"And if you like games that are designed by people who care about giving gamers a great experience, then you should pick up Elemental: Fallen Enchantress and then work your way through the rest of the Stardock catalog."

C'mon you gotsto put that part in too.

Does this review count on meteoritic?

It probably could. There appear to be links to attach it to the metacritic, but I think the reviewer has to do this task.

As as, http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/elemental-fallen-enchantress has a whomping score of 98!!! (with only 4 posts...but still )

Yes yes great article but why did that guy only review 3 games, and all of them Stardock titles? I mean his credibility is... meh. He doesn't have to convince me, I own both Elemental games, but just saying.

Bought the game based on the number 8.7.  Didn't even read the review.  Oh yeah, and Brad Wardell.  When it comes to strategy games, he's the guy I want in charge of the company making it.

While I fully agree with you about Paradox (I own most of their titles) and Stardock (I own WoM, FE, GalCiv II and Demigod), there are plenty of good AAA games, Mass Effect and Skyrim being the best known. And while indeed it seems useless to review games like Skyrim and Mass Effect about which everyone writes, you just can't say all big games are bad, or that all big companies are bad. Bethesda has always followed their big titles with patches, content, DLCs and modding tools. But because these games have a huge customer base, it's normal that there will always be some unsatisfied customers. Just like I would still like to see another GalCiv II patch to fix some obvious flaws with the AI, which even as it is now, is still one of the best out there, hopefully to be surpassed by FE, if it wasn't already.

Everyone knows Paradox titles ship with plenty of bugs for example, but everyone also knows that Paradox obsessively follow their games with huge patches with huge changelogs with fixes and added content. As much as I love Stardock, I don't expect every company to behave like them, because Stardock is still a very small company compared to Bethesda, Bioware, or even Paradox Interactive. Brad and the team have the time and pleasure of browsing the forums and talking to us annoying customers, but you can't expect people from Bethesda or Bioware to do this, even though they still do it; even the people of Paradox are way too busy and have way too much forum traffic to interact with people at the level Stardock does.

How offtopic am I?

  Some factions are better suited toward using magic, others are better at diplomacy or economics...

There’s not much to say about the gameplay itself...

Hmmm... I will wait for a couple more reviews before I break out the champagne.... Or fancy ale because I hate wine.

Ale versus Wine, aside ...     

You both have a Good Point!   (And bbr91 noted it too.)

As gratifying as this review was (and it was reasonably well written too), this reviewer is not one of the Major Players in Game Critics World.  Perhaps he is objective; but until a few of the Major (well-known and influential) Critics weigh in, it is a little premature to break out the Vodka Sours, and the Lime Rickeys.  After we get a few of the Big Boys' reviews, then we will know whether or not there is cause to celebrate.            

Good song indeed

Yes, it's like Crusader Kings II for me as well, in that respect.  Because instead of offering endless repetition slightly shaded by new gear, it offers a host of different challenges and strategic choices.  I'd prefer if the choices were more focused in some cases, but there's always the lure of "one more move to see what will happen and what I can do, next" thing that really good games provide.

That's a very favorable review. I'd wait until the first patch, I still find it pretty rough around the edges.

When will we actually hear about a patch?

Nope haven't seen it. Still user reviews taking the pace.