I think part of the problem is...

There's no such thing as too much input.  The problem arises when you try to satisfy all that give input.

I happen to have quit playing TA because the things I wanted to change about the game were hardcoded.

I Bought this game because it is more flexible and therefore more fun to me. It is too bad you find this game unplayable. I don't really see a huge difference between this one and TA (refering to the general developement), other than the fact that I can change anything that bothers me about this one. Maybe when the expansion comes out you will give it another try.

Very true Wayninja, you said it better than me and thats really more or less what i mean. Seems like Stardock tried to satisfy too many people instead of focusing more or their own formula for the game.

Seanw3- its not that i find the game unplayable, I actually haven't come across the game stopping bugs that lots have complained about. And i can actually overlook occasional crashes if the game is fun. Some of the mechanics just bother me... for instance, the way the turns play out- where i only move a tile or 2 each turn and every turn it seems like i am building something in my city. Too much city building for buildings that too me seem pointless (meaning maybe there should be less buildings and more combined stuff that you could build that would take care of multiple things.)  I feel like i end turns way too often and the AI also is not very good...

I agree with the OP. 

I think that's his point. Aside from the AI that can't be modded too easily right now (but will be later), both of your other points can be easily addressed with a mod. Making improvements more powerful and take longer to build... takes... 5 minutes. Make units move farther, takes... another 5 at most. The game is built in such a way that it can be tweaked and tinkered to your style of play, since no matter how they design the core game, it'll never be able to satisfy everyone.

I think he hits the nail on the head, the game suffered from waaaay too much community input instead of Stardock and its designers designing the game. I've though all along that they are a little too involved in the community and the forums and its akin to being a friend to your child instead of being a parent, it sounds good but it doesn't work out so well in those critical situations.

I disagree, it's not a problem of design by committee, it's a problem of design not fully implemented.  You can see where they are trying to go and feature creep isn't the issue.  The problem is they simply didn't implement, or implemented poorly the design.

If you took a comprehensive poll of the community's ideas and the explicit method in which these ideas were posted and then cross referenced that with the final product, the analysis would undoubtedly change your mind. I have been posting here since the first of the year and every aspect of the game has been thuroughly thought out.

The execution of these ideas is significantly different than the community's input. The bigggest problem for me has been engine based troubles that I expected to crop up. There are alot of posts about game mechanics that were overlooked due to lack of time or a different vision by the devs. It is their game and their right as designers to do whatever they think will be the best for their game. It becomes our game when I start to alter Elemental to suit my vision of the ultimate 4x TBS game.

For instance I enjoy waiting epic lengths of time between techs as it gives me a sense of accomplishment to get them. I like thinking about how useful a tech is as I spend 40+ turns getting it. I like to methodically plan my cities, giving each one its own flavor and function within my empire. I like heroes that level to become gods by level 50 and mere soldiers at level 3. I like spending the better part of the day in real life trying to get a small group of adventurers across the vast distances of Prirod. I like having epic wars that span these distances and take 300+ turns to finish.

I like our game and you can too if you take the time to make it.

Too much input is not elementals' problem.  Neither is trying to incorporate everything.  The two biggest problems have been not staying true to their original plan for the core concepts of the game (massive scope, living world, player's kingdom is one part in many in the game), and NOT paying attention to consensus opinion regarding input on the state of the game and how to make it better.  I've been offering input from the start, and there have been several things (the economy, and gameplay readiness spring to mind) that consensus has very definitively emerged from within the community... where that consensus has not been listened too.  There are a lot of good ideas out there for game play improvements... too many to really count.  They just need to be assembled into a coherent whole, and ordered through priority in terms of both ease of execution, and how important they are to enhancing the game.

One reason I think you are saying that there is too much feedback is that now there really is a massive amount of feedback now that it is out.  In and before Beta 1... nowhere near as much.

I disagree. No one in the community wanted this magic system, or the tactical combat that we have now, for example. I think they have listened and made notes but still not implemented the most important suggestions.

They did listen to the "graphics doesn't matter" crowd though...

I partially agree, but it all would not matter if Brad or game designers knew what kind of the game they want themself. Its scary to consider how much stuff was re-done during beta and post-release, like there was no design at all beyond 'ohhh, this feature would be great to have!'.

It's supposed to be a game played endlessly for its sandbox mode. Turns out there's not even a map generator (which kind of obliterates the whole point of the game) while the devs decided to spend time on a campaign no one ever really cared about.

I really don't think it's a problem of community input..

I agree with op somewhat.

Frogboy should've stayed true to his first vision of the game and when the game's done and players have it THEN he should start using the community input. Now its just a classical example of "too many cooks spoil the broth"

Now don't get me wrong. Stardock is one of the few companies that have great interaction with their community/customers. But when it comes to the games and game design I really think that a company should first and foremost use their employees for 99% of the game's design and vision.

For example Stardock had a pretty good vision for the tactical battles. But then they started listening on the "old school" crowd. You know the ones that have a hard time trying NEW things and automatically assumes that it's BAD just because the system isn't what they're used to (even though it MIGHT just rock their world..). These are also the kinds of people that would've stuck with DOS or Win 3.1 if they had the chance, too afraid of change.

Community input IS good. But devs should have a clear vision too and not stray too far away from it. Everyone has opinions on everything and you can't please everyone. Or you will just end up with a soup that has every ingredient known to man inside it, and I can bet a lot of money on that not one person would think of that soup as edible

I agree with OP, but also:

Somewhere SD compared Elemental to writing an essay, but coding a word processor to write it on first. The idea was that after making your own tools, the actual creative work is relatively easy. The problem is that they didn't continue the metaphor. When you write the paper you still have to write a good one, and before the deadline. Your tutor will not accept 'but I coded the word processor' as an  excuse.

A problem (not just here) is that game design is not taken seriously. I'm not talking about designing a computer game as a whole. I mean that just because you are an expert programmer it doesn't mean that you are a going to be able to make a fun game.

I design board games as a hobby, and I can say that things like balance and pace and allowing just the right amount of freedom vs restriction are fundamental to a game being fun. They don't just come out of the ether, you have to work on them. I don't know that anyone could be lead programmer, lead game designer, CEO of the company and write a cash-in book at the same time. It's ridiculous.

I wish but alas, that's still an assumption.

We don't know if we will be able to change everything. Only that there will be Python scripts that "do stuff".
There may well be hardcoded layers that stay untouchable and prevent the creation of Cool Stuff (tm). *shrug*

In the end Stardock does whatever they think is best. Player input may just serve as guide/oritentation about things that can be better and doable. Better but not doable things are irrelevant no matter how much people spam about them.

That says it all right there. The only thing this leaves out is that the reason why there's only a skeleton of a lot of the features is the release date got pushed up by six months. I can just imagine how fleshed out everything would have been if they had that additional six months to complete the basic features. If they would have had the extra 6 months the game we would have seen at launch would most likely be the game we see when we get the first expansion. 6 months can make a WORLD of difference in design implementation.