I put "review" in quotations because it's not, really. Mr. Chick explains as much himself. What it is, though, is a fascinating look at the game from a game reviewer who apparently has a working history with Mr. Wardell. I think it's a good read.
I wonder if Frogboy has seen it, and if he'd weigh in.
My comments were with respect to Stardock's development strategy of releasing a solid foundation for people to buy and essentially test while they spend the next year polishing the game and making changes based on player feedback. It actually reminds me a lot of how open source projects are put together with the obvious exception that the end user is asked to pay for it. This model works fine for an independent company with loyal and dedicated customers who expect it, but it doesn't work so well when trying to market to the general public.
Curiously, this reminds me a lot of the Hellgate: London release. The problem with Hellgate: London was two-fold: 1) Flagship's PR was abysmal. Bill Roper openly insulted Flagship's customers in several interviews, and Flagship personnel were rude and condescending when interacting with the public in their forums; and 2) Hellgate: London had fundamental game design flaws that made it a chore to play even if you weren't encountering its numerous bugs. Thankfully, Elemental does not appear to suffer either of these problems, and Stardock is far more responsive to customer feedback than Flagship ever was.
With the exception of Starcraft: Ghost, every game they cancelled was before that was true. Warcraft 2 was a success, but it wasn't a big enough success to give them an infinite budget to go and completely do Starcraft 1 over.
But when the first version of Starcraft 1 didn't work out, that's in fact exactly what they did. They scrapped a lot of stuff and started again.
Blizzard got the reputation and money they have now because they made tough decisions back when they weren't that wealthy. I don't know where people get this idea that Blizzard was always filthy rich. They got there by putting out quality games and earning it.
They also, for better or for worse, lean heavily on how their games are perceived by gamers. WoW has a reputation as the McDonalds of MMOs now, but it got that way because Blizzard listened to what players thought and made adjustments until it found a sweet spot. I'm not saying Stardock doesn't do that, but the whole release gives the impression that there was no one listening to the critical voices that were saying "This is not the time, the game is not ready."
The most obvious answer for me is Christmas. Now they have a bit of time to polish it up.
As far as people feeling they are "ripped off" by paying $50 for EWOM...I feel MUCH more ripped off when I am expected to pay $50 for a game, then download a huge patch, then expected to pay $15 every month for the privilege to play.
I think reviewers need to keep these things in mind lest they throw out the baby with the bathwater. Not all developers are the same, not all games are the same and not all gamers are the same. If I were Tom Chick, I would have definitely told those that believe in Stardock and in Elemental to go right ahead and buy the game now - "come on in, the water's fine!" And to those who want/expect a more perfect product, I'd still have encouraged a bit of patience and advised them to consider a purchase soon, if not now.
You forgot a little game called diablo....which still sells.
What this is, is your opinion. I have found it addictive, fun as hell, and having a huge replay value. It sounds like most detractors are still complaining about ver. 1.0...as of 1.06, the game is pretty darn good.
Give us a little credit... given the incredibly buggy state of 1.0/1.01 I'd be downright shocked if anyone that's given it more than a couple of play sessions hasn't fully patched.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad you think it's good enough as it stands now. I just have much higher aspirations for Elemental than "good enough". Broken and bland magic, 1-dimensional diplomacy, retarded AI and a horribly inconsistent UI just don't do it for me.
He may or may not have seen this... but he is on vacation and his wife will skin him if he does not take a few more days afk heh heh...
As you say, why SD figured Feb is too late is unknown as I haven't seen mention behind the reasoning, other than Brad saying he thinks/thought(?) the game is ready for release as it is now (which I can't fathom), suggesting he thought/thinks(?) waiting til Feb was unnecessary.
Thanks for the polite and well-reasoned discussion!
Unfortunately, Elemental only has until Civ 5's release to fix itself. Once Civ 5 comes it's a wrap. We all know this. Even the most fanboyest fanboy knows it deep in their tiny lil fanboy heart.
There's a word for what you're talking about here: Charity. There are studios that operate on this principle, like Data Realms and Bay12. Labors of love, often open source, developed by a single person or very small distributed team. They're either free to play and supported by charitable donations, or hover around a $5-10 price point which amounts to the same thing because it's presented as helping finish development of the game rather than purchasing a finished product.
Last time I checked there was not a "Donate" paypal button on Stardock's site, and it costs a lot more than $10 to download Elemental.
I was flush with cash and blinded by nostalgia for Master of Magic when I shelled out $80 plus shipping for the special edition. I also paid that money for a shot at getting in on the beta, which I knew would not be fun (though I secretly hoped otherwise, and to be honest it was in those brief periods between crashes), but it was worth it for a glimpse at the game in it's early stages and the chance to help ensure it met my expectations. I almost feel a bit guilty that I had to drop out of beta shortly after I got in due to other demands on my time, as if I'm in part to blame for the state in which it shipped.
Because the state in which it shipped is not that of a finished game. I'm fine with this, since I've already committed to paying for beta access. As far as my pocket book is concerned, the game hasn't really been released yet and I'm still helping work on the beta. What boggles me is the number of people who profess to believe this game is fit for a $50 price tag and full release to people who aren't knowingly paying to beta test.
As fans and detractors alike have noted, there's huge potential here. The unit design system is the skeleton of something great (my dream being something like SMAC's system), the magic system is a great framework upon which to build, the research system is pretty solid though lacking in variety at the top end, and the tactical battle system will be pretty cool though hampered by issues with the unit and magic systems. But that's just it: it's all potential. None of the many subsystems of the game feel incomplete, and huge cracks show through wherever they hook up.
I mean this sincerely, to all of those professing to love the gameplay as is: What are you doing that's so fun? I honestly hope you've noticed something I've overlooked that adds spice to the experience.
Addictive I'll grant you, but so far the play for me has been more compulsive than entertaining, even in that smooth period between starting the game and when it eventually chokes around turn 150-200. I've found the shard bug, the shrinking unit bug, the passive wildlife bug/behavior and the alternately timid/suicidal AI combine to produce a rather bland play session that has me clicking the turn button hundreds of times hoping something interesting will happen before eventually just sending my sovereign, his summoned units and whatever troops I have laying around off to single-handedly conquer every nation on the planet, or until my turn button goes permanently grey and I have to start over again.
This is just not my experience with Elemental at all. I haven't experienced any of these bugs or slowdowns, even after 400+ turns. Maybe I got the one good copy.
Dude, the bugs with shards and shrinking units are not hardware. Unless you're playing a build of the game from the future, they're there - even if you haven't noticed them yet. The game is opaque enough to conceal it's mechanical glitches for quite a while if you assume that it's running fine. I certainly loved my first ~5 games, despite the performance issues that I happen to get on top of the bugs in the game rules. Heck, I can still enjoy the game in small ways (playing for a quest win right now), but it's impossible to play to win with anything approaching a straight face.
Would you stop with these stupid fanboy posts? It doesn't help and its not constructive. I think they are two different games, civ 5 will sell more, but elemental won't fail due to stardock just continuing on with it.
I think its a pet peeve of mine with these fanboy comments, it makes people look about 10.
I was mistaken, the shard bug is real, I've seen that. But shrinking units...nope.
Indeed,I have myself taken some umbrage with the level of vitriol and attack against this game.I have not suffered the crashes or found it unplayable,quite the opposite.I also appreciate the efforts of the stardock team to develop,release and patch the game as they have done the first release week.
Anything I have posted i have seen with the seeming unending its broken complaints.Now I shall return to my game and leave you all to the forum banter.If I ruffled some feathers good.
Agreed on this. Empire had some launch issues, but they were performance bugs(that still should have been fixed prior to launch, IMO) rather than completely unfinished elements and broken mechanics. That is the kind of patching I expect from PC games to a certain degree, not a "we'll get you the second half of the game sometime within the next year" patch scheme.
In other ways I think he is even selling Stardock and Elemental short on a couple of those comparisons. Star Trek Online, for example, while buggy and unfinished, was/is simply a bad game. Elemental, on the other hand, is a decent game with lots of potential that simply needs to be finished and polished.
The real issue at this point, at least for me, is that they need to drop the statements like this and just own up to the fact that they made a poor release decision. The game is in an unacceptable state for $50, and it needed more testing/polishing. Period. Some recognition of this fact on their part, and some gesture towards making up for it would be nice. I have no doubt that Stardock will come through in the end and give us a truely outstanding strategy game, and I am equally confident that Stardock's player community will provide them the feedback they need, as always, to reach that end. I'm also very excited to see the mod community hit the ground running with the user-friendly tools we have been provided. Heck, maybe some of the issues/features we'd like to see finished or added can be done by the mod community itself.
I think that's in reference to the bug where if you reload a saved game which was created when some of your parties/squads/companies are damaged, then those groups are reduced to a single unit (or fewer units) when you reload. That's still alive and well.
I assure you that it is not graphical. If the game is saved while the squads are damaged, then those squads, and their monstrous HP stats, are gone for good upon reload.
Not in my games - they go down to one unit every time, including stats. In fact, I just checked a saved game from last night, from just before it did the usual CTD I get after turn 80 or so. A party which had some damage has gone from 48 attack and 20 defence to 12 attack and 5 defence. In fact, it's not even consistent - the unit card tells me the party has 2 units and the HP are for 2 units, but the attack and defence values are for one.
It might only happen if the unit is stationed in a city - I haven't tested while it idles in my borders, but it's certainly happening.
I love it - even the glitches have glitches! The one I've been able to repeat happens both inside and outside of cities, consistently, and affects stats. Probably worth reporting the graphical-only version, if it hasn't already been reported.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
