Game Pressure - First Look at Stellaris

Couchpotato · August 22, 2015

Game Pressure takes a look at Pardox's new game Stellaris.

Link - http://www.gamepressure.com/e.asp?ID=243

The development division of Paradox Interactive has reached the point when they could make historic RTS games on a sewing machine with their eyes closed while handcuffed to a bathroom radiator; and even then it would be a better game than what most of their competition can manage. Nevertheless, Stellaris seems like a jump off the deep end of the pool even for them. The Swedes are completely new to the Sci-Fi setting while their newest project has all the marks of a typical 4X (eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, and eXterminate) game. After the gamescom presentation, however, it’s hard to avoid the impression that breaking the pattern may have been a good call from the genre veterans. The Stellaris’ complex and well-thought design looks very promising, and, although you couldn’t say, it won the hearts and minds of anyone who saw it. I believe what Paradox prepares for us, may be one of the most interesting games aimed at RTS fans in the coming years.

I can't wait to see more gamepaly footage as I'm very interested in this game.

Zloth · August 22, 2015

PC Gamer had a preview, too: http://www.pcgamer.com/stellaris-how-paradox-plan-to-make-an-infinite-grand-strategy/

It actually lowered my expectations. I've already got a game where I can do all that in a turn based environment: Gal Civ 3. And that game has it's own engine, not one made for another game and modified.

wolfing · August 22, 2015

Zloth said:
PC Gamer had a preview, too: http://www.pcgamer.com/stellaris-how-paradox-plan-to-make-an-infinite-grand-strategy/

It actually lowered my expectations. I've already got a game where I can do all that in a turn based environment: Gal Civ 3. And that game has it's own engine, not one made for another game and modified.

I don't have that feeling. Gal Civ 3 is pure 4x, while this seems to be more than that.

wiretripped · August 25, 2015

RPS has a preview too: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/08/06/stellaris-paradox-strategy-game

Honestly, this game sounds bloody good to me. I'm mildly hyped. It sounds like it will add a new twist to the 4X genre. I agree with Wolfing, it promises to be so much more.

Archangel · August 27, 2015

This sounds interesting but they didn't mention how space and ground combat will look. They did say you will gain control of planets through diplomacy but that could be done after you do fight for a while and win major battles. If the game is like GavCiv3 with no tactical combat, I am out.

wolfing · August 27, 2015

Archangel said:
This sounds interesting but they didn't mention how space and ground combat will look. They did say you will gain control of planets through diplomacy but that could be done after you do fight for a while and win major battles. If the game is like GavCiv3 with no tactical combat, I am out.

You're probably out. Paradox games don't have tactical combat (and that's why people who like them... like them). It's all about strategy.

wiretripped · August 28, 2015

wolfing said:
You're probably out. Paradox games don't have tactical combat (and that's why people who like them… like them). It's all about strategy.

Yes. Chances are if you don't like EU or CK, you're probably not going to like this either. It's "grand strategy". Think RISK (the board game) here.

DArtagnan · August 28, 2015

Lots of grand strategy games have tactical combat

wiretripped · August 28, 2015

DArtagnan said:
Lots of grand strategy games have tactical combat

Depends on your definition of "grand strategy".

But possibly, I won't claim to know every game. It's just the label PDX sticks on their own games.

DArtagnan · August 28, 2015

wiretripped said:
Depends on your definition of "grand strategy".
But possibly, I won't claim to know every game. It's just the label PDX sticks on their own games.

Games like Civ and MoO are considered grand strategy games, AFAIK.

The point is that I don't think the omission of tactical combat has to do with the grand strategy genre.

It's more that Paradox games are more hands-off than most.

wiretripped · August 28, 2015

DArtagnan said:
Games like Civ and MoO are considered grand strategy games, AFAIK.

I never played either, but wouldn't they be labeled as 4X games? Or would you say 4X games are grand strategy by default?

DArtagnan said:
The point is that I don't think the omission of tactical combat has to do with the grand strategy genre.

It's more that Paradox games are more hands-off than most.

I don't play enough games of that sort to be able to disagree with you.

DArtagnan · August 28, 2015

wiretripped said:
I never played either, but wouldn't they be labeled as 4X games? Or would you say 4X games are grand strategy by default?

I can't immediately recall a 4X game that I wouldn't consider grand strategy

I don't know the official definition, but I would consider any game that involves governing entire nations or worlds quite "grand" in terms of strategy.

wolfing · August 28, 2015

Mostly 'Grand' strategy means you have to take care of other systems like economy, diplomacy, intelligence, etc. Sure most strategy games have some sort of resource management, but to be considered 'grand' they have to be similar in depth and importance as the combat systems.

DArtagnan · August 28, 2015

wolfing said:
Mostly 'Grand' strategy means you have to take care of other systems like economy, diplomacy, intelligence, etc. Sure most strategy games have some sort of resource management, but to be considered 'grand' they have to be similar in depth and importance as the combat systems.

Source for this definition?

wolfing · August 29, 2015

DArtagnan said:
Source for this definition?

Got it from the wiki for Grand Strategy, not saying it's the Oxford definition or anything, but sounds about right to me:

Grand strategy expands on the traditional idea of strategy in three ways:

expanding strategy beyond military means to include diplomatic, financial, economic, informational, etc. means
examining internal in addition to external forces – taking into account both the various instruments of power and the internal policies necessary for their implementation (conscription, for example)
including consideration of periods of peacetime in addition to wartime

Archangel · August 31, 2015

Civilization fits very much into this definition.

DArtagnan · August 31, 2015

Sounds reasonable enough, though I would still consider the scope of the game more relevant than the detail of the systems. That said, I tend to be a bit literal when it comes to words and their meaning.

Silver · August 31, 2015

I'm leery of games that promise to do too much too soon. I would prefer a tighter focus initially with gameplay expanded outwards civilization style in the form of expansions. Time and reflection helps the iteration process hugely.

But on the other hand they are experienced developers so probably misguided doubts on my part.

DArtagnan · August 31, 2015

I've yet to really like one of their games, except perhaps the first Europa Universalis. I always loved the concepts of their games a lot more than actually playing them.

Then again, I'm not crazy about making limited adjustments to the same formula and releasing it as a new game over and over and over.

Silver · August 31, 2015

Same developers as Europa aye. Well I probably wouldn't enjoy it, there games are very samey. I get why game developers are so risk averse but new ip demands that you take some new creative direction. Not sure these developers can or want to.

Game Pressure - First Look at Stellaris

Part-Time News-bot

I smell a... wumpus!?

Dalek SasqWatch

Machiavellian

SasqWatch

Dalek SasqWatch

Machiavellian

DArtagnan

Guest

Machiavellian

DArtagnan

Guest

Machiavellian

DArtagnan

Guest

Dalek SasqWatch

DArtagnan

Guest

Dalek SasqWatch

SasqWatch

DArtagnan

Guest

Spaceman

DArtagnan

Guest

Spaceman