Audible eXtension for Interstellar Space: Genesis

Join Rob, Nate and Oliver as they discuss the Interstellar Space: Genesis review. We discuss what was left on the cutting-room floor and where this game is headed. Come and listen to what we think about the first try from Praxis Studios.

Music for eXplorminate by Mangadrive

Show Notes: 

  1. Interstellar Space Genesis Steam page
  2. Interstellar Space: Genesis Review
  3. Master of Orion 2 Steam page
  4. Endless Space 2 Steam page
  5. Galactic Civilizations II: Ultimate Edition Steam page
  6. Stellaris Steam page
  7. Galactic Civilizations III Steam page
  8. Stars in Shadow Steam page
  9. Master of Orion: Conquer the Stars Steam page
  10. Endless Space Steam page
  11. Bejeweled 3 Steam page
  12. XCOM 2 Steam page
  13. Thea 2: The Shattering Steam page
  14. Age of Wonders: Planetfall Steam page
  15. Civilization 6 Steam page
  16. Warhammer 40,000: Gladius – Relics of War Steam page
  17. Endless Legend Steam page

3 thoughts on “Audible eXtension for Interstellar Space: Genesis

  1. Unless there is another way I am not seeing, increasing the difficulty of colonizing other planets is probably only going to be achieved by increasing the military requirements or by slowing down early production rates on new planets. The first will end up becoming just another form of slow start. The second will result in a crawl feeling to expansion.

    I don’t think the solution to a slow early game is making if more difficult somewhere else. The only possible solution is just making it faster.

    However…

    I dunno… I have yet to play IS:G. And hearing that this would have been a blockbuster some 10 or 15 years ago only makes me want to play it more, because frankly between then and now nothing has improved whatsoever other than those gameplay features not related to the 4x genre — like aesthetics or rich lore. To this day, I still adhere to Oliver’s last year article. Like in 2018, nothing really changed since then.

    So what bothers me is knowing that the developer is listening to complaints about a slow start, or aesthetics, or lack of factions and promising to address them. What I would really like the developer to listen to is the fact that maybe he needs to make a 4x game that tries to be more than that. Because THAT is what everyone else is doing.

    What about victory conditions revamping, or remove them entirely? What about gameplay progression events and mechanics that ensure you are always playing a strategy game from start to finish? This is where I would like the pressure directed at developers was.

    Like

  2. My second to last paragraph reads the wrong way. Let me rephrase:

    […]What I would really like the developer to listen is the fact that maybe he needs to make a 4x game that tries to be more than just those things. Because those things is what everyone else is already doing. And no benefit to gameplay came out of it.

    Like

    1. Yes, I share your views.

      I wasn’t totally content with there we landed during this episode. I think it came across as a little negative – which from a certain point of view I think is justified. But at the same time – for me – fancy graphics or “asymmetry for the same of asymmetry” that wrap around pretty bland gameplay (MoO: CTS) or easily exploited gameplay (ES2), doens’t matter to me much at all. For others, they will.

      Look at it this way – from a pure mechanical system design, I’ve had the fewest actual complaints about ISG than any other space 4X game of the past many years. The game works and is bug free, and every system is frankly at or above average from a design standpoint. The pacing issue is a concern of perception and initial impression, but it goes away when you figure the game out more.

      If you can look past the pacing and rougher aesthetics, the question then is really if sticking close to a traditional 4X game design is going to be of interest or not. If it is – then ISG is a great fit. If you’re tired of the traditional design – as i suspect Rob and Nate are (and me to some extent), then ISG might be a miss.

      Rob or Nate, if I can put words in their mouth, might advocate that the game needs to be more aesthetically engaging or have more “content” or make itself different by being weirder or having more asymmetry or varied factions in order to properly “hook” them. For me, it’s all about the refined and innovative mechanics – and I’d really love to see the game tackle some grander mechanical issue that expanded the core gameplay.

      Like

Leave a Reply to Mario Figueiredo Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s