I don't think Stardock/The Elemental Team is getting enough props for what they did right here.
As for me, I'm a gamer going back to the PC jr. days in my childhood; I spent thousands of hours in 1994-1995 playing MOM. In reality, I'm a database engineer- meaning I know a little bit about project releases.
Elemental has some rough spots. I bet they can all be traced back to an ROI push that cut resources and time to make an arbitrary number somewhere. Consider that Steam has CIV V, and that Blizzard just released SC 2.
So anyways:
- They took an enormous risk on a genre that hasn't been successful in the US since 1994. (Civilization + Fantasy RPG)
- The art style is incredibly distinctive and lush.
- When RTS/Quick attention span incredibly popular (Starcraft II/Farmville, anyone?) they took a risk on a game with sessions lasting 10-15 hours.
- They built a turn-based CIV engine from scratch. (Didn't seen any licensing props in the credits...)
- When the overall market trend is towards pimping IP again and again ('oh boy, Peggle Carnival IV!!!') they invested in world creation.
- Most of the complaints seem either tech engine or balance related. (E.g. 'On my ATI 9200 when I alt-tab...' or 'Sovereigns should be able to defend at +1 vs..') These are the issues resolved without a hard release deadline. For all we know, half of these issues were spotted *last week* in the Beta.
- Robust DEV interaction since the beginning.
All this criticism is harshing my mellow. This is the core of a fine game-- and all of this reminds me of the noise around Sins of a Solar Empire at launch-- a game that became a classic after a single expansion.
So, I'm sure I missed many other positives, but feel free to share. I assure you that I had all the CTD's and 15-turn games due to wonky AI as anyone else.
Cheers,
BW