delijoe79 delijoe79

Elemental seems to be getting very little attention

▼

Elemental seems to be getting very little attention

from Elemental Forums

I'm sorry if my concern here is completely unfounded, and I don't think that Stardock very much cares how "big" Elemental gets but it seems like to me that Elemental has received very little coverage in mainstream gaming media, and even among the hardcore strategy fanbase, nobody seems to care.  Maybe that's because of the 2 500lb Gorillas in the room (Civ 5 and SC2).  I then listen to the podcast on modding from 3 moves ahead and not a mention of Elemental... It just seems that we're being shoved into a tiny corner of an already niche genre, and it's worrysome.

My main concern here is that there won't be a big enough mod community.  I look at the Civ 5 community, not to mention Fallout 3 and Oblivion and some of the great mods that have come out of those communities and wonder whether the community will be big enough to get some really quality mod projects for Elemental.  Look what happened to the Galciv mod community... it's still probably the best 4X space game out there and it just died. Even Swords of the Stars has a more active modding community.


PLEASE don't let the same thing happen to Elemental.  I wish there was some more promotion going on because we're almost 2 weeks from release and outside of this forum there's simply very little excitement.

elemental
73,170 views 136 replies
Reply #126 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting phazonfreak, reply 125



Quoting joasoze,
reply 123
Why does Blizzard do this? To secure better/faster connections, to save money or what?


The ultimate reason for everything in this world: to earn more money.
End of phazonfreak's quote
So... I'm not part of everything then? Bah.

Reply #127 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting StevenAus, reply 126




Quoting phazonfreak,
reply 125

Quoting joasoze, reply 123Why does Blizzard do this? To secure better/faster connections, to save money or what?

The ultimate reason for everything in this world: to earn more money.


Or at least they think it will earn them more money.  Getting more money when you already have gazillions is so ho-hum - getting more money beyond a certain threshold doesn't particularly make life any more satisfying.  Money for the sake of money is the ultimate road to well, nowhere that important.  And the more "more money" becomes the focus, the less of all the important things are that are essential for it.  In the end, the product has to be basically functional and useful, but if too many corners are cut...

Best regards,
Steven.
End of StevenAus's quote

Well I don't think their stockholders would be too happy if they said "we have enough money already, we don't need any more". Corporations try to make money, it's their whole purpose for existing. And even rich corporations can go bankrupt if they don't make enough. Multi-million dollar corporations often have multi-million dollar expenses too.

More money being the focus is good when a company understands that a quality product and a good reputation will give them more money in the long run then anything. Certainly Blizzard is known for understanding that more then anybody else.

ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #128 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting andrewlt, reply 114


I wouldn't classify a lack of LAN option as "DRM". When I think DRM, I think of some crap like SECUROM. Then again, I believe that was Civ 4, not Civ 5. Steam isn't exactly a rootkit, virus-like DRM like SECUROM.
End of andrewlt's quote

But DRM was the specific reason for removing LAN functionality.  They don't want LAN play, or things like Hamachi, because they want all MP to be routed through battle.net, which requires login and authentication.

Battle.net offers a lot of nice features and so it may not be a big deal to some people, but the removal of LAN was most definitely designed and implemented as a form of DRM.  Blizzard admitted as much :)

Reply #129 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting goodgimp, reply 129



Quoting andrewlt,
reply 114


I wouldn't classify a lack of LAN option as "DRM". When I think DRM, I think of some crap like SECUROM. Then again, I believe that was Civ 4, not Civ 5. Steam isn't exactly a rootkit, virus-like DRM like SECUROM.


But DRM was the specific reason for removing LAN functionality.  They don't want LAN play, or things like Hamachi, because they want all MP to be routed through battle.net, which requires login and authentication.

Battle.net offers a lot of nice features and so it may not be a big deal to some people, but the removal of LAN was most definitely designed and implemented as a form of DRM.  Blizzard admitted as much
End of goodgimp's quote

Yea battle net is nice but all multiplayer games should have a LAN option and Hotseat. Well maybe not Hotseat for FPS, RTS  and MMO games but for all other games it should be in. Escpecially TBS games. 

When I play TBS games I usally run to to three different sides at once because of the Hot Seat function.

Reply #130 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting goodgimp, reply 129



Quoting andrewlt,
reply 114


I wouldn't classify a lack of LAN option as "DRM". When I think DRM, I think of some crap like SECUROM. Then again, I believe that was Civ 4, not Civ 5. Steam isn't exactly a rootkit, virus-like DRM like SECUROM.


But DRM was the specific reason for removing LAN functionality.  They don't want LAN play, or things like Hamachi, because they want all MP to be routed through battle.net, which requires login and authentication.

Battle.net offers a lot of nice features and so it may not be a big deal to some people, but the removal of LAN was most definitely designed and implemented as a form of DRM.  Blizzard admitted as much
End of goodgimp's quote

Securom has different flavors really. Civ IV had a disc check and that was it which was removed with one of the last patches. Trying to destroy the ability for anyone to use Hamachi and systems like it is certainly a DRM move, and like you said, Blizzard pretty much said this is why they removed LAN ability.

LAN games still require being able to save to a Stardock server right?

Reply #131 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting niteshade6, reply 128

Well I don't think their stockholders would be too happy if they said "we have enough money already, we don't need any more". Corporations try to make money, it's their whole purpose for existing. And even rich corporations can go bankrupt if they don't make enough. Multi-million dollar corporations often have multi-million dollar expenses too.

More money being the focus is good when a company understands that a quality product and a good reputation will give them more money in the long run then anything. Certainly Blizzard is known for understanding that more then anybody else.
End of niteshade6's quote

I'm just saying that money isn't everything.  I'm aware that corporations try to make as much money as possible.  But sometimes (just occasionally ;-)) they lose sight of what makes them the most money.  Whether Blizzard has (or will) go down that path remains to be seen. ;-)

Best regards,
Steven. 

Reply #132 from Elemental Forums Top

I'd think that the reason blizzard split the servers in two was for latency issues

Reply #133 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Zorbane, reply 133
I'd think that the reason blizzard split the servers in two was for latency issues
End of Zorbane's quote

They split them for latency and load reasons, but that was done years ago. Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 1 let you change which area you want to log in to. Starcraft 2 doesn't.

Reply #134 from Stardock Forums Top

I'm dissapointed Game Informer hasn't done any previews of the game leading up to its realease. Any word if they'll get a review of it in the October issue?