So as I did for my previous favorite game SoaSE, I'll be scouring the web for Elemental reviews and posting them here. That way there will be a single location where we can navigate to all the reviews of the game, for easy reference.
If you happen to find one I don't post, leave a comment below it in the following format:
I hope this will be made sticky by someone from SD like my previous thread was in SoaSE.
Metacritic Average
English Reviews:
**********************************************************************************
NEOSEEKER
9/10
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Games/Reviews/elemental_war_of_magic/
Eurogamer
BIG Download
Verdict: Must Own
http://news.bigdownload.com/2010/09/07/review-elemental/
IGN
6 / 10
http://pc.ign.com/articles/111/1117649p1.html
Gameshark
C
http://www.gameshark.com/reviews/3607/p_0/Elemental-War-of-Magic-Review.htm
Gamespot
4 / 10
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/elementalwarofmagic/review.html
GamerNode
2 / 5
http://gamernode.com/reviews/9442-elemental-war-of-magic/index.html
GameInformer
6.5 / 10
http://gameinformer.com/games/elemental_war_of_magic/b/pc/archive/2010/08/31/review.aspx
Giantbomb
Rock, Paper, Shotgun
""At the moment, I think “unfinished” is too harsh a phrase. I’d lean towards “a bit shoddy”.""
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/30/impressions-of-elemental-war-of-magic/
Joystiq
Destructoid
PC Gamer
70 / 100
http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/09/02/elemental-war-of-magic-review/
G4 X-Play
2/5
http://g4tv.com/games/pc/63836/Elemental-War-of-Magic/review/
Shacknews
No score at this time.
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/65347
1 UP
C+
http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3181116
Fidgit
"I guarantee it's not going to be like anything you'll read from any other reviewer."
hhttp://fidgit.com/archives/2010/08/elemental_the_review.php
RPGWatch
"Elemental is still 2-3 patches away from being ready for prime time. When and if those patches are done, Elemental has the potential to be one of those few games that stays on your computer for years as a fun gaming experience."
http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/article?articleid=159&ref=0&id=412
OutOfEight
5/8
http://www.outofeight.info/2010/08/elemental-war-of-magic-review.html
GameEnema
6/10
www.gameenema.com/2.shtml
GamePro
3.5/5
http://www.gamepro.com/article/reviews/216449/elemental-war-of-magic/
Non-English Reviews:
iPon
57%
http://ipon.hu/jatekok/elemental_war_of_magic_%E2%80%93_elementalis_bakloves/825/
Meristation
6.5/10
http://www.meristation.com/v3/des_analisis.php?pic=PC&id=cw4c7d415c6ed86&idj=cw4911603a40884
Gamestar
79/100
http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/elemental-war-of-magic/test/elemental_war_of_magic,44740,2317608.html
I'm more with Tridus on this one. You posted an example of two games one of which did you even play? I don't think it's a requirement for a review site to only give me reviews that I agree with, especially when there are certain series people will dismiss by the "cover" and not actually play. I am not sure any of the Settlers series ever got much higher than a 6 or a 7 and that was one of my favorite series. They are, however, for particular tastes.
Let's be fair here. All we can do at this point is to average the reviews thus far and give it a grade. So let's see:
Neoseeker: .90
1 Up: .77 (C+)
Out of 8: .625 (5/8)
GameEnema: .6 (6/10)
Average = .72 (C -)
Add to this the hungarian review of .57 and the French of .3, which was mentioned earlier and you just dismissed without giving a reason, and the result is:
(.9 + .77 + .625 + .6 + .57 + .3 )/6 = 3.765/6 = .6275.
The neoseeker review is quite fun.
Yeah, sure. Did we play the same game? Did you see ANY explanation of what diplomatic capital is, or how it works? Neither in the documentation nor the Hiergamenon.
You assume quit a bit about what I think. You don't have the reasoning skills to manage that so stop trying. Its also stupid to put too much stock in someones first review ever on a brand new site with no history. For all we know its the one and only review this mouth breather will ever do. It has nothing to do with the size of the companies doing the review you asinine air head and everything to do with building a reputation for quality reviews. Clearly you must have read all his previous reviews to feel the way you do. Oh wait there are no previous reviews. You should learn to try to use that thing stuck between your ears that you call a brain.
Yeah I thought the Neoseeker review was laughably bad. As you mentioned, he called it easy to learn and 'accessible'. Um. I would consider myself a veteran of the genre and compared to all of my favorites, Elemental is near the bottom of the list for accessibility.
He then goes out of his way to praise both the single player campaign and the tactical combat, both of which are huge weaknesses. He also does not mention the almost complete lack of accurate documentation which is...kind of important for a 4x game.
I like the summary in the OutOfEight review:
What say you? Part turn-based strategy, part city management, part role-playing game, partly finished, occasionally fun: 5/8
I think it describes the current state of Elemental well.
updated list!
Another quality post from our friend here, let's all give a hand to the one, the only Dragoaskannnnnnnniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii. How 'bout we, you know, base judgments on actual content rather than 'experience.' That turd Eric Nahler's been farting out terrible reviews at 1up for years (I mean, read his Yakuza review... its a comedy goldmine)... Tim Rogers has been inflicting reviews on the public for god knows how long.The fact that people feel the need to resort to adhominem attacks in defense of a video game (calling the other foolish, no less) is totally hilarious.
He did say it had to do with the reputation of the reviewer not the company. I can see you chose to read over that part and focus on the insults instead though.
Hehe, the neoseeker review is funny indeed.
No hints on practically useless unit design coz it's all just the same with just a little more +X here n there but no special abilities or t he complete lack of flying units. No hints on magic spells being all the same with just a bit mo oomph. Not mentioned that the major magic element namely shards are pretty much useless atm due to broken damage calculation in spell xmls, the crappy AI and countless other issues that have been brought up and confirmed in this very forum.
It's simply just an ode to Elemental and therefore just as useless as the die-hard fanbois consider other gamers' complaints to be.
I addressed this in the most substantial part of my response.
This game has got a great potential. It can Be great but if Stardock team wont do something.... This game is full of bugs and disapointments. You did GalCiv... You can do this as well. But at the moment you sell beta version not gold .... Try to look more to master of magic, galciv and read what people are writing. Sorry for my english.
G4 X-Play - 2/5. Reads like someone who WANTS to like it (except the lack of documentation, they really don't like that).
Hey pal, I feel so sorry for the state of this game. I've posted quite a lot until a month be4 the release, stopped posting until Brad suddenly announced that the game will be ready in a month.
I do hv a very busy RL, any game that is medicore does not worth my time. I'll not play it now (I've played few hours already, game not attractive to me -> quit playing). I'll wait for months & years to see if this game will hopefully attain its full potential; maybe in the form of a mod, or cannon content. I hope it will.
Best wishes to SD, but this launch is screwed up. Plz just admit it, move on, and do damage control.
G4 X-play is up
updated, and made a non-english review section at the bottom
It's iPon not Ipon .
fixed my mistake.
Gameshark - C
http://www.gameshark.com/pc/reviews/3607/Elemental-War-of-Magic-Review.htm
What's Hot: Original design, clever tech tree
What's Not: Terrible artwork, technical problems, underdocumented
......terrible artwork...seriously wtf?
----------------------
GamerNode - 2/5
---------------------
Just a note with regard to the [hungarian] iPon review -> The reviewer liked the art style, but he is annoyed by the gameplay bugs/"missing" features, which is why he gave 4 for gameplay.
The artwork has always been a "love it or hate it" proposition, and they acknowledged that going in with the style. It's entirely a stylistic preference though and best to just discount that part of any review entirely (not just this one, all of them).
[The above text refers to the currently available 1.06 version of the game. If you're looking for a review of the unpatched version that shipped on disc, it's right here: "Terrible. Do not play under any circumstances. Patch immediately."]
haha. +1 lulz to Game Informer.
Yeah....reviewers should try to be objective....somewhat at least.
The phrase "terrible artwork" is generally used to describe any game that isn't a shallow FPS bolted on top of a bleeding edge graphics engine.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
