Stellaris

[Misery]

Well... I had hoped for a more EU4 inspired diplomacy / faction system.. guess that is not on the table for this game....

Those gameplay systems need a serious overhaul. I don't want a copy and paste diplomacy system from Europa or Crusader, both of which are a series of gaining enough points until the tooltip turns green, irregardless of whether or not the relationship makes sense.

Hm, I haven't played those, but I have to say that particular system sure doesn't sound all that interesting.  Would definitely rather see something else.

[Cyborg]

Who is talking about reverting? I'm talking about having the AI have strategic objectives beyond "1 arranged marriage, 1 gift, and 12 months of compliments."

I just mean that the policy seems arbitrary, but AI ultimately is. If you add more things the player will still game it. The only way to prevent the gaming is to make the AI flat out not do certain things, which sounds nice but ultimately limits options.

The only way? What? 

Here's another way: make AI strategies emergent and have the player try to deduce what they are by playing the game.

[chemical_art]

Here's another way: make AI strategies emergent and have the player try to deduce what they are by playing the game.

That's a neat goal, but I don't understand how it stops the arbitrary "tooltips going green" that player to AI diplomacy uses. For example you can make the AI decide to go peaceful, in which case it would be more willing to accept trade deals. Or it could go anti-trade and do the opposite. Those are neat goals, but ultimately are no different the mechanics that give positives or negatives due to traits, religion, etc.
If you are just saying the diplomacy could become deeper with the AI having shifting goals as new leaders come and go, yes I agree. I just thought you had implied a method of other then the "gather up green +'s to erase the -'s". I would be interested to hear it, I just as of right now believe it is the best comprise for right now.

[Cyborg]

Here's another way: make AI strategies emergent and have the player try to deduce what they are by playing the game.

That's a neat goal, but I don't understand how it stops the arbitrary "tooltips going green" that player to AI diplomacy uses. For example you can make the AI decide to go peaceful, in which case it would be more willing to accept trade deals. Or it could go anti-trade and do the opposite. Those are neat goals, but ultimately are no different the mechanics that give positives or negatives due to traits, religion, etc.
If you are just saying the diplomacy could become deeper with the AI having shifting goals as new leaders come and go, yes I agree. I just thought you had implied a method of other then the "gather up green +'s to erase the -'s". I would be interested to hear it, I just as of right now believe it is the best comprise for right now.

My concept of what I mean by emergent diplomacy is a little bit more complicated than can fit inside a forum post and yet isn't so complicated that it cannot be coded. I believe that the "game" part of diplomacy needs to be emergent. There needs to be qualities and goals that come together that are hidden from the player and can only be discovered by paying attention to what the AI is doing as well as interacting with the AI. For example, maybe I notice a lot of mercantile actions, high unemployment, aggressiveness, peacefulness, low education, disease, or any number of qualities that can be measured, and I can begin to form a profile of my AI ally or opponent. What are the sacred cows of the AI player? Sacred cows are what trigger massive changes or events, even so far as to warp the personality of the AI.

If you can create this complicated recipe with probabilities, interactions, and other AI, you could potentially see incredible events in the galaxy. You could bear witness to complex diplomatic situations.

Like a few others on here, I have played so many 4X games. I don't believe that my time playing these games has been a waste, but rather has become a discarded Rubik's cube. And like the Rubik's cube, once you know the algorithm, it's no longer interesting. So that's the problem that needs to be solved, and I think that's what emergent diplomacy would do for 4X games.

[eRe4s3r]

Well you know what I want out of diplomacy, an RPG (animated and voiced at the minimum) where leaders and the various intricacies of diplomacy play out (alien and your own ambassadors, political stances and attitudes you set and procedural gifting system specifically). This should not be something you do every round, but something that you do when you want it and that the AI does procedurally, IE the AI will have a pool of 10 to 20 different approaches and each will play out differently depending on your choices. In those interactions between 2 alien races, ie their ambassadorial staff and you the leader, and your staff and their leaders, will decide how diplomacy plays out, and open up the way to various sub systems, like integrating of aliens into your own society or.. well so on. Possibilities are infinite.

If you wanted to "simplify" the system, think gift , attitude and staff choice you are given, with a multitude of staff options for a diplomatic engagements... there would be no stats, the choice whether 2 races hate each other or not depends on randomized situational decisions you made beforehand, including the first contact scenario, whether you have first contact protocols and whether these protocols end up creating friends or foes...

[Mánagarmr]

Watched Scott Manley's first three episodes of a let's play of Stellaris. I actually broke my rule on preordering games with this one. The game is very well designed, paces really well and is extremely immersive. It actually takes its narrative seriously and don't even give alien races names until you find out what they call themselves and how to even talk to them.

And the soundtrack. THE SOUNDTRACK! Oh my god, it's auditory orgasms all around. <3

[Misery]

I agree, I did the same thing.   Though I was watching Paradox's own (hilarious) playthrough that they streamed on Twitch.

I keep saying I wont preorder stuff, but in this one specific case... I've seen enough to know that I'm getting something of real quality here.  ALOT of quality.  Really, I'm just stoked for this game to come out, cant wait.  I actually bought the "Nova" edition because for once I rather liked the look of the extra stuff (more aliens to choose from is the main thing, I already really like the way the already-existing ones look, they did a superb job with that).  And it comes with the soundtrack.  I haven't actually HEARD the soundtrack really (they have the sound turned way the hell down for their stream, which does make sense in a lot of cases with streaming) but I have already heard that it's very good.

Just a few more days till this is available!  In other times I'd say "argh, I need some other game to hold me over!" but right now I'm testing Starward over... and over... and over... and over... and over... we've got a patch (big one) coming hopefully in the morning.   Got Gungeon too which has grown on me over time.

EDIT:  Apparently this game is also going to be super modable. 

[chemical_art]

Every time I tell myself "I will break my rule for preordering" for any reason but "I want a sequel. period. full stop." I have been disappointed in one way or another.

But the games I have done so do get sequels, so "The process works TM"

[Mánagarmr]

The soundtrack sounds like something out of Deus Ex Human Revolution mixed with an epic space opera. It's...perfect. Like how the Simcity 5 soundtrack was amazing (the game sucked balls, but the soundtrack was JUST RIGHT for that game).

[Mánagarmr]

Apparently the game has several phases it goes through. Once you reach a certain planet limit, you need to start appointing districts and regions and you start managing the game that way. So the micromanagement overload you can get by the endgame seems to be handled neatly.

[Cyborg]

Look at how far this thread has come. I also preordered this. If it is able to do what we saw on the gameplay video, it will already be worth it. If anyone read the RPS article from this week, the author has already so many play hours even before the review is out. We may have a game of the year candidate.

So yeah, please release this game soon! I haven't been this excited for a game in a while. This could be the one, the space experience we have been waiting for.

[Wingflier]

Could somebody link the best gameplay video of this one? People keep mentioning them but I want to see the right one.

Also out of curiosity, what makes this one so special? What does it do right that the others have done wrong? Is combat handled in an interesting way?

Thanks in advance.

[Misery]

It's the sort of thing you'll have to see for yourself, definitely.

I mean, firstly, it's a Paradox game; it's definitely got their trademark style to it and doesn't just try to copy Civ.

One thing that caught my eye immediately is that there's no static tech tree.  When it's time to choose a tech (and you don't just research one at a time) you pick from three that are randomly chosen; they seem to have differing rarities, too.  Which means that you have to THINK about each choice.... you don't just pick one because "well this is the good path I always go down so I need this one".  Tech trees in most 4X games, and most RTS games bother me because of their static nature.  Honestly AI War is the only other one I can think of where I like how the research works, since you don't need to, for example, pointlessly research both rockets and jumping robots before you can research land mines; a lot of 4X games make you do stuff like that, and always in the same order, and it just irritates me.  It's the same every game and it's bloody boring.

The diplomacy stuff is, well.... it's Paradox.  If you've seen their games, I doubt I have to explain it much.  I'm interested to see just how involved this aspect of the game gets.

But really you'd have to see it for yourself.

I've no idea what videos to recommend, I've been watching Paradox's own streams (which are still up on Twitch) and I started watching Scott Manley's videos of it too. 

[Wingflier]

I mean, firstly, it's a Paradox game; it's definitely got their trademark style to it and doesn't just try to copy Civ.

So how would this game then compare to say "Distant Worlds: Universe", which is also a Paradox game, a space game, with space simulation mechanics, diplomacy, ship design, fleet logistics, planet automation, and the whole works.

I remember when that game came out the Arcen forums were similarly excited.

[Misery]

I mean, firstly, it's a Paradox game; it's definitely got their trademark style to it and doesn't just try to copy Civ.

So how would this game then compare to say "Distant Worlds: Universe", which is also a Paradox game, a space game, with space simulation mechanics, diplomacy, ship design, fleet logistics, planet automation, and the whole works.

I remember when that game came out the Arcen forums were similarly excited.

I looked up Distant Worlds.   Best I can tell there is no connection to Paradox.  Where are you seeing that?

The developer is "Code Force" (developer of Stellaris is Paradox Development Studio) and the publisher is Matrix Games / Slitherine LTD.    Needless to say the publisher of Stellaris is Paradox. 

There appears to be no link between Code Force/Matrix and Paradox.

This makes sense:  These two games probably share some gameplay elements (both are space 4X after all) but other than that they look nothing alike.  Stellaris is still using the Clausewitz engine that PDS has been using for a billionty years now (so some aspects of it have a very similar appearance to Paradox's other grand strategy games like EU and whatnot).    Wheras Distant Worlds.... well, I tell ya, that has one heck of a different.... everything.... to it.

Distant Worlds actually is one that I keep meaning to get and then keep forgetting about.  It looks quite good.  And confusing.