Paradox detractor behavior, can someone explain it to me?

[Kugelbliz]

Hello,

My question is not related to Stellaris, but rather to the typical Paradox detractor behavior.

The game is great and has a lot of potential, that's for sure.

I won't expand again on everything that the game could've done right to make it more interesting, involving and more quality of life focused, a lot of people did that already very well, you can find a HUGE Reddit post with a lot of problems that need to be solved or improved. Some of those problems appears so rapidly and were so simple to fix that you ask yourself how they did, so I feel like it is wrong to say that the game in his current state is bad.

The typical answer to this kind of post is "They know, they wont fix it, in some months it would be a way worse game than now and it is so disappointing " and Paradox detractors seem to accept that with no problem. After few patches and a DLC, it will be perfect.

I feel like if this was any other publisher people would white knighting them constantly, I've seen so many publishers be completely supported by their community for less than that, and people are usually fine by the idea of "making a game great with a DLC"

Why is it okay for Paradox to do so?

I didn't buy that game to be awesome in 6 months, I bought it and enjoy it today, and I am going to come back and do a 10 hours game in 6 hours just to see if the expansiveness of the late game (just to quote an example) has improved. (Okay, maybe I won't because the game was so fun I've played 55 hours already, but most people that don't know Paradox are not going to)

I know that Paradox games have never been the greatest at launch, but I don't see this as a bad thing. I understand what they gain from that as a developer, why they couldn't wait 1 or 2 months to bring us a more polished version of the game (bills need paid or there wont be a game). While an release like this isn't optimal, it doesn't feel like what a monetary focused game maker would do.

Was funny to read, thank you. Just don't want to clarify to the other that if you read the discussion on my post, you'll clearly see that i am not a hater, I listen to arguments, i am respectful, etc

The discussion is at least interesting for me.

I guess you don't want an answer to this post, but if you do, i'll sum it up shortly. everything is Stellaris is basic, Diplomacy is just pushing the embassy button to improve relation, trade is just asking the first race you click on to trade your minerals against their credits and they ll do it even if they hate you, they barely accept trade for anything else when they love you anyway, so what they think seem to have no impact. Nothing has depth. How is it hard to understand that some people coming from their REALLY complex and in-depth games like CK2 are disappointed ?
There's almost no need to think about what you're doing

 

[CyaN]

How is it hard to understand that some people coming from their REALLY complex and in-depth games like CK2 are disappointed ?

They got complex and in-depth after years and years and years of post-release development. They shouldn't expect a newly released game to have the breadth and depth of a game with 10 major expansions released over a span of 4 years.

 

[Kugelbliz]

They got complex and in-depth after years and years and years of post-release development.

I bought CK2 at release, and I feel like it was way more complex and required you to think a lot more about your actions that what stellaris is doing, but I may be wrong, it's a long time ago and the game changed a lot

 

[Laexio]

wait waht? There are Wargoals!

they're very basic. conquer and vassalise.

 

[Shimmergloom]

I bought CK2 at release, and I feel like it was way more complex and required you to think a lot more about your actions that what stellaris is doing, but I may be wrong, it's a long time ago and the game changed a lot

Try to keep in mind, that CK2 had a CK1 at some point, and also stuff from the other "real world historical kind of games"-franchises like EU, Victoria and even HoI that they could draw upon. Stellaris is in large parts brand-new. Give them some leniency for the great game that they already delivered. It will only get better.

 

[blallo]

I bought CK2 at release, and I feel like it was way more complex and required you to think a lot more about your actions that what stellaris is doing, but I may be wrong, it's a long time ago and the game changed a lot

Well you can revert back to 1.0.0 and check for yourself. Eu4 1.0.0 does look bland

 

[Illanair]

Why does Paradox get a pass?

Because they're a small studio, and people grossly overestimate what a handful of people can do with a genre as complex as Grand Strategy (and in this case a pseudo GS/4X hybrid) in a certain timeframe and budget.

Because unlike most larger studios they actually deliver new content for their games for years to come. I can count on my fingers the number of AAA games I have bought in the last couple of years that has seen any new content (be it patches or actual content) half a year down the line.

Because Paradox deliver lots of FREE content, as well as give us plenty of small, optional DLC instead of cramming it into larger bundles and marking up the price.

 

[Laexio]

None of the "missing" features were announced or are considered staples of the genre. There was no reason to think these features would be present and therefore no reason to buy the game if you deem said features necessary. Again, something that wasn't supposed to be there can't be missing.

i disagree with them being staples of the genre. everyone is entitled to their opinion. i knew about them not being present and i bought the game anyway. i enjoyed the game and i don't regret buying it. that's not the point i'm trying to make.

 

[Thorbjorn42gbf]

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-explain-it-to-me.934459/page-2#post-21214920

 

[Kugelbliz]

Try to keep in mind, that CK2 had a CK1 at some point, and also stuff from the other "real world historical kind of games"-franchises like EU, Victoria and even HoI that they could draw upon. Stellaris is in large parts brand-new. Give them some leniency for the great game that they already delivered. It will only get better.

That's right, did not think about that

Why does Paradox get a pass?

Because they're a small studio, and people grossly overestimate what a handful of people can do with a genre as complex as Grand Strategy (and in this case a pseudo GS/4X hybrid) in a certain timeframe and budget.

Because unlike most larger studios they actually deliver new content for their games for years to come. I can count on my fingers the number of AAA games I have bought in the last couple of years that has seen any new content (be it patches or actual content) half a year down the line.

Because Paradox deliver lots of FREE content, as well as give us plenty of small, optional DLC instead of cramming it into larger bundles and marking up the price.

I have to tell that it's hard for me to see them as a small studio since the number of games they published and the quality of each of them. Are they really that smll? Wasn't CK2 very successful for example ? (in terms of sales)

EDIT: just used google, they are rather small indeed, impressive

 

[Sparhafoc]

Yes, I can explain it.

We live in Outrage Society. If you aren't outraged at every single thing that happens, you're basically a fool and a corporate tool. Gamer culture is deep into Outrage Society, and as such, the only possible reaction towards the release of the game is doing like everyone else does and accusing the devs of being thiefs and cheats, which shows to Outrage Society that you are a free spirit capable of free thinking.

Yep. Outrage and entitlement. Sadly, this is the culture of these fora.

The game's good fun, offers lots of play time, and will only get better - but the whinging will be endless every step of the way.

 

[Laexio]

Why does Paradox get a pass?

Because they're a small studio, and people grossly overestimate what a handful of people can do with a genre as complex as Grand Strategy (and in this case a pseudo GS/4X hybrid) in a certain timeframe and budget.

Because unlike most larger studios they actually deliver new content for their games for years to come. I can count on my fingers the number of AAA games I have bought in the last couple of years that has seen any new content (be it patches or actual content) half a year down the line.

Because Paradox deliver lots of FREE content, as well as give us plenty of small, optional DLC instead of cramming it into larger bundles and marking up the price.

paradox haven't been a "small" studio for a while now.
companies will release new content for games so long as it's reasonably profitable. i also don't consider paradox to be a small developer anymore. they're well known throughout the PC gaming world and their games are some of the best selling games on steam.

 

[Laexio]

Yep. Outrage and entitlement. Sadly, this is the culture of these fora.

you sound outraged. it's okay though. you're entitled to your outrage.

 

[Sparhafoc]

you sound outraged. it's okay though. you're entitled to your outrage.

You sound trolling, that's ok - it's your right to try and get a reaction. Sadly, it's not going to happen in this case!

Clearly, there was no 'outrage' in my post. If you think otherwise, there are things called 'dictionaries' that will help.

 

[Person012345]

Hello,

My question is not related to Stellaris, but rather to the typical Paradox detractor behavior.

The game is great and has a lot of potential, that's for sure.

I won't expand again on everything that the game could've done right to make it more interesting, involving and more quality of life focused, a lot of people did that already very well, you can find a HUGE Reddit post with a lot of problems that need to be solved or improved. Some of those problems appears so rapidly and were so simple to fix that you ask yourself how they did, so I feel like it is wrong to say that the game in his current state is bad.

The typical answer to this kind of post is "They know, they wont fix it, in some months it would be a way worse game than now and it is so disappointing " and Paradox detractors seem to accept that with no problem. After few patches and a DLC, it will be perfect.

I feel like if this was any other publisher people would white knighting them constantly, I've seen so many publishers be completely supported by their community for less than that, and people are usually fine by the idea of "making a game great with a DLC"

Why is it okay for Paradox to do so?

I didn't buy that game to be awesome in 6 months, I bought it and enjoy it today, and I am going to come back and do a 10 hours game in 6 hours just to see if the expansiveness of the late game (just to quote an example) has improved. (Okay, maybe I won't because the game was so fun I've played 55 hours already, but most people that don't know Paradox are not going to)

I know that Paradox games have never been the greatest at launch, but I don't see this as a bad thing. I understand what they gain from that as a developer, why they couldn't wait 1 or 2 months to bring us a more polished version of the game (bills need paid or there wont be a game). While an release like this isn't optimal, it doesn't feel like what a monetary focused game maker would do.

*sigh*

To play devils advocate for detractors (whether you were serious or not), I think they were typically expecting more and got bored of what is here fairly quickly. I think they also expect that everyone else did the same. From that standpoint, if you're comparing it to EU or CK after years of development, then you could well perceive it as lacking, especially if you didn't get as much fun out of it. You may not percieve your money as well spent and if I were in that situation, I would probably not be forgiving on the basis that "it will be fixed". However I am not, and I adore the game just as it is. I recognise it has bugs and faults and they should be fixed to ensure longevity, but I have already far and away got my money's worth from it, so if they fix it up I will be happy to just throw money at expansions that improve it even further.

 

[CyaN]

From that standpoint, if you're comparing it to EU or CK after years of development, then you could well perceive it as lacking, especially if you didn't get as much fun out of it. You may not percieve your money as well spent and if I were in that situation, I would probably not be forgiving on the basis that "it will be fixed".

Stellaris costs 40€, Crusader Kings II costs around 200€. For that price, it might as well be five times as good as Stellaris.

 

[Laexio]

it's your right to try and get a reaction. Sadly, it's not going to happen in this case!

Clearly, there was no 'outrage' in my post. If you think otherwise, there are things called 'dictionaries' that will help.

 

[Chiron]

Paradox and its DLC model seems to be one of the best ones out there, coupled with frequent sales. Well worth supporting them.


I mean you could be reliant on the likes of Sega and Total War devs or EA and then you'd be fucked.

There is a lot of resentment for the DLC model out there sadly and because Paradox does have such a lot of DLC for often very minor things "completests" insist they are being short changed by having to buy 3 extra character portraits but getting a major revision or expansion to gameplay for for under a tenner.

 

[Jolly Reaper]

wargoals are very basic. they'll be changed/edited in one of the first few DLCs. mark my words.

Asimov update includes "More war goals: Humiliate, Open Borders, Make Tributary, etc.", as well as many other sorely needed improvements to diplomacy.

It would indeed be irritating to pay for that, but all that those greedy corporate sods at Paradox are milking me for is some bandwidth. Was it disappointing that Stellaris wasn't quite up to the level CK2/EU4 were at launch? Sure, but only mildly, because it wasn't too bad either, and I knew there'd be plenty of free improvements in the pipeline. Besides, MP is already fun.

 

[Laexio]

Asimov update includes "More war goals: Humiliate, Open Borders, Make Tributary, etc.", as well as many other sorely needed improvements to diplomacy.

that's good to hear. i'm glad there's free content coming in a free update. i stand by my points though; i don't believe paradox would be doing a free update (other than bug fixes), but for negative feedback. if everyone said the game was fine and dandy, they'd have no incentive to add free content.