| Forum Index > General Games |
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17096 Posts
On August 22 2024 02:36 CicadaSC wrote: Here is an example of how a company may come up with a valuation. You can play with these numbers and see what they were expecting to arrive at 150mil. https://imgur.com/a/OvfegIv Thx for posting this. It is informative. | ||
|
Yurie
11953 Posts
On August 22 2024 03:24 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Even if the game dies at least some good people got to do some decent work within the RTS genre. Perhaps they can move on to a different, more financially viable RTS game. A lot of RTS engines being completed near this time. If one of them is easy to use we could see a resurgence in RTS titles due to it no longer taking 3 years to just get the basics working before you add your vision to it. So that could also be a positive from this. | ||
NonY
8751 Posts
I’ll check back for each major patch (next one is 2nd half of September I believe). And I will check in with the top players to see what the meta is. And maybe I’ll dive in again. I’m also a little frustrated by their design/development style. Of course I don’t really know what it’s like for them (but that’s part of the problem, that we don’t know all the designs they have planned but haven’t implemented yet). If I were tasked with making an RTS in the spirit of SC, this is not the way I would’ve done it at all. Of course, they’re the industry vets… Having said all that, for all I know their process will actually turn out well in the end. They project confidence that their process is the most efficient long term. In that case I’ll surely be back. | ||
|
PurE)Rabbit-SF
United States675 Posts
On August 22 2024 05:28 NonY wrote: Blah I’m out. I’ll check back later in development but I want off the wild ride for now. The absolute core gameplay that is the same in every patch is not compelling or fun enough for me atm. And each patch usually has some problematic strats and units that lead to degenerate competitive gameplay. If I had nothing else to do I’d probably keep playing to solve it as much as possible each patch and also improve my mechanics. But there are other good games to play. I’ll check back for each major patch (next one is 2nd half of September I believe). And I will check in with the top players to see what the meta is. And maybe I’ll dive in again. I’m also a little frustrated by their design/development style. Of course I don’t really know what it’s like for them (but that’s part of the problem, that we don’t know all the designs they have planned but haven’t implemented yet). If I were tasked with making an RTS in the spirit of SC, this is not the way I would’ve done it at all. Of course, they’re the industry vets… Having said all that, for all I know their process will actually turn out well in the end. They project confidence that their process is the most efficient long term. In that case I’ll surely be back. Very well put, the fear of the degenerate competitive gameplay is definitely how this game feels like. | ||
|
RogerChillingworth
Chad3080 Posts
To have the means to experiment and get gnarly, I'd just cancel the 3v3 mode. Let the community make it with the editor (they'll make a better one). Turtle up a bit and come out with some radical changes that help the game to be more expressive. It isn't too late. Meanwhile, start mining how we can keep more casual players actively engaged. I'm available :wave: | ||
|
Brutaxilos
United States2630 Posts
Day9 explains pretty well why the "simplified" UX for stormgate can actually be more confusing for new players, and frustrating for old players | ||
|
KingzTig
155 Posts
Patch doesn't do enough, units need to be more radically redesigned. All you need is to watch the games and see how meh all engagements look. A complete mess most for the time with how many units there are. There's very little fun dynamics, partly because of that as well. To illustrate this, even if TvZ only has lingbanemuta and tank marine medivac, it will still be far more interesting than everything stormgate can offer. There's no need for creep camps, destructible tree mechanics etc. The fear of low time to kill, but failing at making it more broodwar like/or Warcraft with hero system just make it a really subpar RTS game. I honestly don't see the potential in it at all, its better than some like crossfire legend and that's about it. | ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1841 Posts
On August 21 2024 15:21 CicadaSC wrote: player counts are back below 1000 concurrents :/ currently sitting at 960... i know its late, but i saw this before early access went free to play and people told me to wait for that, now were almost back at the playercount we started at. every day it is trending downwards. down to the 800s just a day later... this is bad. like, real bad. | ||
Waxangel
United States33496 Posts
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-08-16/maker-of-stormgate-a-starcraft-2-successor-hopes-fans-will-be-patient https://www.ign.com/articles/stormgate-review-early-access In any case, the coop has been decently fun for me. Functionally, it plays almost exactly like SC2 coop, so it's basically five new commanders worth of discovery/grinding/messing around that will take a while to exhaust. The problem is that there's nothing yet that can make me say "I see the vision." Obviously, I don't expect it to have the breadth of SC2 coop—the # of commanders and maps to play on—given how much of a 'head start' SC2 coop has. However, I'm sorely disappointed there's no hint of the depth I wanted—the various systems and ideas they said they wanted to add to SC2 coop but were unable to. Sure, maybe there's a good practical reason that their process is to build out the core features of SC2 coop first, and then move on to the novel features. But I feel like there had to be at least a HINT of something totally new to keep people engaged and interested during EA. The "gear" tab in the hero select UI seems like a precursor to some branch specialization, but if it's just a less fleshed-out version of Ascensions in SC2, it's going to be disappointing. | ||
|
gingerfluffmuffnr2
107 Posts
On August 22 2024 14:54 Waxangel wrote: Pretty standard, they take the press kit provided word for word. Maybe boot the game up for half an hour and it is done. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26194 Posts
On August 22 2024 14:51 CicadaSC wrote: down to the 800s just a day later... this is bad. like, real bad. This becomes a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy too. In some ways I think public player counts and such stats can kinda suck. Hey I’m all for transparency too, especially if money is involved. But I’ve seen many a F2P game where people don’t even try it because it’s ‘dead’ even if it’s healthy enough to likely easily find good games. Which eventually of course does actually lead to dedgaem. Not that I’d necessarily advocate to change this, but it is an unfortunate side-effect. In addition we may shortly run into the brutal, and unfixable problem at the dev end that the only people playing Stormgate are either competitive standard RTS players, or less skilled players but who’re still pretty decent, and have been playing it for months. There’s at present not much of an on-ramp for prepping for 1v1, nor is there that much content that isn’t 1v1. So what players do trickle in aren’t likely to have a great time right now. I had this issue with Quake Champions, trying it out way after release. While not a total noob I wasn’t finding too many games suitable for my level, and there wasn’t a load of more casual lobbies of people just playing drop-in deathmatch or whatever. Thought it was a decent game, maybe too focused on competitive modes for arena vets which harmed it overall. Which, despite not being their stated intent is also where Stormgate is currently sitting. I already feel I’m on a timer with this game where I almost need to get grinding ladder in the next week or so, as if I delay much more I’m going to have to put in a lot more hours getting to a level I have fun games. | ||
|
Nirli
Bulgaria378 Posts
| ||
|
gingerfluffmuffnr2
107 Posts
On August 22 2024 17:08 WombaT wrote: ... Hey I’m all for transparency too, especially if money is involved. But I’ve seen many a F2P game where people don’t even try it because it’s ‘dead’ even if it’s healthy enough to likely easily find good games. Which eventually of course does actually lead to dedgaem. Not that I’d necessarily advocate to change this, but it is an unfortunate side-effect. ... You can also see it the other way around, it protects players from spending on a dying game. Which good does a skin, etc. when the servers are down. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26194 Posts
On August 22 2024 20:12 gingerfluffmuffnr2 wrote: You can also see it the other way around, it protects players from spending on a dying game. Which good does a skin, etc. when the servers are down. Yeah that’s definitely part of it too. But I feel it’s combined with a pretty bad gauge of how many concurrent players you need to actually have a decent experience, partially informed by how huge the numbers are for the bigger titles. It’s definitely a useful tool for consumer choice, but on the flipside perhaps is too fixated upon, and you end up with many a game being DoA because the perception is that it’s stillborn. Which makes it doubly important that a F2P, multiplayer game launches well. If there’s an example of one that launched badly and pulled it back it would be a new one on me. Not advocating for hiding such information or anything! | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17096 Posts
On August 22 2024 18:41 Nirli wrote: It's up to FGS to prove it's not dead yet. And they're really silent for someone on the precipice. There is probably a lot of recalibrating going on now that the Steam money is flowing into the company. FG had projected #s and now everyone can ballpark the actual #s. FG's top guys and the investors are discussing the next moves. Many employees and contractors of project based work begin looking for new work as soon an the org stops hiring. They do not listen to PR press releases. They go by the employer's ACTIONS not the employer's WORDS. If FG stopped hiring then employees and contractors anticipate layoffs. The flip side of that is that you have to pay people a lot when they know the work is temporary. Also Remote Workers get changed faster than light bulbs. When you are never in the same room with the people paying you...you trust them a lot less. And vice versa. | ||
|
SoleSteeler
Canada5454 Posts
On August 22 2024 14:54 Waxangel wrote: I've found it amusing that some traditional media are rather kind toward FG/Stormgate, really giving them a lot of grace due to the game being early access. Not sure if that's how those particular writers/outlets generally cover EA games, but I guess that's the difference between a community that's been sold a lot of hype and an outsider who comes in and goes "oh look at this curio." https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-08-16/maker-of-stormgate-a-starcraft-2-successor-hopes-fans-will-be-patient https://www.ign.com/articles/stormgate-review-early-access In any case, the coop has been decently fun for me. Functionally, it plays almost exactly like SC2 coop, so it's basically five new commanders worth of discovery/grinding/messing around that will take a while to exhaust. The problem is that there's nothing yet that can make me say "I see the vision." Obviously, I don't expect it to have the breadth of SC2 coop—the # of commanders and maps to play on—given how much of a 'head start' SC2 coop has. However, I'm sorely disappointed there's no hint of the depth I wanted—the various systems and ideas they said they wanted to add to SC2 coop but were unable to. Sure, maybe there's a good practical reason that their process is to build out the core features of SC2 coop first, and then move on to the novel features. But I feel like there had to be at least a HINT of something totally new to keep people engaged and interested during EA. The "gear" tab in the hero select UI seems like a precursor to some branch specialization, but if it's just a less fleshed-out version of Ascensions in SC2, it's going to be disappointing. I stopped playing co-op right now because I feel if I max anything now and they really improve the "journey" later on, I've kinda missed out. I never actually bought any SC2 co-op commanders, just played the base 6 heroes to max. I guess I owned Fenix somehow (bought his voice pack? Also Stukov, I think because I owned SC:Remastered). I played a couple games recently - it is pretty fun.  | ||
|
PurE)Rabbit-SF
United States675 Posts
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/FNBDDSB.png) In the meanwhile even AOE4 still has a steady player base of 10k+ | ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1841 Posts
| ||
|
SoleSteeler
Canada5454 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17096 Posts
On August 22 2024 14:54 Waxangel wrote: I've found it amusing that some traditional media are rather kind toward FG/Stormgate, really giving them a lot of grace due to the game being early access. corpo outlets like IGN and ScreenRant are a joke. They rag on Black Myth Wukong while giving Stormgate a pass. ScreenRant gave BM:W a 6/10 while saying that "Stormgate is the next Starcraft RTS". IGN ragged on BM:W hard. BM:W is stellar. The authors and editors at IGN and ScreenRant lowered their already low credibility again. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
StarCraft2.fi
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
WardiTV 2025
StarCraft2.fi
PiGosaur Monday
StarCraft2.fi
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
