tevans6220

[quote who="dragoaskani" reply="145" id="2757771"] Quoting wynams, reply 142 I thought Brad said Elemental wasn't rushed out, that Stardock didn't rely on game sales and that even if they didn't sell another copy that the team would work on improving Elemental for the next 2 years. Guess Brad led a lot of you astray ... as my first dealings with Stardock was the game Elemental, I really do not understand where all the loyalty comes from

Something doesn't add up. Didn't Brad say that they broke even just on pre-orders alone? If that's the case then any sales after pre-orders is pure profit. Is Brad saying that sales are so bad that they didn't make any profit? Show of hands. Who got a refund on their pre-order? Reason I want to know is that's practically the only way that revenue projections could be so bad as to lead to layoffs. All of the diehard fanboys are keeping their copies, right? It just doesn't ad

[quote who="revjwh" reply="61" id="2756470"]Really? Hm. Let's take apart your logic, Soliddoucheboy. I downloaded the game. Paid money for it. I then realized it wasn't anywhere near playable. Knowing that this would hurt the company's bottom line (which affects real human beings) I then took out my credit card and bought the LE to send money to the company - i.e. gave money. You: bought the game, feel offended, post shit comments

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="12" id="2757013"]Guys, Let's focus the blame where it belongs and that is on ONE person: ME. I could list out the sins right here: I violated my long-standing tradition of monitoring the forums and playing the game and instead focused on working on the game directly. If I had spent more time on the forums instead of the compiler, I'd have been convinced of having a public Beta 5 and then likely would have just pushed the date

[quote who="wayninja" reply="27" id="2757194"] Quoting Phantus, reply 26 I can't believe somebody thought this was okay to release. Constant crashing and a one act campaign?!? The patches haven't really done anything to stop the crashing. This may very well be the end of Stardock. Oh, please. Might you be exaggerating a wee bit? Sure, the game is rubbish as is, but Stardock has too many other solid ti

[quote who="Cryptomancer" reply="11" id="2755977"]If you care to do something positive, instead of being passive echoes of one Gamespot reviewer's opinion -- and that's all it is, a personal opinion -- please vote on Gamespot, granting a higher user-rating. It often happens, on Gamespot, that the aggregate user-score is much higher than the official reviewer's score -- who is just one guy, with his pseudo-expert opinion. EDIT > Because of reply #15, I remove an i

[quote who="ferang" reply="1" id="2756713"]Yawn [/quote] Real nice intelligent response. Guess you couldn't think of anything else, could you? Moron.

This isn't anybody's fault other than Brad's and Stardock's. As consumers the only obligation we have are to buy the products that are of interest to us. As the developer of this game it was up to Brad and Stardock to put out a product that consumers would consider buying. They failed. All the hype and all the promises were of Brad's doing. What you're saying is that the game failed because Brad and Stardock listened to "us". I disagree with that. I think the game failed due to

[quote who="revjwh" reply="57" id="2756456"]No Solidsmooky, people respond because you are clearly an asshole. To make light of someone's firing and taking a potshot at Brad who has just admitted it was his responsibility is just immature as hell. You're a douche masquerading as a human being. [/quote] Well here goes another round of insults on these forums. Personally I think we should be left out of the business end of Stardock. The only thing that should matte

[quote who="Ahroo" reply="32" id="2754262"] Quoting tevans6220, reply 25 Quoting Ahroo, reply 8 2-3 years is just insulting. They waited about a couple of months before they finally reviewed Mount&Blade Warband. Another game that was in the same boat as this one. They also did the same thing to another game, I think it was GTA4? Where they reviewed it but didn't give it a final score till they threw in the multiplayer and finished the game. And rerwr

[quote who="woca" reply="16" id="2754017"]I was wondering this the other day - do game reviews thing 70 is average, or 50? or do they think it's something else? I usually went with a 70 was average, and recently i've gotten in many arguments with friends who say 50 is. If they were going on a 50 average, I overrated a lot of girls on the hotness scale probably. [/quote] When I was in school a 59 or below was an F, a 60 to 69 was a D, a 70 to 79 was a C, an 80 to

[quote who="GI_Joe" reply="9" id="2753800"] Perhaps, but I know I got the LE and right out of the box it worked. There was no crashing to desktop every 5 minutes, and it certainly wasn't unplayable. Whether it was fun in its present state is another matter. [/quote] I think statements like yours are why there is so much animosity on these forums. Just because the game didn't crash for you every 5 minutes doesn't mean that it's that way for everyone. Unplayable is

[quote who="Ahroo" reply="8" id="2753790"] 2-3 years is just insulting. They waited about a couple of months before they finally reviewed Mount&Blade Warband. Another game that was in the same boat as this one. They also did the same thing to another game, I think it was GTA4? Where they reviewed it but didn't give it a final score till they threw in the multiplayer and finished the game. And rerwrote the review and scored it the next month. I don't see why they can't do the same her

Brad I wasn't sure until now but you're a standup guy. Takes a lot of balls to say what you just said. You're okay in my book. One thing I would like to see however is the removal of the story about the glowing 9/10 review from Neoseeker. Your own admission of problems with the game refutes the review. Still showing it as news and providing a link to it sort of puts Stardock in a goofy situation. The CEO claiming the product just released is not up to par and yet providing a link to a

Sorry Frogboy but I see your comments as "too little, too late". The genie is already out of the bottle. Please don't take this as a personal attack because that's not the intent. Most CEO's would not have gone on sabbatical or vacation with such a failed launch. It may have been planned and you absolutely have a right to time with your family but the timing was awful. It puts your company in a bad light. It gives the impression that you don't care or that you're the type to hide or fold unde

Tell me something. With all of things on that huge master list that need to be fixed, how in the world can anybody give this game a 9/10? It doesn't make sense. This game has potential but you can't review potential. You have to review what's there and there's no way that reviewer can honestly say that what came in 1.0 and is now in 1.06 is anyway near a 9/10. Maybe a 5. A 6 if you want to be generous. Stardock should be ashamed to advertise or link to that review. It's not objective and more

I think the biggest reason for all the negativity is that Stardock is held to a higher standard. It was Brad and Stardock that touted the Gamers Bill of Rights which practically all gamers agreed with. So I think the bad release of Elemental came as a shock and also put Brad in a bad light. It looks like he intentionally violated the thing that made him and Stardock stand out above all the other developers and companies. It makes him out to be a phony. Though I'm sure none would ever admit it

[quote who="rossanderson48" reply="39" id="2748115"] and those that can run it are constantly running into bug after bug, the game is broken and clearly unfinished. Wrong! I can run it constantly without any bug after bug and the game is not broken and was stated it would never be finihed. So you are just trolling around like the rest of the trolls looking for your attention for today. Brad doesn't owe me or us anything. Besides he's already given what I consider a

[quote who="charon2112" reply="6" id="2748007"]Jeebus! How many threads like this do we have to see on here? We get it...some of you aren't happy. Guess what? Many of us are VERY happy. So do us all a favor and return your game...quietly. [/quote] Then why are you on the forums? Why aren't you playing? Basically what you're saying is that because you're a happy customer, the unhappy customers should keep quiet. It doesn't work that way. Try telling s

[quote who="Jharii" reply="203" id="2746496"] And yet your assessment completely ignores Brad's (and Stardock's) dedication to address these issues as quickly as possible. So please, continue to quote the consumer's opinions and ignore what Frogboy has himself stated. It will be handled in a timely fashion and is their number one priority. [/quote] Politicians promise a lot of things too and never follow through. Someone new to Stardock has no idea what you're ta

[quote who="Mtn_Man" reply="200" id="2746473"] Quoting tevans6220, reply 195 Version 1.0 is what ended up on store shelves but he wants reviewers to review the 1.05 version. Why? Dude, even StarCraft II had a 60MB day one patch. That's just how things are done in this age of internet connectivity. Get over it. [/quote] So. I didn't buy StarCraft II. I did buy Elemental and the version that I got thru download and box was ve

Typical attack by a fanboy. Brad didn't go far enough with point 7. Version 1.0 is what ended up on store shelves but he wants reviewers to review the 1.05 version. Why? If 1.0 was good enough to sell then it's certainly good enough for review and let Brad/Stardock take their lumps. They certainly deserve them. I gues the Gamers Bill of Rights was nothing but BS, right? I don't see anything wrong with what Nick said. He certainly wasn't trolling. The true trolls are the people who zea

[quote who="Rune_74" reply="86" id="2744684"] Quoting tevans6220, reply 81 Quoting Rune_74, reply 77 Quick can you name 2 gamers that don't have internet access? So what if I can't. Doesn't mean they don't exist. Not everybody has access to or can afford internet service. That doesn't mean they don't play PC games or console games for that matter. Just for the record I can name at least two gamers without access.

I understand that. My point was that 1.0 is what shipped to the stores and 1.0 is what should be reviewed. My other point is that the version sold on retail shelves should be the best working version available. If 1.05 was that version then 1.05 should have been the boxed version not 1.0. Since it was 1.0 then 1.0 is what should be reviewed.

[quote who="Rune_74" reply="77" id="2744644"]Quick can you name 2 gamers that don't have internet access? [/quote] So what if I can't. Doesn't mean they don't exist. Not everybody has access to or can afford internet service. That doesn't mean they don't play PC games or console games for that matter. Just for the record I can name at least two gamers without access. I can name whole areas of the USA without internet access that have a local Wal-Mart where Elemental is sold.