| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20318 Posts
The worst thing is they keep moving the goal posts on common terms and then acting innocent when the community calls them out. There are also people who sit on every single forum/server relating to SG and just argue that people are idiots for pointing it out all day, some of whom are getting paid for it. | ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey419 Posts
On August 12 2024 02:58 Cyro wrote: "If people don't agree with my takes, the only explanation is they are being paid".There are also people who sit on every single forum/server relating to SG and just argue that people are idiots for pointing it out all day, some of whom are getting paid for it. | ||
|
moomin22
30 Posts
| ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey419 Posts
Back to "early access", I actually got more examples with very comparable games. Planetary Annihilation devs recently launched a Kickstarter for their new game and here is what is promised for the early access launch: - No campaign - Only skirmish and 1v1 - Only 1 incomplete faction https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/indannihilation/industrial-annihilation As it stands, Stormgate early access has more content than Industrial Annihilation plans to have at full launch. Actually, Planetary Annihilation is also a good example of what early access games are usually like. It was a barely playable barebones game. Sins of a Solar Empire 2 is another game in an adjacent genre that launched early access in a very barebones state. | ||
|
gTank
Austria2584 Posts
It also doesnt say much how the game runs now and how much content it has, only when it starts EA and finally when it hopefully will be finished 2025. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25884 Posts
On August 12 2024 04:04 gTank wrote: I had way more fun playing other EA games than Stormgate so far, it need way more time to be good and run well. No need to argue with diehard fanatics obviously somehow directly invested into that stuff, you will not come to an agreement whatsoever. It also doesnt say much how the game runs now and how much content it has, only when it starts EA and finally when it hopefully will be finished 2025. One day my prog album may eventually drop, hey half of the material is garbage, but it’s ambitious! (Some of it is ok, I do myself a disservice) I think part of the problem is the transition from fully-funded to ‘fully funded until Early Access’ and all that entails. It’s simply the difference between ‘hey it might take a while but we’ll get there’ to ‘hm, actually completing the game to the initial blueprint may be dependent on EA buying enough money and time’. That’s a pretty huge difference, you can put out something barebones and it’s an early build with funding to finish it, versus potentially never getting there, and you’ve seen quite a lot of optimism vanish with that change. Look I hope it works out, but there’s very little I’ve seen from FG in the past 6+ months that really filed me with confidence, quite the opposite indeed. And if one scrolls back in this thread I really was trying to keep optimistic as I’m personally invested in having something new to play and learn in an SC2/WC3 vein 1v1 needs work but, I will concede it’s actually not in an awful state either. There are some decent bones there. Co-op is unplayable on certain rigs, and it’s not as good as Starcraft’s anyway. I’ve played a bit of co-op with both my partner (complete gaming scrub) and my kid (big gamer, but not many PC games in his ma’s) and that was fun. Well I can’t because the performance is too bad . Campaign is bare bones as fuck. I’ve played a lot of RTS games in my time but I usually grinded Blizzard ones as they were my favourites, while snapping up other RTS games in Steam sales. Here’s a list of things I’m playing atm: - SC2 all brutal, all achievements run (almost done) - Replaying WC3 after 15+ years, hard campaign run - Some BW and SC2 custom campaigns that are good Past that here’s a list of games I never got round to playing, that I either own, or have via GamePass, and are on the to-do list - Dawn of War 1/2 - Replaying Myth 2: Soulblighter - AoE2 and 4 - Age of Mythology is about to drop, which I never played first time round This isn’t even including about another 10 games in my Steam library, or something like Godsworn which looks like a promising ‘one and done’ kinda game I’m a 40K nut. I love ancient history (granted I’m not expecting accuracy from AoE) so I mean, there are settings that are compelling to me before a game is even built around them. Here’s why FG are in trouble IMO. Why would I play the campaign if I have so many classics I haven’t even got round to yet? And I can’t play co-op atm with the people I usually play with. I basically used co-op to train my little one to enjoy RTS so he hopefully keeps it up! The mode I might actually get into and play, 1v1 is the mode that isn’t yet monetised. After 14 years, 12/13 we were running de facto national championship tournaments a good chunk of our folks were kinda burned out on SC2. We’re trying to rebrand outside of SC2, run more general RTS tournies but even the people dying for a new game to try aren’t all enthusiastic to pivoting to doing Stormgate stuff either. | ||
|
gTank
Austria2584 Posts
 ).If there would only be Stormgate and no other game coming up soon, I would be a little bit hyped but Age of Mythology Retold alone makes me forget about SG so often. I can recommend Godsworn too, has more content than SG and is developed by two (!!!) devs. Interesting setting. AoE4 is great too, playing 1-2 games every day since release and its not boring yet. SG lacks a bit of a unique selling point besides "superior next level technology" that doesnt even work great on most rigs. No one is going to by a brand new rig just for SG anyway. | ||
|
sophisticated
60 Posts
 | ||
|
ChillFlame
180 Posts
On August 12 2024 03:26 _Spartak_ wrote: Manor Lords is a good one. It is even a successful launch. It doesn't have nearly as much content as Stormgate. Actually, none of the three games that were mentioned in the message I was responding to have as much content as Stormgate. These games are mostly games that are played with one mode, whereas Stormgate is building all modes included in a massive scale game like SC2, albeit currently at a preliminary state. Stormgate offers more hours of gameplay for those who like the game at its current state than any of those titles did at their early access release. "If people don't agree with my takes, the only explanation is they are being paid". Yeah let's compare the game made by 1 man and the game made by corporation with 40mil funding. | ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey419 Posts
| ||
|
ChillFlame
180 Posts
On August 12 2024 06:21 _Spartak_ wrote: I am not comparing it to suggest FG did a better job than Manor Lords dev. I am giving examples of how games usually are at early access release because I was asked to provide examples of games with less content than SG at EA launch. You're right. You don't compare it to suggest FG did a better job than Manor Lords dev. That's because it's wrong. ML's dev made a content-wise comparable game with a tiny fraction of FG's resources and workforce. That's the important thing. Why do we need to pay 2 times more (compared to SC2) for the unfinished and inferior game if we can just pay for an actual good game. Or just buy an almost finished EA game. Or, if we want, we can just support an actual indie dev, not 150 mil corporation. When you compare the actual game (not the dev's promises) it always loses. | ||
|
Tal
United Kingdom1017 Posts
| ||
|
Husyelt
United States837 Posts
On August 12 2024 05:02 sophisticated wrote: Had I received 40M$ in funding, I would have simply produced and released a 40M$ game wait they got 40 million in funding? thats insane for a fundraiser. im all for paying artists and programmers what they deserve but there was some serious errors here in judgment or direction. I'm fairly confident I could make an entire RTS for a 1-2 million bucks with just a couple other Devs if we just focused on PvP and saved the story for down the line. Just start with 2 races, prototype that shit out while an artist or two work on the visual style. after you have a working prototype go full in with the rest of the money on art and very basic multiplayer functionality. Unreal Engine 5 is literally free to use until you make your first million in revenue. Make the basic game $20 with PvP ladder and custom only, and then an expansion pack with a new race and maybe a simple story for another $20. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25884 Posts
On August 12 2024 12:25 Husyelt wrote: wait they got 40 million in funding? thats insane for a fundraiser. im all for paying artists and programmers what they deserve but there was some serious errors here in judgment or direction. I'm fairly confident I could make an entire RTS for a 1-2 million bucks with just a couple other Devs if we just focused on PvP and saved the story for down the line. Just start with 2 races, prototype that shit out while an artist or two work on the visual style. after you have a working prototype go full in with the rest of the money on art and very basic multiplayer functionality. Unreal Engine 5 is literally free to use until you make your first million in revenue. Make the basic game $20 with PvP ladder and custom only, and then an expansion pack with a new race and maybe a simple story for another $20. They got most of their funding from standard investment and not via fundraising from Kickstarter etc. It still needs some work by most accounts, but they have by and large made a very, very solid base engine. I imagine that cost a fair chunk of their budget. It may be that even if they fail to hit their own ambitions, they may license that out which would be great for the genre. For all my criticism I still hope the project succeeds in one way or another, but that may be a silver lining of sorts. It’s a hell of a lot easier to piss out a shooter or action-adventure or well, lots of types of games because you have engines like UE good to go pretty much out the box. RTS you just don’t have that to my knowledge. Every dev seems to do their own thing, and usually on a budget. Hence why you’ve got a ton of RTS games with cool aesthetics, genuinely interesting ideas and design decisions, almost invariably all crippled to some degree by the control and pathfinding. Ok, crippled is stretching it, but I really feel the ‘man this is cool, this game would kick fucking ass if it controlled half as well as SC2’ all too often. I think it’s maybe, in fact almost definitely a hugely underdiscussed facet in the age-old ‘why has RTS declined?’ question. Tastes may vary, some prefer older games regardless (WC3 may be my bae) but I genuinely can’t think of another genre whose peak in terms of those technical aspects was reached over 14 years ago, and it’s not even that close. | ||
|
Husyelt
United States837 Posts
On August 12 2024 13:01 WombaT wrote: They got most of their funding from standard investment and not via fundraising from Kickstarter etc. It still needs some work by most accounts, but they have by and large made a very, very solid base engine. I imagine that cost a fair chunk of their budget. It may be that even if they fail to hit their own ambitions, they may license that out which would be great for the genre. For all my criticism I still hope the project succeeds in one way or another, but that may be a silver lining of sorts. It’s a hell of a lot easier to piss out a shooter or action-adventure or well, lots of types of games because you have engines like UE good to go pretty much out the box. RTS you just don’t have that to my knowledge. Every dev seems to do their own thing, and usually on a budget. Hence why you’ve got a ton of RTS games with cool aesthetics, genuinely interesting ideas and design decisions, almost invariably all crippled to some degree by the control and pathfinding. Ok, crippled is stretching it, but I really feel the ‘man this is cool, this game would kick fucking ass if it controlled half as well as SC2’ all too often. I think it’s maybe, in fact almost definitely a hugely underdiscussed facet in the age-old ‘why has RTS declined?’ question. Tastes may vary, some prefer older games regardless (WC3 may be my bae) but I genuinely can’t think of another genre whose peak in terms of those technical aspects was reached over 14 years ago, and it’s not even that close. oh boy, a friend turned enemy you'll see my lawyers tomorrow. and best you be sure, they wont take kindly to 40 fucking million dollars going into an RTS that looks like a mobile phone app. but like if you like that, thats cool, i personally dont accept a revolution with such weak results | ||
|
Tal
United Kingdom1017 Posts
On August 12 2024 13:01 WombaT wrote: They got most of their funding from standard investment and not via fundraising from Kickstarter etc. It still needs some work by most accounts, but they have by and large made a very, very solid base engine. I imagine that cost a fair chunk of their budget. It may be that even if they fail to hit their own ambitions, they may license that out which would be great for the genre. For all my criticism I still hope the project succeeds in one way or another, but that may be a silver lining of sorts. It’s a hell of a lot easier to piss out a shooter or action-adventure or well, lots of types of games because you have engines like UE good to go pretty much out the box. RTS you just don’t have that to my knowledge. Every dev seems to do their own thing, and usually on a budget. Hence why you’ve got a ton of RTS games with cool aesthetics, genuinely interesting ideas and design decisions, almost invariably all crippled to some degree by the control and pathfinding. Ok, crippled is stretching it, but I really feel the ‘man this is cool, this game would kick fucking ass if it controlled half as well as SC2’ all too often. I think it’s maybe, in fact almost definitely a hugely underdiscussed facet in the age-old ‘why has RTS declined?’ question. Tastes may vary, some prefer older games regardless (WC3 may be my bae) but I genuinely can’t think of another genre whose peak in terms of those technical aspects was reached over 14 years ago, and it’s not even that close. Yeah this is a good point with the Snowplay engine. And credit where credit is due, the engine seems to be good in terms of responsiveness, stability, and handling latency. It does appear to have serious problems in late game, co-op games, and on weaker computers, but this might be fixable with optimizations down the road. This responsiveness is also hard to feel in game because pathing and unit AI is still weak, but this can change too. If they license it to others it could be great for the RTS genre - as you say, there isn't an off-the-shelf solution right now for new devs. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25884 Posts
On August 12 2024 13:14 Husyelt wrote: oh boy, a friend turned enemy you'll see my lawyers tomorrow. and best you be sure, they wont take kindly to 40 fucking million dollars going into an RTS that looks like a mobile phone app. but like if you like that, thats cool, i personally dont accept a revolution with such weak results Good luck suing somebody with no tangible assets bar a 20K+ post TL account, that’s gotta be worth something right?! I am really differentiating between Stormgate the game as it is now, and the Frostplay engine underpinning it. The game may never get there, but the engine is already pretty damn good, and if they license it at a reasonable price, perhaps the RTS games that come after may be the Great Leap Forward. It still pains me to this day that a whole generation of younger gamers are familiar with the Unreal Engine, but not the games it came from, and it looks like will be some time returning  | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25884 Posts
On August 12 2024 13:36 Tal wrote: Yeah this is a good point with the Snowplay engine. And credit where credit is due, the engine seems to be good in terms of responsiveness, stability, and handling latency. It does appear to have serious problems in late game, co-op games, and on weaker computers, but this might be fixable with optimizations down the road. This responsiveness is also hard to feel in game because pathing and unit AI is still weak, but this can change too. If they license it to others it could be great for the RTS genre - as you say, there isn't an off-the-shelf solution right now for new devs. It has the same issue SC2 used to have (I mean still has, but 14 years on in hardware it’s much less an issue) in that it’s really CPU heavy, and it’s doing most (all iirc) of that off a single core. Especially when hardware kinda stopped pushing single-core performance in general over expanding the cores, in general anyway. I’m unsure if it’s feasible to do more parallel processing, or if heavy optimisation will just improve performance. It’s neither my area of expertise, nor am I a soothsayer. There’s certainly a decent skeleton already, as to how much flesh gets put on the bones I guess we have to wait and see. Provided an engine isn’t fundamentally broken, or just wholly unsuited to a task I still imagine it’s less work tweaking a decent but imperfect base than having to build a bespoke one: | ||
|
KingzTig
155 Posts
Many games work around or with the limitations of engine instead of trying to fix it from the ground up. It doesn't have the budget to do what it aims to do and player count dropping to all time low constantly. unless they do a miracle for early access, they wouldn't get a splitgate treatment where the massive success netted them a 100mil investment. And just to think how much ff16 costed to develop and then we have stormgate. Yeesh | ||
|
moomin22
30 Posts
https://youtube.com/shorts/a_BHDbo_pRU?si=Mk8Xk_D3gaV5VZ1e | ||
| ||
|
|
Safe House 2
IPSL
Sziky vs Havi
Artosis vs Klauso
Monday Night Weeklies
WardiTV Invitational
WardiTV Invitational
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
Online Event
RSL Revival
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
