Limboldt

My game opinion

▼

My game opinion

from Elemental Forums

So you want to release it, this is courageous...

 

Since the last time I played a while ago besides the nicer design most of the game feels the same with all of its problems.

Yes, some people will like it for a while, because it makes fun to play around in an Diablo meets Civ-way.

But it is not or wants not to be an challenging strategy game.

And it has to many beta-state bugs:

Some of the quests I played in the recent version did not work properly, I could not enter humble inns or when I entered locations for finished quests nothing happened or I did not get any info anywhere what to do else.

Party managment when standing on the same tile is not possible.

When I tamed a beast and had no place in my party the beast stand alone next to an enemy army after the battle that directly attacked and killed it.

I still have problems to see where I can settle, sometimes this information disappears and I have to reload to see it again.

Same with the info how far I can move in tactical combat, sometimes I can not see that anymore till I reload.

It is useless when you have a non-aggression-pact and free travelling through an opponents territory when you can not pass their cities and outposts.

Since my first game of FE I tried very fast to attack enemy towns and it is still very easy (Level Cheallenging) and after that not much happens as reaction.

The world still feels very calm and boring since you killed some monsters in your way. You do not feel under pressure or feel any tension.

The AI-Fractions have no lively personality at all.

I can not say anytime how the state or progress in the game is compared to the others. Yes, I see my and their points, but I can not say if I am on a good way and most of the time I only have to conquer some towns and then the opponents are not strong anymore.

After my opinion it is a shame what came out at the end. FE could have been a great follower of Master of Magic, but as Elemental war of Magic I see an unfineshed mediocre design study not better then some of the Civ-Fantasy Mods.

112,532 views 34 replies
Reply #26 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Glazunov1, reply 21
I agree that diplomacy is very under-developed, as I mentioned above.  But let's be fair, Limboldt: who can forget that in all Civ games (except the fourth), an AI who liked you a lot would suddenly do a hairpin turn and tell you they hated you, and immediately declared war?  Calls for help during war to allies often went unheeded, and you yourself could supply a single unit without hurting an allied relationship.  And diplomatic options have been pretty modest in the Civ titles.  And for all that Civ leaders play a bit differently, I never felt they had the sharpness of profile in this respect that I can get out of SMAC and FE.  Kraxis doesn't play like Magnar, who doesn't play like Tarth, who doesn't play like Pariden.

 

That said, I do feel this is the real weak point now of FE.  (More could and should be done with spells, but what's there is pretty good.)  So much can be added along those lines.  Like Seanw, I've thought long and hard over it--but sadly, diplomacy is probably the single element most players (and all too frequently reviewers) overlook in a strategy game, and that's probably why it's left to last to get right.  (If ever.  I don't thing AoW ever got that down.)  You can get by with poor diplomatic options and strange AI choices, as long as you have a solid mix of combat, a good UI, depth to the game mechanics, an interesting assortments of rules that allow each opponent to play a somewhat different game, etc.  It's pretty clear to me that FE is at that point. Could it be better?  Certainly.  But given Stardock's record on all but one of its previous games, I expect there to be significant improvements to the core product before it ever acquires an expansion.  In the meantime, I at least find much to enjoy in what's here.

 

That is true, but Civ worked continous on improvements. And I still wonder altogether concerning round based strategy games that this part is in so many games a problem in 2012.

I do not know about programming, but much older games were successful in creating at least a good illusion of AI behavior.

The difference I see is that Civ has gone into the 5th Version with a long tradition.

You can say Elemental stopped its first part and decided to invest the time directly in the second edition.

So I think as a customer I have the right to be a little bit skeptic.

And also ambitious, because we are talking about Stardock, a firm which released great other games.

I would perhaps be more merciful when we would talk about a startup and their first game.

But here I see the difference: Firaxis always delivered. They polarized with all the Civs but they delivered and completed.

And look at "Endless Space", a little firm of players released a game what was astonishing stable and complete when they released it.

Reply #27 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Derek, reply 20
fwiw, there was a 1% chance that a quest location wouldn't have a quest. Appearance chance was 100 for all quests, but the rng rolled from 0-99, so you could get a very small chance that the quest location would be dead. That will be fixed for release. 280 hours of gameplay and I never saw it, but a player sent me a save with it and we were able to track it down. Sounds like what the op ran into.

Sounds good, thank you for that Information and good Luck with the relase.

The Political Machine 2024
Reply #28 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Frogboy, reply 25

@Lim. I'm sorry you don't like the game.  If you bought War of Magic prior to release, you get FE for free.  

I think there may be a language issue here.  It appears there are certain features that you think a strategy game should have that FE doesn't have and therefore you don't feel its "finished" as a result.  All I can say is that those features you mentioned are ones that I certainly agree would be nice to have but they were never planned.  

The other things you mention we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Hey, User Number 1, nice :)

That I criticize hard does not mean that I do not like it.

You are right, that I expected perhaps something else. Or more. And I thought that perhaps many strategy gamers like the same things as many of us liked the same games (Master of Magic, Master of Orion, GalCiv, Alpha Centauri,...).

And regardless what sort of game you take: you can always compare the possibilities the game offers you with the way you feel it plays.

And concerning FE I think and hope that there are some aspects where the game can offer more, and that we have/had the chance to see something really really great and big here. But I, in my own personal opinion think, that we now, in this state of the game, we "only" see something good.

Perhaps there will come more...

 

(If you get it free depended on the date you bought it, I had to pay a discounted price.)

 

 

Reply #29 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting seanw3, reply 26
If GalCiv is any indicator, the majority of diplomacy will be in future releases. [...] But I guess I am just a little ahead of the curve on wanting a more complex endgame. Time and resources are increasing come next week, so let's make sure this gets on the ticket for the 1.1 version.

May the force be with us ;)

It is always good to see ambitious Modders around turn-base-strategy.

+1 Loading…
Reply #30 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Limboldt, reply 26

That is true, but Civ worked continous on improvements.

 

So does Stardock, judging from its record.  Let's not undervalue the company in this respect.

 

Though it is true that Sid Meier's mother made chocolate chip cookies that have yet to be surpassed.

 

I do not know about programming, but much older games were successful in creating at least a good illusion of AI behavior.

 

Try watching Magnar.  The AI rules have been done very well for him.  Tarth is pretty decent, too.


I would perhaps be more merciful when we would talk about a startup and their first game. But here I see the difference: Firaxis always delivered. They polarized with all the Civs but they delivered and completed.

 

Civ III was kind of underwhelming, and that was one of their titles, while Sid Meier's Railroads! was awful, as far as I'm concerned.  (I'm a big fan of the Railroad Tycoon series, on the other hand.)  They've had their share of bombs, but no one remembers them, because, hey, Sid!Meier! ;)


And look at "Endless Space", a little firm of players released a game what was astonishing stable and complete when they released it.

 

That's a great little game, I agree.  But it had a lot of small bugs that have quashed in successive fixes since then, and their diplomacy screen and behavior and absolutely zero feel.  (I mean, no major diplomacy screen per race, no "leader" remarks, much less remarks tailored for each leader: what kind of flavor is that?)

 

All I'm suggesting is to give FE a chance, once its gold code is out in a couple of days, and the changes/fixes start showing up.  Stardock isn't EA, and the satisfaction of its users/players clearly means a great deal to the company personnel, judging from past releases.  You can always bow out later on, if you don't like what you see, but quitting in the home stretch seems a bit unwise.

Reply #31 from Elemental Forums Top

I've seen a number of bugs, some of them more frustrating then others, and I've posted on most of the stuff I've encountered. I agree as it seems most do that the system could use some refinement in a number of areas.  However, there is limited time and money at play just like in most games.  However, it seems to me like Stardock spent their time and money to provide amazing tools and potential for others to build this refinement and more; others who are chomping at the bit to do just that.

 

One of my favorite and most played games of all time was Neverwinter Nights.  The game had a really lackluster main story, and the mechanics were not super solid either.  But the modder community was able to do amazing things with it, and thus it provided a robust playing ground for roleplayers, that extended the life of the game well past its effective obsoletion as far as graphics and whatnot is concerned, with nearly endless replay value during that time.

 

Do I expect all of that from this game?  No, but it does seem to me like the makers went out of their way to allow for creativity of users to have their way; and experience has shown me when users help create a game, amazing things often result.

 

I'm excited.

Reply #32 from Elemental Forums Top

I know what you mean about people liking the same game, but not the same parts of it. I thought CivIII was the best Civ just because it took things past the modern era. I am sorry, but the modern era is so incredibly weak and boring. I look at it with pitiful disdain. Why would you ever include that in a game, except as a footnote to the genetic age? It would be like stopping at the copper age in a game. Why not go on to iron? And then every sequel continues to disappoint me with absolutely nothing in terms of orbital space mechanics or any technology past modern tanks. Why o why must we live in the bowels of time?

Reply #33 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting seanw3, reply 33
I know what you mean about people liking the same game, but not the same parts of it. I thought CivIII was the best Civ just because it took things past the modern era. I am sorry, but the modern era is so incredibly weak and boring. I look at it with pitiful disdain.

 

I weep for you. :)

 

Why o why must we live in the bowels of time?

 

An air purifier helps.

Reply #34 from Elemental Forums Top

What I don't get about the AI is that it seems to be set to 1 mode only for every patch. I play one patch, the AI is completely passive and never talks to me. The next patch, the only thing they do is offer a trade treaty. The next patch, they don't offer anything but trading tech resources. Now all I get is AI declaring war on me.

It's like there's all these different ways to interact with the AI, but I only really get to see one way every game because its behaviour weights are fucked up or something.

The AI needs to be worked at from top-down, not bottom up. Stop fixing individual functions with the AI that seriously unbalance how they act in the game. Come up with a good design for how the AI should act, then build towards that.