Sorry for the dissertation, but if you are bored while waiting for Elemental to get fixed and want to contemplate the silliness of the human psyche....
I must admit I don't understand all the anger/people saying Stardock should have delayed releasing Elemental until February 2011. It seems to me that EVERYONE is better off with the game released and in players' hands, rather than having Stardock work on it internally for another 6 months before release:
1.) Stardock
Obvious - better off cause they have people's money, and can get players to do their "beta testing", find bugs, etc. without having to pay them...big win.
2.) Players who like the game
"Fanboys" or not, there are apparently a lot of people (50%-ish in the poll, and some positive comments in the forums) who are enjoying playing the game, even if they realize it is not perfect. They are happy it is out now so they get 6 months more of enjoyment. Plus the ability to make suggestions, which means the game will be better by Feb 2011 than it would be if it was just in Stardock's hands internally...let's face it, the official beta-testing process was not, and would not have been, as intense as what is happening now that the game is released - i.e. whenever the game got released players would have a lot of complaints/suggestions, and this way they are taken care of now, rather than 6 months from now. So you get to have whatever fun you can have with the game now, PLUS have the game in better shape by next February than it would otherwise be...PLUS have Stardock feeling bad and more likely to give additional free content that they were planning on charging for going forward = big win for this group, as well.
3.) Players who hate/are frustrated by the game in current form
Okay, you hate the game. Don't play it until next February, and you are in the same place you'd be if they didn't release it until then. Only you are even BETTER off, becasue of the reasons outlined above....you at least have the chance to make suggestions, and/or have other people climbing all over the game and improving it, so it will be better this way by February 2011 than it would have been if they didn't release it until then. Plus more Stardock effort/free stuff, as above. Okay, you had to put up your $50 now. But since you were going to spend $50 next February, you didn't LOSE $50, you just lost the use of that $50 for 6 months. Left in the bank, at the current .1% interest, that "costs" you $.025 in interest (pre-tax!). That sucks, but only a little. I would think if you were going to plop down $50 in 6 months anyways, plopping down, in effect, $50.025 now to get a more-robust, fully tested and vetted game in 6 months that you can mess around with now if you feel like it (and ignore if you don't), PLUS get Stardock's extra effort to make up the problem stuff, seems like a pretty good deal. So ignore the game, come back in February, and have a better game due to the "early" release than you would have had otherwise. If losing out on the $.025 interest on your money for 6 months really annoys you, get a refund and rebuy later - annoying, but not catastrophic, especially relative to the "free look" at maybe enjoying the game now and definelty enjoying the game more once it's been refined by the rest of the public. Either way, the "pre-mature" release seems like a small win even for this group.
I understand if a company releases a game that's not ready, takes your money, and walks away...that REALLY sucks, and no one wants to support the trend of companies doing that. But no one, even those who hate the game in it's current form, appears to think Stardock is going to do that.
Feeling like you are going to get something great, and then having to wait, is annoying...but you'd have to wait if they delayed the release, too. And buying something you thought you'd like, and having to go through the hassle of getting a refund cause you need the money to buy something else to amuse yourself, is also annoying. But it also seems that the annoyance is small compared to the CHANCE to get a look at something early...you might like it..you might not like it but like the chance to help reshape it...you probably will like it more in 6 months than you would have if the release was delayed...it just seems to me that if you really THINK about it, we should ALL be glad Stardock released this game now rather than working on it internally until Febrauary of next year... Stardock wins; people who are enjoying the game now win, and even people who dislike the game in it's current format kinda win. So why the hate?!?!
...if you truly believe that they will continue to improve the game as much as they would have if they kept it internal for 6 more months, the "early" release is a GREAT thing for EVERYONE (like how the capital letters make my points so much stronger.."look, it's in capitals..must be right!"). And it gets even better if you STOP writing how much you hate the game in the forums, and let other people help improve it for you without the distraction!!
Stardock - KEEP releasing games early, AS LONG AS YOU WORK HARD TO SUPPORT THEM AFTER RELEASE, we all win that way!!!!!!
Honestly, Frogboy, if you restructure the beta program slightly such that the last 1 (or 2, preferrably) months before launch is spent with the beta testers dealing with a full-featured build (all features and full content), this basically won't happen again.
There problem with Elemental was that we the beta testers never got a build we could just hammer for gameplay, which is now the vast majority of complaints other than the OOM crashes (which, coincidentally, is the product of the same thing - we never got a completed game to run late-game scenarios with).
The beta testers are the same kinds of people as those who'd be buying the game after release, we just agreed to put down our money before hand to help you guys develop it. All the gameplay feedback (vastly underpowered spells, overpowered squads, AI, Champion/Sovereign scaling, world difficulty/monster scaling, etc) that you're getting now would be the same feedback provided by the beta testers had the schedule allowed for us to spend time essentially with the release candidate
What? How are the two related?
Off by a mile, to say the least
In reply to Frogboy's post. I was a bit surprised that the game when from beta 4 to gold to release in less than a month with most of the campaign and AI work not finished until the last two weeks. I think there should have been a beta 5 which would have been a playable beta i.e a we think this is the finished product that should go gold.
While I didn't get as hooked on EWoM as compared to GalCiv2 I still find myself playing it every night despite its flaws. I haven't mastered the nuances of city building and that has been quite fun to play with. I also like how points of interest get revealed as more research is done by any faction in the Adventuring tree. I look forward to how this game will evolve.
Thank you Brad.
If anything, this restores at a nice modicum of lost faith.
As for me I'm not disappointed about when the game was released or the game itself, but that Stardock didn't recognize it needed more time.
I expected better. That said I still like the game a lot and can't wait to see more content added.
That's all well and good to lash yourself but how about giving us daily updates on progress and tell us when the patch is coming today?
I am impressed, Brad and BB.
I was hoping you would see it this way after you had some time to distance yourselves from the hecticness of the past month (once you closed the beta down).
I'm glad to see that your objectivity does not appear to be impaired.
I wonder though, what remedy? Is the game really 'fixable' (well ultimately it is) by patches? Or is a 'recall' more along the lines of what you are thinking. Clearly it's not a 'recall' in the traditional sense of 'send back your baby formula', but in the sense that the product was clearly not what it 'needed' (by your definition, not mine) to be.
I'm on the side that thinks the game play mechanics are utterly broken, though engine can probably handle an overhaul of them. But to do that you NEED to go back to the drawingboard (in my opinion) and determine what the core game play features are really suppsoed to be, *and* if you can take all the features you want and make them some how coherent.
I would strongly suggest even taking some time off from Elemental entirely and playing (or replaying) various FTBS standards. Ideally AoW:SM (though I don't much care for it, it does have well tuned game mechanics) and Fall from Heaven2 (the civ4 mod). Even Dominions3! because that game has an amazing fleshed out combat and magic system which simply work outstandingly (though I don't think you want to just copy them). This way you may regain some perspective on what it takes to make a FTBS fun and not feel disjointed or incomplete.
Again, take some time away from Elemental, at least Brad, refresh your system and come back to it with a clear purpose, because if the purpose is just to 'fix' Elemental I still think you'll ultimately fail to achieve the goal of making elemental the game everyone is going to be playing for the next decade.
I'm actually playing the game and having some fun for it, but that's a damning statement. It's easy to take a myopic view when you're that close to the situation, but every aspect of the game feels unfinished to me still. The game has appealing aspects but I find it troubling that you could play it and not be aware the combat system sucks, the magic system is flat out broken, the RPG aspects are horribly weak, the adventure aspect is repetitive, and AI is not where you have set the bar for AIs too. Someone said the other day that Elemental is more of a platform than a game right now and they're absolutely right... you've done all the hardcoding stuff pretty well, but all the parts that actually make a game fun and replayable over the long term are horribly underdone.
I have faith in Stardock, but I had faith in Paradox and Hearts of Iron 3 is still the worst game I've ever played while HoI2 is still one of my favorites. There's more than bugs to squash here, the game balance and systems need to be re-imagined from the ground up. We're not talking balance tweaks here... there were serious issues with the design from the minute you set pen to paper to imagine how things would work. I think the structure is in place to get those things done, but for a company whose previous games have been strategic masterpieces it's strange to me that you saw Elemental as a finished product. I can see it as one with some imagination, but there's serious work between here and there. Good luck.
Thanks for the post, Frogboy. You must be going through a whole lot of unpleasant thoughts and emotions right now. I feel really sorry for you guys, and I hope you don't take this blow too hard and manage to come back stronger than ever. I wish you all the best. It feels really wrong for a dev team like yours having to go through this. You deserve better, but then again this is one hell of a valuable lesson to learn.
Just how many CEO admits to this degree that it was his mistake about the state of the game release? I for one working in the game industry , haven't seen one like Brad. Admitting is a start (good start) to amend mistake. I think we have plenty of people still looking forward for this game to be polished so come on Brad. We will help you. We like this game as much as you do. We will do our part and I believe you will do yours.
Your whole argument is based on the idea that in 6 months the game will be 100% fun and playable, with issues addressed, rebalancing, etc etc. That's an awfully big assumption, even given the best goodwill and 'desire to do right' in the world.
I don't really agree with this. Most mechanics are solid, just need a good balance and scaling pass. All the games you listed are purely subjective, too. I played AoW:SM, but I don't really think it's essential for Elemental to model anything from it. I played FFH2, and don't particularly think anything needs to be in Elemental from it, either. It's entirely possible to tweak Elemental's tactical battles to work with the current stat system and overall mechanics without throwing it out and re-designing it from scratch.
Obviously I'm not them, but I'd say yes, the game is 'fixable' by patches. (For the record I'm one of the not very happy customers, but I don't intend to ask for a refund. My comments will probably explain why.)
The core concept works, and the core gameplay is actually pretty fun. Even with the issues, starting a game and recruiting wandering people to help me build a kingdom and "fight back the wilds" by pushing back monsters and bandits is some of the most fun I've had in a game this year. There really is a good game in here that wants to get out.
There's UI issues, which are fixable. Technical issues, which are fixable. And mechanics issues, which are fixable but more painful because of how mechanics changes can "chain" and need more changes elsewhere. But given the comments from Brad and Boogie (and Stardock's support reputation, which was well earned), I don't think they'll shy away from it.
For the most part, pretty much every problem is fixable. It's not like the whole vision behind the game is fundamentally broken. It's not. When it works, it works well (even several of the reviews that were overall negative talked about just how good it is when everything clicks).
So while the launch was obviously bad and the game right now isn't in a great state, it's capable of becoming a great game.
Ok mr. cattess. So please give my 50$ back. And I will buy the game when it is ready to be BOUGHT. (in next february as you said?)
OK ?
Except for how defense works, I agree with you. Most of the mechanics work alright and just need a balance pass. Defense IMO will never work very well for a game with single unit heros in combat. Maybe they could change enough stuff to make it work, but there's a number of far better alternatives suggested on the forums already.
I agree with this. We were allowed for better or worse to see Elemental "Cloth Map" style at Beta 1. Yeah we were warned it was ugly and not fun etc.. Did you really need us (Most of us beta testers) that early? To me the kind of stuff we're running into mid-game CTD's and playability stuff could have had more time with the beta testers help you polish it up before "release". I'm also going to pick at it a bit and say it has some design issues. Like every Sovereign can have the same spells. *yawn* Maybe this wouldn't be a bad thing if had to work their butts off to get it, rather than handed it at the start. There needs to be some building help add to base production and not %. This will help out 'bad starts' or starts with really crappy starting resources compared to neighbors, etc. (Victim of the RNG( Random Number Generator)) Need to be able to have more than 1 caravan per city. sheesh. Collectively because of all these things I feel Elemental launch could have been much later. There's another thread that list UI concerns and I'm not going to rehash that, especially since it was so thorough. Some of that I do not fault SD for, but I do expect the tooltips to actually say the correct thing about what a building does. (see bugfix patch thread)
Don't rest too much on those laurels, it'll be time to crack the whip when the vacation time runs out.
sales@stardock.com
That really depends. Defense scales with DEX, and if it has a minimum roll which also scales with DEX, it will be able to keep up with weapon advances on squads as long as there's a defense roll for each attack roll. Basically, due to the stat bonus the Champion/Sovereign has a much higher armor than a mundane unit, and with better rolls (like 20-40 instead of 0-40) rolling against each attack from a member of a squad the single champion will take much less damage and remain competitive. The key is to get the right balance of numbers.
"There will be massive consequences for Stardock's game studio."
can you go further in what you mean here brad?
hmm. Yeah that might work if you pair it up with a HP boost.
And then some.
I still don't understand how you guys could come up with the game mechanics, try to combine them with things like character development, city upgrades, equipment costs, unit combat values & so on, without seeing the frankly enormous flaws.
I'm pleased you guys are finally acknowledging the game is broken, though (and I can guess it must have been tough to own up to it), and I'm sure you'll do your utmost to fix it. But... I'm sorry to say I don't have a lot of faith you actually can. Because you still don't seem to realise what the problem is. You still appear to have a collective love affair with the terrible game mechanics that are screwing up the game.
As for future betas, I hope you guys agree giving the testers time to find the design flaws, imbalances & bugs of the complete game is necessary. But I'm not sure I'll participate. You haven't paid any heed to the tester feedback on the systems design (with game-breaking results), tonnes of the bugs the testers found were still present in the release version of the game (some are still in v1.06), and by your own admission you didn't release early for lack of money. So the three reasons I had for participating in the beta are all void.
For what it's worth, I'm not pissed at you guys. I'm disappointed as hell, and I'm worried and very nearly convinced you guys can't make a game without trying to make it GalCiv, however badly that design fits. But I'm not angry, because... I don't think you can help it.
he's going to fire all the yes-men that surrounds him?
It good to see a post like this, at least your head isn't in the sand anymore ( as you said ). Annatar made a good point, 1-2 months of testing the completed FULL game , would have been the better course of action. And even 2 months would be on the short end of the testing stick imho.
I am a customer for life, your company's level of support is unquestionable, and RARE in these days of shovel-ware... But somethings just stick out like giant flaming red flags, that as a beta tester , could be seen since beta 1.
What it seems is you guys went the "APB" course of everyone working on their own little part of the project , plopping it all together at the end, and saying its DONE, its FUN, and people will LOVE it.
I can't imagine there wasn't anyone on the team that said, "you know what this is a major issue regarding how its all coming together." Nobody ???
Its a dangerous game when you have only YES men reporting to you...
The first 3 betas in my eyes were alpha tests, and beta 4 (where it all came together should have been what was given to us at BETA1) there is no reason I should have a game now that I cannot complete due to some BEX error or APPCRASH error, every single time I play. Worst part is this error only started happening after the 1.06 patch, which makes even less sense to me.
I am sticking with you guys, I don't want a refund, I think I just wanted to vent a little as I want the game that was promised, and I am willing to wait for it!
You know I read a lot of your posts closely as I find your logic intriguing and your opinions relatively well-grounded, but to claim didn't "globally violate" the GBoR #2 is absolutely absurd in the extreme. #2 explicitly states:
"Gamers shall have a right that games they purchase shall function as designed without technical defects that would materially affect the player experience. This determination shall be made by the player."
Beyond the present hogwash state-of-the software business "0-day" patch approach, are you telling me that the boxed version of the game-- that was purchased-- didn't "globally violate" #2? Perhaps the patched version of the game, that many review sites are using, also didn't violate GBoR #2? Or are you just hung up on your word "globally" since EWoM works for some and not for others? How many others does the product need to be busted for before you concur rights were violated? Please.
And to keep this on topic, I suspect a lot of us are "very upset" because we feel Stardock as a business failed our expectations based on their pre-established ethical standards, etc., not because one software product bit the dust (and will be fixed).
And KUDOS to Frogboy above on his response. THAT post for me is worth more future goodwill to Stardock than almost anything written on these boards since 8.24.
WHAAAAT??!?!?!?!?!?!?
I WANT A REFUND! NOW!
/ragequits
It's good to get some view from the inside. I was thinking of overconfidence but blindess will do. The game bases seem solid to me. Yes, there are many things that can be improved and there are some that could use a total conversion/remake. Patches can do much for the game but if you want to take it seriously, first expansion pack shouldn't be soon.
In any case, as I already said in another thread, I think that all this is good for Stardock. They learnt from Demigod and now from Elemental. It would have been better for the customers if the whole mess hadn't happened but it has and Stardock can learn a very valuable lesson that can impact possitively later developments.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
