EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/wRpUHEV.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/enbigzp.png)
A large reviewer asked for comment when this content was instead locked behind a high price tag, and instead of a media response FG deleted these parts of the kickstarter page. Why wouldn't an honest company just say "whoops, my bad?"
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread - Page 154
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20326 Posts
A large reviewer asked for comment when this content was instead locked behind a high price tag, and instead of a media response FG deleted these parts of the kickstarter page. Why wouldn't an honest company just say "whoops, my bad?" | ||
|
gingerfluffmuffnr2
107 Posts
Thats 6,5D chess right there. edit: 90k views and very positive comments, people clearly dont mind. FGS keeps winning. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22281 Posts
On August 11 2024 05:23 Cyro wrote: Yes, they payed for the kickstarter but FGS has already spend that money, they need new money. Can't get new money if you don't offer anything to buy to people who already payed for the 'full' package.They pre-paid $40-60+, more money earlier is better. If the investor market hadn't dried up and forced FGS to release EA now to pay for the remainder of development they wouldn't have had to break their promise that the full package would include all EA heroes. | ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey443 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26667 Posts
On August 11 2024 05:52 gingerfluffmuffnr2 wrote: FGS did that on purpose, so that they can play the victim when Gamestar calls them out. Thats 6,5D chess right there. edit: 90k views and very positive comments, people clearly dont mind. FGS keeps winning. Are they winning? I was always more in the cautious optimist camp, and not a ‘hater’ by any means (see my posting history here) and they’re losing me, they’ve lost peers of mine with a similar disposition. | ||
|
Tal
United Kingdom1017 Posts
"Fully funded to release" - turns out to mean 'only funded until early access release, after which the game needs to make money.' Way less people would have backed the Kickstarter if they'd understood this. "Early access release" - turns out to not mean early access in the way every other game does it, where a lot of the content is ready and just needs polishing and iteration. Instead we have talk of almost every aspect of the game getting a complete rework, as if we are still in late alpha or early closed beta, and any criticism is met with 'but we are in early access this is totally normal for this all to be miles away from good.' "Receive all our year zero heroes with founders pack" - turns out to mean only those at the start of year zero. Also the whole model is opposite to the way every other game does it, in which when you buy the expensive ultimate edition, you get a season pass for the first year of content (or at least 6 months). Many direct comparisons to Starcraft 2 in their marketing, claims of being triple A and being the next gen RTS successor, but as soon as they are attacked say they are a small indie studio and that SC2 had a long development time. | ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey443 Posts
On August 11 2024 14:41 Tal wrote: I don't know what kind of early access games you have been playing lol Stormgate is more content-rich and bug-free than 99% of newly-released early access games.turns out to not mean early access in the way every other game does it, where a lot of the content is ready and just needs polishing and iteration. | ||
|
uummpaa
238 Posts
On August 11 2024 16:25 _Spartak_ wrote: I don't know what kind of early access games you have been playing lol Stormgate is more content-rich and bug-free than 99% of newly-released early access games. citation needed | ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey443 Posts
| ||
|
kAra
Germany1415 Posts
rather optimistic to launch like this when the 1v1 mode is not on par yet with a 14 year old game. | ||
|
Tal
United Kingdom1017 Posts
On August 11 2024 16:25 _Spartak_ wrote: I don't know what kind of early access games you have been playing lol Stormgate is more content-rich and bug-free than 99% of newly-released early access games. This simply isn't true. Even a cursory look at recent successful early-access games shows most launched in a much better state. The only way I can imagine what you are saying making sense is if you are including random shovelwhare games which no one buys in your 99% statistic. In which case, I guess Stormgate is indeed better than those, but so is everything, so it's not much of a defence. Just looking at some of the random early access games I've played personally at launch. Against the Storm Mechabellum V Rising All three were streets ahead of Stormgate in terms of content and quality at Early Access release, despite having far less resources. They also had their core gameplay absolutely nailed, even if they had a lot more to add. Stormgate's current state is unusual for early access, especially given their resources and marketing power. Can you give some examples from your side? What big early access games do you feel launched with less content and quality? | ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey443 Posts
| ||
|
Tal
United Kingdom1017 Posts
On August 11 2024 19:09 _Spartak_ wrote: Why the qualification of "successful" or "big" early access titles? Your initial argument was that "early access" tag is used for games that are in a more complete state than Stormgate. I don't agree that the games you listed had more content than Stormgate btw. Stormgate may have more content missing in relation to what it will get eventually but that's because the game is bigger scale than the ones you mentioned, not because it has less content overall. 1v1 and co-op alone offers dozens of hours of content for those interested in those modes. So no examples then? | ||
|
KingzTig
155 Posts
On August 11 2024 19:09 _Spartak_ wrote: Why the qualification of "successful" or "big" early access titles? Your initial argument was that "early access" tag is used for games that are in a more complete state than Stormgate. I don't agree that the games you listed had more content than Stormgate btw. Stormgate may have more content missing in relation to what it will get eventually but that's because the game is bigger scale than the ones you mentioned, not because it has less content overall. 1v1 and co-op alone offers dozens of hours of content for those interested in those modes. Most Indies games don't do these scopes because none of them have private fund raising, KS, indigogo and star engine. There are plenty very good EA titles, with good amount of contents because some genre naturally have good repeatable gameplay loop. Otherwise you have splitgate that raised 100m after a massive success in their beta launch. | ||
|
moomin22
30 Posts
| ||
|
Agh
United States1044 Posts
On August 11 2024 17:46 kAra wrote: checking the roadmap, there is no team modes/ladders except maybe "co op" till next year? rather optimistic to launch like this when the 1v1 mode is not on par yet with a 14 year old game. Why on earth would you devote any time at all to those things over focusing on core gameplay? Stormgate won't "launch" for another 2.5 years. Your comparison is trash given that it's in the same if not a better state than SC2 was at the same point in its cycle. It's a much more ambitious project that something like Battle Aces which in comparison is just a glorified warcraft 3 custom map. | ||
|
uummpaa
238 Posts
ofc not, if you have to take time spent in 1v1 as content, then any cheapo battle chess game has the same amount of "content" (minus the campaign in case of SG), and the good old "pump enough money into it ahead of time we get sooooooooo much more" is never missing either but there is no real point in arguing with spartak, he is just as blindly positiv as was megabuster negative before the ban, only difference is that he writes in coherent sentences and doesnt derail everything, but both are not helpful to progress any conversation here | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26667 Posts
On August 11 2024 14:41 Tal wrote: Wow, the ninja edit on their own FAQ is pretty unfortunate. The worst thing is they keep moving the goal posts on common terms and then acting innocent when the community calls them out. "Fully funded to release" - turns out to mean 'only funded until early access release, after which the game needs to make money.' Way less people would have backed the Kickstarter if they'd understood this. "Early access release" - turns out to not mean early access in the way every other game does it, where a lot of the content is ready and just needs polishing and iteration. Instead we have talk of almost every aspect of the game getting a complete rework, as if we are still in late alpha or early closed beta, and any criticism is met with 'but we are in early access this is totally normal for this all to be miles away from good.' "Receive all our year zero heroes with founders pack" - turns out to mean only those at the start of year zero. Also the whole model is opposite to the way every other game does it, in which when you buy the expensive ultimate edition, you get a season pass for the first year of content (or at least 6 months). Many direct comparisons to Starcraft 2 in their marketing, claims of being triple A and being the next gen RTS successor, but as soon as they are attacked say they are a small indie studio and that SC2 had a long development time. It’s unfortunate because some areas the communication is excellent. The latest patch notes for 1v1 are thorough, clear and really outlay the rationale behind the changes. Others they’re unclear to the level where they start to feel dishonest. Be it through genuine mistakes or intentionally. There’s just such a marked difference between the communication in areas like the former, and in areas like release rewards, funding etc. Rather than editing the Kickstarter after the fact for example, make those changes and communicate why, and where confusions may have arisen. It’s not that hard | ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1905 Posts
On August 11 2024 23:56 Agh wrote: Why on earth would you devote any time at all to those things over focusing on core gameplay? Stormgate won't "launch" for another 2.5 years. Your comparison is trash given that it's in the same if not a better state than SC2 was at the same point in its cycle. It's a much more ambitious project that something like Battle Aces which in comparison is just a glorified warcraft 3 custom map. Stormgate full launches next year, early access is going on right now or "technically" the 13th. I don't get why people keep bringing up how many years -whatever game of your choice- was in development. A game is ready when the developers say it's ready and wanna put it out there to the public. Stormgate wants to full release 1.0 in 2025. Will it be a finished state and development will halt after that point? Probably not but neither did StarCraft. StarCraft saw new units and game modes and quality of life changes implemented over the years. | ||
|
Agh
United States1044 Posts
On August 12 2024 01:34 CicadaSC wrote: Stormgate full launches next year, early access is going on right now or "technically" the 13th. I don't get why people keep bringing up how many years -whatever game of your choice- was in development. A game is ready when the developers say it's ready and wanna put it out there to the public. Stormgate wants to full release 1.0 in 2025. Will it be a finished state and development will halt after that point? Probably not but neither did StarCraft. StarCraft saw new units and game modes and quality of life changes implemented over the years. Doesn't do any good arguing the semantics of what qualifies for a launch, hence the quotes -- but I think anyone taking outlines at face value has quite the rose tinted glasses. It's amusing that one of the old sayings used to be the game will be ready when it's ready. It's an extremely nu-blizz/activision esque take to try to conform to a timeline, and leans toward failure and disappointment from all sides. The thing I DO hope they do involving a timeline is take a note from League and go full live service with a patch schedule. Adjust and test things even if it is solely in the vein of promoting variety. | ||
| ||
