Who keeps going back to Sword of the Stars II?

[Sparhawk]

I spend most of my time playing space 4x. The last couple of years have been amazing. I'll play through the circuit of games I have, most recently several days of Polaris Sector. When I tire of them I fire up Sword of the Stars II. Admittedly there are warts but I overlook them because more than any other game I can create parameters that suit my play style. I dislike the mad rush to gain territory. In SotSII I can slowly develop planets and set up trade between them without worrying about being blocked from essential systems. I guess the pacing works for me. Others may think it a bit slow. I absolutely love gaining technology and designing ships. This is not a game that you can spam fleets of ships, logistics and finances prevent that. Smart design and tactical care are essential. I crave an updated and polished version of this game. Does anyone know if Kerberos is still around? Will we ever see a continuation of the SotS 4x universe?

[Yskonyn]

SotS 2 is excellent and I play it still as well. Especially multiplayer is super fun, but the activity in the Steam group has died down unfortunately.

Kerberos is still around, but they are short on funds last I know. Their small games like The Pit and Ground Pounders were a project to raise money, hopefully enough to work on the next SotS project.
But I don't think it has been very successful. News has been slow, so they might be working on something or they might not.

Paradox still owns the rights to SotS 2 and has ended support for the game a long time ago. Kerberos cannot release updates for it.
They did release a patch to fix a glaring AI issue that was left over but that was the last of it.

Arinn created a magnificent lorebook, which I backed, and its just great to see the depth of the SotS universe. I really hope they can climb out and restart.

[HoodedHorseJoe]

I covered SOTS2 closely in the run up to launch - such a beautiful, ambitious project. I was one of the many who was utterly disappointed with what we got. Alarms started ringing for me when it got to the week of launch and I realised I hadn't actually played the game yet, or even seen it played in front of me (Paradox were always good for that at the time).

After they released that free expansion a year later that allowed it to be given the "All clear", I did actually play it a fair bit. It is very compelling to design your ships, your fleets, work your way up the technology tree. Battles are great fun, but that game over all wasn't. I'd argue Spar that the "pace" you refer to is actually from the game not having a particularly good AI rather than intentional design. Go play SOTS1 (which is very good, if a bit aged now), and you would feel under more pressure because the AI actually does things.

Eventually I stopped going back to it and I don't think I ever will because it just upsets me to imagine the wasted potential. Plenty of people blame Paradox, plenty of people blame Kerberos... it's just one big tragedy really. I'd be surprised if they ever get given enough money to do another game on the scale of SOTS2, but I feel the 4X genre in general is having a bit of a renaissance so we don't really need them too - someone will make a similar/comparable game that will be just as good, and on time.

[Yskonyn]

(..) so we don't really need them too - someone will make a similar/comparable game that will be just as good, and on time.

Can you name any examples? The tactical combat in SotS has not been used in any other 4x game to date.

[HoodedHorseJoe]

(..) so we don't really need them too - someone will make a similar/comparable game that will be just as good, and on time.

Can you name any examples? The tactical combat in SotS has not been used in any other 4x game to date.

Not off the top of my head - you're right I don't think the tactical combat specifically has been replicated elsewhere... but then for all we know that's where all the money went and caused the project so many issues in the first place.

Legends of Pegasus had something similar to SOTS2, but poorly implemented. I personally liked Endless Space as a way of abstracted combat beyond mere number-crunching with some visuals (like Stellaris or GalCiv3), but that game could get stale quite quickly.

I know another well-known 4X series is getting a sequel, but I'm not really allowed to talk about it. No idea how combat is being handled though. Iceberg Interactive are churning out the 4X games at the moment - haven't kept up with their recent ones but glad to see someone is flying that flag.

[Jarhead0331]

SotSII will always have a place on my HD. Despite its issues, it still manages to be a great game.

[HoodedHorseJoe]

SotSII will always have a place on my HD. Despite its issues, it still manages to be a great game.

It'll always hold a place in my heart for the best ship-design and tactical battle system I've experienced to date (I think? I forget a lot of games I play), but I'm past the point in being able to forgive studios for their follies. With the caveat that I don't really know the story of what happened so it could have been something completely understandable.

From what I did hear though, they kept Paradox in the dark about a lot of things, which is just poor communication and causes more problems.

[Yskonyn]

SotSII will always have a place on my HD. Despite its issues, it still manages to be a great game.

It'll always hold a place in my heart for the best ship-design and tactical battle system I've experienced to date (I think? I forget a lot of games I play), but I'm past the point in being able to forgive studios for their follies. With the caveat that I don't really know the story of what happened so it could have been something completely understandable.

From what I did hear though, they kept Paradox in the dark about a lot of things, which is just poor communication and causes more problems.

A simple Google query will throw a different light on your last statement. The whole affair isnt some kind of secret.

[Trooperc7]

I own both SOTS and SOTS2.... of the two, i like the SOTS better...........I think the AI provides for a better game....the only real complaints i have about both games is the garish bright neon color of everything.

[HoodedHorseJoe]

SotSII will always have a place on my HD. Despite its issues, it still manages to be a great game.

It'll always hold a place in my heart for the best ship-design and tactical battle system I've experienced to date (I think? I forget a lot of games I play), but I'm past the point in being able to forgive studios for their follies. With the caveat that I don't really know the story of what happened so it could have been something completely understandable.

From what I did hear though, they kept Paradox in the dark about a lot of things, which is just poor communication and causes more problems.

A simple Google query will throw a different light on your last statement. The whole affair isn't some kind of secret.

Apologies - didn't mean to suggest it was! Kerberos, to their credit, were quite willing to accept blame for what happened and Paradox also admitted a lack of resources on their end to perhaps catch issues early. The game was incredibly late by the time it came out, from what I understand.

[Jarhead0331]

I get that the release state of the game left people with a bad taste in their mouths, but it has been heavily patched and is quite a bit more playable in its present state.

its just like MOO3. People hated it at release, but its been patched and modded into one of the greatest space 4x games in the history of electronic gaming (in my humble opinion).

[Yskonyn]

No worries, but single statements without context make my neck hair rise.
While it is true there have been delays at Kerberos' end it was Paradox as a publisher who set the deadline and forced a broken game to be released. After the backlash of the release Paradox did precious little to salvage the situation and rather quickly pulled the plug leaving the the users and Kerberos left to hang.
That's not to imply Kerberos doesn't own any responsibility in the whole thing. Obviously they do and they own that fact as well.
The above is already more nuanced than your first statements made to believe I find.
No offense meant.

[Nefaro]

I own both SOTS and SOTS2.... of the two, i like the SOTS better...........I think the AI provides for a better game....the only real complaints i have about both games is the garish bright neon color of everything.

The bright neon colors of SotS 2 did seem way too much.

Last time I tried playing it, a few years ago, it was rather sluggish.  I never stuck with it long enough to see if it got worse.  If it would run on my lowly laptop Nvidia card & slow-ish processor just fine, I'd have played it more.  But when I'm on my gaming desktop, I tend to wanna play other more intensive games instead.  And it ran rather crappy on my desktop so..

[Yskonyn]

Yeah I never understood the performance issues either.
My gaming pc had trouble with it, but my laptop with a puny Intel 5500 integrated graphics chip runs it flawlessly as long as I keep all post processing off. Weird.

[sandman2575]

I keep coming back to SOTSII as well. Along with Distant Worlds, it's probably one of the 2 space 4x games I'd take with me to the proverbial desert island.  I keep meaning to give MOO3 a go on the strength of JH's advocacy -- one day I'll get there.

WargamerJoe mentions a 4x 'renaissance' but I have to say that sounds a bit optimistic to me, insofar as so many of the 4x games that continue to come out stick to the same, tired, done-to-death formulas. What distinguishes both SOTS and Distant Worlds to me is the fact that both games dare to take chances that so many -- too many -- 4x games fail to take, instead opting for safe tried-and-true ideas. What's needed is not a 4x renaissance so much as a 4x revolution...