I wonder if they genuinely felt like the game they were developing was a successor to SotS in terms of philosophy and design?
I would argue that it isn’t and that their implementation of the systems inspired by SotS suggests they didn’t really understand the subtlety and nuance of said systems!
I think they were trying something new (for them) and took a whole lot of inspiration from SOTS, which was clearly a game they appreciated. And then they whiffed on the execution and couldn’t figure out how to integrate certain features (notably FTL) into a Paradox grand strategy game.
@kedaha and @kevinc : yes, I think they thought of Stellaris as both an evolution of Sword of the Stars and a new step in the evolution of the classic PDS gameloop.
And like you both, I feel that Stellaris absolutely fails as a Sword of the Stars 3, because it doesn’t really understand what made Sword of the Stars good (or how to make it work in the PDS structure). Which is mainly my big problem with Stellaris.
Now, it seems Paradox is moving Stellaris away from the “SotS evolved” view into its own thing (and if Stellaris is going to be a new classic someday, that’s the only way they can go). Maybe they’ll get it right, but that means I still want a Sword of the Stars 3. ;)
What made SOTS really good… now that’s a very good question @rhamorim My opinion is that it wasn’t so much as to what specific mechanics amounted, like having several different FTL methods, but rather the effect those had in how you approached the game and how well it was all clicking together. You could totally have one single FTL method and still introduce assymetry linked to “species” and “civic” traits. For instance, having humans a weird lethargy as they “jump”, following the lead of C. J. Cherryh’s books on the “Pact” universe.
Still, the main issue with Stellaris is also its major strength: its eclecticism when it comes to incorporate gameplay components. Eclecticism, in my opinion, is the pathway to true innovation. Eventually, given enough perseverance, it all clicks together and what used to be perceived as a pastiche, becomes a new style. In the meantime, you get weird concoctions which are unsatisfying to various degrees.
The new thing is that this process of iteration over designs, which used to take place behind closed doors, now it is happening in the open, funded by interested parties. PDX (or PDS) doesn’t make games in the traditional way… they’re taking us along for the ride (for a fee, of course!).
EDIT: Actually, Kerberos pioneered this iterative approach to design, with the first SOTS, as other have rightly pointed out already.
It’s going to be hard being stuck in the office all day tomorrow while other people are posting impressions in this thread. However, I’ll comfort myself knowing you’ll all be beta testing the inevitable hotfix for me!
I’m in the same boat, but on holiday from tomorrow for 2 weeks. Going to skip a hour or two of possible play time tonight and sit on it until I’m back - I figure it’s a good chance to start after the 1-2 hot fixes!
I may wait until the weekend. I fully expect there to be some huge bug that none of us can believe made it through QA that requires a hotfix. Seems like par for the course nowadays.
I’m expecting a few whoppers, but I’m still planning on diving in after work. I’ll just consider it a throwaway game to experiment with the new additions.