Eu5 isn't even out yet. Probably at least that and maybe one more other game. Then maybe Stellaris 2.
-
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.
CK2 and EU4 were both more substantial at release than their predecessors.
The game that we're all going to call EU5 even if Paradox call it something else when they announce it in a few hours looks likely to be a massive improvement on any iteration of EU4.
I wish it wouldn't happen in the near future. since the tendencie of the last two releases (CK3 and Victoria 3) has been a lack of content from its predecessor. being trapped for years to incorporate content, flavor packs and some mechanics from its predecessor, of course, if it doesn't first come out as disastrous as Victoria 3 that they have to remodel everything from scratch.
Maybe EU5 will break the bad streak, but only possible because it has a veteran team and is such an emblematic saga for Paradox that generated so much money for them for years.
Maybe EU5 will break the bad streak, but only possible because it has a veteran team and is such an emblematic saga for Paradox that generated so much money for them for years.
Uh, that's not hard considering those games are successors to titles that are probably older than half the Stellaris playerbase, successors to games that functionally predated the concept of long-term DLC support and were in that gray area where 'expansions' were still a thing. Either way, neither CK1 nor EU3 ended their lifespans much different than how they began, not even remotely on par with Paradox's current model.
You're comparing legacy systems of game design to modern ones.
Last edited:
- 1
I don't mind if stellaris keeps updating and adding new dlcs for the next decade, what I do mind is the unnecessary massive reworks that break the game for months or years on end. Stellaris was fine prior to the latest dumpsterfire, it wasn't perfect but it was alright, and a damn sight better than it is now.
Stop trying to do so much at once in a single update and bricking entire chunks of the game for no good reason. If scope creep starts setting in you're meant to split the project up into manageable chunks, not double down and make everything worse.
Stop trying to do so much at once in a single update and bricking entire chunks of the game for no good reason. If scope creep starts setting in you're meant to split the project up into manageable chunks, not double down and make everything worse.
It's just my opinion, but after seeing EU5, I'm more in favor of Stellaris 2 than I was back then. EU5 looks pretty good. I know some of you will disagree, but I can see them overhauling a lot of mechanics with the lessons learned in Stellaris 1.
- 1
"is it time for stellaris 2?"
i'm leaning towards "no" here, at least right now.
it's an age old problem of software development: do incremental changes, or start over from scratch? however you twist it, both methods have serious drawbacks.
if you only ever do incremental changes, you start running into walls sooner or later. these walls will get more serious and more numerous as time goes on. architecture decisions made decades ago will continue to hold you back, and an ever increasing inertia to change will set in.
if you start over from scratch, you can fix some of these architecture decisions, but you run the risk of repeating mistakes that you long forgot you made and fixed before. and you have a long time to get to the point of feature parity. the most infamous example for this is probably Netscape 6, which famously ruined the company. But also Cities Skylines II should be a worrying example in this sector.
you can mitigate some of the risks of starting over by supporting the old platform in parallel. that means, you should probably *internally* think about starting to work on stellaris 2 at some point, but not expect to be releasing it within 5 years or so. give it time to mature, port over old features to the new engine, do parallel development of new features. that is lots of work that doesn't directly result in more sales for a very long time. there is probably a sweet spot on how long to do this parallel development for the new game to not feel like an empty shell. but every effort you put into the new game won't be put into incremental updates of the old game, which also comes with dangers. like new DLCs feeling unpolished and lacking.
i'm leaning towards "no" here, at least right now.
it's an age old problem of software development: do incremental changes, or start over from scratch? however you twist it, both methods have serious drawbacks.
if you only ever do incremental changes, you start running into walls sooner or later. these walls will get more serious and more numerous as time goes on. architecture decisions made decades ago will continue to hold you back, and an ever increasing inertia to change will set in.
if you start over from scratch, you can fix some of these architecture decisions, but you run the risk of repeating mistakes that you long forgot you made and fixed before. and you have a long time to get to the point of feature parity. the most infamous example for this is probably Netscape 6, which famously ruined the company. But also Cities Skylines II should be a worrying example in this sector.
you can mitigate some of the risks of starting over by supporting the old platform in parallel. that means, you should probably *internally* think about starting to work on stellaris 2 at some point, but not expect to be releasing it within 5 years or so. give it time to mature, port over old features to the new engine, do parallel development of new features. that is lots of work that doesn't directly result in more sales for a very long time. there is probably a sweet spot on how long to do this parallel development for the new game to not feel like an empty shell. but every effort you put into the new game won't be put into incremental updates of the old game, which also comes with dangers. like new DLCs feeling unpolished and lacking.
came in here to say this. rediscovering everything from scratch has been fun every time, even with rough patches
- 1