I'd like to request a brand new review. I have implemented two huge changes. As of 1.22b, I have included both a MAZING mode and automatic REMATCHES. Thank you!
Glad to hear it! I really appreciate your interest in and support of the game.
I use this mousepad at home with my desktop and another on the go with my laptop. I'm sure my experience will be viewed as biased. But I will say it is very durable, has a great surface, does not slide, and looks amazing. It is after all produced by a gaming gear company (QPAD).
Having flashbacks is not a bad thing inherently. I see game review sites giving high ratings to sequels that are more of the same. If it ain't broke, why fix it? Generally speaking, sequels do not radically change the series. What people look for is whether the sequel upholds the standard set by the previous iteration. They then look for refinements, improved graphics, and additional mechanics.
Let's take a couple of your examples. StarCraft 2 is just a refined version of StarCraft with better graphics and a few additional mechanics. Anyone who has played StarCraft will surely find StarCraft 2 similar. Yet we all agree StarCraft 2 is a solid game (excluding BNET 0.2). The same reasoning applies to Diablo 3, yet a lot of people are dying for it.
Honestly, it sounds like you are in the minority when it comes to views on sequels. Now I haven't played a Worms game in years so it could very well be too much of a rehash.
Back to Element TD, I would describe it along the same lines as StarCraft 2. You have a refinement of the game in the form of new towers, improved balance, and some tweaks to the mechanics (removal of interest etc.). The graphics are obviously improved by default and should be judged on how well the SC2 assets were used. Finally, there are new mechanics. Most notably Tower Wars but also Teams, Casual, Race, and XP/stats (with unlockables). You may want to wait for Mazing which will provide a 180* shift in gameplay.
I appreciate the explanation, but you did not touch upon my concern. I don't believe fun factor should be lowered due to the existence of the WC3 version. Correct me if I am wrong, but that is exactly what it sounded like earlier.
Perhaps a fresh review with people who have never tried the WC3 version? By the way, did the hater dislike the map or does he just hate TDs?
Game ratings are intended to tell potential players the best and worst parts of a game. Players aren't going to care if the editor has his work cut out for him because he was using an idea he already had.
I must admit though that I'm a little perplexed by your statement. I don't think it is appropriate to take into consideration the WC3 version. Marking it down because it feels like the original doesn't make sense to me. Most SC2 players have never tried WC3. The expression "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" comes to mind. In my humble opinion, it should solely be rated on its merits as a SC2 map.
Guess this thread is dead?
I'd like to request a brand new review. I have implemented two huge changes. As of 1.22b, I have included both a MAZING mode and automatic REMATCHES. Thank you!
@Enexy: Go
Glad to hear it! I really appreciate your interest in and support of the game.
I use this mousepad at home with my desktop and another on the go with my laptop. I'm sure my experience will be viewed as biased. But I will say it is very durable, has a great surface, does not slide, and looks amazing. It is after all produced by a gaming gear company (QPAD).
Shameless Ad: http://store.eletd.com/mousepad.html
@SkrowFunk: Go
Having flashbacks is not a bad thing inherently. I see game review sites giving high ratings to sequels that are more of the same. If it ain't broke, why fix it? Generally speaking, sequels do not radically change the series. What people look for is whether the sequel upholds the standard set by the previous iteration. They then look for refinements, improved graphics, and additional mechanics.
Let's take a couple of your examples. StarCraft 2 is just a refined version of StarCraft with better graphics and a few additional mechanics. Anyone who has played StarCraft will surely find StarCraft 2 similar. Yet we all agree StarCraft 2 is a solid game (excluding BNET 0.2). The same reasoning applies to Diablo 3, yet a lot of people are dying for it.
Honestly, it sounds like you are in the minority when it comes to views on sequels. Now I haven't played a Worms game in years so it could very well be too much of a rehash.
Back to Element TD, I would describe it along the same lines as StarCraft 2. You have a refinement of the game in the form of new towers, improved balance, and some tweaks to the mechanics (removal of interest etc.). The graphics are obviously improved by default and should be judged on how well the SC2 assets were used. Finally, there are new mechanics. Most notably Tower Wars but also Teams, Casual, Race, and XP/stats (with unlockables). You may want to wait for Mazing which will provide a 180* shift in gameplay.
I would love to see a fresh review. I don't think the WC3 version should factor into the score.
@Malpheus: Go
I appreciate the explanation, but you did not touch upon my concern. I don't believe fun factor should be lowered due to the existence of the WC3 version. Correct me if I am wrong, but that is exactly what it sounded like earlier.
Perhaps a fresh review with people who have never tried the WC3 version? By the way, did the hater dislike the map or does he just hate TDs?
Well said.
@Malpheus: Go
Thank you for reviewing it!
I must admit though that I'm a little perplexed by your statement. I don't think it is appropriate to take into consideration the WC3 version. Marking it down because it feels like the original doesn't make sense to me. Most SC2 players have never tried WC3. The expression "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" comes to mind. In my humble opinion, it should solely be rated on its merits as a SC2 map.
Makes sense, thank you for doing that. I should note there is another huge update coming in the next day or two. I'm trying out TEAMS!
I would be curious to see how Element TD fares.