Nick-Danger Nick-Danger

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

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

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.

 

 

59,538 views 52 replies
Reply #51 Top

Quoting awuffleablehedgie, reply 39
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.

 

OK people you know damn well what Raven means and don't pretend you don't. This nick picking crap is stupid.  It does not matter what you spent on a game if it does not live up to what it is suppose to be then you did not get your money's worth no matter how much you paid for it. It hurts more when you spent $70 as opposed to $30  but it is still a loss.  So yes if I spent $70 on the package deal and the game is crap then I will have waisted $70 not $50 despite what else came with the game (I only use this last part as an example, I don't think the game is crap yet)

 

 

+1 Loading…
Reply #52 Top

Quoting Nick-Danger, reply 50



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'.

 

If we could get both increased scale and some sort of lore-based game-changing effects similar to the Sauron vs Men or better yet Morgoth vs Elves (and everyone else) comparisons, I'd be FAR more pleased with my purchase.