Frogboy Frogboy

Elemental: June 2009 FAQ

▼

Elemental: June 2009 FAQ

from JoeUser Forums

Elemental_WorkerInAction

Our friends in the Demigod community seem to like having journal entries that answer a lot of questions in one swoop so we've decided to do the same in Elemental.

Q: What is Elemental?

A: Elemental is a fantasy strategy game (turn-based) developed and published by Stardock Entertainment. In it, players take on the role of a powerful sorcerer known as a "Channeler" whose goal is to build a kingdom and restore the devastated world of Elemental back to its former glory.

Opposing you are up to 11 other kingdoms and empires who have a similar objective except with the world under their control.

Players can win the game in a variety of ways including achieving the spell of making, completing the quest of mastery, diplomatic victory as well as the traditional military conquest means of victory.

The game puts most of its development focus on the single-player experience but there will be multiplayer as well with clans support (kingdoms and empires) and a series of multiplayer modes (and single player modes) that let people play the game in some unusual ways.

Q: Are the screen shots we see indicative of the final quality?

A: NO! The engine we've developed is still being enhanced. For instance, in the screen shot above, the shadows aren't in yet. There are still a lot of features left to be put in visually.  That said, one of our primary objectives with Elemental is to have a game that has unprecedented flexibility in terms of the systems it can play on: Netbooks all the way up to 64-bit Core I7s with monster video cards.

Q: What about modding?

A: Elemental will support in-game modding where users can create their stuff and submit it in game. It then gets moderated and becomes part of the game world. Players can decide which mods they want to use (ones just from Stardock, favorite ones, categories of them, etc.).

Elemental_TileEditor_1

Q: How many factions are there?

A: There are 12 pre-made factions made up of 2 official races (Men and The Fallen). Each faction will play substantially differently. Players will also be able to create their own factions and modders will be able to add more races.

SnowYetiQ: What kinds of other creatures are in the world?

A: Elemental has a large set of species that inhabit the world. They are, however, individually rare and much of the strategy of the game is to recruit some of these creatures onto your side.  You will not be able to, for instance, simply "build" dragons.  The only units you can build are those of your race.  Other races (Dragons, Demons, Ogres, Yetis, etc.) are ones that you have to actively recruit to join you.

Q: When will the "beta" be?

A: We expect to have an alpha out in the next 30 days that will be available on a very limited basis. However, we anticipate launching the beta officially at the Penny-Arcade Expo on September 4th. This beta will be available to anyone who has pre-ordered the game.  Be warned though, our betas are not fun. They're real betas which means they're incomplete and unbalanced. But through these betas, users can help mold the game by working with us online.

Elemental_1244581868 Q: I've heard this game referred to as "Master of Magic 2"

A: While Master of Magic is definitely a major source of inspiration for Elemental. A lot has changed technologically since then that we (game developers) couldn't do back then. In an age of multithreaded supporting OSes, we can have much better computer AI for enemy players and game mechanics that benefit from what is possible today (3D engines for doing very very nasty things to the game world when you have enough magic -- think Populous).

Another example is how cities can be handled now. There isn't a separate interface for managing cities. Cities grow on the main map itself. When players click on any part of the city they get the options for the entire city right away on the same main UI. The idea is to keep the user interface out of the player's face and let them concentrate on playing the game.

That said, there's a lot of influence here. Tactical battles, for instance, will have some inspiration from XCOM (though much shorter in length).

I would describe the games as being in the same family of the same genre. But someone looking for a Master of Magic 2 would not likely find Elemental to be similar enough to be considered a genuine sequel.

Q: What are some of the game modes you have in mind?

A: We are looking at having a lot of different ways of playing the game other than simply the classic "start a kingdom, conquer the world".

For example, we are looking at game modes where players can just play an extended tactical battle.  Another example is "duel" where 2 humans play against each other with the AI players as pawns in their struggle. 

The idea being that we want to let players play games that are very short in length if they want or can potentially take months to play.

Q: Will there be native 64-bit support?

A: That is our intention. Right now we are relying on Intel's Havok for the physics of Elemental and so it will largely depend on where its support of 64-bit is.

Our engine, however, will natively support 64-bit thus we want to provide (with the game) both a 32-bit and 64-bit version. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

257,885 views 132 replies
Reply #51 from Elemental Forums Top

yay new screens shots, lets hope for more in future posts!

Reply #52 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting the, reply 24

This is actually more a discussion about fantasy literature, but I do agree in principle. But note that there is a key difference between how common a creature i said to be in the world (elf= rather common compared to a Nazgul for example) and the role it plays in the story. As a matter of fact, in many respects Sauron is one of the main characters of LOTR, although he is actually never featured "live" in any single scene. Why? Because everyone is constantly talking about him, he provides much of the backstory, he sets the scene for the overall conflict ... The book is a lot about him, just look to the title of the novel ...  Also, look to the Nazguls: in effect they are more prominent than dwarfs or goblins for example, storywise. Saying they are rare is just a trick of the authour to make them more exciting. And the rare impressive creature (like dragons, Nazgul), doesn't preclude the more basic ones like the usual orc, goblin, elf etc.  They can very well coexist.

Honestly I think a lot of the same principles that apply to literature apply to games of the same genre. Obviously some things that are fun to read about are not at all fun to play and vice versa, but there is a huge common ground. And roles creatures play in the story are often asymmetrical to how common they are. We don't read fantasy books about some random grunt in an army - that's just not as exciting. And even though creatures like the Nazgul were in some ways more prominent than goblins and orcs (and definitely dwarves, they hardly made an appearance), the fact that they are limited to 9 and there usually being fewer than that present made a big difference. If there were an army of Nazgul they wouldn't have been as intimidating or as effective in capturing your attention. Same with the Balrog - if Balrogs kept popping up here and there throughout the book they just wouldn't have the same effect. My point is that this 'principle' is just as true in books and in games. The trick in games is to balance it so that such creatures are rare enough that they're exciting but common enough that we actually get to play with them and see them on a fairly regular basis.

Games where fantastical units are so prevalent to the extent that they are as common as or more so than 'regular' units makes the fantastical units become regular units. It's more exciting to see them (wandering, in your army and even in opponents' armies) when they aren't common. Being uncommon and uncommonly powerful makes them more significant, I think, than making them the mainstay of the game.


Quoting the, reply 24
Recruting fantastical creatures is fine, but we still don't know how the game will handle creature versus alignment: if I play an archevil faction of the Fallen, would I still end up with unicorns in my armies just because they are the most powerful creature I might have early access to? I sure hope not. Better would be that the alignment of the creature on the map decides its morale when it joins any faction, so that good creatures like unicorns would rather attack an evil faction than join it. On the other hand, this would introduce a lot of more chance to the game, as you could end up with only creatures to get rid of instead of to use as resources in the early game ...

I agree with you that some creatures should certainly have intrinsic alignments, but not all and maybe not even most. Unicorns, sure - it's been so drilled into us that unicorns are good shiny happy creatures that there would be an uproar if Stardock made them neutral (god forbid evil!), although I think that would be an interesting take on matters :P I'd like to see them break out of the normal 'alignment' mold and be creative. They should create their own original creatures, and they should take liberties with the archetypal ones to add some freshness to the game.

The Political Machine 2024
Reply #53 from Elemental Forums Top

it's been so drilled into us that unicorns are good shiny happy creatures that there would be an uproar if Stardock made them neutral (god forbid evil!)
This is exactly the kind of thing I'd like to see. Break some boring cliches.

 

:fox:

Reply #54 from Elemental Forums Top

To break cliches just because they are cliches is very bad. To break them to offer some really interesting and with sense, is another thing. If Stardock could do the second, then ok. If not, let Unicorns alone. (doesn't D&D already have en evil unicorn?)

Reply #55 from Elemental Forums Top

yeah, an evil unicorn isn't exactly amazing.  its just an evil magical horse with a horn by concept.   I like breaking cliches as much as the next guy, but I hang out with too many "idea guy" designers that think such an idea is "creative".   But that being said, if somebody said "oh, I wish they had a yeti with horns in Elemental" I'd likely shrug it off as nothing exciting.  But the yeti image above I think is a pretty awesome piece of art.  So you can do anything with anything should it be done with a good vision and talent.

Reply #56 from Elemental Forums Top

Not to bead a dead bear or anything but to me the "spell of making" sounds an a lot like "the spell of doing stuff" or

"spell where things happen".  Better to my ears is the "spell of ending", "spell of twilight", "the breaking of ages", "song of the new age", "seeds of the new age", "wall of time", "the shattering" ect.   The "making" sounds like a craft project.

One thing I really like about this last journal entry are the pictures of the cities-some of them have double walls-I wonder how this will effect seiges?

Reply #57 from Elemental Forums Top

It really depends on what we're making. If it's the spell of pure creation, that is, Massive Cold Fusion Power + Universal Energy-to-Matter Constructor, "Spell of Making" sounds great. It's the spell that makes something from nothing.

:P

Edit: Man, the basic smiling-smiley creeps me out.

Reply #58 from Elemental Forums Top

Thanks for the FAQ and updates Frogboy and team! Great info!

Liking the screenshots too. :thumbsup:

Also, appreciate the tidbits on twitter. Only reason I use it. ^_^

Reply #59 from Elemental Forums Top

Games where fantastical units are so prevalent to the extent that they are as common as or more so than 'regular' units makes the fantastical units become regular units. It's more exciting to see them (wandering, in your army and even in opponents' armies) when they aren't common. Being uncommon and uncommonly powerful makes them more significant, I think, than making them the mainstay of the game.

Yes I totally agree. So in that sense it's good that the fantastical creatures will be rare in Elemental. But it's definately possible to keep a dragon rare and powerful also in a world with say orcs and goblins. If you had entire armies of dragons (like in Silmarillion, earlier referred to as a main inspiration for Elemental by the way) then you would need to add something else which is rare and even more powerful, like a demigod or the like. It's all about inflation and relativity.

To break cliches just because they are cliches is very bad. To break them to offer some really interesting and with sense, is another thing. If Stardock could do the second, then ok. If not, let Unicorns alone. (doesn't D&D already have en evil unicorn?)

Regarding the clichéss I think it has to be remembered that there is a reason for something being a cliche. Some images and concepts resound strongly within people in a certain way, that's why they become so popular that they eventually turn into clichés. The difficult thing is to be creative and come up with something new that still resounds  as strongly (in a positive way!) within people. If Stardock could do this it would of course be the best. But  I must say that  often in books the author fails terribly in trying. They try to be fresh and modern and end up with something that just feels contrived or worse. And in games it's often even worse since so much effort goes down on the technical side and other aspects than the story/world concepts.  So please, no "fresh" evil unicorns or vampires choosing their alignment freely.

The dragon is one of the rare creatures fitting for both absolute good and abslolute evil, but the alignment has to be well reflected in the type of dragon, it's looks, powers etc. A beautiful gold dragon is traditionally good. A dracolich animating the dead is fitting for evil. It can be noted that in Western myth the dragon is considered evil (but D&D was so successful at coming up with good "western" dragons that they feel like part of an old myth now ...). While in the East dragons were often good, but looked different (more like snakes with many legs and manes ...).

 

 

Reply #60 from Elemental Forums Top

Players can win the game in a variety of ways including achieving the spell of making, completing the quest of mastery, diplomatic victory as well as the traditional military conquest means of victory.

I don't think any one single action such as a single spell should allow a victory.  On a very large map a smaller nation can instantly end a good challenging game... there's no clues to even identify this threat.  At least with a diplomacy victory it would take time and players can attempt to stop the threat.  Even the quest of victory can provide a series of stages which other players should be able to recognize and work towards preventing the opponent. 

If an all powerful winning spell exists it should include not only the necessary research, but the forging of an item and then the construction of a building where only one can be done at a time.  When the item is forged all players are notified and then the building can be constructed... once constructred all players are notified.   

I can't think of anything worse than....  SURPRISE  you lost.  

 

Reply #61 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Wintersong, reply 4
To break cliches just because they are cliches is very bad. To break them to offer some really interesting and with sense, is another thing. If Stardock could do the second, then ok. If not, let Unicorns alone. (doesn't D&D already have en evil unicorn?)
Ay. That's why I want the boring ones broken. I'm personally tired of seeing former enemies team up to take down a new threat. Or the 'all for one, one for all' team.

 

:fox:

Reply #62 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting the, reply 9

Yes I totally agree. So in that sense it's good that the fantastical creatures will be rare in Elemental. But it's definately possible to keep a dragon rare and powerful also in a world with say orcs and goblins. If you had entire armies of dragons (like in Silmarillion, earlier referred to as a main inspiration for Elemental by the way) then you would need to add something else which is rare and even more powerful, like a demigod or the like. It's all about inflation and relativity.

But that's the point. If you add in hordes of goblins and orcs and elves, they stop being something exciting. There's almost no point in adding them in because they just sort of fade out into being regular run of the mill units and you don't pay a second moment's notice to them. Having all fantastical creatures (besides the Fallen, of course) being on the rarer side of things makes the fantastical element of the game that much more exciting and fun.


Quoting the, reply 9

To break cliches just because they are cliches is very bad. To break them to offer some really interesting and with sense, is another thing. If Stardock could do the second, then ok. If not, let Unicorns alone. (doesn't D&D already have en evil unicorn?)

Regarding the clichéss I think it has to be remembered that there is a reason for something being a cliche. Some images and concepts resound strongly within people in a certain way, that's why they become so popular that they eventually turn into clichés. The difficult thing is to be creative and come up with something new that still resounds  as strongly (in a positive way!) within people. If Stardock could do this it would of course be the best. But  I must say that  often in books the author fails terribly in trying. They try to be fresh and modern and end up with something that just feels contrived or worse. And in games it's often even worse since so much effort goes down on the technical side and other aspects than the story/world concepts.  So please, no "fresh" evil unicorns or vampires choosing their alignment freely.

Of course, but with some creativity it is possible to get away with butchering clichés and even to be better off for it. And, have you ever read the Coldfire Trilogy by C.S. Friedman? They're great books, and one of the protagonists is an unlikely vampire-like antihero, and she made it work very well. It doesn't take creativity to say "this is an evil unicorn LOL!" But it takes creativity to ignore such an ingrained cliché in a meaningful way that actually convinces people - and it is very possible to do so. And one thing to consider is that many such clichés are not at all explained. There is rarely any reason given for why unicorns are such good and pure beings, and unicorns are usually considered to all be such heavenly beings with no exceptions - no rogues, no variance. So if you provide a good reason or background to support an unconventional choice, I think most people will be more than happy to accept it.

I think if you said, for example, that Unicorns in Elemental are self-interested beings (maybe even especially so since the cataclysm) inherently connected to Life magic, you could make them much more interesting. Their greatest powers could still be healing and all, and maybe they'd still lean towards the good side of things, but if they would benefit greatly from siding with an evil power they wouldn't be fundamentally, irrevocably opposed to doing so at great cost. Frankly I think that's a much more interesting take on things than "unicorns are shiny, good and pure beings that chase away evil." The latter honestly is a little demeaning in my opinion - it basically makes all unicorns the same, it removes their independence and makes them purely instinctual, and also makes them too perfect - why can't unicorns make poor decisions like anyone else?

Reply #63 from Elemental Forums Top

 I'm personally tired of seeing former enemies team up to take down a new threat. Or the 'all for one, one for all' team.

well that is a very different kind of cliche compared to "unicorn = good white horse with horn".   If you has a different suggestion as to how you might make a 'team' interesting, that doesn't include some previously used dynamic, you've likely found something that  could make you a lot of money.   Those are cliches because people like to see bitter rivals have to work together, and they like hearing about the companionship in "all for one and one for all" teams.   Lets not forget the "we all have different motives, but are working towards a similar goal" teams (that would include the Watchmen).    

If trends in cinema hold true, we're going to be seing a run of more elements of noir in the more popular media here in the next 5 years.  I wouldn't expect the "all for one  and one for all" cliche to be seen in mass for a while.

Reply #64 from Demigod Forums Top

And still nothing on the actual combat.. )=

Reply #65 from Elemental Forums Top

If you add in hordes of goblins and orcs and elves, they stop being something exciting. There's almost no point in adding them in because they just sort of fade out into being regular run of the mill units and you don't pay a second moment's notice to them.

Well they would still be as exciting, personally I would say probably more exciting, than the same number of human footsoldiers we have seen even more times than the orcs. The point here is that you need both common units and rare, awe-inspiring units in the game. You can have a unique and powerful dragon in an army of either men or say elves/orcs. I don't agree that all fantasy races would turn "boring" in a game just because it features factions of various fantasy races, e.g. humans, orcs, goblins, lizardmen etc. Was MoM boring? Was AoWSM boring? Is Galciv2 suffering from having too many alien races? No way. Also, if you like playing more humanocentric games it's easy to do it by not allowing the others into the game, so you can fully enjoy the game. But if you like a mix of races you don't have the possibility to add them in because it's a completely different story to try to mod whole new factions in ... Why not go for a solution that could please both tastes?

As for avoiding clichés with special backstory I tend to agree. But it's much more difficult to get this info over in a PC strategy game than in a novel trilogy. Even if it says somewhere that unicorns are so and so in the world of Elemental as opposed to how most people expect them to be, the risk is that the player won't take notice as he is so occupied playing the strategy game. The best way of making him notice is to make the difference important for his strategy so that it really counts in the game. It has to be done carefully and for good effect and not just for doing traditional creatures differently.

Reply #66 from Elemental Forums Top

Unicorns have no alignment in d&d 4

Reply #67 from Elemental Forums Top

Bah D&D 4th.   Its a good hack and slash system, but alignment has no thought in it.   They removed several archetype alignments, including "neutral good" which would be what a unicorn.  

Also arn't they also of animal inteligance in D&D 4th?   I.E.  are neutral because they arn't smart enough to have an alignment.

Reply #68 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting landisaurus, reply 17
Bah D&D 4th.   Its a good hack and slash system, but alignment has no thought in it.   They removed several archetype alignments, including "neutral good" which would be what a unicorn.

Also arn't they also of animal inteligance in D&D 4th?   I.E.  are neutral because they arn't smart enough to have an alignment.
Actually I made a response similar to yours, but I removed it because it turned into "I hate DnD 4th Ed".

Anyway, the reason I think it's removed now is because they classify Unicorns as animals, instead of Magical beasts. Animals doesn't have an alignment since they're not "thinking". Unicorns in 3/.5 are classified as "Magical Beasts", at the very least basic sentience, and are invariably Chaotic Good (although I agree with you, I'd still give Unicorns 'Neutral Good' to be in line with their easy-going animalistic nature).

But yeah, animals doesn't have alignment in 4th Ed. In 3/.5 they have True Neutral, but I actually agree with this particular aspect of 4th Ed - animals don't make concious choices or choices based on alignment, thus they shouldn't have an alignment at all.

Reply #69 from Elemental Forums Top

Unicorns can be neutered randy monogamists.  Then the game wont be cliche no matter what else they do..

+1 Loading…
Reply #70 from Elemental Forums Top

Are they chaotic good?   My guess is the person that wrote that one had to train a mean horse (I swear, some horses go out of their way to give novice trainers a hard time)

Actually the whole animal int = neutral exists in 3rd as well.  If it has int of 1-2 > then it is unable to have an alignment that isn't neutral (I believe it directly states that somewhere).   From watching shows like "Unico" and "the Last Unicorn" as a child, I can't imagine they being dumb beasts.   (Unico is freakin' scary to a 4 year old.  I remember freaking out to the crazy trees.   Should I ever raise offspring though, I'm going to subject them to the same since hiding from the sexy/deamon-skeleton man is a highlight of my childhood)

Reply #71 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting landisaurus, reply 20
Are they chaotic good?   My guess is the person that wrote that one had to train a mean horse (I swear, some horses go out of their way to give novice trainers a hard time)
Horses are Chaotic Dumb.

:p

Quoting landisaurus, reply 20
Actually the whole animal int = neutral exists in 3rd as well.  If it has int of 1-2 > then it is unable to have an alignment that isn't neutral (I believe it directly states that somewhere).   From watching shows like "Unico" and "the Last Unicorn" as a child, I can't imagine they being dumb beasts.   (Unico is freakin' scary to a 4 year old.  I remember freaking out to the crazy trees.   Should I ever raise offspring though, I'm going to subject them to the same since hiding from the sexy/deamon-skeleton man is a highlight of my childhood)
But yeah, like I said, Animals in 3/.5 Ed. must be Neutral ('True' Neutral, not just 'any Neutral alignment afaik). In 4th Ed. they don't have any alignment at all - which I think is better. Every alignment should have a meaning, disposition or characteristic associated with it. 'True' Neutral does too and it should take reasoning to have it.

If they can't reason, they shouldn't have an alignment at all. They simply don't know or care about morals or ethics or codes, nor are they influenced to act in a certain manner by the planes (Such as how other reasoning beings of the planes, Solars, Baalors, etc, all have set Alignments too). Base Unicorns have Int of 10 and they can actually take classes. The sample Celestial Charger in the Monster Manual is a 7th-level Cleric. They speak Sylvan and Common.

And I think those two last parts are silly too. But I think it's an effect of the rules on magical beasts. I think they should be magical beasts, but not able to take classes or speak - especially not common. I think these rules spawned out of some retard wanting to play a Unicorn. And the 4th Ed. rules spawned out of some retard calling the other retard on his desire to play Unicorns.

+1 Loading…
Reply #72 from Demigod Forums Top

Native OS X support, for the love of god!

Reply #73 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting eobet, reply 22
OS X support, for the love of god!

Not happening.

Reply #74 from Demigod Forums Top

As has been said countless of times before, Stardock is exclusively a Windows company.

Reply #75 from Elemental Forums Top

Someone should count them. So we get a precise idea of how many times people has chosen to ignore that little detail. :rolleyes: (obviously, ignoring those who honestly didn't know that fact about the company)