Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mini]

I feel like I could play Sword of the Stars right now and no matter HOW fun it is, I'll be entirely bored just because of the connection. It is that bad.

Then maybe you should stop playing games entirely, because SotSII was a game and therefore by the connection every other game will be boring because of the relation. SotS 1 and 2 are different games, no matter how much you say (without playing the first) that they are so similar, in a thread about a different game so I'm not going to be continuing this discussion here any longer in the interest in not derailing it into SotS 1 vs SotS 2.

[Neonivek]

Then maybe you should stop playing games entirely, because SotSII was a game and therefore by the connection every other game will be boring because of the relation.

I didn't think Mini would say that Sword of the Stars 2 would be that boring. Also don't blame me Mini. You took my basic statement which was basically "I really don't like Sword of the Stars 2 to the point where it makes it hard to appreciate the first" and called me out on it. Not my fault that I actually explained what I meant.

Now you are taking my statement which was clearly an exageration and taking it as if it was entirely serious. I'd say "Well you cannot translate sarcasm over the internet" except that I intentionally included "Psychic barrier".

In otherwords: "How DARE you even hint that Sword of the Stars was anything less then a stellar achievement you ignorant simpleton. I shall now stick my fingers in my eyes, close my eyes, and sing 'la la la la la' over and over while hurling indirrect insults your way. Clearly that is the mature thing to do"

As well since this is a thread about "Investing" in a game. Bringing up Sword of the Stars 2 is an excellent topic for whether or not they can sustain a level of quality in light of that game.

[lordcooper]

To be fair, it can be rather to difficult to tell how serious you are being at the best of times.

E: That sounds harsh.  Harshness not intended.  Too tired to word.

[Neonivek]

To be fair, it can be rather to difficult to tell how serious you are being at the best of times.

E: That sounds harsh.  Harshness not intended.  Too tired to word.

No thats fair and hardly harsh.

Then maybe you should stop playing games entirely

That was harsh and not really fair.

[Shades]

Most of the blame for SotS 2 seems to be directed at Paradox for pushing the game too early. However not coming even close to development goals and having a planned product with less features than the original SotS + expansions doesn't exactly make Kerberos blameless either. 

Pretty much my view, I only hope Kerberos dug their heels in as much as possible. I have to say I'm happy with the amount of support it's been given since release but from my view it's only just about good enough for release now and should never have seen the light of day a year ago.

I feel like I could play Sword of the Stars right now and no matter HOW fun it is, I'll be entirely bored just because of the connection. It is that bad.

Then maybe you should stop playing games entirely, because SotSII was a game and therefore by the connection every other game will be boring because of the relation. SotS 1 and 2 are different games, no matter how much you say (without playing the first) that they are so similar, in a thread about a different game so I'm not going to be continuing this discussion here any longer in the interest in not derailing it into SotS 1 vs SotS 2.

Actually I (slightly) agree with Neonivek here. I love SOTS, but I can't bring my self to play it as I feel I should play SOTS II instead. But as much as I enjoy it even in it's broken state I'm not convinced it is as fun as the original.

[lordcooper]

Aren't Paradox meant to be the Good Guy Publisher though?

[nenjin]

Seems like lately Paradox's rep is slipping a bit too.

[RedKing]

Keep in mind that when I first played vanilla SOTS, I was seriously underwhelmed and threw it back into the ether (half the benefit of pirating is never having to feel bad when you play a clunker). Then when the Born of Blood expansion came out, I yohoho'd again, and said, "Hey...this is a lot better than the first time. Might hang onto this one."

Then came A Murder of Crows, and I said, "Damn this has turned into a fun game!"
Then the Argosy Shipyards (which was mostly filler but did add some nice options).

For me, when they added the ability to turn economy and tech down by 50%....that made it an entirely different game. No more desperate tech-rushing, no more designs that are obsolete by the time they're built, or that I only build one or two of because I move onto something new. No more turtling, and trade networks suddenly are worth the pain in micromanagement.

So yeah....
SOTS on launch (even with the first few patches) = Ugly Duckling
SOTS + all the expansions = Sexy Swan

I've steered clear of SOTS II (I actually own it but can't play it because I'm running XP), but I'd be interested in this idea. It's a mythos that could stand a few more iterations (wouldn't mind a decent RTS, and I'd love them forever if they made a space combat flight sim).

[motorbitch]

i realy want this to succeed, so i want to make sure you catch the latest infos on this.

theres are a lot of new information under the update tab of the project page.
i think especially the gameplay question and answers look very promising. looks like we can expect a hard game where loosing is fun and with a good crafting / skill system.

[BurnedToast]

I gotta say, kerberos has the biggest balls of any studio I've ever seen, I gotta give them that.

Release an alpha (or if you are feeling generous, and early beta) as a finished, working game... then manage to even fuck that up (first release was an even more broken alpha). Take about a year to get the game working halfway decent, though it still runs like a pig.

Then, have the sheer audacity to beg the same community they shat all over with sots 2 for more money... in a flexible funding campaign.

Damn kerberos, have you no shame?

[Djohaal]

Sounds more like desperation, they don't seem too enthusastic about continuing to work with publishers after the SOTS II fiasco.

[hemmingjay]

Fort Zombie + SoTS2 = no more $ for them

[motorbitch]

though it still runs like a pig.

you own the game? what was the latest build you tried? because, on my 2.5 years old computer, it runs very well.

aside, paradox was in controll of releasing the game and still has all controll about the monitarisation. its paradox that gets all money from the sales. though paradox made a generous refound offer, it was not kerberos who decided to launch sots.
also, kerberos saied within 2 hours after release that sots2 was not a finished game and should not played (or bought) by anyone at that time.

Sounds more like desperation, they don't seem too enthusastic about continuing to work with publishers after the SOTS II fiasco.

this is true. kerberos wants to become a full independend developer.

[BurnedToast]

I'm sure paradox is not completely innocent and deserves some of the blame but let's be honest here - it took them a *YEAR* longer then the release date to get the game working.

You can't put all the blame on the publisher for that. A month or three early? sure, publisher forced them to release, I'll believe it. Hell, I'll give them 6 months. But if you take a year after your game is supposed to be done (and let's not forget, they kept pushing the original release date back, it's not like this was the first deadline and they got no extra time at all) it means your project was either unreasonably ambitious or incredibly horribly mismanaged, or both.

We will probably never know the real story of what happened, but to pretend it was all the big bad publisher's fault and kerb is totally innocent and blameless is absurd.

Also if they had any integrity they would not have done a flexible funding campaign. What happens when they don't meet the goal? They get to pocket whatever money they did get with no obligation to produce anything.

[Neonivek]

Well sometimes it is really no ones fault.

Sometimes games just take so long and have such hurdles in production that they just cannot be finished reasonably.

It is why while others were ready to burn Lionhead alive for Black and White 2, I already forgave them. I read their development logs and realised that they did whole heartedly tried to bring the game we wanted. They just ran out of funding, time, and had horrific luck during development (Mind you I blame them for the release video of LIES but not how the game turned out).

This wasn't Fable where Peter didn't know how to communicate the difference between "this is how I would like the game" and "This is a development goal". (I really liked Fable, it was my favorite out of the trilogy)