http://www.gamersbillofrights.com/

It's always been there.

Yeah I saw that in the other thread. What's up with the press release link not working?

From https://forums.elementalgame.com/392474:

With regards to a post on Rock Paper Shot Gun, which picked up the PC Gamer UK story, they erroneously point to a 2+ year old URL to a Stardock news item that is no longer active (we switched news systems a year or so ago). Their article falsely implies that we have stepped away from our commitment to the Gamer’s Bill of Rights.

Entries 3 and 4 of Tom Chick's Elemental diary:

http://fidgit.com/archives/2010/08/elemental_hey_whered_that_come.php

http://fidgit.com/archives/2010/08/elemental_day_zero_--_and_elem.php

I'll keep playing this week, and on Friday evening, I'll sum it all up in a review. Consider it a State of the Elemental address. I don't think it'll be pretty, but I also don't think it'll be as despairing as it would have been yesterday.

Yeah, Tom will be doing a review on Friday, I will post that link once he gets it on his site.  I'll include sublinks to his diary entries.

Perhaps some of the reviews are not out because the reviewers can't get the game stable enough to actually play.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6274610.html

A lot of the hardcore fans here seem to be giving these reviewers a harder time than they've earned; all of them that I've seen so far have been INCREDIBLY patient with the crashes and such, mostly because of Stardock's reputation and previous championship of the customer. It seems like they're actually going out of their way to be more lenient on this game because it's Stardock and because the game concept is so solid, that they are amending their normal reviewing processes - most games will get the majority of their reviews within the first 2 days and patches be damned. An appeal to those who get a little hot around the collar seeing anyone questioning the game: go play some more, or read a good book, and relax. People are not the bogeymen you seem to be making us all out to be, just because we are complaining about a game crashing.

Here's a youtube video review:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahTehhLD5ec

The question people should be asking is ...  Why do reviewers judge a game when it comes out?

I believe many of these people believe that a game should be nearly complete when it comes out.

Umm... it should be nearly complete when it comes out. You kidding me? How can you even make this argument?

I love Stardock as much as the next guy, but you people need to stop drinking their kool-aid without thinking.

EDIT: I'm gonna go ahead and assume that was sarcasm but it doesn't make sense any other way.

Stardock themselves say that all gamers have the /right/ to demand a game be released in a finished state. Brad himself wrote this handy list see, of what he believes Games should be: http://gamersbillofrights.org/

The problem is, im cool with financing works in progress which i think have potential, i did it with Fallen Earth and mount and blade. But one is a MMO and the other openly stated you were paying for a beta, which would get constant updates. This is where the problem lies, i would have no problems paying for a quality beta from a company that says: look, we are a small team, we need a bit of float and input to make the game better. But thats not what stardock claimed, it says you have a right to a finished product when it ships. Well, multiplayer is out, game crashes very often for me (Sometimes 5 times per hour), i cannot access the tac battle editor without crashing, things are poorly explained about the advantages of going this or that way regarding units or tech. Its all ok with me, because i have faith that stardock will make it right, but they kinda inserted a foot in their mouth by making claims of "games should be finished when it ships" and then shipping the version we got.

They wouldnt have caught all this flak if they would have taken the Mount and blade dev road. And they would not have been left wide open for criticism which sadly is tarnishing what is a great but roughly polished game.

I am stunned the big sites have not reviewed the game yet and I dont know why.  Certainly they are not waiting for the game to be playable, ie. doing Stardock a favor.  I see reviews all the time that ding games for bugs, lack of polish, etc.  And while it is a niche title...its not like Stardock is some unknown studio.  They develop.  They publish.  They are not EA but they are big enough to merit week 1 reviews, or even day 1.

Yeah I have searched around, nothing yet...

Fidgit (Tom Chick's site) will be posting a review tonight, I'll link to it once its up.

That actually seems to be exactly what they're doing. See the Gamespot article linked earlier, and the PC Gamer guy actually restarting his review after the patch.

Also, they don't seem to have given out a lot of advance copies. In order for reviews to be done by the release date, reviewers will typically get copies well before that. Obviously that didn't happen.