Nick-Danger Nick-Danger

Elemental -- 'Epic' or not, supposed to be or not?

▼

Elemental -- 'Epic' or not, supposed to be or not?

from Elemental Forums

With all the talk of 'Epic' lately, it got me thinking (ruh roh...).  Was Elemental intended to be 'Epic'?  If so, is it?

First, what's 'Epic'?  Lord of the Rings is Epic, right?  Civ4 or MoM games aren't, at least not compared to the Epicness of LOTR.

I think Elemental is supposed to be Epic.  Civ4 and MoM didn't have lore as Elemental does.  Evidence for Epic includes:

-Those nasty Titans screwed up things and putting them in their place broke the world (note -- I'm not much for lore so I may have some of this wrong), and we gotta fix things back up.  That qualifies as Epic.

-We have the factions -- empires vs kingdoms.  Empires vs Kingdoms isn't good vs. evil, but they're supposedly antagonistic beyond the normal competition between leaders/civs such as Lincoln vs. Montezuma vs. etc.

So, assuming the above isn't too far off-base, how well has Epicness been achieved so far?

Fixin' the broken world

We found cities and attract people out of the 'wilderness' and re-invent civilization.  Problems:

-population pretty much only affects city leveling, which in itself seems under-utilized.  Pop is supposed to be subtracted for recruiting, but I haven't ever had a difficult 'recruit and lose pop or build pop and risk not enough troops' decision.

-the game not only allows city spamming but rewards it.  Hard to get the feeling we're struggling to bring back civilization when you can't hardly swing a dead cat without hitting a bunch of cities.

-food for pop isn't that hard to come by, and global resources makes it a no-brainer once the +food resources are built.

-essence started off being very important for revitalizing the land, but now it's seemingly not even related.  Folks who weren't in early beta probably don't even realize any essence-revitalization link.

The above are Epic-less features.  I can't think of any +Epic features, so the net grade for fixin' the world is Not Epic.

Kingdoms vs. Empires

Are the conflicts between K vs. E any different from the conflicts between the Sovs within each?  I don't see any.  Am I missing something?  Assuming I'm not, then Not Epic.

How to make Elemental Epic

Regarding fixin' the broken world -- there needs to be a feeling of a struggle here.  Founding cities and successfully growing them needs to be a challenge.  Attracting and feeding the pop -- challenge.  There needs to be a feeling that, without smart game play this could go south pretty easily. 

-Essence needs to be part of the revitalization equation -- real trade-offs between revitalization and sov power. 

-Sovs need to really compete for pop -- a 'zero-sum game' where the pop I get is pop another sov loses out on.  And pop would be a diminishing resource that gets progressively harder to acquire.  This makes an 'early pop rush' a viable strategy because it only gets harder later on as the global pop pool decreases.

-maybe the Titans aren't really completely gone and they could return if some things don't/do happen.

-etc.

Regarding teh K vs. E thing

I think a chance was missed here to make something kinda Epic.  Kingdom lands look pretty (like Trammel), Empire lands look ravished (like Felucca) like the non-revitalized lands.  Essence is supposed to be needed to revitilize.  Why aren't Empires the 'anti-Essence' faction (anti-essence ~= death)?  Maybe E sovs get their power from absorbing essence (which ravishes the land), much like the Kingdom folks get their power from 'freeing' essence (which revitalizes the land).  This would explain why Kingdom land looks revitalized and Empire land looks ravished (is there an explanation for this currently?).

Ks and Es can fight over the shards (making shards more important) -- the Ks to free the essence for their power, and the Es to suck out the essence for their power.

This makes the struggle between K and E sovs more than just a struggle amongst K sovs and amongst E sovs, and it adds Epicness -- does the world end up revitalized or stay ravished feel to the game?

And maybe the E sovs are trying to bring back the Titans who'd re-inslave the world, or at least possibly break the world again defeating them.

Maybe there's a better way, and/or additional ways, to add Epicness (heck, maybe no one wants Epicness...).  I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer and I'm sure there's better ideas out there to make Elemental (more) Epic.

 

 

elemental
59,538 views 52 replies
Reply #26 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Raven, reply 22

If you got the LE Edition, your game cost you 70. Pretty simple math there my friend.
Right but, you paid 50 for the game (which they're fixing) and 20 for the extra content (which I'm sure arrived in proper form).

Edited out the FrogBoy response thing as I see you've found it.

Reply #27 from Elemental Forums Top

Well now we are just playing economics... since you can get the game new for around 27 dollars now, can't I argue that you paid 27 for the game and 23 for 'time'?

WindowBlinds - Free yourself of the default settings, customize your desktop.
Reply #28 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Jandurin, reply 26

Right but, you paid 50 for the game (which they're fixing) and 20 for the extra content (which I'm sure arrived in proper form).

Edited out the FrogBoy response thing as I see you've found it.

I'm still not seeing your logic. You're breaking down the cost of the game from the cost of the extras and that's NOT how it works in a store. If you wanted to itemize everything like that then by that logic I spent 4.99 on the hieregimon and 3.99 on the world map, and 2.99 on the box, and 5.99 on the Dragon etc etc. It doesn't work like that. I Paid $70 for a PACKAGE Deal, Including the LE goodies AND the Game. It doesn't break down costs because some of it was "Extra". I hope you see the logic behind that now. I'm looking at it from a standard consumer's standpoint.

It's like going to Burger King and buying a sandwich. That sandwich "Can" come with Bacon for an Extra .99 cents. When you add up the costs though you say you spent 4.99 on the sandwich. You don't say you spent 4 on the sandwich and .99 on bacon.

Reply #29 from Elemental Forums Top

No... Jandurin's point of view is perfectly valid. People who purchased LE spent $50 for the "game" itself, and $20 for the extra goodies. Only an idiot would assume that they are going to "patch" the extra goodies and continuously "improve" them, as the game is improved. 

He's either content or unhappy with the $20 he spent on the extra goodies. Regardless, what was in it was perfectly clear when he ordered the product. And he recieved it. 

The $50 for the game, however, is what he is expecting patches and continuous improvement on. He isn't playing economics. He's splitting the transaction into two separate transactions to eliminate a fallacy: that the person who spent $70 on LE is somehow more entitled to a better game than someone who spent $50. That is, he expects the game to hit a level of value of $70 before he considered it to "what he paid for", not $50. 

Reply #30 from Elemental Forums Top

Let's just keep it to the base entry price of the game which allows you all in game features :P

Reply #31 from Elemental Forums Top

And... yes you can say you spent 4 on the sandwich and .99 on the bacon. That's exactly what you did. If you were unhappy with the bacon, you'd as for your .99 cents back. If you were unhappy with the sandwich but not the bacon, you'd ask for your $4 :/ 

Reply #33 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting awuffleablehedgie, reply 29
No... Jandurin's point of view is perfectly valid. People who purchased LE spent $50 for the "game" itself, and $20 for the extra goodies. Only an idiot would assume that they are going to "patch" the extra goodies and continuously "improve" them, as the game is improved. 

He's either content or unhappy with the $20 he spent on the extra goodies. Regardless, what was in it was perfectly clear when he ordered the product. And he recieved it. 

The $50 for the game, however, is what he is expecting patches and continuous improvement on. He isn't playing economics. He's splitting the transaction into two separate transactions to eliminate a fallacy: that the person who spent $70 on LE is somehow more entitled to a better game than someone who spent $50. That is, he expects the game to hit a level of value of $70 before he considered it to "what he paid for", not $50. 

I don't get it...I really don't. No-one is saying they are entitled to a "better game" because they got the LE Edition instead of the Normal edition. He's correct in saying the Base Game costs 50, I'm not arguing with that. What I bought however was a PACKAGE, the base game plus the extra goodies. The game needs fixed and is being fixed, the goodies obviously can't be "fixed"..lol, and I'm quite happy with my $20 goodies.

Reply #34 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Jandurin, reply 32



Quoting Raven X,
reply 28

You don't say you spent 4 on the sandwich and .99 on bacon.
I absolutely do.

Well...to me that's just silly :P sorry.

Reply #35 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Jandurin, reply 30
Let's just keep it to the base entry price of the game which allows you all in game features

 

Fine, leave my time argument out.  See if I care.  It's much better than your bacon sammy crap.

Reply #36 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Raven, reply 34



Quoting Jandurin,
reply 32



Quoting Raven X,
reply 28

You don't say you spent 4 on the sandwich and .99 on bacon.
I absolutely do.




Well...to me that's just silly sorry.
If you get a chipotle burrito (6 dollar base price) and add guacamole (1.50), the guacamole was 1.50 and the burrito was 6, even though you pay 7.50 (before tax).

Anyway, it's a silly argument.  The interesting question is, if you returned the game, could you just return the 50 dollar game and keep the goodies for 20?  That's neither here nor there, but it occurred to me.

Reply #37 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Jandurin, reply 36


Anyway, it's a silly argument.  The interesting question is, if you returned the game, could you just return the 50 dollar game and keep the goodies for 20?  That's neither here nor there, but it occurred to me.

 

This is really getting silly now.  Is that a serious question?  Try taking half a bottle of soda back to walmart for a 49 cent refund and see how that goes.

Reply #39 from Elemental Forums Top

It was RavenX who brought up the bacon sandwich analogy, btw.

I don't get it...I really don't. No-one is saying they are entitled to a "better game" because they got the LE Edition instead of the Normal edition.

This is exactly what you're saying

As long as they live up to the original design intentions and DON'T make me pay another $70 bucks (LE edition here) for it I'll be happy. ...

also EXPECT not have to have to Pay For It out of My Pocket until the game is where it should be for what I consider my initial $70 was worth. Also, I'm pretty poor so I expect my initial $70 to be worth a lot.

Your argument is this:

1- I was promised XXX and I feel like I didn't get it

1 conclusion- Therefore, I should not have to pay anymore until I get what I was promised

2- I paid an initial $70

2conclusion - Therefore, according to 1-conclusion, I am entitled to a $70 game.

I am breaking down your argument 2 (I'm fine with your first one).

2- I paid an initial $70. $20 of this is for goodies. $50 was for the base game itself.

2a- I am happy with my $20 goodies

2conclusion- Therefeore, according to 1-conclusion, I am entitled to a $50 game.

 

The reason is because, for me

2- I paid an initial $50

2conclusion - Therefore, according to 1-conclusion, I am entitled to a $50 game.

 

Believing since you spent $70 on the game (and you're poor so it's worth "more" to you than to me), you deserve a $70 game instead of a $50 game.

 

Reply #40 from Elemental Forums Top

Yes.  And using this logic, I purposefully overpaid 200 dollars for this game.  So I think stardock should give me a $200 game.

 

Also, anyone who paid less than 50 for the game, should have to work the difference off in the kitchens or something.

 

What were we talking about again?

Reply #41 from Elemental Forums Top

Also, anyone who paid less than 50 for the game, should have to work the difference off in the kitchens or something.

Not really. They would just be "entitled" to whatever they paid for. If I get an old game on sale for $5 it's going to be judged on a much different scale than a brand new cutting-edge game I get for $50. You're being obstinate and, yes, you are paying for "time". The "pleasure" to be a release-day adopter. But a particular retailer undercutting the MSRP of a game to try to get some last-second sales while people are still willing to purchase the game, yes that is just economics. 

Purposely overpaying doesn't even make any sense so I'm not even going to address that seriously. I guess $200 == 4x $50 so you might be able to expect to play multiplayer...? Oh wait. You still can't.

Reply #42 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting awuffleablehedgie, reply 41

Also, anyone who paid less than 50 for the game, should have to work the difference off in the kitchens or something.

Not really. They would just be "entitled" to whatever they paid for. If I get an old game on sale for $5 it's going to be judged on a much different scale than a brand new cutting-edge game I get for $50.

 

They would be entitled to whatever they paid for it?  I'm not sure what you mean.  If I pay only 25 dollars then I only entitled to half a game?  What does the game being on sale have to do with scale in which it's judged?  Or are you saying that people who pay 25 dollars today are using a totally different scale than those that paid 50 dollars 3 weeks ago?

 

So if you can 'pay for the pleasure of being an early adopter', then my logic stands.  You did not pay 50 for the game and not entitled to a 50 dollar game.  You only payed 27 dollars for the game and 23 dollars for the 'pleasure'.

 

If I seem obstinate, its because your logic is selective.  Also, my posts were not serious, so there is no reason to try to rationalize them.

Reply #43 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting wayninja, reply 42
They would be entitled to whatever they paid for it?  I'm not sure what you mean.  If I pay only 25 dollars then I only entitled to half a game?  What does the game being on sale have to do with scale in which it's judged?  Or are you saying that people who pay 25 dollars today are using a totally different scale than those that paid 50 dollars 3 weeks ago?

 

So if you can 'pay for the pleasure of being an early adopter', then my logic stands.  You did not pay 50 for the game and not entitled to a 50 dollar game.  You only payed 27 dollars for the game and 23 dollars for the 'pleasure'.

 

If I seem obstinate, its because your logic is selective.  Also, my posts were not serious, so there is no reason to try to rationalize them.

2 things

1.  You have to only use the price at launch because it's pointless to debate various retailers.  Really, it should just be using stardock's retail price (I got it from Amazon as a pre-order and got a 10 dollar coupon right away which I used on Reach).

2.  I laughed at your no need for serious business line.

Reply #44 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Wintersong, reply 5
Is Elemental epic? It is.
How?

Seriously, how is Elemental Epic to you?

Does it matter which sov wins, other than that it's your sov?  Does the fate of the lands or revitalization or anything else depend on your sov winning?  How is it any different from a game of chess or solitaire or twiddly-winks?

Could Elemental be more?  Should it be more?   Or is it enough to fix the broken/imbalanced game features then call it a day?

@Raven X

Good post, but the past is past, and with all the upcoming changes/fixes to the bits&pieces it's important to not lose sight of the big picture.  I don't see a lot of talk about looking at the game as a whole, and how well it meets whatever goal(s) SD set, and if not, what can be done to address any possible shortcomings.

 

Reply #45 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting katalist, reply 1
Its epic to me personally and thats all that I care about (:
That's cool.

I'm curious tho -- what exactly about the game is 'epic' to you?   Serious question  :)

 

Reply #46 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting wayninja, reply 2
You can revitalize land through essence?  Or do you mean that was removed in beta?
In early beta it took essence to revitalize the land before cities could be placed.  The revitalization would spread out at a constant rate.  City placement in 'green' areas cost no essence.  If we found a good city location outside the green we had to choose to either wait for the green to spread, or spend essence.  When adventure locations were added those spots were a small green area and no essence was required for city placement there.  As beta went on the essence-city link disappeared, to there being no link now.

Regarding the semantics of defining 'epic' -- I'm using Elemental's lore as the definition.  The lore contains a number of 'epic' elements, as my first post described.  Does the game utilize these elements? If not -- should it?  Is there a missed opportunity to make Elemental stand out from other TBS games that have no 'epic' lore?

Why put in lore if the game play pretty much ignores it, let alone use it to best effect?  Just to sell books?

Reply #47 from Elemental Forums Top

HAHAHAHA... I love how no one is reading the OP and just keying on the word epic.

 

This thread is epic win.

 

That is what happens when someone uses a word in a completely inappropriate context. It would be like starting a thread with the title: "Why are the battles not scientific enough?" or "Why is the character development not green enough?"

Reply #48 from Elemental Forums Top

 

I think the term 'EPIC' means something different to each one of us.

I don't agree that Lore makes a TBS game epic. CIV4, DOM3 and Total War are what I would call an Epic game. The reason is scale. CIV4 is about massive armies that you control to conquror the world.  While games like MoM and AOW would me less epic in scale but they muck up for it with the RPG element in them.  Yes you can have a awsome battles in AOW and MOM that can be more fun than CIV4 or Total War however I would not call them EPIC. 

 

Reply #49 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting jamotide, reply 47
That is what happens when someone uses a word in a completely inappropriate context...
:rofl:

Kids these days...

Buy 'em a thesaurus and they eat the pages...

 

Reply #50 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Bellack, reply 48
I think the term 'EPIC' means something different to each one of us.
The wisdom is strong in this one :grin:    Obviously you took the book to school instead of eating the pages ;)

I don't agree that Lore makes a TBS game epic. CIV4, DOM3 and Total War are what I would call an Epic game. The reason is scale.
Scale is a good attribute to base 'epic' upon.  For Elemental to be 'epic' in that sense then adding something along the lines being discussed in Raven X's thread A Official "Epic Request" to Stardock from the Player Community would be a good place to start.

The reason I'm using lore for the basis for 'epic' in this thread (for other threads/topics, other things can be used to define 'epic' -- interesting how that works, eh?) is that froggy and SD went to a lot of trouble to give us lore for the game, and I'm guessing it wasn't merely to sell books (tho that's surely a part of it).  We've got this detailed lore but I'm arguing it's not being used to anywhere near its potential, and that it can be used to provide an 'epic' component to the game (as discussed in the first post).

Adding scale would be great.  The lore could add another 'epic' layer beyond that provided by scale.  They're not mutually exclusive, and in fact they compliment each other.

'Epic'-based lore would set Elemental apart from games like Civ4, where you can conquer the world but the ramifications from who conquers would be much different.  Using LOTR for an analogy, Civ4 is more akin to the difference between Rohan or Gondor winning the game (or maybe Rohan and The Shire), while, if using Elemental's lore as I'm suggesting, Elemental could be more akin to Sauron's or the 'Good Guys' winning.  The fate of the Age of Man is a consequence ~an order of magnitude different from the Rohan-or-Gondor consequence, and that difference would add 'epicness'.

Anyhoo, thanks for the intelligent and well-reasoned reply :)