Not to be annoying, but the right thing to do would have been to not release it like this to begin with.
Regardless, I'm still very excited for the 4.0 changes to the game, great concept!
- 3
- 2
- 1
-
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.
Not to be annoying, but the right thing to do would have been to not release it like this to begin with.
Regardless, I'm still very excited for the 4.0 changes to the game, great concept!
True, that was awful. Thankfully, they got improved at some point, and trade hubs now generate 8 trade each:
By the way, now that gestalts use trade too, it sounds like it's the best time to allow solar panels and trade hubs for everyone.
- 3
- 1
Woops. I got so used to these being useless that I never even thought to check how they got changed in 4.0.
Any fix for virtual ascension making enormous numbers of civilians? I tried playing and ended up with 70k civilians on my home habitat by year 2280, eating all my energy and lagging the game so much I couldn't continue playing. Same thing happened on other habitats but with less pops. I had 180k total pops across 5 habitats, almost all civilians for whatever reason.
Dev dairies are primarily a marketing tool why do you think they do them, I'm sure dev's like showing their work and communicating with fans but there is also certainly a business sense behind it.
You are correct that I am not legally owed any explanation (Neither would a shareholder btw), but I am probably legally owed a solution within a reasonable timeframe as a good I purchased is defective within the timeframe where I should reasonable be able to expect it to keep functioning.
But regardless of the legality of anything, the way things have been going with PDX recently does not really inspire any confidence in me as a consumer that doing business with them in the future is a good idea, and the less open communications from PDX are the less slack I am willing to cut them when they mess up, it is a give and take.
And while I can pick out some form of answers to my initial questions from the recent response, its not exactly a very clear or open retrospective look on how this could have happened, But I hope we might get some form of retrospective dev dairy somewhere in the future that does that.
- 5
BIg change added same time as major DLC took longer to implement than expected.
That is exactly what happened.
You bought something digital. Its not defective. Theyre working on fixing it. In fact, they have been fast about it, faster than other devs might have been. And no, you are not "legally owed a solution...". You end up with what you paid for. Maybe you and some others on here who talk about scams, legal matters and suing should read the EULA.
Im not satisfied with the new planet UI and function but i wait and see how things turn out. Im sure a mod could eventually get me back to the pre-4.0 layout, so im not worried. And im also quite satisfied with Paradox games, with the exception of some of their games coming with excessive DLC/expansions at steep prices on release, but i can live with that. You see, im not here to praise Paradox but the Stellaris devs are doing their best to get the game back to a properly playable state.
- 4
- 2
At some point they knew that, had the option to delay it, and chose not to.
Steam's rules are a red herring, they require sticking to the listed quarters in season passes. The quarter this is listed for wasn't up until the end of June.
I think we can make some pretty safe assumptions here, there WAS a point at which they chose to continue despite knowing it wouldn't be ready. When is a separate question that doesn't change my response. A point where I would guess they knew is when almost everyone playing the beta started screaming from the rooftops that they wouldn't be ready by 5/5 literally the day they announced that release date. They realistically should have earlier, but I'm willing to believe that they were overly optimistic.
They're not legally required to tell us, but we aren't legally required to buy any of their future products. Their choice to communicate better than having an open beta, ignoring the feedback, telling us it was a great DLC and patch, and then going live with a flaming septic tank of a patch (or to not communicate better at all) would certainly influence my choice.
Thus far, they're communicating better but not well. Primarily, we don't know what they intend to change to stop this from happening again beyond vague promises (vague promises we had as recently as after the previous DLC, and which obviously didn't come to anything) and a statement of attempting to fix this before their summer break. That first part is, again, worthless without more detail - mainly because we already had exactly that once and they got worse instead of improving - and the second part is tentatively good but critically lacks any mention of when said summer break might be, which would influence, quite frankly, how much it should be trusted. It also lacks clear descriptors of whether they mean fixing the bugs, or the bugs and the design flaws by the summer break. If the former, when will the design flaws be addressed? No idea.
- 1
- 1
Whether bought video games are a good or a licence to access has not been settled as far as I am aware.
It is defective, because the advertised (Literally on the steam page) feature/game mode "Multiplayer" does not work. If that is not defective I don't know what is....
That means what was paid for is a DLC/Game with multiplayer, which does not work, so you did most certainly not get what you paid for.
Law supersedes EULA's, and most EULA's are filled with unenforceable clauses that bank on no one being able/willing to fight it.
Giving how wrong you are on all these things I think it might be you that needs to educate themselves a bit on how things work from a legal perspective.
Regardless I am not the one who started bringing up legal matters because noone is gonna sue anyone or anything like that, all I said is that this situation makes me feel kinda scammed which is simply voicing an emotion, not a threat of legal action.
You are the one that brought up "All the communication you get on here is a courtesy, not a requirement" and thereby bringing the conversation into the legal realm of "What are you actually owed as a consumer".
Overal I actually really like how Stellaris has developed over its lifetime, and I generally think the Stellaris team has one of the better communication styles of all the PDX teams. Bugs and issues happen, games are hard, but completely bricking one of your main gamemodes/styles for what looks to be probably more than 2 weeks is such a colossal failure combined with the fact we still have no statement on how this could be allowed to happen, or even a statement on when such an explanation can be expected that I am not inclined to cut them much slack.
- 3
- 2
You get civilians? After I went Virtual, all my civilians disappeared and never came back.
@Eladrin Can you please look at EvoPred/Hive/Genesis Guides??? All you need to do is start a game on 4.0.x without changing the default species rights to slaves instead (starting behavior is undesirables) before you unpause and all your pre-sapients on your home world get dissolved while you still have your Blocker and can no longer remove it through uplifting. The Pre-sapient Policy (Protected) should prevent these pops from being purged but it doesn't.
Relating to Pre-Sapients & BioGenesis, some of the traditions indicate that you can add and remove the hivemind trait, but I am unable to do that for uplifted species. Is that a bug or WAD? Would it be possible to choose when uplifting them whether to make them a Hivemind or a Livestock?
Finally, I really like the new species template integration, it is soooooooooo much better than constantly having to run "apply template" projects. Doing it once to create the template and then allowing you to make it a default that you integrate to makes so much more sense and its a big QoL improvement.
Relating to Pre-Sapients & BioGenesis, some of the traditions indicate that you can add and remove the hivemind trait, but I am unable to do that for uplifted species. Is that a bug or WAD? Would it be possible to choose when uplifting them whether to make them a Hivemind or a Livestock?
Finally, I really like the new species template integration, it is soooooooooo much better than constantly having to run "apply template" projects. Doing it once to create the template and then allowing you to make it a default that you integrate to makes so much more sense and its a big QoL improvement.
I mentioned this elsewhere on the forum but I figured I'd post it here too.
Pop growth for multi-species empires, especially with Xeno-Compatability active, is completely out of control.
I started a Broken Shackles game with the preset empire and default Pre-FTL settings, and still started the game with over 10 pop growth on my capital. This got close to 20 as I finished genetic asention (without any clone vats built). When I got Xeno-Compatability it instantly shot up to an absurd 50+.
Now I'm not the most experienced player with Broken Shackles, but 10 feels high when half your pops aren't even suited to your homeworld, and I'm pretty sure 50 is more than 20% higher than 20.
Pop growth for multi-species empires, especially with Xeno-Compatability active, is completely out of control.
I started a Broken Shackles game with the preset empire and default Pre-FTL settings, and still started the game with over 10 pop growth on my capital. This got close to 20 as I finished genetic asention (without any clone vats built). When I got Xeno-Compatability it instantly shot up to an absurd 50+.
Now I'm not the most experienced player with Broken Shackles, but 10 feels high when half your pops aren't even suited to your homeworld, and I'm pretty sure 50 is more than 20% higher than 20.
.png){kind=avatar}
