What will the next Phenotype DLC be?

[bronze Void poison]

That kind of DLC should be more than just art, like plantoid are, some new mechanics should be in too.

1. Organic, but vastly different biology - ammonia, liquid methane, that sort of things, living on normally unihabitable planets.
2. Inorganic life forms - gaseous, energetic, crystal, etc. living on stars, gas giants or in open space.
3. Cybernetic or fully machine.

And of course, the pinnacle of all creation:
4. Space catgirls.

I can mostly under stand but why catgirls?

 

[Milten]

That kind of DLC should be more than just art, like plantoid are, some new mechanics should be in too.
...
4. Space catgirls.

What kind of unique mechanics do you expect?

 

[Monphat]

Personally would like to see next phenotype packs released in following order:

1. Amphibioids (is that even a word?) are the most obvious choice for the first pack. Toads, salamanders, caecilians etc. would make good addition to the game. Considering sheer amount of phenotypical variety among this group making distinct portraits would not be a problem. Bonus points for not requiring special mechanics: Stellaris amphibians would survive in any environment because each planet has at least some amount of water.
2. Life Aquatic pack. I'd really love to see various fish phenotypes being added in this game. In addition, mammalians should get dolphins, reptilians should get crocodiles, more stuff for molluscoids. Special mechanics are not really needed, but creatures in this pack would need their own detailed city landscape and ships to make it look like they live in some sort of aquariums.
3. Life is Strange pack with really bizarre creatures under special category. Species wearing artificial suits, low-gravity species, high-gravity ones etc. There are lots of sci-fi works to get inspiration from.
4. Earthoids pack. Nothing too crazy, just more Earth species-inspired portraits across the board. More mammalians, please, for me this group is by far the worst, least inspired and looks plain bad compared to excellent work done with other groups. More avians, more insectoids etc.
5. Silicoids pack for true sci-fi experience. There is a lot that can be done here but obvious problem is that this group may need some sort of special mechanics for immersion. That's a question for a later day, when game mechanics would take more stable form.

 

[TheAtreides84]

Let me put it this way: if the game applied particular Traits or Trait-like modifiers based on the category of portrait you picked, I would be a very unhappy camper. If its completely separate and in no way influenced by the type of portrait a species has (for player or AI), I'm fine with it (but it should probably just be part of the existing Traits mechanic than something brand new).

Whatever, randomize it, disable it for the AI, I don't care and don't even understand your logic. That's not the problem.

If the game in no way models the exact particulars of a species mindset, then we can all RP our species however we like.

We can play D&D all we want, fact is these things will exist just in our heads and not in the game.

The idea that species that share certain visual characteristics would behave, think, or develop technology along the same lines is stupid and I hate it. Someone already mentioned naked molerats- eusocial mammals- as an example of why you wouldn't want "archetypes" to be locked to a single phenotype... but that misses entirely that making these arbitrary categories of lifestyles is stupid in the first place.

The "someone" was actually me. It's almost like you don't read. And the same someone will tell you that yes, physical characteristics have a bearing on behavior and development of species. Feuerbach famously said that humans were an intelligent species because of their hands, and it's a well established fact that having appendages to manipulate tools is a powerful boost in the evolutionary development of certain areas of the brain. Same has having a versatile vocal apparatus is very useful in the development of language. There are lots of exception, obviously, but if you actually bothered to read you would by now know that no one is calling for a 1:1 portrait-to-trait correspondence.

You want a eusocial species? Conformist, Communal, Rapid Breeders, whatever defect-Trait you want for flavour.

And it will behave nothing like an eusocial species. It will behave like every other species in the game with an added morale bonus.

Or build them totally differently! Up to you!

Up to me what? I don't have the tools. I can't have a species with biologically different castes of citizens and queen-based reproduction like hymenoptera. My aquatic species will just be a normal species which likes certain planets, while developing a civilization underwater would lead to a totally different perception of space and distances. If your idea of a thing being in the game is "well, I can always make it up with my imagination" don't really think this conversation can go anywhere.

I absolutely do not want to see insectoids portrayed as hive mind society by default, nor do I want to see reptilians portrayed as emotionless slavers, or felines as a honorable warrior race. Those tropes have been done to death.

So I don't understand why having them all portrayed basically like humans in rubber costumes is fine.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

The "someone" was actually me. It's almost like you don't read.

Mostly I don't care enough to keep arguing, but lemme just leave you with this: it's almost like on a site with really generic avatars and long, drawn-out threads, I lose track of who posted what talking point sometimes.

 

[Kat Tsun]

Flatships for humanoids, like in the loading screens. Also tentacle monsters, perhaps holding little hand puppets with button eyes and pleated skirts. A diplomatic screen animation is one of the tentacle monster's tentacles adjusting the puppet so it doesn't fall off after gesticulating excitedly. Could equally be "cuties 2.0" or "monsters from the id".

I can mostly under stand but why catgirls?

I'd be fine with more Cute things, like Squirrel People to go with the Space Foxes, or space anime girls.

They could have big eyes like the Cute Gecko.

 

[Wade Smith]

After more consideration...
I hope for Ichthyoid then Lithoid then Anneloid.

(then a sort of Plasmaoid/Energoid)?...(some sort of plasma or energy species)?

Then we would have, I think, all imagined types covered in a nice dozen.
1. Humanoid
2. Mammalian (and marsupial)
3. Avian (feathered/bird)
4. Reptilian (and amphibian and dinosaur)
5. Molluscoid
6. Arthropoid (insect and crustacean)
7. Fungoid
8. Plantoid
9. Ichthyoid (Earth aquatic-like APPEARANCE)
10. Lithoid (silicon, crystal, mineral)
11. Anneloid (worm-like)
12. Plasmaoid (or Energoid?)

 

[Wyvax]

I think it would be cool to release themed packages that are even narrower in scope that don't add any new phenotype but more variety to one or more of of already established ones. Just a quick idea of my own for example. Dinosaurs and Dragons: this would be a themed pack that would add quite a bit to the reptilians of course, but also perhaps two or three portraits to the avians and even one to the mammalian and insectoid respectively if they're illustrated right. That's just one really, really narrow theme, but you could get out of that portraits that are really beautiful, intimidating, ugly, creepy, unnerving, threatening, inquisitive and just plain weird. We can get really nice effects just by mixing up perceived cliches to the phenotypes, just look at the mammalian with the chelicera. I personally wouldn't mind some nasty looking furry mammalian monster race with the traditional slack-jawed horror-mouth associated with theropod anatomy, or a lithe exoskeletal draconic lizard being. See? Variety!!

 

[Rotkohl]

reptilians should get crocodiles.

Look at Wyvax' Avatar; we already have crocodiles.
Other than that, your ideas are awesome!

What I think is sorely lacking, is a vulture-like species. We have so much variety in the avian phenotype, but there`s no species looking like the coolest birds around?!

 

[Caspoi]

I wish to point out that the phenotypes are only an approximation based on their appearance. None of the portraits in Stellaris actually represent insects for example, they show insectoids or "creatures that look like insects". Applying insect stereotypes on an advanced intelligent alien species that has zero relation to Earth insects (which is actually far less than we, humans have) is simply wrong, especially considering that said stereotypes (such as insects being hive based creatures) are of dubious accuracy even if you just limited yourself to the species living on Earth. Furthermore it would really limit the player's roleplaying ability if they where limited in what species concept they want to create by what portrait they chose as well the wonder at meeting a new species in the game if all you have to do is look at it's portrait and say "yeah now I know what kind of empire this is".

 

[Hawk_za]

PLEASE please please let it be a bug or xenomorph type dlc ( like zerg and bugs and arachnids)

 

[Wyvax]

Look at Wyvax' Avatar; we already have crocodiles.
Other than that, your ideas are awesome!

What I think is sorely lacking, is a vulture-like species. We have so much variety in the avian phenotype, but there`s no species looking like the coolest birds around?!

Considering we got a DLC with cuties, I wouldn't mind one about uglies. I could definitely see vultures in there.

 

[Zaltys]

There's no bat-like species either, or anything that looks even remotely like a rodent. I'd like to see a couple of such species added at some point.

 

[Chaos_TLW]

There's no bat-like species either, or anything that looks even remotely like a rodent. I'd like to see a couple of such species added at some point.

Isn't the very creepy ghoul-ish like Mammalian portrait supposed to be a bat? Always looked like one to me.

 

[Zaltys]

Isn't the very creepy ghoul-ish like Mammalian portrait supposed to be a bat? Always looked like one to me.

Is that what it is supposed to be? I don't see the resemblance, but that would explain why it's in Mammal instead of Humanoid. ...I always thought that it's just some ghoulish humanoid.

 

[jalapen0]

We have cuties. Now we need monsters.

 

[Vanhal]

I can mostly under stand but why catgirls?

The name of the DLC triggered me on. Utopia is possible only when it contain a catgirls.

What kind of unique mechanics do you expect?

Cuteness oveload. Suddenly catgirls, thousands of them. Kicking butts over the universe (in case of said catgirls actually being a Ctarl-Ctarl).

 

[MateuszS]

BTW what about mythical creatures DLC? Vampires, werevolves, catgirls( ), devils...

 

[Wyvax]

@Vanhal No way, they should be quite frisky yes, but otherwise domestic and provide a substantial +30% happiness for all xenophile pops, +20% for xenophobe and +25% for everyone else. This based solely upon my real life experience with my ex.

 

[Kat Tsun]

We have cuties. Now we need monsters.

View attachment 239265

Some people might consider this a cutie.

Cuteness oveload. Suddenly catgirls, thousands of them. Kicking butts over the universe (in case of said catgirls actually being a Ctarl-Ctarl).

Only if you accept that the catgirls will either be humanoid portrait with space fox ears (they look just like a kitty's!), or some sort of hyperreal anime character with big Gecko-esque eyes that Anschlusses the entire uncanny valley. Not that it's bad, but what you're imagining as cuties might be more crawlies.

Actual animes would look goofy next to the hyperreal portraits of Stellaris.