Print

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

[Telgin]

I find it amusing that all of these bugs seem to happen in systems that shouldn't have even been touched

Yeah welcome to programming. In one of my own projects I once implemented a new style (visual only) of icon fade for a skill cooldown and it ended up breaking the ability to talk to NPCs. The links between systems aren't always obvious.

Oh, sure.  I'm a programmer so I get it.  I just...

Management likely has no idea about specific bugs like that. The more likely answer is poor version control. This is Paradox' bread and butter for years now. They fix something in one version of the code, only to revert it by accident later when they release a major update that's based on a version of the code from before the fix.

This has happened so many times with EU4, CK2, etc, that I've lost count. People who have worked there have confirmed that they fundamentally don't have real software development practices in place. They just kind of do it as they go along. When they were really a niche indie developer 10 or 15 years ago, fine, whatever.

Okay, yeah, that explains it.  They have no real source control and almost certainly no formal testing procedures, much less anything like system level automated testing that ensures that, say, the pathfinding algorithm doesn't break because they had the audacity to glance at the crisis code.  They probably just have a couple of interns play the game for an hour or two before release, and if the game doesn't crash, they're not going to notice 90% of the bugs.

[Cruxador]

So... has this reached a reasonable state worth playing, yet?

I would say the economy overhaul has made it worth a couple evenings of free time, assuming you've got that, but since the latest patch introduced a bunch of new (and in many cases serious) bugs, maybe wait for a bugfix.

[forsaken1111]

So... has this reached a reasonable state worth playing, yet?

I'd hold off until they finish fixing all the shit they broke in the last big patch/expansion

[eerr]

The last vanilla version, left me with huge out of sync errors, every few minutes. This was in multiplayer with one other person.

[ZeroGravitas]

I can't say I'm really impressed with the archaeology stuff. I've done like half a dozen and it's just EU4 siege system for a bunch of text updates with some goofy rewards. There aren't any choices or anything else remotely interesting about them except a small-medium wall of text.

Like, maybe, ONE has had some kind interesting thing emerge from it at the end.

[Cruxador]

I can't say I'm really impressed with the archaeology stuff. I've done like half a dozen and it's just EU4 siege system for a bunch of text updates with some goofy rewards. There aren't any choices or anything else remotely interesting about them except a small-medium wall of text.

Like, maybe, ONE has had some kind interesting thing emerge from it at the end.

Yeah, from the way they were talking about it in the devlogs, they were basically using this time to add the new system, but the content using the system is still fairly basic. It's more about potential than the current crop.

One would think that after this much time we'd be past the "add new features" stage of the game - what is often called the alpha - but I suppose it's understandable that the new head dude wants to put his own ideas in. To be fair, it's definitely a good idea for a system, it's just a bit awkward putting it on a game that under most devs would be close to the end of its life cycle, not the beginning.

[Rolan7]

One would think that after this much time we'd be past the "add new features" stage of the game - what is often called the alpha -

Cripes, you're not wrong.  Though I say CK2 shows that adding new features over time can work well.  Perhaps modern games (with trustworthy developers) break the old model of alpha-beta-release-fix-expansion. 
No wait this is just the expansion phase, but with digital delivery.  and a lack of "fix"

but I suppose it's understandable that the new head dude wants to put his own ideas in. To be fair, it's definitely a good idea for a system, it's just a bit awkward putting it on a game that under most devs would be close to the end of its life cycle, not the beginning.

I don't give a fig for "relics" I just wanted to play with habitats and there's all this broken stuff.
But drunk whining aside, it's probably the 64bit move, which is *awesome* and I actually remain very happy with Paradox.

[Egan_BW]

Sometimes I think that games being under constant development for years and years is the ultimate form of "sequel", not just of "expansion". Why make an entirely separate new game when you could just iterate and add onto the original until it's something entirely new, ship of theseus style?

See Total Warhammer 2, which is basically just Total Warhammer 1 but with a different game's worth of content.

[ollobrains]

what they should do is say with ck2, is any dlc that are from older than 5 years should now be rolled into the base game, and anything less have a pricing structure that slowly drops over time.  That way paradox could keep it going but not screw older players over with 50 dlc

The seasonal model of elite dangerous is another option

[Egan_BW]

Eh, I'll just wait 25 years and pick up everything they've ever made for $2 in a steam sale. Maybe by then I'll have the patience for strategy games, too~

[forsaken1111]

A new beta patch is out that addresses most of the remaining annoying issues, so yay. I can play again

[Cruxador]

what they should do is say with ck2, is any dlc that are from older than 5 years should now be rolled into the base game, and anything less have a pricing structure that slowly drops over time.  That way paradox could keep it going but not screw older players over with 50 dlc

The seasonal model of elite dangerous is another option

They won't do that, because age of DLC is not the determining factor in which DLCs people buy. There are many old ones that still sell well. And Paradox is a for profit company – and a publicly traded one, as of recently, which means that not only do they want money, but they have an obligation to their stockholders to ensure that they make as much as possible.

[Wiles]

They won't do that, because age of DLC is not the determining factor in which DLCs people buy. There are many old ones that still sell well. And Paradox is a for profit company – and a publicly traded one, as of recently, which means that not only do they want money, but they have an obligation to their stockholders to ensure that they make as much as possible.

Giving more value in the base package doesn't necessarily mean they'd make less money. You can't sell DLC to people who don't make the purchase in the first place. Looking at a game with many years of DLC can be so off-putting for some that they won't buy it at all. Games like Crusader Kings and Europa Universalis make it very confusing for new players, if you visit forums or subreddits about them you'll see posts like "which dlc are essential" fairly often. I know I didn't buy Crusader Kings II because there was already so much DLC out that I didn't want to spend all that money on one game at one time. Also, going in without the DLC the community deemed essential didn't appeal to me. Eventually they had a sale that bundled all the DLC they had released up until the "Old Gods" for like 20 bucks. They've been taking my money ever since

[Draignean]

They won't do that, because age of DLC is not the determining factor in which DLCs people buy. There are many old ones that still sell well. And Paradox is a for profit company – and a publicly traded one, as of recently, which means that not only do they want money, but they have an obligation to their stockholders to ensure that they make as much as possible.

Giving more value in the base package doesn't necessarily mean they'd make less money. You can't sell DLC to people who don't make the purchase in the first place. Looking at a game with many years of DLC can be so off-putting for some that they won't buy it at all. Games like Crusader Kings and Europa Universalis make it very confusing for new players, if you visit forums or subreddits about them you'll see posts like "which dlc are essential" fairly often. I know I didn't buy Crusader Kings II because there was already so much DLC out that I didn't want to spend all that money on one game at one time. Also, going in without the DLC the community deemed essential didn't appeal to me. Eventually they had a sale that bundled all the DLC they had released up until the "Old Gods" dlc for like 20 bucks. They've been taking my money ever since

Yar, I have CK2 because it was free for a couple days. I then looked at the DLC and decided I was better off focusing my Paradox affection on Stellaris rather than trying to get big Vinny to extend me another line of credit.

I want to love DLC, but too often it contrasts with my now old-fashioned beliefs on what expansion content should be, and I can't quite justify paying several hundred dollars for the 'complete' experience of a particular game.

[tnc]

Which mod do you guys use to improve AI? Is it the Glavius mod?