Paradox has made many games, and the loyalty of their customers comes mainly from them. I personally came the way of CKII. Do I have absolute confidence that Paradox will get Stellaris right? Of course not, only s̶i̶t̶h̶ fools deal in absolutes. But the built up trust from previous games I like gives them leeway, and while some issues annoy me (I'm looking at you, sectors), I am for the most part pleased with the game so far.
Your opinion is your own and you are entitled to it. But don't expect people to agree with you just because you feel everyone should think like you. Have a disagree and a good day.
Last edited:
I can only speak for myself but yes, actually.
The only reason I bought Stellaris on release because it was Paradox and their continuing DLC and support of EUIV (that I had just gotten into earlier in the year) sold me on it. And I knew full well (and have not been surprised by) the fact that it was not close to perfect out of the gate and knew iot was going to take time for it to be perfected. I knew what I was getting into.
Personally, I am one of those who think that one can make positive or negative remarks while remaining respectful.
On the other hand I think it is still difficult to understand and especially to accept what happened with the patch 1.6. Pdx has clearly play with his image.
Pdx would have done better to wish itself a happy birthday by some other means rather than releasing a patch at this bad point.
I think stellaris has a very good base, that the additions were welcome and that future improvement are expected.
BUT that if Pdx wants to keep the trust of his community, maintaining a certain level of quality is essential. This is what makes the difference between a game or one takes pleasure in playing, and a games that we put aside despite its potential.
Certainly, it is better to repair small bugs and balancing for a better immersion, but it remains playable (except 1.6). Where it would be possible to get weary is for the quality of the AI particularly in the management of the sectors and its populations (although improving but still insufficient).
On the other hand I think it is still difficult to understand and especially to accept what happened with the patch 1.6. Pdx has clearly play with his image.
Pdx would have done better to wish itself a happy birthday by some other means rather than releasing a patch at this bad point.
I think stellaris has a very good base, that the additions were welcome and that future improvement are expected.
BUT that if Pdx wants to keep the trust of his community, maintaining a certain level of quality is essential. This is what makes the difference between a game or one takes pleasure in playing, and a games that we put aside despite its potential.
Certainly, it is better to repair small bugs and balancing for a better immersion, but it remains playable (except 1.6). Where it would be possible to get weary is for the quality of the AI particularly in the management of the sectors and its populations (although improving but still insufficient).
There is info in this thread. Saying there won't be a patch until the multiplayer beta is done. Somehow they think this is acceptable. I don't think they actually understand that people are still not happy with the current live version or they wouldn't be delaying fixes because of an unrelated multiplayer test.
This i disagree with in principal because in my experience when Paradox screws up (by the way this is NOT the first time a patch has been this broken) they do their damnedest to get us working again, and while it may not be "perfect" (really what is in video games today) it is working - as long as you don't use missiles
Just look at EU4 and CK2 and even HoI4. If you want a buggy mess look to HoI 4 not Stelaris. Even then i still enjoy HoI 4 and it is getting better (as sometimes i miss the wars for Africa). Look at any game in the industry today.... ANY GAME. Especially newer games not games that were patched 40 times during its life cycle. Heck just compare a game of EU4 vanilla from launch and EU4 today.
As for cutting things for time... welcome to the creative process. For ANY industry. I am not joking. Things get cut for time (also budget - just look at the new King Arthur movie - WAY WAY over budget). They always will. There are great Youtube videos from many different people in the gaming industry alone trying to explain this to consumers not to mention the myriad of other industries doing the same thing and for exactly the reason you think : most people do not understand the larger issues concerning creating a video game (or the creative process in general) or even the economics of it and trying to bring it to market. It gets thrown around a lot but this is a company and they make games to make money. If they dont make money on a product they wont make a product or continue to support it. They make them for fun too or i dont think we would have Grand Strategy or other genres : we would only have Candy crush everywhere with the flavour of the month/quarter thrown in for good measure.
Even then it isn't new. Even great games of the past got things cut or released as a buggy mess (cough cough Bathesda) . Sometimes they are rushed out the door too soon (tabula Rasa, MoO 3....poor poor MoO 3), or something last minute happens (that's normally when the shit hits the fan btw) that screws stuff up and then has to be dealt with. Sometimes the logistics of a launch can be underestimated (Sim City, Diablo 3, etc...) This is still the nature of the creative process.
Shit will, i repeat WILL go wrong. No matter how hard you plan it will. It really is how a game developer handles the bad that shows the true character behind that studio.
As for releasing buggy patches...... The best and worst example is World of Warcraft. A game that made more money then anyone has any idea to do with , so there is " no excuse" for not being able to hire more staff to throw people at the product development. Shit still went wrong, or cut for time, or budget. Why... cause stuff happens and things take time if you want to have a vision get realized. We've seen this happen in real world issues too with bridges and tunnels and other large infrastructure projects whos budgets have exploded either to mismanagement, feature creep (yes that happens in the "real" world too), or quite frankly cause things happen that you didnt expect it and it takes more time - along of course with all the really bad stuff like curruption and bla bla bla.
Hell just look at Harmonics and the downfall of Madcat. I don't think anyone saw that happening and the product was still good just there was not enough interest for the scope they had planned.
At the end of the day we (the consumer) want it yesterday (even i do), but most (i stress this - as it is the minority who do) do not understand even the simple logistics or make it overly simplistic as to why things are not done. Things are rarely as simple as they seem and the resource that is most limited is time. Things take time. Good/Great things take A LOT of time. Every so often something magical happens, but those are the rarity - and even then an immense amount of time and effort was spent.
Sorry for the wall of text but i just saw Alien: Covenant this afternoon and needed to vent after seeing that craptastic movie. I chose that word specifically.
Very well written and quite true. I love PDX games since I started with CK2 (so not as "old" fans as others
). It is true that all the bugs we had in Stellaris (and still have) can be frustrating but the game is that good that I still have hope and know they will improve it.
By making good games, constantly, and without ever screwing over the customer.
Speaking for myself, this is the case. I wouldn't have bought the game from anyone else. Not the way they advertised it, anyway. I'll get to that in a moment.
Now that is just ridiculous. While I have been critical of PDX's pricing policy ESPECIALLY for Stellaris (8 bucks for plantoids was seriously pushing it), and I will keep criticizing them if I see something wrong with their games, 10-20 bucks is absolute nonsense. All you base your argumentation on is that you feel robbed, and you didn't know what to expect. While I admit that Stellaris is certainly not like every 4X game, it is far from being worth only 20 bucks. Judging by your owned PDX games I am assuming that you are one of the people that bought the game because it was a new 4X, and, no offense, didn't seem to read the advertisement correctly. From the getgo, PDX made it clear that Stellaris would be THEIR take on a 4X, with all the caveats and unique ways of dealing with the matter included. This means that they planned to make a Paradox 4X game, not a 4X by Paradox. After they said this, it would have been sensible for you to check what that meant - you didn't, and now you're here, complaining.
What I don't understand, is what your complaints are. Sure, they screwed up a patch. Happens, and everyone that has played ANY regularly updated game knows that even bugfix patches occasionally don't work as perfect as they should. That's how programming works. Sure, they could have done it better, but raging about someone making a mistake is hardly getting you anything. Plus, have you noticed something? This is patch 1.6 by now, every single of which has improved even the base game significantly. While I certainly agree that PDX should reconsider the pricing policy for their DLC, you can't claim that you have only "half a game". Stellaris is perfectly playable without any DLC, not to mention that the vanilla version gets new features whenever the DLCs release.
So, tl;dr: Stop throwing vitriol at a developer that keeps trying to improve on a game that you bought a year after it was released. Is Stellaris perfect? No. Not at all. But did they cheat you on buying the game? No, they didn't. They were perfectly up front with saying that this will be a PDX game. If you feel cheated because Stellaris gets treated and developed like one, you shouldn't have bought one. And that's not PDX's fault.
As for the bugs: They'll be fixed. It might take them a while, but they will get fixed.
Seeing that Wiz is busy working on a complete replacement for the AI rebellion instead of fixing it or working on other fixes for 1.6 after the horrible release and insufficient hotfix, I have now entirely lost confidence in what the dev team is doing.
They are absolutely not hearing the complaints around the current state if the game of this is how they are addressing it.
So much for Jamor saying they busy working on fixes. Instead they're busy making a new crisis.
They are absolutely not hearing the complaints around the current state if the game of this is how they are addressing it.
So much for Jamor saying they busy working on fixes. Instead they're busy making a new crisis.
Instead of fixing the not-really-a-problem issues remaining after 1.6.1 they're addressing longstanding AI issues and a completely defunct crisis, that has been a problem since launch. Damn them!
- Status