Stellaris: Galaxy Command available now on mobile devices.

[Nikolai]

Not sure relaunching a game with proven theft issues is wise, but best of luck for Paradox I guess. I won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

 

[Sigma 582]

It sounds like PDX should have made their mobile game(s) themselves and in good PDX tradition rather than trusting it to a shady ill-reputed company.

 

[Marmelado]

when talking about dependency there is a distinction from physical dependency and psycological , in this game there is barely a "action\reward" dependency push . and this is way over the top of talking about making this kind of "market practice" as illegal .

Not really sure what you want to say here. Physical addictions are pretty much always accompanied by psychological ones, just as psychological addictions pretty much always have physical component. This is a default position of neuroscience today and it is hard to refute. Saying that you are against ethanol and nicotine addictions but alright with dopamine is pretty weird.

And no, I am not sure where you get the impression, but I have not talked about making such games illegal?

there is no gambling in the game, all that it gives you , its exatly what you pay for ..

again, gambling dependecy is something that is born from the idea that the "next time will be the one" , and this game doesn't have something like this, only frustating you in time-consuming procedures and offering you an easy solution for money .

Not sure that you understood what I was writing about. Gambling addiction does not come from an idea, it comes from excessive dopamine that makes a brain vulnerable to an idea. Neurologically, there is no major difference between someone spending money right here and now to win a jackpot in a casino or someone spending money right here and now to win a useless trophy in a raffle for charity or someone spending money right here and now to get a bonus in a videogame. Dopamine addiction is about a reward, what is a suitable reward varies from an addict to an addict.

Glad you mentioned time-consuming procedures, because... Why are they so time-consuming? Maybe because a healthy person would either abandon the game or wait, while a dopamine addict would just pay to satisfy the urge?

Also, you talk as if gambling was a big no-no that must be banned, but by your own logic, it should actually be deregulated as it is merely a psychological issue. Why exactly do you think gambling is bad?

well, i mean, if you go so deep on the malfuctioning dopamine , gaming its not realy the only problem in your life, since you can get addicted to anything that give you any easy sadisfaction . then again, its not the job of companies to take care of special cases .

Yes, people do get addicted to a lot of things. But there is a difference between a special case when someone develops an obsession with a company's product (there is a case of a person who watched same movie in theater for 30 times) without a firm's intention to get that, and a special case when such a person is actively hunted upon by a company that developed a dopamine generator trap knowing full well what it is doing. In the first case it is a personal tragedy, in the second it is an unethical business practice.

 

[cloudwasher]

Reputation and good will with your customer are two valuable things that are hard to get these days. I’ve been a Paradox fan and customer for the last 19 years because they have produced quality products that they’ve taken pains to maintain and update years after being first released. But this app flies in the face of that. I didn’t think I’d ever see a bare bones pay to win minimum effort zero complexity reskin game coming from Paradox and quite frankly it makes me really sad that no one at the company seems to realize the potential brand damage and loss of trust that comes with a cash grab like this is far more costly than whatever meager amount of money your p2w micro transactions will generate. I just hope someone comes to their senses and kills this project.

 

[Verx90]

Not really sure what you want to say here. Physical addictions are pretty much always accompanied by psychological ones, just as psychological addictions pretty much always have physical component. This is a default position of neuroscience today and it is hard to refute. Saying that you are against ethanol and nicotine addictions but alright with dopamine is pretty weird.

I realy don't want to force a moderator to delete my\our post again .

so i will try to stop this by saying that it is right that those element are both present , but the difference from psicological dependency and physical dependency its that you can cure psicological dependency anytime ( and i'm not saying its izy) but the phisical dependency require most of the time a gradual reduction of the drug, because its not only your mind that require it ( with varius reasons, even dopamine) but litteraly your body require said substance , and stopping it without knowledge and abrudctly may have grave repercursion .

and there is difference from what generate the dependency , if you started the dependency by psicological factors, or if the drug ( like eroine) generate immediate phisical dependency .

paragonating microtransaction to eroine , its going over the top .

Yes, people do get addicted to a lot of things. But there is a difference between a special case when someone develops an obsession with a company's product (there is a case of a person who watched same movie in theater for 30 times) without a firm's intention to get that, and a special case when such a person is actively hunted upon by a company that developed a dopamine generator trap knowing full well what it is doing. In the first case it is a personal tragedy, in the second it is an unethical business practice.

again, this is a society bias idea , you don't go around calling cigarette\alchool companies as drug dealers , but start assaulting a compani as "unethical" because they usa a microtransaction in a free game ( that actualy, don't require to use money for it any of it, if you looked at the game ; they just made mental pressure by the time consumption , its a soft p2w meccanic) .

so, you start calling any society that work with dependency inducing "products" that try to look for potential aquirents , and i will have nothing against your argument .

still, the game is realy basic and had potential, it was kinda wasted for a generic *kinda* p2w , so yea, not the best title for paradox standard ; but from this to call them unethical i find it a bit excessive.

that said, i realy don't wish to keep going on this discussion , so i will read your reply and we will go our ways .

 

[Officer Crabtree]

The thing is, these 'games' are designed to target a very specific democraphic, problematic spenders, referred to as 'whales' in the industry, any other players are there just to generate interest and attract more 'whales'. The 99% of players who spend no more than a few quid, if anything at all, are just there to generate 'engagement' and attract more 'whales' to the game. While people don't go around calling tabacco companies 'drug dealers', it's pretty well established by now that they enriched themselves over the backs of the addicted and spent the proceeds on suppressing attempts to migitage the damaging effects of smoking. This kind of psychological manipulation can be just as damaging as a physical addicion like smoking, spending your life savings on microtransactions won't give you lung cancer, but it will leave you bankrupt and broken.

Consider the fact that the Stellaris 'game' is a Nova Empire clone that is designed to appeal to Stellaris fans. Consider the target demographic for this kind of 'game'. Not a very pretty picture if you ask me.

 

[Marmelado]

I realy don't want to force a moderator to delete my\our post again .

Alright, that is not my intention either.

so i will try to stop this by saying that it is right that those element are both present , but the difference from psicological dependency and physical dependency its that you can cure psicological dependency anytime ( and i'm not saying its izy) but the phisical dependency require most of the time a gradual reduction of the drug, because its not only your mind that require it ( with varius reasons, even dopamine) but litteraly your body require said substance , and stopping it without knowledge and abrudctly may have grave repercursion .

and there is difference from what generate the dependency , if you started the dependency by psicological factors, or if the drug ( like eroine) generate immediate phisical dependency .

paragonating microtransaction to eroine , its going over the top .

See, what made me reply in the first place is that you seem to vastly underestimate chemical component of "non-physical" addictions as if it was merely a mental problem. But that's not correct, at least according to contemporary science. Normally a (qualified) therapist working with a person suffering from gambling problem would prescribe dopamine inhibitors as auxiliary but neccessary addition to psychotherapy. It is the same principle as you describe with other drugs, body develops a need for the harmful substance and a medical intervention is needed to detoxify a patient's system. Difference with addictions to external drugs is that, roughly, detoxication comes first and psychotherapy comes second. As far as I know, it is possible to overcome psychological addiction without taking medicine, but that requires incredible amount of willpower on part of the patient, so it is very very far from a normal case.

In other words, dopamine or adrenaline or other internally produced addictive substances are not really different from extenally ingested substances like ethanol or nicotine. It is all drug addiction, even if in case of psychological addictions it is not visible. And yes, while psychological addictons do primarily operate in a mental realm and can be cured within that realm, the physical component should never be underestimated, especially when we talk about causes or treatments.

again, this is a society bias idea , you don't go around calling cigarette\alchool companies as drug dealers , but start assaulting a compani as "unethical" because they usa a microtransaction in a free game ( that actualy, don't require to use money for it any of it, if you looked at the game ; they just made mental pressure by the time consumption , its a soft p2w meccanic) .

so, you start calling any society that work with dependency inducing "products" that try to look for potential aquirents , and i will have nothing against your argument .

True, ethanol and nicotine are often called "socially acceptable drugs". However, it depends on where are you from, but in Western countries today people generally do consider cigarette companies to be "evil" entities and tolerance to smoking is going down every year, including legislation and enforcement of anti-tobacco regulations. Alcohol is trickier because its consumption is nearly as old as humanity itself, according to some researchers, but society today certainly does not welcome heavy drinking, especially of distilled alcohol, so it is not like alcohol companies get away with a stellar reputation.

 

[Coffee Fox]

And when will people in the United States be able to play? Great, soft-launch... but many of us aren't in Canada or Australia or wherever else it's launching.

 

[Blayze]

What's this about a $150 macrotransaction?

 

[Plastic_Duke]

The fact that Paradox as a publisher is still trying to double down on this garbage is really concerning. All I can say is that I'm disappointed, I wanted to believe you're above this, but turns out you're not.

Sadly (but also logically), no publicly traded company in its right mind is. Once you let finance rule you, you will obey what finance wants first and foremost - the biggest possible piece of the cake. To expect otherwise would be foolish, at best.

And to be clear, I'm not endorsing this mind set, nor the commercial behaviour that comes with it.

 

[Badesumofu]

again, gambling dependecy is something that is born from the idea that the "next time will be the one" , and this game doesn't have something like this, only frustating you in time-consuming procedures and offering you an easy solution for money .

This is very wrong. Gambling addiction arises because the experience of gambling hooks into a person's reward systems. There are loads of gambling addicts who understand full well that they are not going to win, and that if they do come in and win one night, that they are going to lose all that again before long. Yes, there are some gambling addicts who think they can pay off their gambling debts by doing more gambling to win money, and others who think all sorts of other things. What they have in common is that their brains are rewarding them with dopamine when they gamble which makes them want to do it more.

I've picked out this part of your post as an example because I have a lot of experience with gamblers so I know a bit about what I'm on about. But my point is really that your understanding of addiction is very wrong.

 

[Dnote]

It sounds like PDX should have made their mobile game(s) themselves and in good PDX tradition rather than trusting it to a shady ill-reputed company.

We're not going to try and transition our current studios to do free to play games, that would be a fools errand (been there, done that, didn't work, at previous employers). Our primary business is still premium games with DLC.

What's this about a $150 macrotransaction?

Currency pack, spending behavior on mobile indicates that a very small number of people buy a bulk load of currency then spend it over a long period of time. Don't really understand why anyone would do this, but that's why it is there.

Sadly (but also logically), no publicly traded company in its right mind is. Once you let finance rule you, you will obey what finance wants first and foremost - the biggest possible piece of the cake. To expect otherwise would be foolish, at best.

And to be clear, I'm not endorsing this mind set, nor the commercial behaviour that comes with it.

Well, we need to make money sure, but the strategic intent is actually to reach more players, the same reason we did console, if premium would work on mobile, we would've done that.

 

[Gilad Pellaeon]

What is PDX's stance towards microtransactions and monetization models that have been shown again and again to be exploitative and harmful to those who fall for them, and why does PDX insist on using those very same practices as opposed to opting for a less harmful (even if then less profitable) approach?

 

[alexlock]

What is PDX's stance towards microtransactions and monetization models that have been shown again and again to be exploitative and harmful to those who fall for them, and why does PDX insist on using those very same practices as opposed to opting for a less harmful (even if then less profitable) approach?

It's a pointless question. First of all, it won't be answered. Second of all, we already know PDX's stance towards MTX - i mean, Galaxy Command is still there.

P.S: The first one.

 

[Plastic_Duke]

Currency pack, spending behavior on mobile indicates that a very small number of people buy a bulk load of currency then spend it over a long period of time. Don't really understand why anyone would do this, but that's why it is there.

I can think of only two reasons myself. Those people are either very rich, and eager to squeeze any bit of fun they can get from any kind of source, or, if not, in very big psychological distress. Probably the latter, since I hope that well-off people have way more amusing and satisfying things to do with their time and money.

Well, we need to make money sure, but the strategic intent is actually to reach more players, the same reason we did console, if premium would work on mobile, we would've done that.

From a purely financial standpoint, I don't think there's such a difference between "reaching more players" and "making more money". Maybe I am the cold-hearted one here, but they do seem pretty equivalent to me. Although no two players are absolutely equivalent in how much money they bring. And that's probably why PDX is making a push in the mobile gaming market now. Big, big, and juicy market, full of compulsive spenders. Many many dough to be made, I'm sure.

You just need to balance that with what hurting the trust of others ethically concerned customers will make you loose on the other hand. But it seems that someone has already done the math and decided it was a risk they could take. And that someone is probably right, unfortunately.

(Also, I personally never asked for premium games on mobile. I would never buy or play those anyway. I don't usually play with my phone or portable consoles.)

 

[Dnote]

What is PDX's stance towards microtransactions and monetization models that have been shown again and again to be exploitative and harmful to those who fall for them, and why does PDX insist on using those very same practices as opposed to opting for a less harmful (even if then less profitable) approach?

Not sure the company has an official stance, but in regards to how I've been planning our approach forward for strategy games, we're interested in finding more acceptable ways to do free to play. First, we need to build knowledge and understanding though, then we can expand to trying our own things.

Its actually a topic I'd love to talk more about, but this isn't the right place for it.

 

[Alfray Stryke]

Not sure the company has an official stance, but in regards to how I've been planning our approach forward for strategy games, we're interested in finding more acceptable ways to do free to play. First, we need to build knowledge and understanding though, then we can expand to trying our own things.

Its actually a topic I'd love to talk more about, but this isn't the right place for it.

How about on the Paradox Podcast or a talk at PDXCON?

 

[Sigma 582]

@Dnote I appreciate you engaging in the dialog with us players amidst the criticism gushed in PDX's direction. It's reassuring to know that PDX keeps its focus on making solid games with healthy monetization model (namely premium games with DLCs). You guys are good at what you are doing and it's great you're keeping it up.

Regarding mobiles, I'm curious if you considered "f2p + payed DLC" model as an alternative? Some mobile versions of board games do payed DLC (Ticket to ride, Carcassonne, Pandemic).
Those titles also charge for the base game though because they are already famous and popular enough to ask for money upfront. But if like you said Stellaris is not THAT popular (yet ), making the base game free could work to hook people up and convince them to invest in expansions over time.

This model would probably take much longer to return investments than microtransaction-based quick cashgrab but wouldn't long-term strategy benefit from good reputation and high esteem among devoted player base?

PS: if this is not the right place to talk about these things, would would be the right place? Looks like a lot of people are interested in this topic.

 

[Dnote]

How about on the Paradox Podcast or a talk at PDXCON?

I was thinking of hijacking a live stream at some point, probably a Stellaris one given that's our current mobile game.

@Dnote I appreciate you engaging in the dialog with us players amidst the criticism gushed in PDX's direction. It's reassuring to know that PDX keeps its focus on making solid games with healthy monetization model (namely premium games with DLCs). You guys are good at what you are doing and it's great you're keeping it up.

Regarding mobiles, I'm curious if you considered "f2p + payed DLC" model as an alternative? Some mobile versions of board games do payed DLC (Ticket to ride, Carcassonne, Pandemic).
Those titles also charge for the base game though because they are already famous and popular enough to ask for money upfront. But if like you said Stellaris is not THAT popular (yet ), making the base game free could work to hook people up and convince them to invest in expansions over time.

This model would probably take much longer to return investments than microtransaction-based quick cashgrab but wouldn't long-term strategy benefit from good reputation and high esteem among devoted player base?

PS: if this is not the right place to talk about these things, would would be the right place? Looks like a lot of people are interested in this topic.

I don't think the way we do DLC would work with the player behavior of mobile gamers, they don't tend to stick around long enough to buy DLC (or multiple DLC).

 

[Alfray Stryke]

I was thinking of hijacking a live stream at some point, probably a Stellaris one given that's our current mobile game.

If you do that, can I ask that you let us post questions to the forum in advance as some of us can't watch the livestreams at work and ask questions in chat?

And although I may fundamentally disagree with many aspects of your current mobile game, I do appreciate your answering questions and the back and forth that's occurring here.