I just got my copy and I'm surprised to see the number of horrible horrible bugs in it. The AI is not better than Elemental's (i.e. pretty much useless without heavy cheating). There are graphic/performance bugs as bad as Elemental's late-turn-slowdown. The balance is not the best either (Bushido just pwns all). Of course there's also the good stuff and I do enjoy the game, much like I enjoyed Elemental when it came out.
But like Elemental, the initial excitement will wear off and the bugs/balance will start to annoy so I will stop and wait for the patches. However, given the negativity in these forums, I was starting to get convinced that Elemental is not worth it. Civ5 came then and proved that the "perfect launch" just doesn't exist. If even an AAA and overhyped title like Civ5 can't get it right, I think that the launch of Elemental is at least tolerable. At least they were apologetic and understanding of their failures while I doubt that with Civ5 we'll get anything close to an apology. Certainly we're not going to get the same level of support that Stardock is known to provide.
So, as ironic as it may be, Civ5 changed my perspective on Elemental for the better.
How about you?
I agree this isn't the place to talk about Civ V lock thread and let's move onto talking about the great game of Elemental. ~
There's nothing wrong with talking about Civ. It's merely in the wrong forum section and should be moved over.
Civ V looks lame, regardless of bugs. I played Civ 2 to death and never bothered with another Civ since. *shrug*
I'm not a big Civ fan, but I played the demo of V and enjoyed it. It is 100 times more polished than Elemental. Depth etc can be discussed forever, but to even claim that Civ V is almost as bad as elemental at launch is off-the-scale ridiculous, regardless of personal gaming preference.
What bothers me is the enormous difference in meta-critic score (elemental is 54 and Civ V gets a 91! With the only fair review from 1up which gave it a 'C'). Is there really a 70% quality spread between Elemental and Civ V? I don't see it.
And yes, once you have a franchise, you have certain standards to live up to. If you want to be Revolutionary, spin off another title...like
Civilization: Panzer General OR
Civilization: Elven Legacy
That pretty sums up how I feel about the Civ series. Except I've played the rest and, yes, you've done the right thing. Every subsequent game has just added unneeded fluff to the core game.
Civ is one of the all time great strategy games, period. That's a fact. I remember when the First came out in the late 80s, loved it to death; second version with alpine troops, loved it; third version I can't remember. The fourth version was good, but they changed the combat system if I remember as far as stacks, I think cities & fortified locations had "stack combat" ability which was a fairly huge change from the other versions. I liked the spice trade with bananas & plums special locations & the spawning of unique leaders. Can't say I loved the combat change, but at least it didn't screw up the franchise like MOO3 did. I'm sure civ5 will be at least good from watching the demo & I will definitely get it at some point.
BTW: there's nothing wrong with talking about other games in a forum. Every single game forum I've been in wiill have at least some posts or threads comparing the game to other games, nothing wrong with that, it's normal.
Are people still comparing Civ V to Elemental? haha Thanks for the laugh guys!
Yeaup, there are some massive bugs in Civ5, and yup, the AI is just as terrible as it is in Elemental. There are a few more unit abilities, but on the other hand there's nothing that is similar to magic. For the player, I think the depth of the gameplay is about the same (=shallow).
The largest difference is in graphics. Civ5 looks a lot better. Elemental devs seemed to think that because the world had been ruined, they could leave it mostly empty and bland. Bad choice. And even though Civ5 doesn't have tactical battles, they've still managed to make combat _look_ more exciting. In Civ5, when I attack a group of 8 guys with my 8 guys, all of them rush forward to fight. Amazing, isn't it.
I hope that Elemental will stay true to the vision of the game, but consider implementing some of those things that make CIV5 a better game.
Good point, I'm outta here!
OP and those who agree with them -- you are utterly ridiculous and completely lack perspective.
Of course Civ5 has bugs, and imbalances (especially around diplomacy), but to think that Elemental comes anywhere near the level of polish in gameplay and balance is just plain asinine. I get that people are trying to be positive here, but don't let that make you say idiotic stuff.
I'm fine if you appreciate the features of Elemental more than Civ. I'm fine if you like the open ended aspect of Elemental, the world, the lore, or any of the many preference-based aspects that make the games differ. However, if your honest opinion is that the quality of Elemental is equal to the quality of Civ5, then your opinion is worthless.
CIV 5 *looks* more polished. It has more features right now.
However CIV5 has crappy turn by turn performace. My machine will blow the socks off alot of peoples, I didnt have performance issues like alot of people did with Elemental. However in CIV, even small map few players, turn to turn lag is hell. The AI is retarded, like seriously retarded. There are some balance issues but the way the game is played i think they are harder to notice. Elemental half the races are exactly the same so its easier to pick them up.
Dont get me wrong I like both games, and dont think either game is up to its potential. But they are entirely different types of TBS.
Firaxis and Stardock both have alot of work to do in both Single and Multiplay for both these games.
As glad as I am that I passed on Civ V, I think the sales are going to ensure that the series continues in that direction.
Maybe an upgraded, expanded, and fully polished Elemental can pick up some disgrunted grognard types, though it will be a tough slog.
GalCiv III in 2012 or 2013 might have a better shot at it though. (I'm salivating at some of the features from Elemental fused into GalCiv's philsophy- I see SO much potential there if Elemental is learned from)
I've been saying for a long time that the major game reviewers base their reviews on polish and accessibilty more than anything else. Take GTA 4 for example, it was far more shallow than GTA San Andreas, but got higher reviews across the board.
Same thing with the Halo series. If you went by game reviewers, Halo is the best FPS series on the planet. Yet, most true FPS fans would argue that Counter Strike, Battlefield, Quake, Half Life, and Call of Duty are superior and were doing what Halo did, only years and years earlier. But since Halo is so accessible, it gets most of the mainstream praise.
If you were to strip away the slick interface, and the overall polish of Civ 5, I would say Elemental is the deeper game overall. So, yes, Civ 5 looks a lot prettier and feels a lot nicer. The problem, as I see it though, is that you can fix a poorly polished game a lot easier than you can fix the overall depth of game-play.
Ironically, I think your definition of "depth of gameplay" is incredibly shallow. Deep gameplay does not mean lots of features and doohickeys and junk. Deep gameplay means there are a lot of strategic choices to make. That is the hallmark of the Civ series, and Civ5 does it better than Civ4 in some areas, and worse in others.
However, Elemental is a game with shallow gameplay (very few or very obvious tactical choices), and lots of stuff tacked on (half of which will never be used).
Now, it is possible that Elemental could become a deeper game than Civ if (and only if) it is balanced, and its poorly designed features are removed/redesigned. I'm highly doubting this will happen, so Elemental will continue to be a game that's fun to play only as a "see what happens" kind of casual game.
As I think Elemental has proven, it's a lot easier to improve an already polished game (we're talking gameplay here, not graphics or accessibility) than it is to fix a game with straight broken gameplay.
I'm sorry, but from where I'm sitting, you're the troll, you haven't added anything to this thread and are only being disruptive to a totally relevant discussion.
You are saying this is an Elemental board, and you are right. As such, comparing Elemental to the reigning "king" of TBS games (whether you like to admit it or not, Civ is THE 4x turn-based strategy game to beat) is most definitely completely, and totally relevant. Just b/c it's an Elemental forum doesn't mean people that post here have to put on blinders and ignore the rest of the world, even suggesting that is silly. Of course people are going to compare Elemental to other games, but especially Civ, as it's the most popular TBS series there is, and as long as people are being constructive, i.e. not just coming in and being all like "Civ 5 is the shznit, and Elemental is a steaming pile of poop", then I can't think of a better topic for an Elemental forum.
As for Civ 5...I got it the day it was released, the digital "Deluxe" edition no less, and I have to say that I am thoroughly enjoying it. I disagree with some of the design decisions, for example I think removing Religion, and to a much lesser degree Espionage, were mistakes, but overall I think it is a step forward for the series. It has definitely improved in it's presentation and accessibility, while retaining it's strategic depth, something not very easy to do imo. I also keep hearing people moaning about the AI and I really don't think it's that bad...well, the opponent AI is not terrible anyway, the ally AI is pretty retarded and makes some odd choices, but at higher difficulties the opponent AI does present some challenge (mainly b/c it cheats, so it's still not a great AI, just more difficult to beat). Yeah, the game does try to lead you by the hand a bit, but in no way plays the game for you, if you make bad choices you will pay for it. I don't know, I have to say that besides removing Religion and Espionage, they made all the right choices in design.
To compare Civ 5 and Elemental...well, even though they are both in the same genre, they are different games with different goals. Elemental is a HUGELY ambitious game that is overflowing with potential to be a truly epic game, it's just not there yet, it's not finished and needs more time to bake. That being said I am confident that given more time to iterate, Elemental will be an epic game that I can play for hours on end, but it's not there yet. Civ 5 is there now though(although admittedly the AI can use some work, but it always takes time for a really good AI) , and that's the biggest difference between the two. Now, if you take both games where they are right now, I have to say that Civ 5 is the better game, but I am more then willing to give Elemental more time and think that in time, Stardock can make Elemental into more then what Civ is.
Well, combat is definitely better. That was the one thing that really dragged down Civ4 for me, watching two stacks of doom gradually wear each other down, and the most meaningful way for me to affect the outcome is to pray the dice rolls go in my favor. Civ5 doesn't exactly have great combat, certainly nothing like MoM or AoW:SM - but 1UPT and ranged attacks and battles that don't always go to the death are all steps in the right direction, it's certainly better than Civ4 in that respect... unfortunately that comes at the price of depth and balance in many other areas. Social policies in particular piss me off, they've taken the tradeoffs out of the system - I liked that a new civic (in Civ4) made you stop and consider whether it was better in your specific situation than older civics, not automatically an upgrade. Social policies turn it into another grind for more points where more/newer policies are always better.
Anyway, keep in mind that Civ4 wasn't that great when it first came out, either. It took two years of expansions, patches, and many many mods to make Civ4 shine - it's no surprise to me that Civ5 doesn't compare well yet, not to mention Elemental (which is difficult to compare directly, anyway). I look forward to seeing what both Civ5 and Elemental are like when they've had Civ4's years of patches/expansions/mods.
Well, we will have to disagree then. Sure, we have the new hex combat mechanic, but the poor AI doesn't even use it effectively. As it has been mentioned above, unlike Elemental, Civ 5 doesn't separate units from buildings in construction, so you lose choices there. Civ 5 doesn't let you get heroes, it doesn't let you get magic, it doesn't let you have sovereigns, it doesn't let you have dynasties or customize your units, it lacks integrated modding, and on and on. Civilization let's you build units or buildings and that's about it. So I see far less strategic choices in a standard game of Civilization. In fact, one of the problems in Elemental is that there are too many choices to make as to how you're going to play.
I hate to agree with this sentiment. Civ5 is light years ahead of Elemental even with its flaws. I have not experienced slowdown or crashes on Civ 5. On the other hand I have experienced many crashes in Elemental. I know that the AI is terrible and multiplayer as I understand is the buggy portion of Civ 5(I found out it was terrible watching streams so I have not played). Look at Elemental day one multiplayer turned into day 25-ish and even in 1.08 the game won't work for a shocking percentage of people.
With all this said I am not happy with Civ 5. As a true AAA title I wanted more from it. I just can't get past the balance issues between Civs. Rome and Japan seem to have special abilities on a different level than others.
To date I've probably played 10 to 20 times longer on Civ V if not more and at current status I'd give Civ 9/10 and Elemental 3/10 (Elemental is just not fun currently, I'd rather play other "broken" games that are fun even).
BUT, in terms of potential love I think Civ V will lose its appeal over time and settle out as a 7.5/10 or 8/10 at a push, Elemental on the other hand could be my absolute favourite game of all time, if it hits all that I had imagined for launch it'll easily be 20/10. I'm hopeful this will happen and I have faith in Brad and Stardock (though to a much lesser extent than most people as I only ever saw Galciv as TOTA and no earlier incarnations).
So to sum up currently Civ V >>> Elemental, but I expect and hope that in a year's time Elemental >>> Civ V and in a few years time Elemental >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civ V and all other games.
The most surprising thing for me is that, on an old laptop (about 3 years now) which is prone to overheating in Windows (its a Macbook Pro Santa Rose) Elemental is nigh on unplayable, from slowdown to burning knees due to overheating, however, Civ V which is meant to be a resource hog runs fine, with no overheating and smoothly. I hope Elemental can drift to the other side of Civ V otherwise I'll never be able to play it.
While I love elemental Civ V is infinitely more playable for me at the moment. The biggest problem I have with Civ V is that the AI turns past turn 500 are pretty damn slow, and the occasional graphical bug, whereas with Elemental I can't reliably play past turn 200 (out of memory, ridiculous performance issues). And Civ is the only game I've ever played where I've been nuked by Gandhi. Twice.
That bloody Gandhi. History remembers him wrong!
That's one of the points were you do not make a choice in Elemental. There isn't one.Elemental is full of no-choices. What about bows? In which battle situation would you choose to use the shortbow over the longbow? They are researched simultaneously so obviously they are supposed to be alternatives.
If you find a spell research resource, would you choose to not build a city there because you decided on a tech-research strategy? I think not.Again, spells and tech research simultaneously so... no-choice.
If you can build squads, in which fighting situation would it be advantageous to have single soldier units instead? Any?
In Elemental you generally have the choice of getting more: yes / no.Your only option is to choose not to do or build the obviously beneficial or more powerful thing.That's not how I understand "choice" in a game.
That's why I suggested more advanced tactical battle rules so there would be a choice between fast and strong units - even smaller units! All would be beneficial in different ways. I suggested a deeper magic system so there would be choices in how you fight and research and which and how many spell books you use.As much as I like Elemental, it is not a strategy game that gives the player many choices. It only has many features, which is not the same thing.
Both games make me want to cry. Civ 5 crash, crash, alright it works, 50 turns later crash, oh look 1.8 GB memory leak, crash, it's very frustrating. Elemental very rarely crashed on this system, but had very bad performance issues, gameplay balance issue, but at least I can finish a game. I can't with Civ. To be fair it could very well be compatibility issue with my crossfire setup. I kick myself for not waiting for demos.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
