Our story so far…
On August 24th, Stardock released the long-anticipated PC strategy game Elemental on schedule…
Except, of course, that’s not quite what happened. Stardock released the game a couple days early to beta testers and pre-order customers – the same version reviewers were given (v1.0) and the results were painful in two basic ways:
1. The new engine that Stardock developed turned out to have a lot of compatibility problems resulting in crashing and out of memory errors for a significant percentage (I’d go as far as to say as many as 30% of users – which is a gigantic number – anything over 5% is considered unacceptable). It’s not commonly known but the engine in our previous games (GalCiv II, The Political Machine, etc.) was developed originally in 1997 and enhanced over the years. Nowadays, most companies just license their engine from Gamebryo (Civilization V, Oblivion, Fallout 3) or the Unreal engine. You are now seeing why they do.
2. The above ensured ruinous reviews but even without them, the game UI and some of the game mechanics just didn’t live up to people’s expectations, and AI issues.
The purpose of this blog is to help answer questions so that we can move forward.
So here are some of the questions / comments I’ve gotten in emails and private messages and on various forums that I’ll try to answer:
Q: What is Stardock’s plan for Elemental going forward?
A: For the immediate future we’re going to go down two paths. First, the v1.0x versions will continue to focus largely on compatibility (crashing or weird video issues) as well as bugs and turning on multiplayer.
Then, we will work on v1.1 which will serve as our answer to player feedback. Enhanced AI, improved UI, a tutorial, updated quest system, new magic system, numerous other tweaks. This version will serve as the basis to make a demo version of the game.
Beyond that, we will be looking at player feedback. That will work towards v1.2 (October) and v1.3 (November). Once we are satisfied that the game has met reasonable expectations, we can then focus on the first expansion pack: Elemental: War of Magic – Book 2, Cerena.
Unlike Book 1, which is fairly short because it’s only meant as a kind of introduction (the game is mean to be played in sandbox mode. GalCiv and Sins of a Solar Empire didn’t even include campaigns, we are generally not very pro-campaign-y people as you can gather, campaigns have limited replayability).
Book 2, Cerena is the excuse to introduce more far reaching game mechanic changes and begin to add in the multiplayer modes we have long been thinking of (from custom servers that yes, will work on your LAN that has no Internet connection) to tactical-only modes.
That first expansion pack will be free to everyone who owns the game at the point of v1.3.
Q: Stardock should just put out an expansion and re-release the game as a Director’s Cut.
A: NO. While we do intend to release future new versions of Elemental beyond the War of Magic series, we will not be re-submitting Elemental “patched and fixed” for re-review.
A lot of people seem to think that Stardock knowingly released the game “full of bugs”. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case. As people who have played through the various versions can attest, weird stuff is very machine specific. For instance, the illustrative outline on graphics causes no difference (not even 1 frame) on our test matrix machines and yet results in 20+ frames for others who have, on the surface, similar hardware configurations for us. The PC Gamer UK reviewer ran into a white tactical battle screen that we had never encountered before (nor had it shown up during the public beta).
The low metacritic score for Elemental (about 3 out of 5 average) needs to serve as a long-term reminder to us and anyone else who might think that you can simply put out a major retail game in 2010 with its own custom engine without a massive massive long-term beta program and a long-term QA process. If you can’t do that, then either license your engine or don’t expect people to shell out $50.
Put another way, the blistering feedback on Elemental: War of Magic should serve as a scarlet letter to make us “never forget”. So no, no re-launch of Elemental: War of Magic. It is, what it is.
For fans who are disheartened, look at on the bright side. We will be able to see how much effect word of mouth is. If we do a good job making the game live up to its potential and expectations, then we can see what effect that has on sales. And we plan to share those details with you.
As it stands today, Elemental has sold approximately 82,000 copies.
Q: I heard Stardock is laying off people, I thought your non-games revenue funded the games team.
A: It does. It funds ONE games team. But Stardock has been hiring up across the board to build a second studio. Only Elemental can fund that. “Stardock” is made up of 3 groups: Enterprise software (our #1 revenue source), Consumer software (Object Desktop, Fences, etc.) and Consumer Entertainment (the games). That’s not counting Impulse which is a separate, profitable entity that doesn’t get affected one way or the other by the success of the games or the enterprise software.
Q: Brad Wardell: You should just kill yourself! [I actually did get this]
A: I’m sorry our recent entertainment product didn’t meet your expectations but I don’t think it would be helpful if I manually modified my date of expiration.
Q: Brad Wardell – you have a martyr complex! You always take personal blame for everyone! Get off your cross! [yes, got this too]
A: That is my job. If you’re going to spend years railing about CEOs not taking responsibility when something goes wrong, it would be the height of hypocrisy for me not to take responsibility when things go badly on a launch.
In addition, some of the issues are directly related to my specific decisions.
Q: Your act is getting old. Fool me once on Demigod, fool me twice, shame on me! [got this too in various forms]
A: The Demigod debacle ultimately resulted from a fundamental communication failure between the publisher (Stardock) and the developer (Gas Powered Games). It took us a long time to figure out exactly how the connectivity issue occurred (i.e. many months). Ultimately, and sadly, it boiled down to a miscommunication. When you host a game in Demigod (even now), you are given a dialog for your port #. It was believed by the Stardock team that Demigod handled direct IP connections and thus its raknet based port system would only be used when that failed. GPG, by contrast, thought Stardock was handling direct connections too. It turned out that that port # part (even now) doesn’t have a function and so 100% of connections attempts when to the Raknet system which overwhelmed it.
The reason why Stardock rightly took the blame is because, as the publisher, we should have looked at the beta tester connectivity logs and seen that 100% of connections were being passed to Raknet for the socket rather than the 10% anticipated. Add tens of thousands of users quickly and bam. A different system had to be developed.
But Demigod didn’t suffer from compatibility issues. It was very solid right out of the gate (for pretty much everyone) and was an excellent game on day 1. GPG did a great job making a great game. And Stardock did do a good job making a good backend. But one miscommunication between developers resulted in disaster. Only a much larger beta test would have discovered the problem. The system wasn’t “buggy”. Not that it does anyone any good now, but at least people can see and learn from what happened.
Point being, the situations are not similar.
With Elemental, the issue is the game itself. With Elemental’s MP, the system works because from day 1, Elemental’s servers are just hosted by Stardock. No P2P.
Q: What do YOU think of Elemental?
A: Elemental is the finest game we’ve ever released. Ever. At least, that's what I thought on the day we released it. However, I have come to the painful conclusion that we will have to dedicate more effort to making the game live up to the expectations of our customers as a whole. You'd be surprised how easy it is to confuse the enjoyment of making a game to the enjoyment of playing it.
Q: My post was hidden on the forums! I have a right to post my anger!
A: No. No you don’t. Believe me when I say I speak from first hand experience, there are entire forums dedicated to letting people post about their anger about something. The Stardock forums have never ever been some forum of free speech. And they never will be. If you’re looking for that, you should go elsewhere. I’ve been moderating “forums” since my Commodore 64 days as a “Sysop” and “Subop”. A few toxic users can wreck a community.
If someone needs/wants technical support, has a question, has a suggestion, wants to interact with the community, that’s great. Go for it. But if your purpose is to vent your rage on other users, us, the game, small animals, what have you, the moderates are instructed to take a very dim view of that.
After the release of v1.08 (this week) I intend to instruct moderators to be even more stringent on that sort of thing because we (as a community) need the Stardock developers themselves to participate on the forums.
While I have two decades of people telling me that I should kill myself or that <product X> is a “piece of shit” as well as various wishes that I get cancer and die “bleeding from every orifice) (yes, there are people out there that post these things) my development team are just normal people who are excited to talk to gamers who have cool ideas and we’re not going to subject them to haters (and most haters don’t have any idea they’re being hateful). Rule of thumb: Just treat people as if they’re right in front of you.
Q: You’re getting screwed in the reviews! I can’t believe <website X> wrote <Y>
A: NO. We’re not getting screwed. While some of the review scores do have a bit of “dogpiling” to them (relative to review scores given to other games) I have yet to read a single review that I felt was unfair in terms of the text.
If anything, I feel bad about putting some of my friends through this. It’s no secret that Tom Chick and Troy Goodfellow are friends of mine. The question isn’t how I feel about them criticizing or giving negative reviews of the release version of Elemental. The question is how they felt having to give a negative review of a game of someone who’s their friend? It’s called integrity. I’ll take a 1 friend who will tell it like it is over a 100 yes men.
So when I read the reviews, my first reaction isn’t anger but sorrow at having put people I respect through having to give something I know they were inclined to like and wanted to like through that. It’s also the reason I will not be re-submitting some “patched” version for review.
It also redoubles our collective efforts to live up to the standards we have set. We will be working on Elemental for a long time. We love it. We live it. And together, we will make it awesome.
Now, let’s move past the drama. Let’s do the things that need to be done going forward to have fun and create something that will stand the test of time.
Well I suppose I would be called a fanboi.. and really I don't care.. But when critique is presented like this it is not considered drama...
They way I read the OP from Brad was.. yup we screwed up.. Here is where we are now and here is how we will proceed..
I got the impression it was not criticism being called into play.. far more the behavior many exhibited when some one had a point that did not agree with their view.
I have not seen where blunt criticism was called on the carpet by a Dev/Mod.. I have seen vitriol statements (both on how bad game is or how stupid people who are nor happy are) called on the carpet..
I suspect we are about to see a very firm hand taken to any posts that are more then well thought out comments and responses.. and frankly I agree, when we start justifying our points/opinions, by saying/inferring people who have different points are some how less intelligent then others we are going no where fast. When we disagree we need to agree to disagree.. Who cares if your a hater or fanboi.. express your self honestly but keep personal attacks, threats, and just plain nastiness to your self.
but as always that's just my view on what happened and what the point of this thread was intended to be.. you are welcome to interpret it how you want and that's fine too.
carry on!
O well first there is no cook who can cook food that everybody likes.. So I bet that no game can please everybody.
After I said that, I would like to point out that criticism is good. IF its well argumented and has a goal to make things better. So just saying things are bad doesnt help. And telling people to drop dead also does not help.
I personally like to read discussions about the system, but Stardock wants to create a product that appeals to the majority of us, so not everybody. Because in the end good sales makes Frogboy and all others happy.
I have no problem with this. What I would like to see for future beta's is a non techy way of delivering crash information to Stardock. Thats a practical thing. Everything else, if the game is so moddable as expected.. Well then all changes can be done to make it a game that appeals to most of us.
But perfect.. Nah it wont be.. it will just be a legendary game. Just like Civ after a few years.
All of the Beta's where buggy as hell, why did it take Stardock until after the final release to figure this out?
Um, who cares? Moving on now. That was the point of the thread.
This just goes to show how many users have such different experiences. WoW was released when it was because THEY thought it was ready. Were they wrong? Some seem to think so.
I have been playing WoW since it launched (before, if you count beta) and it was nowhere near a "disaster." My server never crashed. My client was not ridiculously slow, and I encountered perhaps 1 or maybe 2 quest issues. For me, the only difficulty was the waiting in line to get on the server to play. But all that means is they underestimated the infrastructure they needed because so many people wanted to play the game. When I was online, even from the first day, I experienced nothing but the smooth, polished gameplay Blizzard is so well known for. I certainly don't doubt that others may have had a different experience, but I caution against generalizing one's own experience onto everyone else.
But you see you should not have too. I perfer to play the game knowing what the mechanics are not trying to figure it out piece meal. I personally don't want to go to outside sources (forums, gaming sites, etc.) Just to learn the game to the point where I can play. All this should either be in the game or in the manual or both.
I'm not talking about reviealing all the Secret stuff in the game, I'm talking about general gameplay at least enough to make informed decisions on what course we want to take in play.
Right, I've been watching the fallout for a bit now and restrained myself from reacting quickly. Still want to do so now, so here goes.
I've been watching this game since very early. Built up anticipation with the best of em. Pre-ordered the game months in advance (only got the box yesterday). Played in beta's even submitted some bugs. Just to show the level of interest (or fanboiism if one would want to call it that).
Truth be told, Elemental did not quite live up to my expectations. I see two main reasons for that. 1) My expectations had become fairly high strung over time (which is as much my own `fault` as anyone elses - I made the same mistake with Master of Orion III for instance ). 2) Mistakes were made with the game. The engine is not the epitome of well-testedness and bug-freeness as Stardock itself well realises. It could have suffered a little more beta for play balance, fun, and the "one-more-turn" factor (being pulled in - identifiying with the game - however you wish to call it) as well. It is not the greatest game I have played in recent time, neither is it the worst...by far. At this point in time I have an enjoyable game...not epic...but still enjoyable. Yes...I AM having fun playing it.
Which brings me to the following:
Stardocks hand was forced with an early release in retail. Not that everything would have been solved by a few days more, as Brad has already said, but bug fixing in only a few days after was tremendous. I'm not sure where Brad gets his 5% from (im sure its some kind of coder/developer rule of business) and I agree that 30% of users with serious troubles is on the high side....but I dont see much different with (other) high-profile titles released in the last two years. And they didn´t get quite the bashing Elemental did. I still remember the horror of early Oblivion or Battlefield or any of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R's or Gothic III or... . Elementals bugs in its current state are not as serious, prevalent or gamebreaking as those of the games mentioned at the same point in time after their release and long after.
Also let's not forget the titans work that was done. We have a small independant developer who developed a whole new engine from scratch, extremely moddable (by the looks of things) and with all the tools to do so right out of the box (Sims? anyone?). So they failed here at some points. So did the big boys...and they have a multitude of budget available. And where the big boys will let you suck their bug-ridden software to infinity Stardock actually moves and patches with rather big speed, not only bugs, but content too. Does that absolve Stardock from having released an engine that was not quite ready yet...no. But it does give it context and meaning. Especially when they have proven to do as they say and patch and improve and add content for years after release (I own Dominions III to). In the mean time they do not force some idiot DRM down my throat that nearly forces me to hack legally bought software to get the use out of it that should have been in it to start with.
In this I think that Elemental and Stardock are being done an injustice. They should not have gotten top marks for the engine and game in its current state, but neither should it/they have gotten the bashing it did. I for one will trust Stardock to fix what it wrong beyond any other game company (forgive me ) currently out there. Track record says a lot. If Stardock learned some valuable lessons from all this for the future I'm happy about that too. Who wouldnt want proper bug-free working software on release day (like in the good old days). And oll the other stuff from the gamers bill of rights too . Public Apologies from the CEO do not fix anything either....but it is a rather refreshing difference from the usual "there is nothing wrong with our stuff" approach we have all been forced to get used to.
I still wouldnt stay away from a game they'd develop in the future even if they went for a complete new engine again. Now that is saying something methinks.
Reading back now I see it read like I've jumped on my white horse to rescue a damsel in distress. I think there is no need for that. This damsel will fend for herself pretty well. I just wanted to let know that in my opinion - given the mistakes made- the reactions have been overly harsh.
I also want to encourage Stardock to do as they have done: openness, honesty, respect for gamers and be daring enough to not use the same engine everyone else does, make the same game everyone else does etc etc.
I for one appreciate the work done and the way it is being done and I would do even if I were the only person in the world actually appreciating it.
So there goes
Wouldnt say that. You wrote a very fair reasoned post. No white horse. If anything then a grey horse. Like almost all things in life, there is no black or white. Everything is grey in different shades....
This is an interesting read. http://scarsofwargame.com/DevBlog/
This part really stands out.
Um...ok, this is on the boards already? Whats so interesting about this?
I addressed this in the podcast but specifically:
As beta testers (I hope) will attest to, we made pretty dramatic changes to the spell casting, the UI, goodie huts (they all used to jsut give you gildar), the quests were basically all just escort quests, tactical combat was incredibly painful and ugly, the spell books were incredibly confusing, the spells all had names like "Summon Unit" or "Fire Ball 1", etc.
A screenshot from beta 4 matched up with what was released would really show just how much changed between beta 4 and release.
And while, even with the benefit of hindsight, have gotten dinged for the elements listed above that weren't sufficiently addressed, it is important to remember that the single biggest killer on Elemental's reviews was the stability which Stardock believed was fine on release.
Given the feedback on UI and some of the weaknesses of the design itself, it's not as if Elemental goes from a 3 out of 5 (Metacritic average right now) to a 5 out 5. But I think it's likely the game would have gone from a 3 out of 5 to say a 4 out of 5.
The original Galactic Civilizations, unfortunately, suffered from many of the same issues (design wise) as Elemental when first released. The big difference, however, was that Galactic Civilizations I was reasonably stable versus Elemental that proved to be very unstable or slow on a significant % of machines. The combination doomed Elemental's launch.
Stardock operates pretty openly. We will respond and address criticisms as best we can. What I find irksome is the charge that we knowingly released something that we didn't think was "ready". There's been a lot of internal soul searching on how Elemental's painful launch occurred and it really boils down to poor judgment from bottom to top.
I sometimes wonder at the empathy of anyone who would argue that a company that operates so openly on the Internet as we do would release something it knowingly thought wasn't "finished". What would be the motivation? Certainly none for me. I don't even get paid a salary, my compensation comes from long-term profits, a system, I set up precisely to discourage early releases. I.e. I am Stardock's one and only investor so my own interests are best served by a successful game in the long-term.
The one bright point I can think of is that Elemental's negative reviews liberate us to make fairly significant post release changes to the game mechanics. This was something we didn't feel we could do in Galactic Civilizations II. For instance, people who know me know that I really REALLY hate the economic system in GalCiv. But I didn't feel we could change it because it would be a bit of a "bait and switch" if we made a fundamental change to the economic system of a game that got so many awards as it was. I have to wait for a full blown sequel someday in the future to revisit the economic system.
By contrast, in Elemental, we can do things like redo the magic system and combat system fairly dramatically because, after all, the game is only averaging 3 out of 5 and so we should look to address the things that led to that (stability - of course as well as design elements). I don't think we'd get a huge outcry from players if we make the magic system more like Master of Magic's or if we changed the combat system to have units take their turn based on their combat speed rather than Side A and then Side B and so forth. By contrast, if Elemental had gone and gotten a 4.5 out of 5 (like GalCiv II) we'd have felt kind of stuck with whatever system we had because that is what people were signing onto and changing it all after the fact would likely cause a riot (people get very tied to this kind of stuff in strategy games).
The point being, we released the best game we could. We thought it was a great game on release. We can be faulted on many levels but please don't ascribe malice or greed to it. We're a very small company of people who just want to make cool strategy games. We'll keep at it no matter how long it takes. I'd just ask people to put themselves in our shoes and think what they would do in our exact situation. I think (hope) most people would do what we're doing and that is keep working on the game to make it live up to the expectations we have and others have for it. It's not about the money at this point, it's about the game. We're not a publicly traded company and my interest as "the investor" in Stardock is making sure Elemental is successful in the long term and the best way to do that is to make sure we stick to it.
Well said, Brad, in your initial post. You continue to prove yourself to be an honorable man, and I will continue to give Stardock my business.
It'll sound something like "Hooooray!!!"
Thanks for the response. I can't wait to see how the game turns out in the coming months. I still have high hopes for Elemental. I had fun with it for the first few hours that I played. Sadly due to a few gameplay elements I just kind of lost interest. This is my first Stardock game other than Sins which I never really got around to playing (I really should) and if Elemental turns out half as well as I hope SD will have a new fanboy.
I'll wait things out and give you guys a shot.
First off, I want to say that I bought this game without looking at the reviews because it was from Stardock, and I have faith that the problems it does have will be fixed because I have never known a company to be more loyal to it's fans than Stardock. You guys have earned that loyalty from me, and I can't say that about very many companies.
I have been playing it fairly non-stop, stupid work, and have enjoyed it very much. Yes, it suffers from frequent crashes, and yes there are some strange balance issues with units, monsters, and champions, but so far, I am only seeing problems that can be fixed, I think there is a really great game underneath the flaws and like I said earlier, I know you guys will listen to our suggestions, and work hard to bring this game to it's potential.
I also want to say, Brad, that I have a great deal of respect for anyone willing to admit making a mistake. I feel bad for you for all of this. For me, it's just a game, I am a fan, and I can be let down, sure. But for you, this is your life and I can tell how much you care about the game and Stardock's fans.
The point being, we released the best game we could. We thought it was a great game on release. We can be faulted on many levels but please don't ascribe malice or greed to it.
I don't ascribe malice or greed or any other ulterior motive to it. However, you got to understand here Brad: a lot of us are so disappointed because we think the same company who developed Sins could have released a better game. And we still are going to hold you guys to a high standard because we respect your talent, as well as your openness and responsiveness to customers.
I, at least, want you to win.
There's a difference between "ascribing malice or greed" and just simply asking for you to take all the blame off the external beta testers, very specifically. The part of the podcast where you said that if you looked you could find a user with the white screen issue. I just sighed really hard. What is the point of filling out a bug report if the developer isn't going to track it. You needed to be tracking every single bug report that came in through the external beta's. I can just imagine in any UAT that I have ever been a part of just not even putting bug reports on the bug list and the absolute insanity that would cause in a project meeting. Your basically admitting to ignoring the beta group. Also your attitue towards the people in Beta who were trying to tell you something was wrong is pretty bad. Your basically brushing off your most loyal fans and I don't even know if you realise that. There is no "joe internet guy" theres just alot of real human beings who you seem to have no problem detaching yourself from using forums and media and then blaming them for the exact same behavior. The fault wasn't that external testers didn't consider themselves testers the fault was you looked upon them as customers who were only there to enjoy the preview/demo. I am not saying that was the only problem the other problems you seem to have addressed quite well.
So many expert opinions....everyone should develop games on here:)
Wow I thought you were keeping your nose only on the QTT forums(for the record I am not a poster there but I have read the Elemental thread). And might I say what a fine example of illogical straw man crap you like to put out pretty much wherever you go.
Man, aren't you a charming example of ignorance. I guess in your world character assasinations are fine, because you are on the internet. I post in one thread of rejects about their behaviour and its strawman...yeah, that so logical.
Stardock published Sins. Ironclad developed it.
Ok explain to me whose character I assasinated put the quotes here and be specific. Do you even know what an ad hominem attack looks like? Have I called anyone any names? Impugned, slandered, or held someone libel? Or am I just engaged in fair criticism while you run around throwing up non sensical arguments because you have some bone to pick with any critic.
And yes when you don't address an argument and put up another argument like trying to impugn my credibility by infering that I am not an "expert" then thats a textbook definition of making a strawman.
Grow up, I don't have abone to pick with critics...I have put up things I would fix as well. I have a bone to pick with ignorant people though, there are ways to be critical that is acceptable in the normal world. You act like you are some sort of expert when it comes to everything that happened, when in reality you don't have all the facts, so it is easy to say what they did wrong or didn't when you make the facts up yourself. I'm not sure about you but I would get annoyed as a developer if everyone and their dog said you should have done it this way or that, or even better stated that it is incredibly stupid idea etc(not saying you did the last part, but plentty of that is going around)
PS: You didn't qoute the part I edited in, I meant to imply why I got involved with QT3, I no longer post there because it isn't worth my time to do it. Not exactly a shining example of human beings over there.
You tell me to "grow up" and infer that I am ignorant. You would get reprimanded at most boards because those are absolutly personal attacks.
Your kind of engaging in the same level of detachment that I THINK/FEEL Brad is as well. You don't know me or my life experiences yet you prejudge them because im "joe internet guy". I put up a specific example so why don't you address that instead of attacking my "expertise", why don't you go ask some experts you trust about fundamental software design and testing practices. Why weren't they traking all the bug reports from the beta users? Most of the problems they said they found after release I had and found the bug report for them and either just said, "same here" in the thread or didn't add to the 100 other replies. The white screen issue for the tactical battles was well known as a problem.
This is basic, very basic, software engineering. Tracking bugs on an excel spreadsheet, let alone an actual QA/Testing tool, isn't exactly rocket science. Simply not tracking bugs because you don't value the users input doesn't exactly take a whole lot of expertise to figure out someone was falling down on the data entry 101 job.
Let it go Jam3, it's not worth it.
In this forum, you either kiss stardock's ass or you are told to "shut up and go away" by half dozens of truculent thread-guard fan boys. If you read some random posts about the game, you will be capable to name each one of them.
The best thing we, who have our own opinions, can do is to write the truth and let others decide what they want to believe, ignoring the "shut up" posts.
One day this game will be a good game because of us, the ones that didn't think this game "is the best game ever from the best company ever!".
Then we will feel a sense of completion that the thread-guard fan boys will know nothing about. But it will be an inner feeling, nothing to write about.
So let it go, let the guy talk to the walls.
Cheers.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
