[quote who="KillzEmAllGod" reply="9" id="2764623"]shame not every reviewer looks past the flaws of a game with the way stardocks fixs things..[/quote] Thank goodness there are reviewers who review the actual state of a game, rather than wishes and intentions.
I'm not sure why, but playing a game on normal, these guys barely bothered me... once or twice some big spider/troll would threaten my towns, but a rare inconvenience. Pretty much the same as the AI. The entire game seemed to consist of collecting goodie huts, hunting down monsters as I wondered beyond my zone, and wiping out any other faction I came across in a single battle (sovereign death). I suspect my starter sovereign (one of the presets) was too powerful.
[quote who="StarReaper" reply="1" id="2762556"]I honestly think this will change. If GC2 is anything to reference you get a little Sass from the AI on a regular basis. Even teasing you that if it was on a harder difficulty it would woop your ass for sitting ships on its border. [/quote] Cute... this game would gain so much from this kind of thing.
After playing through some hours of this game, I think it could benefit enormously from a slightly undefinable thing called character. I mean this in a constructive way - people are willing to forgive and overlook so much more if a game has a little frisson, je ne sais quoi; a twist of humour, quirky actions - things that stick in the mind. In Elemental, I feel the elements are there, but that magic spark is yet to emerge. Bugs and mechanics aside, here are a couple of
Seems a little counterintuitive to me... Was this by design, or is it a bug?
I cannot work out how to determine which ally to buff/imbue in a stack of people. Short of breaking that person into a separate square, any suggestions? Thanks!
Aha! I realise what it is now... one of the imbue champions was a life spell, the other a death spell. Weird.
I have only played one sandbox game. (I was messing around in the campaign before, until a bug stopped me in my tracks). It showed me I had the spell imbue to start with, but could also train it. I am not discounting that I have somehow got confused, as I am considerably past that now, but I was struck by it at the time - and thought that perhaps it would improve the imbue.
This situation somewhat lays bare the emptiness of the gamers bill of rights - ie, they are progressive as long as things are going well, but faced with a very difficult situation they are battening down the hatches. Its an old old story. Inevitable, but an interesting reminder that there is nothing too special about this company; sure, they are a decent studio trying to make fun games (which is great), but they are also a business, not a charity, and are trying to save their finances
I suspect so too.
thanks for the useful answers!
I started with imbue champion in my spell list, but also found it in my to learn list. Is this a bug, or does learning it improve the spell somehow? Thanks!
Could anyone explain what I need to be able to speak to NPCs? Most of the time at the beginning of a game, I get the 'speak' icon with a red cross through it. A Lore Master, for example, appears, but I cannot interact. Any suggestions? Thanks
(spoiler alert) I got past the point where I explored all the footprints, met the guy, and moved on. After a couple of battles, I sent my troops back to a city to regen. (PS It's a rather irritating mechanic... you have gone all that way, but the slowness of regen means you have to walk miles back again). I went back where I had been, but it would no longer allow me. It told me I needed to check the footprints. But since I had already done this, i
I totally agree with those who suggest the solution lies in the dynasty system. It is by far the most interesting solution. That plus champs/sovereigns should be a little harder to kill. Perhaps they could gain a pretorian guard or some such - a phalanx of bodyguard who absorb long distance attacks.
[quote who="Ynglaur" reply="7" id="2758906"]I actually disagree with trying to get a subsequent version re-reviewed. There have been a number of games through the years that were terrible at release, but were far more stable and enjoyable a few patches in (Heroes of Might and Magic: Dark Avatar, anyone?). As a consumer, it would be a real service if some of the review sites posted a "six months later" review of some games. For some, it would mean things like "while there use
Indeed. Let's move on. Pull out all the stops to fix the game, refund those who did not realise they were buying something still in development, get over this hump and win back your rep as a games developer and publisher with integrity and flair. I wish you fair sailing.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="45" id="2753014"](I'm up north on vacation typing on an extremely slow connection so bear with me) I don't think people yet fully realize the completeness of Stardock's fail on Elementa's launch. The point is, the issue here is far far worse than many of you think it is. I wish it was an issue of the game being released too early. That's an easy thing for a company to "fix". Elemental's launch is the result of catastrophic poor judgment
[quote who="Krelk" reply="32" id="2756816"] Quoting BoydofZINJ, reply 29I support giving refunds if we are disatisfied. Can we get a refund on this game? You can only get a 75% refund. [/quote] Which is questionable, to say the least. On one level, at least they don't say 'f off, caveat emptor', but the reality is this game was not what they sold (ie a fully-working release-r
The artistic feel is about the best thing Elemental has going for it, right now, so I shouldn't worry. I am betting it's pretty much the bottom of their mind-boggling to do list.
Every time I read one of these posts, which are spot on, the more I seriously wonder how on earth SD created the game they did, and how on earth they considered it ready for release (which I am beginning to seriously doubt they did).
A simple comparison with what else you get in the release ready range (between 40-60) for games these days should make the answer clear. By the measure of 'do you get equal value for money' no. But you might consider it a healthy tip in a jar, if you were so inclined, and believed this company was worth supporting.
I think a 4 is fair. This is 2010, and they charged full whack for the game. But on every level it simply screams 'incomplete'. If they has asked for $20 in a pot to help them complete this game - perhaps in return for some 'pioneer' goodies.. you know, plaques, lands named after players what have you - that would have been one thing. But they didn't. They released into a market of many utterly magnificent games. It was simply not ready for that, and 4 is about what they deser
Yep; sorry to hear about the layoffs, it's always sad when a game does pass muster. Yes, SD has been punished for releasing a shoddy product, and the brutality of the market won't let such things stand. But no true gamer gets any pleasure from hearing this kind of news. Bad game launches and subsequent studio crises are a shame for everyone; fans, studio staff, investors. And the message tends to reinforce the 'make a sequel' mentality. So, here's hoping you ca
An interesting argument, OP, not without merit. On the other hand, reality has shown that it is very difficult to overcome a bad release. Metacritic scores put it into the "one more not to bother with" category, and don't get updated. Release buzz dies. etc etc. This is not to say that they can't recover, but it will not be easy. They released a shoddy product. (And broke trust... they did not sell this as a "lend us $50 to get our game in shape",