|
ExtraNoise posted:The game is looking at the benefits from the perspective of the state. As players, playing as the state, we sacrifice power and control for morality. It's all very meta, and I think in a good way. That sounds really boring. Maybe you shouldn’t look at it from that perspective if it makes the game blander. This isn’t EU making the game that abstract is a really bad idea.
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 18:48 |
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:That sounds really boring. Maybe you shouldn’t look at it from that perspective if it makes the game blander. This isn’t EU making the game that abstract is a really bad idea. Is it bland? This is how I've looked at pretty much every Paradox game since Vic 2. Ruling with an iron fist is fun, but you're a real jerk to your people. Sometimes I like to play as the good guy. Sometimes I like to overwhelm the entire galaxy with enormous assimilating slaver-bots.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
ExtraNoise posted:Is it bland? This is how I've looked at pretty much every Paradox game since Vic 2. Ruling with an iron fist is fun, but you're a real jerk to your people. I meant making it just revolt risk reduction. That’s more something EU would do. Rome has to have more involved politics than that or what is even the point. I mean I never said that going full optimates is something you shouldn’t be able to do but giving the choice adds a lot to the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
populists aren't anarchists, they just want to use the state to accomplish different goals. you know, just like the other factions! every faction should have penalties and bonuses in line with what types of people their policies please and what types they offend. the roman populists in particular didn't want the state to sacrifice control - quite to the contrary, they wanted to amp up state actions to break up private concentration of wealth. it's quite easy to argue that the empire was the end result of roman populism; caesar was a populare and his enemies were optimates. they mostly died! the whole civil war amounted to a revolution in its effects on the "factional control" of rome, even if caesar was simply selfishly coveting power as he's often portrayed. augustus didn't exactly skimp on relief for the poor, either. the empire was a (semi-)stable equilibrium partially because the existence of the emperor allowed the state to bypass the aristocratic senate. Jazerus fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:19
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I meant making it just revolt risk reduction. That’s more something EU would do. Rome has to have more involved politics than that or what is even the point. It was just an example, dude. chill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:It was just an example, dude. chill. I’m uh not mad? I just said how I hoped it would be and if it’s a certain way I would be disappointed. I didn’t say anything negative or anything like that, even said if he wants to play a certain way that’s fine. Calm down a bit. CharlestheHammer fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:25
|
|
|
If the consensus is going to be "this game needs a lot of work after release, just like Stellaris does", and Stellaris has been out for what, 2 and a half years now and is still a WIP, that doesn't bode well for a game's long term future. That said, the game hasn't been released, so I know we're just pissing in the wind with lack of other news to discuss 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
Beamed posted:If the consensus is going to be "this game needs a lot of work after release, just like Stellaris does", and Stellaris has been out for what, 2 and a half years now and is still a WIP, that doesn't bode well for a game's long term future. To be fair, Stellaris is still a WIP because the original designer left and Wiz has vastly different ideas about how the game should be. I don't think Johan leaving to direct something else is very likely, at least immediately.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:37
|
|
|
Pylons posted:To be fair, Stellaris is still a WIP because the original designer left and Wiz has vastly different ideas about how the game should be. I don't think Johan leaving to direct something else is very likely, at least immediately. If the original designer had stayed on, would Stellaris be a better game, you're saying? EDIT: Just to clarify, not being combative, this point just doesn't really hold otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
Beamed posted:If the original designer had stayed on, would Stellaris be a better game, you're saying? You can’t know that for sure but it would be a different game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
Beamed posted:If the original designer had stayed on, would Stellaris be a better game, you're saying? I mean, "better" is subjective, but I do think the game would feel more "complete" without Wiz and the development team having to rebuild fundamental aspects of the game. Which is not to say either are better or worse outcomes - I vastly prefer Stellaris now, probably more than I would if Rikard had stayed on as game director and just expanded on the concepts that existed in the base game without needing to rebuild too much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:45
|
|
|
Paradox games tend to skimp on internal politics, since the player can't exactly be "part" of internal politics, because the player isn't a person, or a faction, or an ideology, the player is some kind of nebulous brain parasite hivemind taking control of leading statesmen and commanders. There's never been playable sub-state entities. Either they're stating that an attack on the plutocracy is an attack on the functioning of the state itself (since that's how what democracies of that time developed into), or they're stating that populism only arises in times of crisis and disappears once the crises resolve, and isn't viable long-term. Either way, they're basically reskinned malcontents. I doubt that there'll be much modeling of a greater populace to either suffer or thrive outside of manpower or revolt chances. Although there's probably a lot of potential to do interesting things with revolts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:07
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Paradox games tend to skimp on internal politics, since the player can't exactly be "part" of internal politics, because the player isn't a person, or a faction, or an ideology, the player is some kind of nebulous brain parasite hivemind taking control of leading statesmen and commanders. There's never been playable sub-state entities. Well I mean most of Crusader Kings is internal and if there is no real internal politics then having characters seems pointless. Though populari only existing during crisis is insanely dumb and you would need to know nothing of Roman history to think that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:10
|
|
|
stellaris isn't a WIP because henrik and rikard left - henrik and rikard left because it was a WIP still at launch. there was no clear vision on where the game should go next apart from iterating on the existing systems, which, when taken together, were still an incomplete game. wiz provided the vision needed to leave WIP status and establish the game's identity more firmly
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:15
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:stellaris isn't a WIP because henrik and rikard left - henrik and rikard left because it was a WIP still at launch. there was no clear vision on where the game should go next apart from iterating on the existing systems, which, when taken together, were still an incomplete game. wiz provided the vision needed to leave WIP status and establish the game's identity more firmly This implies that it's out of WIP status though. The game's release was 2 and a half years ago, and everyone is talking about how "next patch it will be good!!", just like they were last patch, and the one before that, still. That's.. not something to aspire to, as people are saying Rome is/will be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:17
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Paradox games tend to skimp on internal politics, since the player can't exactly be "part" of internal politics, because the player isn't a person, or a faction, or an ideology, the player is some kind of nebulous brain parasite hivemind taking control of leading statesmen and commanders. There's never been playable sub-state entities. You could probably get a pretty good media analysis out of Paradox games (with ancillary examples from things like Civ) about how games like that are naturally sort of opinionated (and often, after enough balance patches, unintentionally so) about what sort of ideology can work in a state just via sheer modifiers and numbers. In addition, the very obvious notion that since you play a state it naturally creates an opposition with things like anarchism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:17
|
|
|
Beamed posted:This implies that it's out of WIP status though. The game's release was 2 and a half years ago, and everyone is talking about how "next patch it will be good!!", just like they were last patch, and the one before that, still. That's.. not something to aspire to, as people are saying Rome is/will be. It’s good now. Next patch will make it better, yes, but duh why would we want a patch that made it worse?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:22
|
|
|
EU4 is still a work in progress because I’m looking forward to dharma I guess
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:23
|
|
|
Beamed posted:This implies that it's out of WIP status though. The game's release was 2 and a half years ago, and everyone is talking about how "next patch it will be good!!", just like they were last patch, and the one before that, still. That's.. not something to aspire to, as people are saying Rome is/will be. stellaris isn't really a WIP anymore, i'd be perfectly comfortable recommending it to someone now whereas at launch it was way too shallow to sustain interest for all that long. the "next patch it will be better" thing is a constant for all paradox games - visit the eu4 thread and you'll see it every time they announce a major patch. stellaris is going through continued major revamps because the design space allows for it and it's what wiz wants to do, not because it's still fundamentally broken
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
I don't want to derail this thread into Stellaris "is it good now" chat, but telling me the game is no longer a WIP is.. I think, a stretch, even if you're a huge fan of it. Obviously the game's a success by every other measure, so irrationally defending it like that is nonsensical. If Dharma had people saying "finally this game is ready", "they finally came in to fix the game's basic features" yeah you might have a point. Unfortunately.. Jazerus posted:the "next patch it will be better" thing is a constant for all paradox games
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:26
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I don't want to derail this thread into Stellaris "is it good now" chat, but telling me the game is no longer a WIP is.. I think, a stretch, even if you're a huge fan of it. To be fair people can say that it’s fixing it all they want doesn’t make them correct.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:29
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:To be fair people can say that it’s fixing it all they want doesn’t make them correct. maybe so. I think if they use it in reference to changing something as fundamental to the game as tiles, to bring in the elephant in the room, it's..meaningful, especially if the director themselves said it's been a change they've wanted since the start. But hey, this might be needless speculation and Imperator is as good as the map promises on release.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:32
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I don't want to derail this thread into Stellaris "is it good now" chat, but telling me the game is no longer a WIP is.. I think, a stretch, even if you're a huge fan of it. i mean, i don't view ripping out tiles as fixing a basic feature. the only currently-existing parts of the game that i feel need fixing rather than elaborating upon are diplomacy and ground combat. am i excited that tiles are being ripped out for a much more interesting system that also enables trade and other cool subsystems? absolutely. but i don't feel that it's solving a basic problem with the game's design in the way that the early patches were doing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:32
|
|
|
Beamed posted:maybe so. I think if they use it in reference to changing something as fundamental to the game as tiles, to bring in the elephant in the room, it's..meaningful, especially if the director themselves said it's been a change they've wanted since the start. I don't see replacing tiles as being a bigger change than institutions, the fort system (although that was over several patches), or development were in eu4. It's people's pet issue but that's not the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:35
|
|
|
Senor Dog posted:I don't see replacing tiles as being a bigger change than institutions, the fort system (although that was over several patches), or development were in eu4. I agree. Your examples weren't the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:36
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I agree. Your examples weren't the same thing. amazing posting
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:37
|
|
|
Yeah EU4 changed pretty fundamentally through patches but I guess it’s different because it didn’t start poorly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
Senor Dog posted:amazing posting What else do you want me to say? You agreed that your examples didn't quite match, that's.. about that. I'm not even really attacking Stellaris, but this idea that 2 years (instead of 2 and a half, then) after release is desirable for Imperator to be complete is one I firmly disagree with. CharlestheHammer posted:Yeah EU4 changed pretty fundamentally through patches but I guess it’s different because it didn’t start poorly. I don't think EU4 is a different game in the sense Stellaris is going to be, but either way, you're right that it's different when the whole point is completely changing the game's vision according to two different directors.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:42
|
|
|
Beamed posted:What else do you want me to say? You agreed that your examples didn't quite match, that's.. about that. I'm not even really attacking Stellaris, but this idea that 2 years (instead of 2 and a half, then) after release is desirable for Imperator to be complete is one I firmly disagree with. no that's not what I said. I said something being a pet issue doesn't mean it changing is fixing the game. I think you knew that though and are doing i don't even know what. e: I just reread that post and I probably didn't make it as clear as I thought since I quoted your most recent post instead of the one I was responding to. Sorry. feller fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
an issue is probably more that this system has to be somewhat generic to work with all the nations, not just rome
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 03:06
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Well I mean most of Crusader Kings is internal and if there is no real internal politics then having characters seems pointless. Though populari only existing during crisis is insanely dumb and you would need to know nothing of Roman history to think that. Well it looks like it's got as much internal politics as Crusader Kings, just, y'know, no more. Like I said before, it looks like the senate functions just like the council in conclave. You got your religious jerks, fighty jerks, wealthy jerks, practical jerks, and jerks who just don't like you no matter what. Not very complex, but it works for a game meant to think about states from external view rather than internal. I'm hoping that individual cities operate like vassals in CK2 that can revolt of their own accord. Political philosophies weren't fully coherent or ever-present back then, or at least if they were it wasn't fully documented, and if you want a game with that sort of attitude, where you can even "roleplay" a political philosophy, you want to go play Victoria. I don't think I know of any particular Athenian "populares" that adhered to some kind of consistent populist philosophy. Linear Zoetrope posted:You could probably get a pretty good media analysis out of Paradox games (with ancillary examples from things like Civ) Or vice-versa, even.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Well it looks like it's got as much internal politics as Crusader Kings, just, y'know, no more. Like I said before, it looks like the senate functions just like the council in conclave. You got your religious jerks, fighty jerks, wealthy jerks, practical jerks, and jerks who just don't like you no matter what. Not very complex, but it works for a game meant to think about states from external view rather than internal. I'm hoping that individual cities operate like vassals in CK2 that can revolt of their own accord. Populari was just a name, it’s just how you group them just like there wasn’t much in the way of any political ideology in those times but weirdly they will still be there for some reason. If it’s just conclave level by itself, well that just isn’t going to be enough frankly. Not even CK can get away with just conclave internal politics. CharlestheHammer fucked around with this message at 03:28 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 03:25
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I don't want to derail this thread into Stellaris "is it good now" chat, but telling me the game is no longer a WIP is.. I think, a stretch, even if you're a huge fan of it. that's a crock of poo poo. It could still be better but if you're gonna say Stellaris isn't a finished game then you could as well say that about 90% of games on the market. Stellaris has been "done" even to the standards of most Paradox spergs since 2.0 launched 6 months ago and by more reasonable standards was a perfectly fine game for a while before that. And Stellaris is a fairly unique case anyway, Paradox devs have talked about how doing a 4x was harder than they anticipated and they bit off more than they could chew with the switch in genres. Whereas Rome is about as iterative as a new franchise can be for Paradox, most of its fundamentals are the same thing Johan has been doing for 20 years now. I'll admit I'm a bit disappointed with most of the dev diaries so far and who knows how the game will actually turn out, but this doom mongering is... I originally wrote weird here, which it isn't at all for this stage before a launch I guess, but it's still dumb.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 03:32
|
|
|
Wait, but why would they name themselves snailiens?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 03:38
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I don't want to derail this thread into Stellaris "is it good now" chat, but telling me the game is no longer a WIP is.. I think, a stretch, even if you're a huge fan of it. Stellaris has been a complete game for a long time, I'd say even before 2.0 was released. It's definitely been improved with each update, but it's definitely also a complete game. I don't know where you're getting this "everyone says it's incomplete still" nonsense. The only people I can imagine saying that are the ones whose real agenda is to attack the Paradox DLC model and are using the updates as ammunition for that argument. I've not seen anyone complain about Stellaris though in a long, long time. Hell, even reddit seems to like it and those assholes hate everything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 03:58
|
|
|
Koramei posted:that's a crock of poo poo. It could still be better but if you're gonna say Stellaris isn't a finished game then you could as well say that about 90% of games on the market. Stellaris has been "done" even to the standards of most Paradox spergs since 2.0 launched 6 months ago and by more reasonable standards was a perfectly fine game for a while before that. ExtraNoise posted:Stellaris has been a complete game for a long time, I'd say even before 2.0 was released. It's definitely been improved with each update, but it's definitely also a complete game. Focusing in on the 6 months part of "2 years and 6 months" is kind of missing the point, holy poo poo. My original post was commenting that everyone going "oh well let's just do with Rome what we did for Stellaris if Rome is released ungood" is not really an approach we want Paradox to make. Hell, in one of my original posts I even said Stellaris was a success by any measure except how fun it was until whatever arbitrary point you want to set. I was impressed on release with what the game was technically, since it was such a departure from a normal Paradox game. Calm down. Mantis42 posted:Wait, but why would they name themselves snailiens? what if what we think of when we hear "snaliens" comes from them?!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 05:18
|
|
|
That was not at all what I was focusing on in my post either
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 05:36
|
|
|
Beamed's perspective on how well regarded Stellaris is may be skewed, I think he's mostly going off how it's talked about on a discord we're both part of, which, uh. Is not generally as well disposed to Paradox's recent output as this place is. People keep asking, "Is the game good yet?" after every patch and we keep going, "Um, uh, well, it's better?" I don't know, I do feel like Stellaris isn't there yet still. The game had been improved a lot even before 2.0, and that patch put war at least on a solid footing*, but the core gameplay loop, the 90% of your time that's taken up with upgrading buildings and shuffling pops around, is still the same tedious mindless garbage that it was at release. The next patch might finally fix that (I'm super hopeful about this, in fact), but the hour's a little late to be handing out medals for it. And then there's still the entire diplomatic sphere to complain about... *Actually, the more distance I get on 2.0 the less I like where it landed in terms of class/weapon balance. The war goal/war exhaustion system is great, and that's the important bit, but I think the whole ship design boondoggle needs another rework. Oh, and Koramei: honestly? Stellaris is probably better than 90% of games. It's definitely better than 99% of space 4Xs, but I'm not certain there's ever been a good space 4X. e: Regardless of whether you think Stellaris is a masterpiece or a warcrime, though, I think we should all be able to agree that this cult of personality around Wiz is weird and gross and needs to stop. If for no other reason than it's really unfair to all the other devs that work on these games. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 12:10 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 12:08
|
|
|
i don't play stellaris because everything i've seen tells me it was and is a terrible game. this means that i generally don't have much to add in the stellaris discussions, but makes looking at these "no joe, it's not a great game, it's the GREATEST game - nuh uh bob, i think it's just very very good" exchanges a somewhat odd experience
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 12:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 18:48 |
|
|
Prav posted:i don't play stellaris because everything i've seen tells me it was and is a terrible game. this means that i generally don't have much to add in the stellaris discussions, but makes looking at these "no joe, it's not a great game, it's the GREATEST game - nuh uh bob, i think it's just very very good" exchanges a somewhat odd experience It’s always a good idea to ignore the game is terrible good posts unless they give you something concrete to judge
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 14:11
|
|