My problem with the game is that I like to digest all of the production numbers and then make the best decisions I can when it comes to deciding what to research, what developments to build, etc. With system production coming from different planets, that means I have to examine each planet, try to keep track of how many fertile, hot, cold, etc… planets I have so I know what improvements would be most beneficial. I’ve got a bad memory for keeping track of that stuff in my head, so that means I either need to write it down or keep clicking on everything to reexamine that characteristics of the planets.
I do like the devs’ faction design and how each faction is so different.
But all that stuff is listed on one screen, isn’t it? Unless I’m misunderstanding what you’re looking for, system/planet management is done entirely from a single screen.
That is true, but I want to keep track of how many fertile, hot, cold, etc planets I have across my empire so I can choose what I research wisely. It is also useful to remember where different races are in the empire in case I need to switch them to another system. There are just a lot of things to track in order to play fully informed. Some people may be able to keep that stuff in their head, but unfortunately I’m not.
Thanks for the responses, everyone. I guess the answer that rings most true to me (as a potential buyer that has been kind of on the fence, and back-logged enough to be in no special hurry) is that Endless Space 1 was just kind of meh, and that probably kept a lot of people from checking out the sequel.
It is one of those game companies I really do want to like, I found a lot to like in Endless Legends, just not enough to make it a classic in my book.
There may have been a lot of early negative reviews due to bugs. I know I could not complete a single game for a good while due to the never ending turn bug. I suspect people just have given up and wrote a bad review and never looked back.
Well, I would also say there’s a lot more competition in the market than there has been for years. Gal Civ 3, Stars in Shadow, Civ 6, Beyond Earth, New MOO, Stellaris, Star Ruler 2… There’s a reason Brad Wardell was talking about the coming 4x Armageddon in late 2015! Even though I have been a long time fan of the genre, these games take a lot of time to learn, play and master. I’m certain I will try Endless Space 2 at some point, but I really don’t feel pressure to do so quickly. I’d rather wait for the bug-free, super polished mega-hyper extra DLC edition with two revolutionary expansion packs. I’ve got little patience for stuck-turn bugs, or bland vanilla games, such as Gal Civ 3 or Stellaris at release! Only problem being, of course, that if all people think like me and defer their purchase, the definitive edition of Endless Space 2 will likely never come to be…
Technical problems are not something that will drive me away from a game. I’ll simply wait for more polish, if that’s the only problem. But I may be in minority here.
And that’s also the main reason why I don’t trust Steam user scores. Bad design and temporary bugs are on two entirely different levels of reasoning, but you don’t know which one influenced the score just by looking at the numbers.
Also, I’m not sure that the culprit for the supposed bad commercial performance of ES 2 is Endless Space. Many people bought and played Endless Legend (me included!) without ever bothering with ES. And I am interested in this but not in the first game.
Yes, but then you’ll read his argument or explanation and you will know the reason for the score and agree with him (or her) or laugh at him (or her). The real equivalent would be just glancing at the score and thinking “what the hack…? This game is sh*t!”, which can be misleading. The problem with user score is that you don’t know the reasons without context, and that’s how many people today judge games. Without context, that is. “This game is not so good because it has a low score.” Which brings us back to the question of “to score or not to score at all?”, and so on… Not for this topic, anyway.
As far a score goes: If it is a game I am interested in, then Ill read the bad reviews and see why people dislike it. If it is a game I only have a mild interest in, then I usually stop at just reading the low score.
For example, ME:A, Most of the bad review at the time were griping about superficial things like crappy animations or not liking some NPC voice acting and that kind of thing. I bought the game anyway. If the gripes had been about a buggy mess or grindy, boring game-play, then I would have passed.
It probably doesn’t need defending anymore but Endless Space (1) gets a bit of a bad reputation on this forum. It certainly has its flaws but outside of here it had a pretty strong following and is a game I keep installed on my machine perennially.
Endless Space offered a unique ambiance. The haunting music score combined with the austere presentation created a feeling of loneliness in me (that I enjoy oddly) that few other games achieve (STALKER and Dear Esther being strong exemplars). While Endless Legend and Endless Space 2 went even farther, for the time of release Endless Space broke the 4X mold and designed very interesting race/factions with a healthy helping of asymmetry. I love the faction descriptions:
“The Sowers are a machine race created by the Virtual faction of the Endless. They took from their creators the mission to traverse the universe and make worlds livable and habitable for the arrival – or return – of the Endless. The Sowers come, establish industries, create the basic infrastructure needed to make a wild planet habitable, and move on to the next one. The Sowers are neither hostile nor friendly; they are simply continuing their programming. Any world they arrive on will be harvested and advanced materials will be developed. Any local populations or other peoples will be ignored – unless they get in the way or oppose the Sowers’ holy mission.”
Endless Space probably doesn’t hold up that well to min/maxers looking for any exploits, but few 4Xs do. If one is willing to immerse themselves in the lore and ambiance of Endless Space it works well and I found the empire management portion of the game one of the more compelling offerings compared to peers.
I’m on record for disliking EL but I think the reason people liked it so much was because it was essentially Civilization but better and more interesting. Considering I don’t like Civ 5, have no intention of playing Civ 6, but actually liked Civ 4, and was underwhelmed by Beyond earth, that is very faint praise from me.
What I am saying is that I have the impression most people came to it from having tried Civ, and compared to that EL is a better game, or at least has more shiny bells and whistles, and more obviously assymetric playstyles, that attract attention.
I don’t think anyone praised the AI in EL. FWIW, in my opinion EL is possibly the most overrated game I’ve ever played.
EL is the best civ ‘clone’ available today…why? it sticks with the ‘army stacks’ that civ4 has
the major change to the civ model that Sid has implemented is the downfall of the civ franchise…its well known the AI in civ cannot deal with the one unit per hex design…i suspect when SId decides to go back to army stacks, civ will find its mojo again
personally, EL , CIV and all the other 4x’s should not have tactical battles whatsoever…if I want a tactical battle simulator, i’ll buy AOW3, xcom etc…I play strategy games to build empires not to micro manage armies, navies, air forces
at least endless space series has a less micro approach to battles…imho, 4x’s combat should be no more than 25% of the gameplay…20% would be perfect
