Stardock's last chance... Elemental: Fallen Enchantress released

[Snerf]

Basically, do you want us to keep making fantasy strategy games?

Yes. even with Elemental's flaws, MoM as a base is a good thing to strive for. Fantasy 4X games aren't exactly saturating the market like Call of Duty clones. Even though Eador (a re-skin of an older game, right?) is on the horizon and there is likely to be some kind of AoW3 in the future, I think that there is still room in the genre.

Like others have said, if you can improve on what's out there, and build on what you have learned, I think that there will still be an audience.

Fantasy stuff is fun. Building empires is fun. Exploring is fun. Having to think, to make tough decisions is fun. Magic, monsters, diplomacy, commerce, intrigue are all fun stuff.

That being said, I'm a goddamn sucker for cyberpunk, post-apocalyptic, or near-future/alt-future dystopia settings as well. I think a strategy/4x game through those lenses could be really neat too.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

I thought he was talking about a Stardock take on Emperor of the Fading Suns.

 

[Frogboy]

Frogboy, reading about how the "design process" failed when you made Elemental:WoM, was it just plain luck that GalCiv 2 ended up as such a good game, or did you do something different when you made that?

Well in the case of GalCiv/Galciv2, I "owned" those projects. It's the difference between the guy making the game and the guy investing in a game. That is, when we did Elemental, I said "make me a MOM with multiplayer and better graphics, here's $3 million." and went back to working on my day job at Stardock and came back to it a few months before it shipped.

With Fallen Enchantress, Derek came in and took on the role I had with GalCiv and we tasked to take the glob that was Elemental and turn it into something.

The lesson learned (which is obvious in hindsight) is that a single person has to own the vision. You can't just have a "team" where everyone is throwing in ideas with no one to say "NO, that's a stupid idea!". With Elemental, there wasn't anyone to say "NO, you can't put in dungeons!" or "NO, you can't have quests!" (the whole quest system in Elemental was a huge time sink to create).

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

I also don't like how much was surrendered for unit design. I could imagine a future version where sure, the humans are adaptable like that but other races may not be so dependent on their equipment but something else that allows us to have drastically different looking (and in turn different acting) races.

You've already got a system in there that would (Mostly) work for that, the traits system or whatever it's called. You'd just have to have visual changes tied to the traits and then you could still use the regular point-buy system on non-humanoid (Or more monstrous) units to give them customization and different looks without relying on humanoid equipment working on their models. Would require more art work of course since for each non-humanoid race you'd have to do unique changes, but most of that could probably be different textures and/or particle effects. Ogre with berserker foams at the mouth, ogre with ironskin is a different color, armored ogre has a few armor bits stuck on his model. Then make some of the traits mutually exclusive so you can only use one defensive, offensive, and specialty trait per unit. So you don't have to make the pieces quite as modular to snap together, so ironskin ogre can't have armored ogre bits on him, but CAN have berserk since that's not model-unique, and can have different weapons since they aren't model-unique.

Off the top of my head I can't remember if any traits already have a visual impact or not (I wanna say no, though) so I guess that may not be possible due to engine limitations or whatever. And to be honest I'd be fine with the humanoid races anyway, that didn't really bother me. I just kinda felt like there should be more to everything else (Which is a vague as hell thing to say but is true), and especially more emphasis on the sorta post apocalyptic setting. I am interested to see what the expansion will add but to be honest I'll probably still wait for a good sale on it before picking it up. Especially since I'm normally not a fan of Stardock at all and FE is the first Stardock developed game to push my buttons even as much as this.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

I finally decided to try my copy. I find it's a good game, it doesn't do anything truly exceptionally, but it's solid, slick, polished and fun. It has nice little touches, I like being given odds preentively for a battle. I agree that Warlock is good, but ultimately shallow, limited and simplistic, even though I tend to like simple games.

It's funny, in 2010 I had preordered the limited edition and then cancelled it. Stardock somehow sent me two copies of the limited edition for free. I never found anyone who would accept the second box even for free.

 

[Atomic]

It's funny, in 2010 I had preordered the limited edition and then cancelled it. Stardock somehow sent me two copies of the limited edition for free. I never found anyone who would accept the second box even for free.

I wouldnt mind taking that extra box of your hands if you still have it (for free of course )

 

[Frogboy]

The Limited Edition has a cloth map and a pewter dragon and the Hiergemenon book. Would be kind of silly for someone not to take it even if they never played the game.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

Haha it might have to do with my disclosing the game's reception when mentioning it. I think my brother would like it anyway, he is interested in Eador. I could probably entice him into getting Fallen Enchanteress once there is a sale.

 

[Metro]

There is definitely room for the type of strategy game you propose. I'd just be careful to define core gameplay experience and make sure the extra features you add reinforce it, rather than just exist on their own or even detract from it. If the focus is on city building and empire governance, RPG elements should be fairly simple and tactical combat either infrequent (large battles) and/or quick to resolve (smaller battles). Conversely, if you focus on one or a few hero characters, simplify the city building part.

Warlock does this well; combat is the focus, everything else is just there to provide some depth and context.

Warlock really is the benchmark on this. Since, after all, they already did this: Warlock == Elven Legacy gone through this process.

I wouldn't consider Warlock a benchmark by any means. Yes, the combat is tight, straightforward, and well done but the problem is the other elements that are supposed to support it end up detracting from it. I won't go too in depth because I'd be regurgitating critiques I already posted on the Warlock thread but the spell system is the most notable example. It's lazy and comes of as being thrown together in a weekend when Paradox tapped them on the shoulder and told them they had to launch. The randomness of both it and what lords you potentially get undermine the base gameplay. It wouldn't have been too much to ask if they came up with a tiered spell tree and perhaps integrate the system with the gods/religion (to make that bit more significant) to support the combat with another small layer of strategy.

While I recognize you don't want to cram a multitude of strategic aspects into a game because it would ultimately ruin it; Warlock ends up being an example of the other extreme: utterly ignoring some of those aspects or leaving them in an unpolished, undeveloped, and sloppy state.

 

[Frogboy]

What I meant by this is that most people are unaware that Warlock is derived from Fantasy Wars / Elven Legacy (and even older titles).

If Fallen Enchantress had been our first attempt at a fantasy game, I think people would have been pretty universally pleased. But it had to carry Elemental's baggage. I don't think anyone held Elven Legacy against Warlock (for instance) .

 

[sser]

A bit of a lame excuse, no? A game either stands on its own or does not. Saying it would be universally received in an alternate universe is really silly.

Here's the differences between Warlock and FE that really divide the games IMO. Everything in Warlock just works. Metro's critiques are right, but regardless, Warlock just works. Everything is fast paced, there is something to do every turn, magic is very diverse, units are even more diverse, combat has very clear, concise rules, it has the random elements akin to Civ4, but nothing game breaking, people are playing it competitively in multiplayer.The game lacks the diplomatic and empire-building nuances of most games, but it's otherwise a very tight game, with all its gameplay mechanics working within the world they created.

FE's problem is more or less the opposite situation. It is not remotely fast paced, you spend many turns doing absolutely nothing (the game's worst problem, IMO, and I don't know how you fix such issues), magic is incredibly boring, every single faction but one is made up of humans which is hella boring not to mention way behind the times (MoM), the combat rules are not always clear and sometimes not followed, actually very little in the game is what I would call "accessible", the game looks drab and washed out whereas Warlock is very bright and easy to navigate. I actually thought this was a serious game design misstep for FE. Because everything looks like mud, nothing really separates itself on the map. Like there are no super bright meadows, and then dark underworld type areas. Everything looks the same to me. Kinda defeats the purpose of playing in fantasy worlds, IMO.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

I must say after my first game I'm not quite sure how I am supposed to progress, the roadmap is confusing to me. I like that FE breaks ground with quite good new features, but I agree with the others who say that the game is compromised of quite many systems that are not that clearly integrated into one another. I mostly invested in warfare, and yet I was stomped by a civilization who had much, much more powerful fighters than me.

It's funny what happened, I was close to the ocean, and then one of the rival factions' territories just expanded, leaving me stuck on a patch of land and with no choice but to get into their grounds. If I accepted to leave on the next turn I brought me back where I was, completely stuck, so I had no choice but to trespass and provoke war. Instantly a powerful faction to the north allied with them, and most of their armies on my towns. They had such powerful units that they captured my towns instantly, going from one to the other in a single turn due to the roads.

 

[Frogboy]

No offense, sser, but you already wrote that you think FE sucks. Clearly, it's not a game for you. Based on its reviews and sales (and continued strong sales) I feel comfortable saying that a lot of people like FE.

I agree with nearly all the criticisms I've read in this thread (particularly regarding how magic is handled and the visual differences on races). So I can read those comments and suggestions and take them back to the team to improve future versions. But when someone says it "sucks" it's hard not to just tune them out because it just says "this isn't my type of game" which is fine.

There are people, in this very thread, who say they think Galactic Civilizations "sucks" too. It's okay to not like a game. And it doesn't invalidated any of your criticisms. But at the same time, I'm not inclined to propose changes to a game people generally like to satisfy someone who doesn't like it.

Incidentally, the first expansion to FE was announced today:

http://www.elementalgame.com/legendary-heroes

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

Except he didn't just say it sucks, he gave a decent pile of reasons behind his dislike. They weren't incredibly finely detailed but I can't say I blame him since people generally don't want to write a wall of text about a game they don't particularly like. And when you dislike as much of it as he appears to that would call for a hell of a lot of writing for a forum post.

Not sure what I think about the expansion based on that page. The "LOTS more" part is vague (Moreso than Sser's post!) and I'm not sure I like the skill tree for heroes. Picking out of what you randomly draw during level-ups was kind of appealing. Can't say I see a bit of difference in the screenshots compared to regular FE. Also it sounds like a distressing amount of removing systems and adding new systems, which may or may not be a good thing. And adding Steam achievements in an expansion while the base game didn't have any? Shameful!
Still, I'll grab it at some point. Possibly as early as $10.

 

[kyrub]

No offense, sser, but you already wrote that you think FE sucks. Clearly, it's not a game for you. Based on its reviews and sales (and continued strong sales) I feel comfortable saying that a lot of people like FE.

No offense, but you already wrote so many different stories about Warlord and FE. How can we trust someone who has changed his own words so many times. You should teach mass manipulation, Brad, instead of running a computer game development.

I have been watching your tactics repeatedly.
- You start by admitting to your own past sin (which is usually something somebody else did in fact; this time "you let others develop")
- Then you claim you are misunderstood (It's Elven Legacy, not MoM derived... (but it was you who always claimed it was MoM successor))
- You claim there is a mystic "multitude" who likes it, to create hype (not in this thread actually. Look there yourself)
- You try to fend off people who criticise the game by saying it's not for them (split the community)


You may do all this - and in fact I find it funnier than the games you create - but don't touch fellow Codexers on your way.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

Yeah, I believe War of Magic's failure has been all of these at some time or another. Brad saying he took too much control over it, that one PR chick who Brad creeped on, and the company as a whole with no interaction from Brad.

 

[Metro]

Incidentally, the first expansion to FE was announced today:

http://www.elementalgame.com/legendary-heroes

You know what this means? 75% off Steam sale. Make it happen, Brad.

 

[Frogboy]

Except he didn't just say it sucks, he gave a decent pile of reasons behind his dislike. They weren't incredibly finely detailed but I can't say I blame him since people generally don't want to write a wall of text about a game they don't particularly like. And when you dislike as much of it as he appears to that would call for a hell of a lot of writing for a forum post.

I agree. That's what I'm getting at: He doesn't like the game. There's nothing wrong with that. And I assume you're not suggesting that there's something wrong with him not liking the game right?

What I'm saying is that someone who thinks the game currently sucks is *not* the person we should be catering to. It's just not his thing. I've read here on RPG Codex people thinking FTL sucks. I like FTL. I don't think it would be a good idea for the FTL developer to focus their energy on making the game appeal to people who don't like it. That's just my view.

kyrub:

I have been watching your tactics repeatedly.
- You start by admitting to your own past sin (which is usually something somebody else did in fact; this time "you let others develop")
- Then you claim you are misunderstood (It's Elven Legacy, not MoM derived... (but it was you who always claimed it was MoM successor))
- You claim there is a mystic "multitude" who likes it, to create hype (not in this thread actually. Look there yourself)
- You try to fend off people who criticise the game by saying it's not for them (split the community)

I'm not asking you to "trust" me at all. I'm not even sure what level of "trust" you are being asked to give. Trust on what? You give your opinion, I give mine.

I will say you misunderstood the discussion on Elven Legacy -- WARLOCK is a derivative of Elven Legacy / Fantasy Wars. Not in terms of game desiign but literal iterations by the same company on the same engine. What I wanted from WOM was a MOM successor. Clearly, it failed at that. What would have been smarter would have been to start with a less ambitious concept (ala Fantasy Wars did and build up to Warlock).


I'm also not suggesting that RPG Codex readers necessarily like or dislike FE. I can't measure that. But let's assume that they all hate it. So now what? I'm in the business of writing commercial software. My measurement of whether people like (or dislike) a game comes down to a combination of reviews and its financial results. Games can get crappy reviews and sell insanely well (The Political Machine games review terribly but sell insane levels). I personally like to look at both the reviews and finances (the reviews for ego I guess and the finances because, well, I'm a greedy capitalist). FE has a 78 metacritic and has sold very well. That's good enough for me.

As for criticism, if I were to say "the game isn't for you" to everyone who criticizes the game then I'd be in that list!

I have a long list of things I don't like about FE (and GalCiv and Sins for that matter). But if someone says the game "sucks" then my view is they're entitled to that opinion but it probably not the game's target audience. If the game isn't profitable, then whatever "target audience" it has becomes moot. Right? But since the game is profitable and getting good reviews then it makes business sense to improve and expand on that base as opposed to go in a very different direction to cater to those who think it "sucks".

 

[Frogboy]

Incidentally, the first expansion to FE was announced today:

http://www.elementalgame.com/legendary-heroes

You know what this means? 75% off Steam sale. Make it happen, Brad.

I'll push for something.

 

[Zed]

Updated Graphics Engine.

The graphics engine delivers stunningly new visuals while improving performance on older machines.

[graphicswhoremode] Still looks like something the cat dragged in. Cloaks and hair still look like ass and textures on characters are still shit. Really ought to remove the cell-shading from inactive objects like trees to make the world looks better too. Buildings should fill more of their cells. Towers and tall buildings should be higher.

Who gets Legendary Heroes for free?

If you purchased War of Magic before 10/31/2010 then you will be receiving Legendary Heroes for free. If you will be receiving Legendary Heroes for free you will receive an email from Stardock when the beta starts.

I guess I can't give up on Stardock if they keep giving me free stuff. Now I have to try this as well.

I don't know why people want xxxxxxxl maps. You won't be able to finish a game like that anyway - game will die from constant memory leaks.

 

[Frogboy]

Re graphics. I'm no fan of the graphics style and not just the cloaks and hair. But I'm not one to talk. The last game I art directed was GalCiv II: Twilight of the Arnor some years ago. And plenty of people think that game looks terrible.

On LH, I did start to get involved more in the art direction to make it match closer to what I'd like. So I got rid of the ground cover and changed the lighting. But I'll never be a fan of the illustrated look the game has and it would be too expensive to redo the assets.

The one thing that we are doing (and it's not in the screenshots yet) is having more consistent shadows. My personal preference on art is for it to be *crisp*. I don't like artwork to get in the way of the game. That's why I so hated the ground cover and all the junk in the various tiles. It just gets in the way. By the time LH is done, it should be much more crisp looking. Whether that's an improvement or not is in the eye of the beholder.

Here's a link to a post that shows FE and LH side by side so you can see the changes. They're not huge but I think every bit helps.

http://forums.elementalgame.com/440014

 

[Metro]

That's cool you're giving it free to people who bought into Elemental at an early stage. Although not to sound overly critical but reading some of the features it seems like a few should just be included in a free patch. Something like

A new Champion progression system. Instead of random traits your champions have a trait tree that they can select traits from as they level up, grow your champions the way you want.

seems to be more of a systemic improvement. I'm fine with charging for stuff like new heroes, new scenarios, new units, and even new mechanics (like religion/spies in Civ 5's Gods and Kings... although it is sort of lame that stuff was in base Civ 4 and they felt the need to charge extra for it in Civ 5) but, imo, updating/fixing existing mechanics shouldn't come at a cost. Warlock struck a balance between this and offered the entire lords and items system for free although you could buy a minor DLC for the ability to craft artifacts.

That said, I don't think anyone could deny you're doing a great job with following up and improving the game which is sadly a rarity in this age.

Zed Hey, breh, I like cell shaded graphics! I think they work particularly well in strategy games as it's almost irrelevant how detailed the graphics are. I do agree with you about super huge maps. I find that I really can't play anything larger than 'standard' size on most games like this and usually default to small. The gameplay is the same it's just that larger maps add to the tedium.

 

[Zed]

Metro The problem isn't cell-shading itself. The problem is cell-shading shit like trees. It adds contrast to things that's supposed to be background. It makes the vegetation look like discarded candy wrappers.

Frogboy That's an improvement in terrain, for sure. I can spot the difference in unit shadows too.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

Now I have to try this as well.

No you don't. You could give your ol' pal Multi-headed Cow your Steam key!

And yeah, can notice the difference a bit more with the comparison. Although some of that looks like normal Fallen Enchantress with "Stylized lighting" disabled under advanced options. Example, here's a screenshot I just took with stylized lighting, and here's one without. And while the ground textures are crisper, they also look like someone just bumped the contrast way higher. It looks kinda like some of those silly texture mods for Bethesda games where they take the regular texture and crank the contrast so it's covered in speckles and noise and say HD TEXTURES. The different tiles are more clearly defined but I'm not sure I'd say it looks better, and having defined tiles wasn't really an issue for me anyway since I play with the grid enabled. Kinda iffy on the reduced ground clutter too, makes the environment look even more sterile which doesn't seem right for a vaguely post apocalyptic fantasy setting. And no city names on the cities on the game screen? That's no good. Having them visible on the map makes it easier to keep track of locations in your head, only seeing city names if you select them is a bummer. Also more difficult if you're doing a let's play for example and take a screenshot of your world, have to annotate it yourself and/or say "Well the city near the middle but kinda off to the left, south of that hill there, that's Elftown" instead of just posting the picture and then mentioning Elftown by name and assuming people know what the fuck you're talking about.

 

[Frogboy]

Metro The problem isn't cell-shading itself. The problem is cell-shading shit like trees. It adds contrast to things that's supposed to be background. It makes the vegetation look like discarded candy wrappers.

Frogboy That's an improvement in terrain, for sure. I can spot the difference in unit shadows too.

It's not just that the trees look bad. It's that they're a different style from the rest of the game. Originally, the forests were supposed to be done as tile designs (like the cities) but it was a huge performance hit. As a result, they were replaced with "billboards" (basically think sprites). It solved the problem but it clashes. What they're working on now in LH is to replace the billboarsd with something that matches the style and then have the shader shadow them consistently.