I understand the OP's sentiment, but I think that even with Le Guin fully implemented, Stellaris is still ripe for a deep rework in many other aspects: Diplomacy, ground combat, spyionage... hell, victory conditions, even. The game is still far from being a balanced blend between 4X and Grand Strategy. But it's getting there, thank in no small part to the dev's will to keep reworking its core mechanics. I think (and hope) that Stellaris reinvention can coexist along with the polish and debugging as the OP wants
[OPINION] After 2.2, development should slow down
- Thread starter Tim_Ward
- 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.
I kinda agree with you. I faced multiple of those issues in some of my most recent campaigns (e.g. machine uprising with no fleets, Great Khanate died because a single planet rebelled, AI ally was incapable in wars despite being closer to the enemy and much stronger than me, awakened fallen empires did nothing), at the end of which I decided that I'd have faith in the dev team to make the game better in future but I'd rather do modding than playing for now
(But I would add that I am very glad at the direction 2.2 has gone, I was never a great fan of the tiles system).The good thing is that several of those downsides can probably be tackled in parallel with big updates anyway. I.e. there is probably someone always working on the AI (there is for EU:IV anyway), Awakened Empires just need some buffing or be set to awaken early, the crisis is just a matter of getting the numbers right (they change at every patch
it is easier said than done to get it right, but trying is not hard ) and the machine uprising bug probably happens when the MU gets no starbases.
Last edited:
You can make all the new contents in the world, if the AI is brokenly bad. Stellaris is not MP focuses, and the game time's, connection style, and game size prevents it from ever being MP focused.
For content Imperium Galactica 2 is the etalon for me in case of space strategies. That game had pretty much everything.
Global trading for ships/tanks.
Diplomacy to trade anything except ships/tanks and make the basic deals.
Espionage strong enough to DESTROY nations who forget to protect themselves. But since no free info gained in the game it was very valuable for information gathering too. Specifically to find the enemys' planets.
Lots of technology with several different tactics, and 3 different focus. Unlike Stellaris you were able to research one stuff at a time, and the 3 focus had 3 differenty building type so you were able to rush for one thing or the other, but doing so have cost other parts of your strength.
Detailed ground combat for the game type with lots of possible plans for tanks and various planetary defenses including the self destructor which destroyed the colony, and any and all attacker who are present on the planet at the moment, but you were able to send only part of your ground forces during attacks.
1 detailed story mode with a huge plot twist in the end.
The only bad point of it was the non-personality AI. All AI "player" played for conqueror victory with no real option to go on their good side. They basically calculated how strong you are, and on easy/normal they were willing to ally with you if you were far stronger. On hard they were rahter died than go into alliance no matter how strong you were. Still the AI was more than decent in direct fight, and not entirely neglected in espionage either.
I think the next DLC will be a species pack but it will come along side 2.2. The reason being that the new economy system allows for different play styles and economies. So the next species pack could inlude new mechanics for silicoids, gas giant floaters, bio-mechanicals, asteroid bugs etc.
There is a reoccurring theme in many of the responses which feels overlooked: Many players admit to stopping once they hear about the new update because it sounds so good they don't want to play the game as is. Now sure, you might write that off as the update is awesome. But I've played a lot of games and I submit it's a sign and present the following argument in support:
What other games do you play that share this trait? For me, No Man's Sky fits that bill. Software Inc also feels appropriate. And these are both games I always end up playing until I'm driven out by the flaws, bugs or missing functionality. On the other hand, a game like Factorio or even a strategy game like Civilization does not. I get excited for updates and expansions, but they aren't required for me to continue enjoying the game.
Whatever you make of this, and those examples are just mine, my point is simple: this dates back to launch. The new features, balance passes and DLC haven't added a reliable and shared experience we can all point to Stellaris as the reason we play. When Factorio announced new features, I get excited for what I will have, not angry at what's not there. Look at games like Jurassic Park Evolution, Two Point Hospital or Imagine Earth. They have obvious and consistent experiences that don't just drop you off with their systems hoping you'll make your own fun. Planet Coaster launched aimless and lacking drive but has since done quite a bit to make it closer to how the Tycoon games felt.
So, what? Different games? Who cares? Ultimately I'm not suggesting a specific path, but highlighting that Stellaris' can be summed up by players who say they don't want to play after reading how improved the game will be. It, to me, implies the game is lacking a specific experience and audience on which to build around. Maybe that's what 2.0 is doing, but those are my thoughts reading through this thread.
What other games do you play that share this trait? For me, No Man's Sky fits that bill. Software Inc also feels appropriate. And these are both games I always end up playing until I'm driven out by the flaws, bugs or missing functionality. On the other hand, a game like Factorio or even a strategy game like Civilization does not. I get excited for updates and expansions, but they aren't required for me to continue enjoying the game.
Whatever you make of this, and those examples are just mine, my point is simple: this dates back to launch. The new features, balance passes and DLC haven't added a reliable and shared experience we can all point to Stellaris as the reason we play. When Factorio announced new features, I get excited for what I will have, not angry at what's not there. Look at games like Jurassic Park Evolution, Two Point Hospital or Imagine Earth. They have obvious and consistent experiences that don't just drop you off with their systems hoping you'll make your own fun. Planet Coaster launched aimless and lacking drive but has since done quite a bit to make it closer to how the Tycoon games felt.
So, what? Different games? Who cares? Ultimately I'm not suggesting a specific path, but highlighting that Stellaris' can be summed up by players who say they don't want to play after reading how improved the game will be. It, to me, implies the game is lacking a specific experience and audience on which to build around. Maybe that's what 2.0 is doing, but those are my thoughts reading through this thread.
Last edited:
The development doesn't need to slow down. What it needs is one patch that focuses on the major issues rather than on a thousand minor ones.
Though judging by how it went in the past, patches that don't bring new features tend to break the game far more than the ones that bring new features. So that focus may not be such a good thing.
Though judging by how it went in the past, patches that don't bring new features tend to break the game far more than the ones that bring new features. So that focus may not be such a good thing.
While I would put it in different terms, and would focus on different issues, I generally agree with the OP's sentiment. Stellaris needs feature fixes, not new content. Of course, without the new content there would be no budget for feature fixes, so bring on the DLC's.
Personally, I'd work on systems in this order:
- Economy (obviously in process)
- Writing - Stellaris desperately needs a lead writer to build its world. Yes, this is a sandbox game, but if anything that means they need to focus on the writing even more. D&D is a sandbox game, but look at the attention to detail that goes into writing each monster, each spell, the history of Faerun. Stellaris needs the same, and it should be an ongoing process.
- Empire characterization and asymmetry - Empire types need to feel, play and be differently.
- Diplomacy
- Exploration - Exploration, with its discoveries and decisions, should change the course of your game, from starting wars, sparking alliances, unleashing hell, founding religions and beyond. Events right now have neither stakes nor consequences. Instead, they should shape the game as you play it. On a regular basis the decisions you make now should set the stage for the conflicts and confederations to come in 200 years.
- Leader characterization - When I put Sisko in charge of a space station, it should damn well matter. When I discover that I can't remove Palpatine as Governor of the Antaran Sector, it should be reason to panic. Stellaris wants to tell stories, but good science fiction is about people, not technology.
Personally, I'd work on systems in this order:
- Economy (obviously in process)
- Writing - Stellaris desperately needs a lead writer to build its world. Yes, this is a sandbox game, but if anything that means they need to focus on the writing even more. D&D is a sandbox game, but look at the attention to detail that goes into writing each monster, each spell, the history of Faerun. Stellaris needs the same, and it should be an ongoing process.
- Empire characterization and asymmetry - Empire types need to feel, play and be differently.
- Diplomacy
- Exploration - Exploration, with its discoveries and decisions, should change the course of your game, from starting wars, sparking alliances, unleashing hell, founding religions and beyond. Events right now have neither stakes nor consequences. Instead, they should shape the game as you play it. On a regular basis the decisions you make now should set the stage for the conflicts and confederations to come in 200 years.
- Leader characterization - When I put Sisko in charge of a space station, it should damn well matter. When I discover that I can't remove Palpatine as Governor of the Antaran Sector, it should be reason to panic. Stellaris wants to tell stories, but good science fiction is about people, not technology.
Last edited:
Oh man I sure hope!
Though mainly because they can be all like: "New DLC: More Bugs!" and it will be hilarious! I can't wait!
Granted, I'm easily entertained.
I'd prefer they fix the most problematic of these while focusing on diplomacy next, and do a massive overhaul for diplomacy. As it stands Diplomacy is such a boring, sh!tshow of a mess... It's why half of your list even exists, just by overhauling the diplomacy you'll see alot of problems being resolved.
The Diplomatic and war AI will have to overhauled meaning most of the war issues will be resolved. Diplomacy in Stellaris is 2 steps under SId Meiers Civilization games, and I consider Civ games to be pretty sub par and basic in terms of diplomacy...
The Diplomatic and war AI will have to overhauled meaning most of the war issues will be resolved. Diplomacy in Stellaris is 2 steps under SId Meiers Civilization games, and I consider Civ games to be pretty sub par and basic in terms of diplomacy...
You forgot the most important part. The AI. A part of the players goes for RP, and doesn't care if have to sit around waiting 2 hours for that one click. But another part goes more like a strategy game with constant wars, or/and federation building with war against those who aren't compatible. AI currently f*cks up federation building on bigger scale, and has lots of bad decisions both in military, and in economy. To me after this economy rework AI would come to number 1 priority.
Steam reviews are only indicative of one thing - some people like to moan. However, a much larger amount of people like to actually play a game, not write something on Steam that hardly anybody reads. Also, some of those DLC's have a really low count of reviews in relation to overall sales (Apocalypse has 1085 reviews and is "mixed" for example - that can only be a fraction of overall sales to have broke even, much less turn a profit while Utopia has 800 or so and is "very positive"), so that skews the overall perception as haters love to hate and will happily post all day about what they dislike, while those who like it are more than likely just playing the game. It's the same as looking at a forum and assuming that because there's lots of moany threads, everyone hates something - where it is more likely that a small proportion of people are moaning while the larger segment are actually happy and getting on with it.
If the DLC sold poorly, there wouldn't be more DLC. If the game was doing so badly, they wouldn't be continuing development. The only explanation is that, actually, the game has sold really well as have the DLC's, hence the continued development and support for the game from PDS.
Last edited:
Well IMO there doing a grand job. yes there is bugs , yes there are flaws, but these are symptomatic of a game that was releced before the dev team where finished tweeking there game, dont get me wrong it was and still is a 5 star game, but now there reworking and improving the way the systems worked and untill thats complete then major bug fixes are likely to get broken the next update they do....
personally loving the planetary rework that they have announced, the question becomes how this rework will affect planetary invasion's, if your a militaristic civ or have an iorn fist on the planet can you ask your police to join the PDF?
Also to the OP's I don't think thet will 'slow own' making changes for a bit, I think they still need to work on the subversive aspects of a culture. spying and infiltration. playing a Bothan type race in stelaris could be really funny. not strong economically or military but a spy and espionage industry second to none. Stealing enemy tech and then selling it on the black market.
personally loving the planetary rework that they have announced, the question becomes how this rework will affect planetary invasion's, if your a militaristic civ or have an iorn fist on the planet can you ask your police to join the PDF?
Also to the OP's I don't think thet will 'slow own' making changes for a bit, I think they still need to work on the subversive aspects of a culture. spying and infiltration. playing a Bothan type race in stelaris could be really funny. not strong economically or military but a spy and espionage industry second to none. Stealing enemy tech and then selling it on the black market.
It's logical, that people point to anything, what they don't like since it doesn't make sense to cheer for something, what hasn't to be changed ...
Ignorance, especially the long-term-version, is the thing, what makes people furious, especially by "moans", which have transformed into actual critiques, which have pointed out mistakes and collected ideas / suggestions or even implementable solutions ...
Like me and I don't even use the agree-/disagree-buttons in this forum, but nevertheless, I've the opinion, that the game is far from that, what it has to be ...
Yeah and everytime, I've read such a statement, I've interpreted it as a threat ...
It's also an exploit in regards to the human nature since the more you've spent on something the higher is your reluctance to give it up, which transforms you (basically) in some sort of a hostage (over time) and it's doubtful, that this is in your interest.
There's nought wrong with criticism, as long as it's constructive and accurate. Quite a few moans I've seen on Steam (not just for Stellaris) are down to personal preference, misinformation or just because they have an axe to grind. People are also much more likely to complain than to praise - an old adage I learned in my younger days working in Customer services was that people will tell 10 people if they don't like something, but only 3 if they do.
It's simple business, nothing more, nothing less. Basic rule of thumb, if a product isn't selling, you don't spend more money developing it further. As long as PDS continue to make money out of Stellaris and it's DLC's, it will be supported and expanded, otherwise there would be no business justification for the continued expenditure.
This this and this.
I'm tired of bobbleheads that don't have any characterization, traits that doesn't matter and the total absence of drama in galaxy etc.
This again - You're not in charge for PDS since you're a customer, nothing more, nothing less, so that it's not your concern, that PDS makes money since I'm pretty sure, that PDS has enough people to develop strategies in regards to this ...
It seems, that you believe, that you have to endure a flawed game in the presence, so that you have to "invest" money in this presence to (hopefully) get a better game in the future, but actually, it should be the other way around ...
PDS has to invest money in the past to offer a flawless game in the presence to (hopefully) sell it to the customers to fund a better game in the future ...
The business-factor of risk is passed onto you and that's not in your favour.
Last edited:
I agree with he OP that polish is required. But if you have a vision for a project that rewrites much of the stuff that you'd be polishing anyway, can you justify the time and expense?
I work with project managers on business improvement initiatives and the reality is that working to improve a flawed system vs a rework is rarely worth it unless it renders operations impossible.
I work with project managers on business improvement initiatives and the reality is that working to improve a flawed system vs a rework is rarely worth it unless it renders operations impossible.
actually DLC's pays for future development and just because you don't like it doesn't make it true. Also the development of this game is not going to slow down cause of what the OP wants. They still need to redo Diplomacy/Federations among other things to add
They have also been making an effort to fix things every single patch/update