New undisclosed Paradox game on the horizon: Millennia

[TruePurple]

I like the graphics myself, I've seen much worse, usually indie games and pixelated.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I dunno why everyone hates the graphics. They are perfectly servicable.

To me they just look bland, a lot of games kinda seems to negate the effectivness of aesthetics, so they do the bare minimum, yes it's pretty, but doesn't have charachter in of itself.

 

[TruePurple]

What matters is game-play.

 

[pokiehl]

What matters is game-play.

That’s not quite true, and you can investigate that claim by imagining how likely you are to play and enjoy a game made on an Excel spreadsheet. There’s a reason that videogame graphics have improved over time: because people enjoy looking at pretty things.

The whole package matters. If I’m spending my money and time on a game, it needs to be visually appealing, have great sound design, and of course have great gameplay.

 

[TruePurple]

I'd much much rather have sufficient graphics and awesome game-play than visa versa and I am not the only one which is why many games come out even now with crap graphics yet still get praise. Going to the extreme and talking about spreadsheets is not a accurate representation of my position.

I will play games with sound off and listen to music or silence so I can't really sympathize with your "great sound design" position.

 

[pokiehl]

Why present it as either/or? Good gameplay doesn’t preclude good graphics, nor vice versa. I’m just saying graphics do matter, and the best games have great graphics, gameplay, and sound.

And for that reason, I don’t think Old World, Ara, or Millenia have a chance at dethroning Civ.

 

[TruePurple]

Why present it as either/or? Good gameplay doesn’t preclude good graphics, nor vice versa. I’m just saying graphics do matter, and the best games have great graphics, gameplay, and sound.

And for that reason, I don’t think Old World, Ara, or Millenia have a chance at dethroning Civ.

It's not either or, but gameplay is way more important than graphics to me and others. The graphics shown are more than sufficient right no (well aside from issues like finding your troops and stuff). Better graphics would just be a mild bonus at alot of additional cost to production.

 

[Dale]

 

[TruePurple]

Also something to consider is that peoples idea of what looks good graphics wise can vary wildly. Games I consider bad looking look beautful to others and apparently visa versa. I think graphics looking good is more subjective than game-play,

Gameplay can be objectively good to a degree within the framework of it's type and such. There will still be different opinions of course. But overall I think it's easier to please more people on game-play than you can in art, especially within the limits of a 4x.

 

[saamohod]

View attachment 673444

If only people like you heard about games like Stellaris, Hearts of Iron or Ringworld, which are very popular and and have complex and addictive gameplay, but have little to show for in graphics department.

 

[pokiehl]

If they had spent half as much time on the graphics they coulda had working games with cool systems that were interactive and integrated.

This is a false dichotomy I think. The artists aren’t the ones making the gameplay and vice versa. Typically art comes from a different budget “bucket.” It’s not like there’s just a pool of money (or talent) all aspects of the project pull from in a zero-sum manner.

 

[TruePurple]

And in general there is so much money developers and their owners are willing to spend. Even if you say different buckets, money can be shifted around as deemed necessary. One needs priorities in any game development, even triple A, and these priorities really shape a game.

In Outer Worlds at first what you are wearing seems to effect how you are treated. There are different dialogues if you wear X equipment/suit. But this does not actually make a difference and you never see this latter on. I think I read they even planned for this to be a mechanism but dropped it. That is certainly the feeling you get from playing. Why? Because there is only so much money and often limited time as well, and you must choose your priorities.

I am not saying to not make a game look nice. But right now the graphics for Millennia look at least acceptable except for issues like finding troops. So keep graphic improvement concerns to a minimum while you tighten up game-play and only if there is money and time left you focus on graphics. Great game-play but so so graphics, you will have customers buying. Beautful graphics but so-so game-play, you won't.

And make it modable. Well this is Paradox, aren't they infamous for making a base game they stop developing on after awhile and just spam overpriced DLCs at it?

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Well this is Paradox, aren't they infamous for making a base game they stop developing on after awhile and just spam overpriced DLCs at it?

They keep on developing it, each overpriced DLC comes with a free update (though some stuff gets either deliberately or by an oversight stuck to DLC content; for example, Barbary coastal raiding for Barbary states is locked behind a DLC, but one of the branches in the mission tree for Morocco requires you to coastal raid)

 

[pokiehl]

Great game-play but so so graphics, you will have customers buying. Beautful graphics but so-so game-play, you won't.

I, as a customer, am equally disinclined to buy games with poor gameplay as I am to buy ugly games.

It’s more accurate to say there’s a minimum threshold for both aspects. Graphics are the very first impression you get with players, and you don’t get to make that first impression twice. If this game looking “fine” were enough, then we wouldn’t be having this conversation and other people wouldn’t have reacted negatively to the appearance, right? The game’s visuals are being widely criticized even in Paradox’s forums.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Graphics isn't just "oh it looks pretty, sunset is gorgeous" What makes games liek EU and CK work is that their "style" is *very* dinstinct. What Humankind lacks is readability of the map that, it is pretty, but the graphics work against it. I know Civ 6 got A LOT of flack for its art style but it actually WORKS for the game (and I think they tweaked it before gold release anyway).

Millenia's graphics look like something out of a manufactored box, which is on par with most Paradox releases (Cities Skylines and Life By You both have this quality to its graphics), it just doesn't feel like they put any thought into a style, so it lacks charachter and personality, which to me, is largely off-putting.

Old World actually has nice graphics, and has a nice UI design to it as well.

 

[TruePurple]

I get what you are saying Bear, I just don't feel that way. I'd much rather have a game that looks nice but has a mix mash of different 'styles' or no distinctness to said 'style' than a distinct specific style. Like unique consistant style is really low down on my personal list, if it even makes the cut. Like I sorta get some graphics not standing out too oddball from the rest but that's it.

I only speak for myself in this, not having a good idea of general opinion on this topic.

One point with having consistant type of style is since prefered style/graphics can vary so wildly between players, more styles you have the more you are going to find someone who doesn't like something. And I think things looking badly has a bigger impact on sales than looking good. But I don't think that is what Bear was talking about.

 

[Dale]

If only people like you heard about games like Stellaris, Hearts of Iron or Ringworld, which are very popular and and have complex and addictive gameplay, but have little to show for in graphics department.

Out of those games I only play HOI. And the last one of those I enjoyed was HOI2. So, not really an argument mate.

 

[saamohod]

Out of those games I only play HOI. And the last one of those I enjoyed was HOI2. So, not really an argument mate.

> Mohawk Games Developer

May I assume that you judgment is a bit biased?
However your reply made me discover Mohawk Games and its product Old World. Currently watching a YT video about the game.

 

[user330977]

> Mohawk Games Developer

May I assume that you judgment is a bit biased?
However your reply made me discover Mohawk Games and its product Old World. Currently watching a YT video about the game.

I don't think so. I'm not a game developer and I bounce off those games as well. They can be fun, but are hardly capable of scratching that deep strategy itch.

Kind regards,
Ita Bear

 

[Dale]

> Mohawk Games Developer

May I assume that you judgment is a bit biased?
However your reply made me discover Mohawk Games and its product Old World. Currently watching a YT video about the game.

Yeah, I'm biased towards Old World, but I didn't bring it up.

I prefer history-based games, and HOI was the only history -based game you mentioned. Its a preference thing.