That part I think isn’t quite fair. The AIs do have personalities depending on their random ethos and “act” appropriately…but they’re unattached to a picture/species. So you’ll have super-individualist fungal colonies and such which act the same way as super-individualist mollusks.
And of course, random.
Well while completely disagreeing that stellaris has less personality than other 4X games, it does feel as you proceed through the game that it was launched a little early. Sector & faction interaction is riven with bugs. Got a powerful faction agitating for the independence of a sector? No problem, just create a new sector (for free) and add all the old sector’s stars to it. Faction gone. And nevermind all the weirdnesses about who leads this or that faction. Why is this faction agitating for return to their old empire being led by a member of the pre-sentient species that cohabitates with them?
Plus there is no difference between a bunch of reasonably sized sectors and just dumping all your planets into one huge sector (in fact the latter seems to be better for a lot of reasons; much larger pool of resource for rapid colony development for one).
That (and UI) stuff aside though, the expand explore exploit and exterminate parts are great. The galaxy is much more interesting and active than in most 4Xs, and there are definitely things out there like fallen empires and invaders form other dimensions to keep you on your toes long after other 4X games would have reached the point of a foregone conclusion. If they can fix the performance problems and have the AI work a little harder to counter the player threat (form larger more dedicated coalitions for example) it really could be EU4 in space.
Which is one of the pillars of Tom’s argument, which he summarizes brilliant in the phrase…
You will always remember the Klackon in Master of Orion. You will never remember the Oogie-Nollocks Union in Stellaris.
Perhaps rephrasing will help - aliens in Stellaris have no character. Their personalities (if there is any) can be broken down to specific gameplay-related perks and limitations, which have no attachment to that species in particular. They’re not memorable because they don’t persist beyond a single game.
BTW, Paradox just posted this:
Am I the only one to think that attributing two well-defined genders to every single alien species shows a distinct lack of imagination? Wouldn’t some alien species be genderless, or perhaps have a much more complex system of genders? That only goes to show that Tom’s remarks are fair.
Nesrie
1844
I know it’s not perfect. There are some glaring AI issues, some what the hell is this working moments, and I spend way too much time trying to get basic information… but I am enjoying it. It’s fun for me and my MP group. I like the events, and this is also Paradox. I absolute do not believe any reviewer should ever, ever base their review on promises to come, but as a Paradox game it means there is more to come… I don’t know that I would classify myself as a huge Paradox fan since there are several of their series I don’t play, but I weather CK1 which was a knotted mess of bugs and errors and also super fun.
I’m enjoying it myself. It doesn’t mean I can’t see its flaws and limitations, though. I’m having fun despite of them, which is an important point to make.
That said, I don’t know for how long I’ll have fun. I can see it being fun for a couple playthroughs, but I don’t see it having the staying power of other 4X games, at least not at its current state.
Right, but I was responding to a worry that the AI didn’t have any personality at all, which isn’t true. That it doesn’t persist beyond a single game may not matter for AA.
KevinC
1847
Yeah, the AI in Stellaris behaves more distinctly than most 4X games, including the Klackons from MOO2. The Klackons might be memorable because you see them every game and they’re the only race that looks the way they do, but they never really behaved any differently from what I recall. They just had good production, which is why I liked playing them.
Everyone’s going to have a different take, but I like not knowing who or what my neighbors are going to be. Within an individual game, I find the AI’s have personalities that are distinct with their ethics. That’s the part that’s important to me individually.
1 star is Grouchy Contrarian Chick at his finest.
I agree with many Tom’s points, but (for example) burning the amount of words he used on “AI personality” was nonsense. Sorry, but the Mrrshan didn’t have a different personality than the Klackons. They were a list of stats that used the same AI. OTOH, in Stellaris, I’ve had the AI races specifically acknowledge my Space Kitties as Space Kitties; i.e. the AI took into account which artwork set I used :)
I definitely do not agree that the game is horribly broken at an unplayable, fundamental level – which is when I’d expect a 1-star rating to be used.
That’s kind of funny. Tom does acknowledge a lot of good things about Stellaris in the penultimate paragraph. He just says that all the good things can’t make for the lack of personality… for him. The good things didn’t compensate for the flaws he listed… in his experience. That’s it.
One star is an understandable score when you read his review (I was expecting two stars from him and from reading most of the review, but that’s me). It’s one star for him. It could be three or four stars for other people. Which is kind of the point.
That said, a part of me wonders if the one star is a statement on its own (“scores don’t matter as much as the written text”) instead of a summary of his impressions. As if he was saying “Paradox, well, since you care so much about scores, let me give you one that may cause you to reconsider that”.
Like I said, Grouchy Contrarian Chick. Most review sites reserve their one-stars for completely broken, unplayable games, or games whose design and execution are so cynical as to be an insult to anyone actually buying them (e.g. slapped-together Unity Store asset games and the like).
Tom hands them out for games that offend him on some fundamental design level, even if there are slews of us out there happily enjoying themselves playing it :)
Tom would probably direct you to his rating system.
1 star for Tom is not exclusively for broken or inoperable software. It’s simply that he hated it.
Tom is not “most review sites”. Tom is Tom, and as Telefrog pointed out, one star for him means “I hated it”. That’s it. I thought he would say “I didn’t like it”. He said “I hated it”. And that’s ok. Other people may like it. Other people may even love it. But Tom doesn’t.
Well, there you go. And don’t try to hivemind me people; I am the hivemind.
Panzeh
1855
I pretty much agree with everything Tom says. If you’re not immediately bought into every premise this game offers, it will be extremely boring. Moo1’s races had much more distinct advantages than Stellaris’.
Teiman
1856
Stellaris has almost convinced me to buy Distant Worlds.
Stellaris has rekindled my love for 4x games. After Swords of the Stars, I was burned of these type of games. I was already tired of Civilization games. These games seems to center all the gameplay in War. Empired making war against other empires. The truth of the blade. I am tired of that.
I am not big enough a boy to play these exquisite strategy games like Universalis or Crusader Kings 2. To me Stellaris is great because give me a bit of that Crusader Kings 2 feeling contained in approachable gameplay. The flaws are too many, and I hate having to deal with broken planets hidden behind sectors, but
Spock
1857
Distant Worlds is great. Overwhelming at first, but a neat game.
I thought Tom posted earlier that he was liking Stellaris. Maybe I remember wrong?
It could have been when he was in the early exploration part of the game which he enjoys. Or possibly during his first game before the repetition of multiple games became apparent.
-Todd
kedaha
1859
I haven’t played SOTS since shortly after A Murder of Crows. I loved the randomised tech trees and how well balanced (and unbalanced) the different methods of interstellar travel were. I hated freighters.
Haven’t played a game since that I think even approached it, and by the sounds of it Stellaris isn’t (yet?) the game to replace it.
Sword of stars is total war in space, Stellaris is eu4 in space.
