I don't think Stardock/The Elemental Team is getting enough props for what they did right here.
As for me, I'm a gamer going back to the PC jr. days in my childhood; I spent thousands of hours in 1994-1995 playing MOM. In reality, I'm a database engineer- meaning I know a little bit about project releases.
Elemental has some rough spots. I bet they can all be traced back to an ROI push that cut resources and time to make an arbitrary number somewhere. Consider that Steam has CIV V, and that Blizzard just released SC 2.
So anyways:
- They took an enormous risk on a genre that hasn't been successful in the US since 1994. (Civilization + Fantasy RPG)
- The art style is incredibly distinctive and lush.
- When RTS/Quick attention span incredibly popular (Starcraft II/Farmville, anyone?) they took a risk on a game with sessions lasting 10-15 hours.
- They built a turn-based CIV engine from scratch. (Didn't seen any licensing props in the credits...)
- When the overall market trend is towards pimping IP again and again ('oh boy, Peggle Carnival IV!!!') they invested in world creation.
- Most of the complaints seem either tech engine or balance related. (E.g. 'On my ATI 9200 when I alt-tab...' or 'Sovereigns should be able to defend at +1 vs..') These are the issues resolved without a hard release deadline. For all we know, half of these issues were spotted *last week* in the Beta.
- Robust DEV interaction since the beginning.
All this criticism is harshing my mellow. This is the core of a fine game-- and all of this reminds me of the noise around Sins of a Solar Empire at launch-- a game that became a classic after a single expansion.
So, I'm sure I missed many other positives, but feel free to share. I assure you that I had all the CTD's and 15-turn games due to wonky AI as anyone else.
Cheers,
BW
Well said! Looking forward to playing this again once they make it a classic.
Great post!I agree, they did some amazing things with this game so far! And it will only get better!Sure its rough around the edges but man is it addicting!GO STARDOCK GO!
Agree. Good post.
The Age of Wonders series, for one, doesn't count?
Don't get me wrong--Elemental is trying to push the genre into new territory and is trying new things. But to say that it is resurrecting a genre which hasn't had a succesful release for a decade and a half is just not true.
Civ 5 isn't being looked upon by anyone as "a risk," and you're ignoring the relatively recent release of Disciples III, another turn-based strategy game.
They're the only people to build their own game engine? Come now.
I agree with this one without reservation. I'm sick of the current trend of milking existing IPs for all they're worth, and this unsettling new trend of making the large majority new release a sequel to something else.
Firstly, the tehcnical complaints are not minor, such as the game slowing down to a crawl even when playing off the cloth map on a modern system that excedes minimum requirements. Secondly, many of the gameplay complaints are likewise not about balancing but rather about fundamental flaws in gameplay. The ones that come most readily to mind are those regarding the flatness of unit design, i.e. how the only real strategic decision there is is whether the unit is going to be equiped with the best melee weapon or the best ranged weapon, and regarding how tactical combat is rather boring and really not neccesary.
Yes, that is refreshing...
Sins didn't need the first expansion to garner both critics' and players' praise. If it did, it wouldn't have gotten 87/100 on Metcritic, which reflects the general rating of a game upon its release.
I must admit, I never thought I'd see a time when farmville and Starcraft II were described as similiar types of games. You do realize farmville is a game where you plant crops and then have to come back the next day (or sometimes multiple days) to harvest them. It's not exactly fast paced.
well say scyldSCHEFING
You realize that Brad created his first turn based game engine in 1991, right? Elemental isn't his first game.
So what did they get right to make the game more fun? All those things sounds like excuses except for the art.
The game is already fun. If you don't like it, then you don't like 4X...you should try Starcraft.
So did I offend you or are you just that sensitive?
This thread should be called What Elemental is trying to do right. A game is not automatically good just because it is trying to do right. It's good when it succeeds in doing it.
So, can anyone get back on topic and tell me what's so great about this game ? My favourite games in the genre are Master of Magic and Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic. I know bugs and issues can be squashed, but if gameplay is fundamentally flawed somewhere then there's no hope. What does Elemental do better (more interesting etc.) than MOM or AOW:SM ? Are there any mechanics not present in the two games which genuinely work well and make Elemental good ? From what I gather Diplomacy, Questing, and dynasties aren't worth much effort.
Sorry, reading the post and I do not see what ARE they are doing right with elemental? The only thing they are doing right (from your list) is the interaction with us, but even that is questionable (beta tester where asking to delay release, and never were able to see concerted version of the game), and they are not doing anything special with elemental, they were allays good, if not better with other games.
Seriously, WHY do you keep coming into threads and crapping on people who have legitimate complaints?
I can make a very strong argument that Elemental is at best a very shallow example of a true 4x game. It has tremendous potential but has barely scratched the surface in some cases (bland city building choices, wide "variety of units that have no real differences except the gear you slap on them, magic system with 20x of "shoot one group for X" and "shoot all groups in 1 radius for X" but precious little differentiation) to the completely BROKEN parts of the game (diplomacy is a 1 dimensional joke, AI is beyond braindead even on "ridiculous", magic is completely craptacular outside of auto resolved combat, 100 amulet/ring exploits, etc.)
I want to see more posts like Mrbrad has made 'cause he obviously has a vested interest in seeing this game truly kick some serious TBS ass as do the majority of those on the forums.
That said, some of your points are overstated (there have been quite a few successful TBS games since MoM) but in all reality there is a ginormous dearth of them presently. And even less so for the fantasy ones as the last I remember is the mostly forgettable Armies of Exigo a couple of years back. So I have a great deal of respect for Stardock risking something this underrepresented in a market that is far more into shooters than just about anything else.
And as much as the art style seems to not sit well with lots of posters, I'm rather enjoying it. I'm far more into a stylized/artistic fantasy feel to this sort of game than the Starcraft approach. I wouldn't mind a TBS with that level of graphics, but realistically it isn't in the cards and gameplay >>>>>>>> graphics everyday of the week and twice on Sunday
There was no legitimate complaint made. I keep looking for it, but I just can't find it...
You, on the other hand, made legitimate complaints/criticisms.
Legitimate "constructive" complaints are fine, but I'm getting a little tired of hearing about how EMOM is "unplayable"...that's bull. It's very playable, and very fun.
Personal tastes I guess. I find the quests fun and enjoy the game more than MoM - haven't tried AOW so can't comment there.
But what if said complaint of "unplayable" is legitimate depending on playstyle?
If, for example, I want to play a heavy magic sovereign "nuker" how well does this game work for me? I can bring along lots of support troops and "champions" (so quoted since they're anything but) but will never see any sort of huge damage output since a HUGE bug somehow managed to squeak out of beta... namely shards not working outside of auto resolve. Or the fact that the insanely limited magic resources I have can be used for spells that not only frequently hit for single digit damage or hell even miss. My choice of this playstyle is completely legitimate and quite workable in other fantasy TBS games so why is it nigh impossible until the very high end when spells actually start doing something of note on the damage scale?
So, in your estimation am I a "hater" as you put it? I find many aspects of the game quite unplayable as they stand and as a whole it's rather broken in many respects.
That's silly...I could just as easily say the game is unplayable because I can't play an alien from Venus. If it's not part of the game, that doesn't make it unplayable. It seems you're looking for problems, and someone who is always looking for problems, will definitely find them.
That would be a more plausible argument if playing magic-heavy characters wasn't one of the game's core selling points!
I'm confused to be honest.
You're telling me that wanting to play a powerful caster sovereign has nothing to do with the game?
THIS is why I actually bought the game. Its called Elemental: War of Magic for a reason. At least, I thought that meant something.
Mrbrad, this isn't to take away from your points either. In fact, I agree with a number of them. However, even all of them combined do not make up for the present state of the game.
charon2112's posts in this thread are so full of fallacies they are not even worth of picking apart. He can't construct a good argument. Even worse, he doesn't know a good argument when he sees one.
Dethedrus, it's not worth it to argue with everybody. Reason and logic only gets you so far against some people. Here, you'd be better served by strong unbacked opinions, personal attacks, and distractions.
Here's what I like. Forewarning this is a perspective of pretty much a 4x newbie...obviously don't understand the detailed working of things. Normal difficulty was designed with me in mind!
-Graphics. Game has a great look. I really like the "painted" visuals of the game. Very unique and fantasy feel.
- City Building. I like watching my city grow, and I like that its not as simple as randomly placing a building. Seeing people working and chatting in city when zoomed adds some flavor. (though max buildings is a mess right now imo, needs to be better explained why u cnt build when tiles are open)
- Tech trees. Seem pretty in-depth and there is def strategy in which/when to level up. More choices than I am used to, love it!
- Tact battles. I'm just glad they made it in. Auto resolve is too random for me. I also like that 6 spearmen show up on a tile rather than a single unit with a number attached. (anxiously awaiting major updates to entire tact battle system.) I'm spoiled from heroes of might and magic. Needs more tactics =P
- Unit design. LOVE being able to make my own unit regardless of the depth. Another feature I cant wait to see 6 months from now. (I agree though, needs more strategy involved......need a reason to take spear over reaver sword)
- Cloth Map. Simple feature that just gives the game a unique feel. Easy to zoom out and identify resources, quests, etc.
Overall I like everything about the game. I just feel all of the systems need to be fleshed out more and given some direction. I've played over 8 hours in 1 game; 3 hours of which have been in an intense war with Kraxis (seriously... they sent 3 armies of 1500 points/defense (whichever =p) to my capital 3 turns in a row. It was crazy but I successfully defended (i.e. exactly why tact battles > auto resolve). We've been swapping cities back and forth; we are gridlocked in an epic struggle for the ages.
But that right there just says what a good game this is/can be. Any other game out there with performance issues I'd drop in a heartbeat, but this game I am STILL enjoying regardless.
Not in my book -- AoW was fun, but it was a tactical combat game, not an empire-builder. Different genre.
Agree with OP 100%
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
