Anyone tried Endless Legend Early Access?

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions Anyone tried Endless Legend Early Access?

This topic contains 83 replies, has 36 voices, and was last updated by  BLOODYBATTLEBRAIN 8 years ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 84 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #85765

    Epaminondas
    Member
    #85768

    Lmaoboat
    Member

    I’m keeping an eye on it. Endless Space was pretty solid, and Endless Dungeon is also pretty decent considering how much I hate tower defense.

    #85774

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    Dito.
    However, it’s a completely different game with a distinct stress on empire-building.

    #85780

    Is it just me, or does PAYING to do QA work/ beta seem just wrong on many levels?

    I find this to be a very disturbing trend. Unfortunately, there are those willing to support this nonsense, so it will continue. Why do betas the old fashioned way when you have nerd whales willing to throw you money for what may not even be good come release BEFORE IT IS EVEN OUT? Is it to “influence the game”? Unlikely since QA is not game design, and many designers will tell you flat out (unless it is just something game breaking you notice that a good dev will have to address anyways). Is it nerd e-peen to say you were one of the first? That and 3 bucks gets you a cup of coffee.

    #85784

    I don’t look at shit until it is at least nearing the end of beta. I hate early access trends in the game industry.

    I remember once upon a time we used to get demos for games and played betas for free in order to provide useful feedback. Now we get to give more profit to production companies and let them fire their test team (that one guy who sits in his car smoking pot all day for $5/hr). More often then not we pay more for 1/16th of a game then we would the end product, get bored with it because of the lack of features, and move on to the next hyped up thing.

    I know the counter argument, I’ve had the discussion on endless forums. “Without early access, kickstarter, etc. games from smaller companies wouldn’t be possible.” Yea, well, sorry, the game industry is not a charity case. Management is not comprised of starving Ethiopians. It is for profit.

    I’ve seen oodles of titles collect 10-20x what they needed for development and take that money and go play golf. Look at Planatary Annihilation, for example. Far exceeded their budget and the game is still a mundane circa 2003 RTS completely running on hype.

    $100 for Galactic Civ III alpha? pffft. more money for profit based on hype from past experience. I wish my boss would pay me 3x my salary for a preview of the code I am going to write in the next 2 years….

    and how many titles have been released under “From the former makers of” which is marketing crap as much as “low sugar.” You take one artist, programmer, producer, designer, tester, etc. and you can legally claim “from the makers of.” I think there has been 7 flopped titles “from the makers of Diablo” already. Hellgate London? We as customers don’t even know which individual out of the 50 involved, including third parties actually made the magic happen or if it was a special combination of them. More often than not, that magic is gone as soon as the team or management changes. There will never ever ever be another game like Supreme Commander Forged Alliance. I don’t care how many times they “from the makers of” Sup Com II – flop. Planetary Annihilation – going to flop.

    Companies that want my money should provide me solid end products on their own. They should provide me demos and they should _want_ me to play their betas for free to collect the valuable feedback that I take the time out my day to provide. If they’d follow that criteria, I’d gladly hand over $100+ for a great release. That would be much better than 10-$10 titles that entertain me for 5 minutes a piece.

    At any rate, I don’t know shit about the game in question in this post, except that it is early access and barely alpha. I probably will continue to know jack about it for the next 6 months.

    #85797

    -snip-

    Agreed whole heartily. AoW3 was the first game I pre-ordered in years and I’ve only done one or two “early-access” games from Steam but for the most part avoid it like the plague.

    We can thank Minecraft for the proliferation of this manner of profiteering I feel.

    Additional, this topic really should be in AoW General;

    * Don’t promote or advertise products unrelated to the Age of Wonders series.

    #85800

    I don’t look at shit until it is at least nearing the end of beta. I hate early access trends in the game industry.

    I remember once upon a time we used to get demos for games and played betas for free in order to provide useful feedback. Now we get to give more profit to production companies and let them fire their test team (that one guy who sits in his car smoking pot all day for $5/hr). More often then not we pay more for 1/16th of a game then we would the end product, get bored with it because of the lack of features, and move on to the next hyped up thing.

    I know the counter argument, I’ve had the discussion on endless forums. “Without early access, kickstarter, etc. games from smaller companies wouldn’t be possible.” Yea, well, sorry, the game industry is not a charity case. Management is not comprised of starving Ethiopians. It is for profit.

    I’ve seen oodles of titles collect 10-20x what they needed for development and take that money and go play golf. Look at Planatary Annihilation, for example. Far exceeded their budget and the game is still a mundane circa 2003 RTS completely running on hype.

    $100 for Galactic Civ III alpha? pffft. more money for profit based on hype from past experience. I wish my boss would pay me 3x my salary for a preview of the code I am going to write in the next 2 years….

    and how many titles have been released under “From the former makers of” which is marketing crap as much as “low sugar.” You take one artist, programmer, producer, designer, tester, etc. and you can legally claim “from the makers of.” I think there has been 7 flopped titles “from the makers of Diablo” already. Hellgate London? We as customers don’t even know which individual out of the 50 involved, including third parties actually made the magic happen or if it was a special combination of them. More often than not, that magic is gone as soon as the team or management changes. There will never ever ever be another game like Supreme Commander Forged Alliance. I don’t care how many times they “from the makers of” Sup Com II – flop. Planetary Annihilation – going to flop.

    Companies that want my money should provide me solid end products on their own. They should provide me demos and they should _want_ me to play their betas for free to collect the valuable feedback that I take the time out my day to provide. If they’d follow that criteria, I’d gladly hand over $100+ for a great release. That would be much better than 10-$10 titles that entertain me for 5 minutes a piece.

    At any rate, I don’t know shit about the game in question in this post, except that it is early access and barely alpha. I probably will continue to know jack about it for the next 6 months.

    Awesome someone agrees. I thought I was being a cantankerous old dude when I pressed “enter” on that post. Then, I thought, no compromises on my principles. I wanted to elaborate on some of the points you made as well.

    1. Yeah, I remember demos, too. They also had the added benefit of letting you know if the game would run satisfactory on your machine if you had a craptop or older PC. Notebookcheck and min system requirement postings are not always accurate.

    2. Kickstarter… Oh, yeah, baby. While I agree that sending money to help a concept you want to see happen actually happen has it’s good points, I think we are beginning to see the “dark side”. For instance, Occulus Rift. A lot of folks sent money to that. And for what? So the devs could get a huge payday when they got bought out from facebook? Not claiming FB will harm or help Rift, but still… this applies to ANY endeavor. Who wants to set someone up to be bought out if they get no return on investment? Or the Tale of Internet Spaceships documentary for Eve Online that folks paid for over a year and a half ago. No documentary yet and it has been forever. Did folks just pay to send 3 Swedish kids to Iceland to drink beer and play with cameras? Maybe if kickstarter and indigogo had some kind of return on investment, it might be a bit cooler. I do not think there is enough pressure to deliver or incentive to finance.

    3. Galciv 3… I laugh. Stardock did this for Elemental: War of Magic and it turned out to be one of the worst, buggiest, unplayable, and financial failures in recent memory. Same genre as Age of Wonders. So bad, in fact, the CEO of that company publicly apologized and had to give two expansions (which, in fairness were MUCH better) for free. Did PAID beta help Elemental? Stardock could have cared less.

    4. “Former makers of”. I agree. While if the former game was shovelware, I do keep an open eye out, making a great game in the past does not mean a good one is upcoming.

    BTW, I amend my previous comment. I suppose there would be ONE reason to PAY for beta. If you are a YouTube pundit with a substantial number of subscribers and monetize (AND the company does not have you under some NDA), you could probably make decent money. But, that is friggin rare. A good company would give beta to someone like that for free (if it is good).

    #85807

    Thariorn
    Member

    -snip-

    -snip-

    I whole heartily agree.
    I think the reasons you gave actually are the very reasons why Aow 3 did not go the early access way (Well and the fact that Notch provided a, I suppose, hefty summ to mitigate the no-kickstarter way.

    Tbh, I backed two games, from which 1 truned out to drag along very very long (Which isn’t bad per sé, but it kinda stops me from starting to play it).
    The other one has this Minecraft-esque way of process but as the provided Demo already resulted in 20 hours of fun I just backed it for 12$.

    #85854

    Sunicle
    Member

    Is it to “influence the game”? Unlikely since QA is not game design, and many designers will tell you flat out.

    Beta testing is not game design, but Alpha testing can be.
    Personally I’ve only Beta tested one game – Eschalon Book III – and the Alpha testers there got credited under ‘Additional Design’.

    But I don’t want to argue against the points you gave. Many people dislike early access. You may find this an interesting poll for reference: http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23683. Although that’s an RPG. With RPG’s people are even less likely to go for early access, as they don’t want to spoil the story for themselves.

    I’ve never gone for early access personally. Funny enough, I’m tempted with Endless Legend. Games with this formula I like, I wouldn’t mind supporting this. But I’m not starved for a game right now. I’m working 7 days a week and I haven’t had the chance to play AoW III as much as I wanted to, so I’ll probably be wise to skip this.

    The boom in games right now is probably indeed partly thanks to Kickstarter and Steam early access. I dislike the trend, I prefer a closed Alpha/Beta and us gamers paying for a finished product, but there’s a nice bunch of games there now that possibly wouldn’t have been made if they had to be made the old fashioned way, so… I don’t find it easy to have just one opinion about this.
    The customer is sharing some of the risk and burden here, there’s no doubt about that. When a project is successfully funded on Kickstarter, there’s nothing you can do if the project starter goes on a trip to the moon with your money. And when a game gets over-funded it can easily lead to nonsense being added to the game. Keep the money for a sequel then, I would say.
    I see the ugly stuff. but I rather leave it up to the game developer and the game fan, let them have the freedom to make questionable decisions.

    #85857

    If the game sounds interesting I’ll pay for Early Access.

    I have my eyes on this game, but the tactical combat sounds gimicky to me.

    Winter and summer having actual impact sounds good. It also sounds like every game had you starting with a settler, like Civ and Fallen Enchantress, so I fear that every game will be a settler only game, which, for me at least, kills alot of the fun.

    #85866

    gunnergoz
    Member

    I’ve played about 9 hours on the Alpha and it is very playable in its present state. I am enjoying it. The combat model is kind of wonky, but still fun. Sometimes there is so much detail in the map that it is a bit hard to see where your units and cities are. The UI can use some work too. All in all it is a very interesting take on the genre. I’ll be curious to see what comes of it.

    #85867

    I have to say, it sounds like a decent empire management sim first, with battles after.

    Sounds much more interesting than Warlock 1+2.

    I predict not being able to manage your units in battle is going to feel very alien (to me at least).

    Commiting to some sort of empire plan every 20 turns could be interesting, and winters getting progressively harsher is clearly their answer to the late game conundrum (for AoW3 mod or expansion I proposed that mana and gold mines should run dry, so you’ll eventually run out of resources the longer the game goes on, and Winter seems to be the mechanic chosen by Amplitude to do the same thing, i.e. Force an end).

    #85873

    @ Gunnergoz, does every game start with a settler?

    #85878

    Taykor
    Member

    Awesome someone agrees. I thought I was being a cantankerous old dude when I pressed “enter” on that post.

    It’s just a common sense and we already have seen examples of how this ‘early access’ could go wrong. So it’s easy to agree with this. For me, at least. I often see the state of some games in EA and wonder how anyone could pay for this.

    Winter and summer having actual impact sounds good.

    Yes, changing environment is a very nice concept. It would be fun if something like this could be implemented in AoW3 (at least optionally).

    #85888

    SpookerT
    Member

    I consider it poor form to sell alpha version games and prototypes as a product. So I’m going to stay on the sidelines and see how it shapes up without paying for it.

    #85899

    Sathra
    Member

    I really disliked Endless Space. I keep wanting to go back and try and get my head around it, but, dunno. There’s something about it that makes playing unpleasant.

    Also I hate not being able to control fights. Too many RTS games and XCOM.

    #85908

    Mediin
    Member

    Gaming nowadays.

    In my opinion, this is simply because video games have the stupidest audience out there, yet. I mean, consuments of other medias don’t thread test magazines with boycots, if their new favorite but not even released hot shit aren’t getting 10/10s.

    However. Endless Space pretty much sucked in my opinion. I mean, card based combat? Com’ on. I therefore think, endless legend isn’t much different.

    • This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by  President.
    #85959

    Epaminondas
    Member

    Dito.<br>
    However, it’s a completely different game with a distinct stress on empire-building.

    Yeah, it seems to have no tactical combat – which is a huge turn off.

    #85960

    Epaminondas
    Member

    I’ve played about 9 hours on the Alpha and it is very playable in its present state. I am enjoying it. The combat model is kind of wonky, but still fun. Sometimes there is so much detail in the map that it is a bit hard to see where your units and cities are. The UI can use some work too. All in all it is a very interesting take on the genre. I’ll be curious to see what comes of it.

    How does combat work? On the main map like in Civ?

    I saw no screenshot of a tactical combat map.

    #85970

    Sathra
    Member

    I saw a few combat maps. Something about deploying troops in one of them.

    The weirdest part is a one sentence feature about being able to start a battle, then zoom out and keep working on the empire.

    #85984

    Sloul
    Member

    Endless Legend is probably going to be the best 4x since MOO2 and Falls from Heaven.
    Hands down.

    • This reply was modified 3 years, 9 months ago by  President.
    #85987

    I’m solidly on the fence for this one. Looks like it has some nice ideas, but at the same time feels like I’ve already played it for thousands of hours. Looks very civ-like and I feel like that design has been done to death already. And Civ V was really only challenging on Diety Domination Victory only, and its combat was horrible lol. It’s one of the things I like about AoW3, is that it has it’s own focus and not the same linear and limited feel. Sort of the difference between a heavy narrative driven interactive movie style RPG and a sandbox Elder Scrolls type. Been there done that a million times over. Not that others can’t enjoy it of course. Not real crazy about their marketing schemes either, but not to the point where it’s a deal breaker I guess.

    #85999

    drachasor
    Member

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gunnergoz wrote:</div>
    I’ve played about <dfn class=”dictionary-of-numbers dictionary-of-numbers-quantity-32400s dictionary-of-numbers-processed”>9 hours</dfn> on the Alpha and it is very playable in its present state. I am enjoying it. The combat model is kind of wonky, but still fun. Sometimes there is so much detail in the map that it is a bit hard to see where your units and cities are. The UI can use some work too. All in all it is a very interesting take on the genre. I’ll be curious to see what comes of it.

    How does combat work? On the main map like in Civ?

    I saw no screenshot of a tactical combat map.

    I read it is a variation of Endless Space. That was basically Rock-Paper-Scissors for both weapons and armor with some card options. I really didn’t like it since it wasn’t that interesting or fun — felt more random. And since everything had its own research path (both for defense and offense) it tended to make mixed forces very difficult (and also less effective than if you just had a straight counter since mixed forces were rare due to research cost).

    Cards were very Rock-Paper-Scissors (they could counter each other) and that tends to just be pure randomness more than anything else — RPS doesn’t have much to do with tactical depth.

    I do not know how much of those negatives this game copies from Endless Space though.

    #86014

    scfs123
    Member

    Fantasy Civ 5.
    Neat.

    Combine that with Civ’s new “Beyond Earth” Alpha Centauri “Spiritual sequel” coming out, lots of good 4x games coming in the future.

    I liked how pretty endless space combat was, and the empire management was neat.
    The mass arms race in it (like civ) just killed the enjoyment of it for me.

    Age of wonders is nice since you can focus what you want to focus on and still put up a fight /have chance at victory. These other 4x games its “Well you fell behind in the arms race, NOW YOU DIE MUHAHAHA”

    #86022

    SlyDevil
    Member

    You know I don’t really see the logic behind the huge problem some people seem to have with early access. If the complaint is “They’re not paying beta testers anymore, now the beta testers are paying them!” Then, well, so what? Are some of you beta testers, angry at having lost your job to this trend? I can understand then, but as someone else said in this thread, the video game industry is not a charity case.

    The fact is that there’s a lot of interest in smaller game companies nowadays because the larger game companies are running off a stagnant business model where very few new ideas get through. Video games are expensive to produce, that’s why they rarely want to deviate from the formula of what is most profitable to them.

    Things like early access and kickstarter allow smaller companies to be competitive, and smaller companies take risks and are innovative more often. Of course I’m sure that some people abuse the system, but is that really any worse than the abuse larger companies will engage in, where they hype up a game whose initial release is buggy – and then when you do get to play it as intended, it’s terrible anyway?

    Especially because the whole early access thing has such a simple solution – if you don’t like it, don’t pay for it, just pay for the finished product – which you’ll be able to have a better idea of what it’s like precisely because of…early access.

    #86059

    gunnergoz
    Member

    I’m still trying to work out the mechanics of combat operate, myself. You begin and remain on the strategic map, only zoomed in a bit. When you commit to an attack (or the enemy attacks your units) you are zoomed in, you select offense, defense or remain in place (until enemy is in range) and your units are arranged by the computer, apparently with melee up close, ranged in back and leader in between. Then you give an order to either advance, pull back or stay, then press the execute button; then there is an opportunity to designate targets and finally another press and combat begins. Movements are made, losses are taken, there is a round of two of this back and forth, based on initiative apparently, and then you can re-issue targeting commands until one side’s units are gone. That’s the basic stuff of it. Like I said, I’ve been through it several times and some of what is happening is still a bit opaque to me. Mastering combat will be interesting. What I don’t want is for combat to be annoying, like the RTS combat in Endless Space is to me…that soured me on the space game to a great degree.

    #86072

    Epaminondas
    Member

    I’m still trying to work out the mechanics of combat operate, myself. You begin and remain on the strategic map, only zoomed in a bit. When you commit to an attack (or the enemy attacks your units) you are zoomed in, you select offense, defense or remain in place (until enemy is in range) and your units are arranged by the computer, apparently with melee up close, ranged in back and leader in between. Then you give an order to either advance, pull back or stay, then press the execute button; then there is an opportunity to designate targets and finally another press and combat begins. Movements are made, losses are taken, there is a round of two of this back and forth, based on initiative apparently, and then you can re-issue targeting commands until one side’s units are gone. That’s the basic stuff of it. Like I said, I’ve been through it several times and some of what is happening is still a bit opaque to me. Mastering combat will be interesting. What I don’t want is for combat to be annoying, like the RTS combat in Endless Space is to me…that soured me on the space game to a great degree.

    Ah, thanks. I am getting a better idea then – it sounds like a faster version of Dominions combat then?

    #86083

    ManiaCCC
    Member

    Ah, thanks. I am getting a better idea then – it sounds like a faster version of Dominions combat then?

    I have to say Endless Legend combat fixed some issues I have with Civ and Warlock combat.. Stacked armies are awesome..I can actually move armies (like in AoW of course) without moving every single unit..but when combat arise, map is used for battle which I like..it doesn’t have tactical depth of AoW 3 combat..however it’s faster and yet still you have to use your tactics skill right..it’s more deeper compared to Civ or Warlock..(they want add active skills to units so it could be even deeper).. nice compromise honestly..

    Another neat promised feature is, that you can manage your combat..give units order and you should be able to just leave battle and do something else while your armies will be beating each other..than you can return look back to battle, assign new orders and again..you can do something else. hopefully it will work how I imagine..so you could be easily managing many battles across map at a same time..

    #86439

    @ maniacc, your last sentence made me think “RTS.” That’s not necessarily a baf thing though.

    I also note that there is an additional resource called “influence” which looks interesting.

    #86447

    esvath
    Member

    I watched a couple of Let’s Play vids and there are some mechanics that I like: the empire building, questing, and unit in stack that zoom in in battle are cool. Even the high terrain mechanic in combat is cool. However, I am puzzled by the fact that players can only issue commands and then press Execute so that the AI finishes the combat for them. That’s like watching AI vs AI combat! The AI is not that bad in executing player’s command, but still it made moves that sometime inefficient and resulted in unit losses.

    If only the dev takes one step further and allow players to take full control of combats, just like in AOW3, that game will be better than now, imho.

    Oh, also the game does not have spells in classical sense. That, and the UI is too “modern” make me consider the game as not a fantasy game, imo.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 84 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.