|
On September 12 2024 06:53 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2024 03:27 CicadaSC wrote:On September 12 2024 02:57 iamperfection wrote:
Yeah thats a clear improvement. proportions still seem a bit out of whack but its definitely an improvement. Eh, now they're just cartoonish, which is fine. Before she looked like a duck-footed bobble-head. E: and yes, it's pretty generic, but generic is better than weird mecha-gnome.
If stormgate early access released with these changes, the graphic overhaul and many more we expect, even if they aren't final I think the game would've been received at least a little better. September for early access start wouldn't have been that much of a delay either. I really wonder why they decided to push it out in such an unfinished state. I know they are trying to be transparent in development but they could've made July's-Now's version a beta test until they had more polish ready.
|
It is easy to "Monday morning QB" this thing. They are prolly in a weak financial position; this duress forces errors that decision makers normally would not make. Amara is much better now.
Gina Carano or Julianna Pena voicing Amara would be super cool.
|
Northern Ireland25930 Posts
On September 12 2024 07:10 CicadaSC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2024 06:53 Acrofales wrote:On September 12 2024 03:27 CicadaSC wrote:On September 12 2024 02:57 iamperfection wrote:
Yeah thats a clear improvement. proportions still seem a bit out of whack but its definitely an improvement. Eh, now they're just cartoonish, which is fine. Before she looked like a duck-footed bobble-head. E: and yes, it's pretty generic, but generic is better than weird mecha-gnome. If stormgate early access released with these changes, the graphic overhaul and many more we expect, even if they aren't final I think the game would've been received at least a little better. September for early access start wouldn't have been that much of a delay either. I really wonder why they decided to push it out in such an unfinished state. I know they are trying to be transparent in development but they could've made July's-Now's version a beta test until they had more polish ready.
Some things are more subjective, art style or the game loop being some of them. So you can’t really predict how it’ll be received
Other stuff is going to be a more known issue and quantity that you’ve full knowledge isn’t implemented or polished yet.
I feel if they’d held off even a little for a small graphics improvement, performance improvement and full custom hotkeys the reception would have been a good bit better. Things they are working on doing, and naturally come in the development pipeline.
Perhaps their hand was forced, but I do think they went with a build that was too undercooked even for EA and that definitely backfired
|
On September 12 2024 07:21 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
It is easy to "Monday morning QB" this thing. They are prolly in a weak financial position; this duress forces errors that decision makers normally would not make. Amara is much better now.
Gina Carano or Julianna Pena voicing Amara would be super cool.
You’re a bit more mask-off than usual today!
|
United Kingdom20318 Posts
I think the game would've been received at least a little better. September for early access start wouldn't have been that much of a delay either. I really wonder why they decided to push it out in such an unfinished state.
It was argued that it was neccesary for $$ reasons (to get funds to continue to develop the game), but i think that if the game is still going then the finances weren't that bad and it could have handled a couple of months more in the oven.
There was an IMO poor feedback environment with a pretty big bubble of what i would call toxic positivity around the main game chats from a loud but generally uprepresentative minority - if you didn't look critically enough, it could appear that there was much more enthusiasm and support for what was in the game while often legitimate and critical issues were tucked away or buried. I think that probably played a role, and that bubble had to pop when the game went F2P.
|
Lol the new 1 on 1 map is literally fighting spirit.....
|
On September 13 2024 06:28 gTank wrote:
Lol the new 1 on 1 map is literally fighting spirit.....
Well what is wrong with that? After all everyone can see this is a big copy paste of broodwar, sc2, Warcraft and also something else; fighting spirit was created in 2012 circa if I recall, so having it remade in 2024, after all, why not?
|
On September 13 2024 06:41 pebble444 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 06:28 gTank wrote:
Lol the new 1 on 1 map is literally fighting spirit..... Well what is wrong with that? After all everyone can see this is a big copy paste of broodwar, sc2, Warcraft and also something else; fighting spirit was created in 2012 circa if I recall, so having it remade in 2024, after all, why not?
I love that map (they even named this very similar to it) dont get me wrong, but it runs against the whole idea of "future of rts" for me to get maps from 2012, at the same time getting told that "it is not starcraft, its very much its own kind of game".
|
United States33465 Posts
On September 13 2024 06:46 gTank wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 06:41 pebble444 wrote:On September 13 2024 06:28 gTank wrote:
Lol the new 1 on 1 map is literally fighting spirit..... Well what is wrong with that? After all everyone can see this is a big copy paste of broodwar, sc2, Warcraft and also something else; fighting spirit was created in 2012 circa if I recall, so having it remade in 2024, after all, why not? I love that map (they even named this very similar to it) dont get me wrong, but it runs against the whole idea of "future of rts" for me to get maps from 2012, at the same time getting told that "it is not starcraft, its very much its own kind of game".
Ionno where you get that vibe, because they've been pretty heavy on the 'spiritual successor' to Blizzard RTS messaging. It's very much in line with their method to port over a classic map, the same way Lost Temple was ported through SC1-War3 (twice!)-SC2.
Now, whether it will be GOOD as a map, who knows  . The track record is pretty bad for SC1->SC2, but Lost Temple ended up being a surprisingly okay War3 map.
|
I don't find the endless stealing charming. It makes me strongly dislike them.
|
On September 13 2024 06:41 pebble444 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 06:28 gTank wrote:
Lol the new 1 on 1 map is literally fighting spirit..... Well what is wrong with that? After all everyone can see this is a big copy paste of broodwar, sc2, Warcraft and also something else; fighting spirit was created in 2012 circa if I recall, so having it remade in 2024, after all, why not?
And the new Amara basically looks exactly like the 12 year old Nova/ Kerrigan Ghost model with a different hair-do
|
On September 13 2024 06:16 Cyro wrote:
There was an IMO poor feedback environment with a pretty big bubble of what i would call toxic positivity around the main game chats from a loud but generally uprepresentative minority - if you didn't look critically enough, it could appear that there was much more enthusiasm and support for what was in the game while often legitimate and critical issues were tucked away or buried. I think that probably played a role, and that bubble had to pop when the game went F2P.
This is all true.
But let's be clear that in any such public development effort it is critical for the devs to be discerning and to tell useful/true feedback from useless/false feedback. And being able to do that is its own skill.
I'll veer on the safe-side and guess that it's not trivial to do that; like, they should have recognized that when feedback along the lines of "it looks bland" is an undercurrent throughout develompent, this does in fact indicate that the art-style is bad and needs to be changed/redone if the game wishes to see success. But how do you discern that? How do you recognize feedback that actually points out real problems/deficencies from feedback that doesn't?
In the end nothing saves the devs from having to be apply their own judgement over inputs coming from the community, and if their own judgement isn't good in the first place, even the best feedback and community won't save this endeavor.
Imho, FGS has done at best a mediocre job at leveraging what may be one of their strongest assets, which is their community and its feedback channels. Another unforced error.
|
United Kingdom20318 Posts
Yeah they made and managed that environment. It set off immediate red flags for me.
It was also generally hostile towards women and queer peeple, the mods did a horrible job with that stuff and FG appointed them and then never stepped in when it got bad. It bled into a lot of the feedback when somebody would submit feedback for devs, it had to be done in a public thread and then they would get flooded with hundreds of posts from trolls saying e.g. that they didn't want female units in the millitaries because of "woke" and so on. It was unmoderated and unavoidable.
One of the mods with the backing of the mod team and FG even gave out a warning to a victim because they protested against a troll intentionally , maliciously, repeatedly referring to them with the wrong pronouns, and this was apparently making a scene about "politics" in the chat.
The game launched with no block function.
If they don't want that whole segment of the population to touch the community because it's a waste dump, then fine - but they can't be shocked when the player counts and the game design suffer for it.
|
On September 13 2024 18:00 Cyro wrote:
Yeah they made and managed that environment. It set off immediate red flags for me.
It was also generally hostile towards women and queer peeple, the mods did a horrible job with that stuff and FG appointed them and then never stepped in when it got bad. It bled into a lot of the feedback when somebody would submit feedback for devs, it had to be done in a public thread and then they would get flooded with hundreds of posts from trolls saying e.g. that they didn't want female units in the millitaries because of "woke" and so on. It was unmoderated and unavoidable.
One of the mods with the backing of the mod team and FG even gave out a warning to a victim because they protested against a troll intentionally , maliciously, repeatedly referring to them with the wrong pronouns, and this was apparently making a scene about "politics" in the chat.
The game launched with no block function.
If they don't want that whole segment of the population to touch the community because it's a waste dump, then fine - but they can't be shocked when the player counts and the game design suffer for it.
No way you are trying to blame SG failure on political crap, and the loss in audience would have gone both way.
And if anything to go by this year, all of these games trying to bring in LGBTQ representative and realistic female beauty or whatever failed pretty hard.
Why are we even having pronoun involved when we are all anonymous users submitting feedbacks.
Meanwhile games that don't give a damn and focus on attractive characters and gameplay simply do well this year.
For the past few years a lot of multinational corp tried to promote DEI in order to get a better rating to cover ESG, and with the economy doing bad, DEI departments are the first to go because a lot has changed back to looking at numbers and focusing on MEI.
And I don't know why this is controversial, because no matter what government talk about inclusiveness, never have immigration policy with the goal to achieve diversity, but they have skilled migration which is merit based, and it is far less about identity but on merits.
|
United States33465 Posts
On September 13 2024 20:08 KingzTig wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 18:00 Cyro wrote:
Yeah they made and managed that environment. It set off immediate red flags for me.
It was also generally hostile towards women and queer peeple, the mods did a horrible job with that stuff and FG appointed them and then never stepped in when it got bad. It bled into a lot of the feedback when somebody would submit feedback for devs, it had to be done in a public thread and then they would get flooded with hundreds of posts from trolls saying e.g. that they didn't want female units in the millitaries because of "woke" and so on. It was unmoderated and unavoidable.
One of the mods with the backing of the mod team and FG even gave out a warning to a victim because they protested against a troll intentionally , maliciously, repeatedly referring to them with the wrong pronouns, and this was apparently making a scene about "politics" in the chat.
The game launched with no block function.
If they don't want that whole segment of the population to touch the community because it's a waste dump, then fine - but they can't be shocked when the player counts and the game design suffer for it. No way you are trying to blame SG failure on political crap, and the loss in audience would have gone both way. And if anything to go by this year, all of these games trying to bring in LGBTQ representative and realistic female beauty or whatever failed pretty hard. Why are we even having pronoun involved when we are all anonymous users submitting feedbacks. Meanwhile games that don't give a damn and focus on attractive characters and gameplay simply do well this year. For the past few years a lot of multinational corp tried to promote DEI in order to get a better rating to cover ESG, and with the economy doing bad, DEI departments are the first to go because a lot has changed back to looking at numbers and focusing on MEI. And I don't know why this is controversial, because no matter what government talk about inclusiveness, never have immigration policy with the goal to achieve diversity, but they have skilled migration which is merit based, and it is far less about identity but on merits.
this topic ends here, full stop
it's effectively politics/ideology, and there are plenty of other TL threads where ya'll can argue such topics and get banned for it 
|
Northern Ireland25930 Posts
On September 13 2024 20:08 KingzTig wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 18:00 Cyro wrote:
Yeah they made and managed that environment. It set off immediate red flags for me.
It was also generally hostile towards women and queer peeple, the mods did a horrible job with that stuff and FG appointed them and then never stepped in when it got bad. It bled into a lot of the feedback when somebody would submit feedback for devs, it had to be done in a public thread and then they would get flooded with hundreds of posts from trolls saying e.g. that they didn't want female units in the millitaries because of "woke" and so on. It was unmoderated and unavoidable.
One of the mods with the backing of the mod team and FG even gave out a warning to a victim because they protested against a troll intentionally , maliciously, repeatedly referring to them with the wrong pronouns, and this was apparently making a scene about "politics" in the chat.
The game launched with no block function.
If they don't want that whole segment of the population to touch the community because it's a waste dump, then fine - but they can't be shocked when the player counts and the game design suffer for it. No way you are trying to blame SG failure on political crap, and the loss in audience would have gone both way. And if anything to go by this year, all of these games trying to bring in LGBTQ representative and realistic female beauty or whatever failed pretty hard. Why are we even having pronoun involved when we are all anonymous users submitting feedbacks. Meanwhile games that don't give a damn and focus on attractive characters and gameplay simply do well this year. For the past few years a lot of multinational corp tried to promote DEI in order to get a better rating to cover ESG, and with the economy doing bad, DEI departments are the first to go because a lot has changed back to looking at numbers and focusing on MEI. And I don't know why this is controversial, because no matter what government talk about inclusiveness, never have immigration policy with the goal to achieve diversity, but they have skilled migration which is merit based, and it is far less about identity but on merits.
Even if they never intend to listen to the feedback of one segment of the community, because implementing their suggestions would piss off a wider segment of their community, it doesn’t mean they have to let them be exposed to bullying or general toxic backlash.
Now I wasn’t present for those phases of the pre-beta, so to stress I didn’t observe this myself. I’ve no reason to doubt either, just can’t corroborate that.
For me ‘this stuff doesn’t matter, it’s about gameplay’ works both ways, and it’s kind of a cop-out. If that were the case, having LGBT characters or a female lead who wasn’t sexy wouldn’t matter right?
I think this does matter to many consumers, so I don’t blame FG for catering to it if they want to be successful. But don’t have people be insulted for the mere suggestion of such things.
I think it’s much more a case of ‘we don’t want unattractive female characters or LGBT ones in our game’ than ‘we shouldn’t worry about such things, it’s all about the gameplay’.
But it is what it is, me disliking a trend doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, otherwise Trump would never have become President
User was warned for this post
|
I hope they can pull it off. I play a decent variety of RTS games, but honestly none have stuck the same way wc3 and sc1/2 did for me.
Aside from those two the ones which I have enjoyed the most did have a more unique twist like company of heroes (also helps I'm a fan of history), northgard, steel division with the deck system and phases.
Otherwise in my opinion if the game is too close to wc3/sc2 I end up just wondering why don't I just go play those games. Although the remaster also soured me on wc3 quite a bit lol
|
On September 13 2024 21:37 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 20:08 KingzTig wrote:On September 13 2024 18:00 Cyro wrote:
Yeah they made and managed that environment. It set off immediate red flags for me.
It was also generally hostile towards women and queer peeple, the mods did a horrible job with that stuff and FG appointed them and then never stepped in when it got bad. It bled into a lot of the feedback when somebody would submit feedback for devs, it had to be done in a public thread and then they would get flooded with hundreds of posts from trolls saying e.g. that they didn't want female units in the millitaries because of "woke" and so on. It was unmoderated and unavoidable.
One of the mods with the backing of the mod team and FG even gave out a warning to a victim because they protested against a troll intentionally , maliciously, repeatedly referring to them with the wrong pronouns, and this was apparently making a scene about "politics" in the chat.
The game launched with no block function.
If they don't want that whole segment of the population to touch the community because it's a waste dump, then fine - but they can't be shocked when the player counts and the game design suffer for it. No way you are trying to blame SG failure on political crap, and the loss in audience would have gone both way. And if anything to go by this year, all of these games trying to bring in LGBTQ representative and realistic female beauty or whatever failed pretty hard. Why are we even having pronoun involved when we are all anonymous users submitting feedbacks. Meanwhile games that don't give a damn and focus on attractive characters and gameplay simply do well this year. For the past few years a lot of multinational corp tried to promote DEI in order to get a better rating to cover ESG, and with the economy doing bad, DEI departments are the first to go because a lot has changed back to looking at numbers and focusing on MEI. And I don't know why this is controversial, because no matter what government talk about inclusiveness, never have immigration policy with the goal to achieve diversity, but they have skilled migration which is merit based, and it is far less about identity but on merits. Even if they never intend to listen to the feedback of one segment of the community, because implementing their suggestions would piss off a wider segment of their community, it doesn’t mean they have to let them be exposed to bullying or general toxic backlash. Now I wasn’t present for those phases of the pre-beta, so to stress I didn’t observe this myself. I’ve no reason to doubt either, just can’t corroborate that. For me ‘this stuff doesn’t matter, it’s about gameplay’ works both ways, and it’s kind of a cop-out. If that were the case, having LGBT characters or a female lead who wasn’t sexy wouldn’t matter right? I think this does matter to many consumers, so I don’t blame FG for catering to it if they want to be successful. But don’t have people be insulted for the mere suggestion of such things. I think it’s much more a case of ‘we don’t want unattractive female characters or LGBT ones in our game’ than ‘we shouldn’t worry about such things, it’s all about the gameplay’. But it is what it is, me disliking a trend doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, otherwise Trump would never have become President
I was in the alpha and generally speaking i can back everything Cyro has been telling in this entire thread since the beginning. For LGBT unfortunately i cannot say, maybe i didn't look hard enough at all the subchannels, but I would have no reason to doubt it either since everything else they mentioned was true. Feedback on art style was immediate from the alpha. I don't quite recall a lot of fake positivity either, it was more in the vein of "but we understand it s an alpha and things could change" and not really "omg stfu you re wrong this is the best". Weird thing though is that the performance was quite bad even with this artstyle. It could have been understood if it were to get better frame rate on lower end PC but that wasnt the case. After that i limited myself to strategy channels, unit and control feedback (hotkeys, aerial units, visibility issues with large armies etc) and then as nothing seemed to really improve i gave up and left and removed the game from steam and by PC during the beta phase.
I would imagine as the beta was more open than the alpha the channels easily went out of hand.
Also FS is not 2012 it s 2009
User was warned for this post
|
On September 13 2024 21:11 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 20:08 KingzTig wrote:On September 13 2024 18:00 Cyro wrote:
Yeah they made and managed that environment. It set off immediate red flags for me.
It was also generally hostile towards women and queer peeple, the mods did a horrible job with that stuff and FG appointed them and then never stepped in when it got bad. It bled into a lot of the feedback when somebody would submit feedback for devs, it had to be done in a public thread and then they would get flooded with hundreds of posts from trolls saying e.g. that they didn't want female units in the millitaries because of "woke" and so on. It was unmoderated and unavoidable.
One of the mods with the backing of the mod team and FG even gave out a warning to a victim because they protested against a troll intentionally , maliciously, repeatedly referring to them with the wrong pronouns, and this was apparently making a scene about "politics" in the chat.
The game launched with no block function.
If they don't want that whole segment of the population to touch the community because it's a waste dump, then fine - but they can't be shocked when the player counts and the game design suffer for it. No way you are trying to blame SG failure on political crap, and the loss in audience would have gone both way. And if anything to go by this year, all of these games trying to bring in LGBTQ representative and realistic female beauty or whatever failed pretty hard. Why are we even having pronoun involved when we are all anonymous users submitting feedbacks. Meanwhile games that don't give a damn and focus on attractive characters and gameplay simply do well this year. For the past few years a lot of multinational corp tried to promote DEI in order to get a better rating to cover ESG, and with the economy doing bad, DEI departments are the first to go because a lot has changed back to looking at numbers and focusing on MEI. And I don't know why this is controversial, because no matter what government talk about inclusiveness, never have immigration policy with the goal to achieve diversity, but they have skilled migration which is merit based, and it is far less about identity but on merits. this topic ends here, full stop it's effectively politics/ideology, and there are plenty of other TL threads where ya'll can argue such topics and get banned for it
Emerging trends in game design can be discussed in the Video Game Industry thread.
|
On September 13 2024 21:37 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 20:08 KingzTig wrote:On September 13 2024 18:00 Cyro wrote:
Yeah they made and managed that environment. It set off immediate red flags for me.
It was also generally hostile towards women and queer peeple, the mods did a horrible job with that stuff and FG appointed them and then never stepped in when it got bad. It bled into a lot of the feedback when somebody would submit feedback for devs, it had to be done in a public thread and then they would get flooded with hundreds of posts from trolls saying e.g. that they didn't want female units in the millitaries because of "woke" and so on. It was unmoderated and unavoidable.
One of the mods with the backing of the mod team and FG even gave out a warning to a victim because they protested against a troll intentionally , maliciously, repeatedly referring to them with the wrong pronouns, and this was apparently making a scene about "politics" in the chat.
The game launched with no block function.
If they don't want that whole segment of the population to touch the community because it's a waste dump, then fine - but they can't be shocked when the player counts and the game design suffer for it. No way you are trying to blame SG failure on political crap, and the loss in audience would have gone both way. And if anything to go by this year, all of these games trying to bring in LGBTQ representative and realistic female beauty or whatever failed pretty hard. Why are we even having pronoun involved when we are all anonymous users submitting feedbacks. Meanwhile games that don't give a damn and focus on attractive characters and gameplay simply do well this year. For the past few years a lot of multinational corp tried to promote DEI in order to get a better rating to cover ESG, and with the economy doing bad, DEI departments are the first to go because a lot has changed back to looking at numbers and focusing on MEI. And I don't know why this is controversial, because no matter what government talk about inclusiveness, never have immigration policy with the goal to achieve diversity, but they have skilled migration which is merit based, and it is far less about identity but on merits. Even if they never intend to listen to the feedback of one segment of the community, because implementing their suggestions would piss off a wider segment of their community, it doesn’t mean they have to let them be exposed to bullying or general toxic backlash. Now I wasn’t present for those phases of the pre-beta, so to stress I didn’t observe this myself. I’ve no reason to doubt either, just can’t corroborate that. For me ‘this stuff doesn’t matter, it’s about gameplay’ works both ways, and it’s kind of a cop-out. If that were the case, having LGBT characters or a female lead who wasn’t sexy wouldn’t matter right? I think this does matter to many consumers, so I don’t blame FG for catering to it if they want to be successful. But don’t have people be insulted for the mere suggestion of such things. I think it’s much more a case of ‘we don’t want unattractive female characters or LGBT ones in our game’ than ‘we shouldn’t worry about such things, it’s all about the gameplay’. But it is what it is, me disliking a trend doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, otherwise Trump would never have become President
well, this is by far the least bad mistake compared to not changing up the visual art style right from the alpha.
Though I suspect there's an element of using cartoon graphics to make sure the game isn't too demanding to run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
