Actually I think the art style is VERY COOL and eagerly look forward to playing it.

It kind of reminds me of the old D&D art work and that has always brought a smile to my face. I first played MoM in 2002 and still play it on an on/off bases even today as do many people I know, so I really don't think that too many people think of graphics first.

That said the graphics on that page are slightly outdated, you might want to check this thread to see a more current standard of the graphics: https://forums.elementalgame.com/358044.

Some of those screenshots are old but the first few give a better idea of the current standard of the engine.

I'll wait till the final game to decide but aren't there quite likely to be a lot of graphic mods?

I firmly disagree. I think the highly stylized, dare I say classical fantasy art motif is exceptionally fitting for this title. This is especially so given the foundation the entire enterprise is based on.

It is pre alpha graphic.

But if it is in your opinion bad, it is bad. Don't buy the game, if you can't live with it.

Now for my opinion: You post = FAIL. You cant judge graphic or even art style 8 month before it is ready to be shown off. Maybe come back when it is finalized?

Did we really need a second thread for this?

And for the record, lots of people like a more "cartoony" unrealistic style. "Realistic" graphics have this nasty habit of looking awful on non top-end hardware, or using a style like in most shooters that everything is some shade of brown.

I think your post is a bit rude and exaggerated.

Remember, Stardock isn't some nameless faceless corporation that has no contact with its fans like you may be used to.  The people who make this game actually read these boards and interact with the fans.  And they are real people with real feelings.  So its fine to have input on the game, they want to hear it.  But choose your words as if you're talking to real people.

I think your post makes little sense. 

Appealing graphics always have value, but putting aside your opinion of the game's grapics, strategy fans are ususlly willing to play a game regardless of any graphics it has.  They certainly dont care a whit about animations, when most tbs and 4x strategy games have very few if any.

And King's Bounty is a fine game, but it has little to do with E:WOM. They are two entriely different genres of game, and dont neccesarily have the same fanbase.  I think it's possible you may not entirely understand the sort of game E;WOM is going to be.

I'm afraid sir, as others have pointed out, the Fail belongs to you.

False dichotomy fallacy.

(also it's 2009., not 2004.)

false dichotomy (plural false dichotomies)

1. (logical fallacy) A situation in which two alternative points of views are presented as the only options, whereas others are available.

Again, I do not think that word means what you think it means. If you actually want to make logic arguments and point our fallacies.

Whereas; the graphics suck and      <---- false premise, opinion stated as fact

Whereas; games that do not have outstanding graphics suck, and   <----- see above

Whereas; the other aspect of graphics other than the style is animations, therefore

Be it resolved; that unless the animations are outstanding, this game is destined to suck.

Since two of your three premises are false, your conclusion fails. A lot of people like the graphic style. Even among those who don't there are many if not most people that consider gameplay more important than graphics (not a false dichotomy, learn what phrases mean before you use them).

Your post is covered in FAIL.

I personally adore the graphic style.  It's a breath of fresh air.  Many games use the same tried and proven style. I'm glad Stardock is going in a different direction.  Also, these graphics make it easier to run on any system, which is something that I definitely approve of.

Lastly, if the graphics engine requires less effort from the developers, they can spend more effort on the gameplay.  Take Dominions 3, for example.  That game has very dated graphics, but it is one of the deepest and long lasting games that I have ever played.

Fortunately for the rest of the world, your personal likes and dislikes are not the definition of good and bad.

Imo, art quality IS underrated in strategy games.  I thought that GalCivII would've been epic (as opposed to just really really good) with less cartoony art.  However, if Elemental lives up to the concept art in some of the forum posts, it should be artistically innovative (for a video game) and visually stunning.

Though perhaps updating the media section with more of the art seen in the forums in the relatively near future would help avoid more misinformed, unfairly judgmental posts like this one...

Um, the art was hardly 'cartooney' in GC2...