Well 4.0 is a bit low i think,sure it has issues and all that but we have Devs that do listen and make patches and try to improve the game.

If it where JOWood or EA or Cryptic then we would just be left out in the dark.

Still the game is far from what you could expect from StarDock but this has been debated here in many threads before.

I would give it 6.0-6.5 anyway.

I have to agree with the review, but not with the score.

Everything he wrote is true, yet despite of that the game kept me playing it for hours again and again. That's just not a quality you can rate with a 4/10. The game is more than the sum of it's parts(or in this case, it's bugs).

On metacritic it is at 52 with only four critic reviews.

Game Informer, 65. But said: "My intense 4X fandom has been conquered by Elemental's nonstop irritations. I'm putting it down for now, but I'm not writing the game off forever." Words unlikely to stimulate sales at the moment.

1UP 58. But said: "So, is it all a disaster? Well, the A.I. problems are fixed to some degree by the robust multiplayer (if you can find friends willing to slog through the ugliest visuals since finger-painting class), and yes, the level of customization for both the world map and your alter-ego hero is nice -- but no number of small details can hope to salvage quality from this debacle of execution." For homework, transition this sentence to a gal reporting to her sorority on her blind date with you! I will not speculate on what she meant by "robust multiplayer."

Gamekult 30. I think they did not like it. French, but put it through Google Translate. "offers more bugs than interest. Ah oui et c'est très très moche aussi. Oh yes, and it's very very ugly too." Again, not something you want a sorority sister reporting about her blind date with you. Sheesh, guy! Always spray yourself down with Raid before you go out!

Well this kind of review was inevitable, not every reviewer was going to give Stardock a pass and say they'd wait for them to fix it up before reviewing. Definitely sounds like he played 1.0 though could be 1.05, certainly wasn't 1.07 since alot of issues I had with the game were fixed there (at least in the technical areas). 

Still I usually don't trust gamespot ever since the Kane and Lynch debacle a couple years ago. 

He didn't say anything that hasn't already been stated here repeatedly.  He did say some positive things.  Given that the reviewer experienced lots of crashes and performance issues on 4 different high end boxes (and I'd imagine GameSpot has pretty solid and well maintained rigs), a score of 4 out of 10 might actually be generous.You don't review a game based on what it might become, you review it based on what it is.  The reviewer did give feedback on the first few patches and could've just as easily have not.

It's kind of silly to say go vote and make the user score higher.  Some people here are delusional about the current and release states of the game.  I have a lot of faith in SD to get Elemental to where it should be, but the fact is that it's not there yet and was nowhere near it at release, and most reviewers and many customers are going to judge the game on the state it was in at release, not where it *might* be in a few months.

It was 1.06. He said there where 3 patches after release. He even said that campaign got a bit better due to it (extra tutorial tips are added with 1.05)

Still... all critical points are valid with 1.06 too.

Even in 1.07, High hopes for 1.1 though

This is giving me positively nightmarish flashbacks to 90's PC gaming...

If Elemental has any paid expansions they're going to have to be not good... but abso-fucking-lutely GREAT.

The only positive I can take from this, and it's a stretch, is that I liked Gamespot's low rated "I have no mouth and i must scream".

this is exactly what needs to be done. my thoughts exactly.

I agree with you on the content part, i was expecting way more quests etc, In terms of contect the release game and Beta C are way to close. This wouldnt be a problem except for the Fact Brad said that most of the quests in the beta were removed and the Gold would have so much new things it would be unrecognisable. I just hope that this major patch they are working on includes a large amount of additional content not just gameplay reworks etc. I have a feelingthe current fanbase are all hoping the major patch will make their investment worth it, if not i doubt thesales are going to pick up because all the word of mouth and late reviews are going to be the same as the mostly negative early reviews. 

One part of the review really struck me though, and kind of opened my eyes, where he talks about the graphics, animations, spell effects, and battle sounds.  He's right, they are really not up to snuff.  My Fire Giant is moonwalking to the next square, this is sub-par.  One little guy runs over to one side of the square, starts whacking, then runs over to the other side and whacks some more, while 7 other guys look on.  I hate to admit it, but that doesn't cut it.  Heck, HoMM just had numbers counting down, and that was more engaging (I killed 87 foogles, impressive!).  The sounds are dull, and the spell effects are just not meaty enough for a $50 game (and the camera follow on spells is just bad, gives me vertigo.)

I've been so concerned about gameplay issues I sort of forgot to be critical about the overall visual/sound punch, but the reviewer has some good points.

Multiplayer is listed on the box, and still doesn't exist two weeks after launch. If that's a "7" worthy game, just what do you have to do to get a 5?

Unfortunately, I have to agree with the Gamespot review.   As much as I want to love this game, it just has far too many game-breaking problems--most of which are the result of poor, sloppy design.  And with a $50.00 price tag, that's just insulting.

As a long-time 'fanboy' of Stardock, and long-time fan of turned-based strategy games in general, I blindly went out and bought this game without the usual 'wait and read the review' time I normally give new games.  Needless to say, I feel like I've been betrayed, and it pains me to admit the fact that I will have to put Stardock in the "wait and read the review" category again, along with all the other game development companies I have lost my faith in.

Like many others, this review rings true for me. I feel ripped off for  $50. This is a $20 game, which is not what I expected based on my previous experience with Stardock. I'm hanging on to it in the hopes that it will become a $50 down the line. I don't see that happening for a few months from now at least. It's sad to see Elemental alongside the ranks of games like South Park: Chef's Luv Shack.

me too i rly hope 1.1 will improve the sales

Unfortunately this game is going to get its share of lumps, but I think we know that.

I already own the game, I know exactly why I made my choice, and that's that.

KVO is a good reviewer, he is helping reduce, in my eyes, the Gerstmann explosion.

Even before that stuff I never cared for scores. I could usually glean form the text or the vids if a game was my thing or not.

And thank God for Zero Punctuation. I know it's comedy, but a good nine times out of ten he succinctly points out exactly what I hate in video games, and helps me avoid or at least put off bad choices. I didn't listen one time and look what I got. A dusty copy of FFXIII.

BTW if you liked the old GS group most are back at it over at GiantBomb, and Screened

i really missed Ryan Davis, now he gets to do whatever he wants, and it is always nuts!

A tough but fair review of the game in its current state and that's what a review should be, not a paean to what the game will hopefully be some time in the future.

There are just too many things either not working or working poorly for Elemental to deserve a good or even a passing grade at this point in time, which is a crying shame, but that's just how it is.

Now there's a fantastic idea.   Release an expansion pack that you think will get positive reviews and market that as a separate product--even if it's free to existing players.    Gamespot would give a 4.0 to Elemental but then they would give a 9.0 to Elemental: Ages of Goodness, or whatever the name is.  

I think the review was fair. It does come over as harsh, but everything that was written was factually correct and you only need to look through these forums to see a vast number of users echoing the same words. In fairness, the reviewer did say that the game has potential for those fans who are prepared to wait it out and from what I can tell, that is exactly what people are also saying here.

I'm not one of them. I got caught up in the hype days before the release and went ahead and bought it on release day. Now I'm just waiting on getting back a partial refund. This game has been a huge disappointment, but at the end of the day it was my decision to buy it and I do hope that SD do good by you guys and one day make it the great game that you believe it will become.

What does it mean if it's 4.0 or 5.0?  I thought his review was quite thorough and insightful to those thinking about getting the game.  What other game wouldn't garner a score or 4.0 for consistent game crashes and an unusable multiplayer?  We forgive Stardock here a little because we've all purchased the product and want to see it be the best it can be.  But truthfully the review is an honest take on the state of the game as it appears in the last 3 patches.

I second this.  They seem very sketchy at best, but I still agree for the most part with the reviewer.  I'd give it a 6.5 though, and an 8 for potential.

I have the same feeling, and on that thought I was going to mention that they should do a "free expansion" so the reviewers review it again later too, which they may not do if they just do patches. I do recommend the first expansion being free at this point.

The game has a lot of potential, and I think a lot of people can see that, but it just needs to be ironed out a lot more.

As a paying subscriber to Gamespot for many, many years, I do not share your "vast majority of the time" evaluation.

You are entitled, of course, to your own opinion -- as qualified by your honest "at least for me". Mine would be this :

Gamespot reviews, at least for me, have been fairly on the mark a very thin majority of the time.

Well I guess Stardock's best game is a 4.0. Such an amazing developer