|
On August 25 2025 13:20 ChillFlame wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2025 13:01 ETisME wrote:
I am plenty sure there's another beta client. It could be the closed beta client
25k was a number referenced in discord a lot, either that is the total player or peak concurrent number of the open beta , I can't be sure. As I said, I'm from one of the earliest closed betas, and both clients were Steam only. If you have any links to the 25000 player count, it would be helpful.
This is what I found on discord
"stormgate had 1,243 average concurrent users in august last year. Tim M is on the record saying that the same timeframe had 300k unique users"
"There were more than 300k players who played during EA. That was just the number in the first month. Those also seem to be achievements from earlier missions. I don't have them for example because I started from mission 7 as I finished the first 6 during EA."
Not sure where 25000 came to but it's referenced on discord, maybe that's for the next fes?
|
Considering a self evaluation of 150 mil snd the ceo being caught faking stram reviews I would not exclude some of those numbers just being fake.
I consider anything coming out of SG that cant be independently verified to be questionable.
The consequence of being caught lying in the past.
As for the hype, there is undeniably a decent audience desperate for the next big rts. Interest in the concept was great but when EA came out and the public saw that the game just looked like shit all that evaporated like snow on the sun.
If you want to capture that audience you need to actually make a good game
|
I was wondering how the current ladder and game activity was going right now, is it relatively easy to find a game at the moment?
|
On August 25 2025 17:34 TelecoM wrote:
I was wondering how the current ladder and game activity was going right now, is it relatively easy to find a game at the moment?
You can still find 1v1 games. Custom lobbies are empty whenever I check. No idea about co-op.
There are about 116 concurrent players online at the time of writing.
|
On August 25 2025 09:54 ChillFlame wrote:
Not even 26k of KS backers.
I don't think we have that number, do we? Just concurrent peak. That means a lot more players in total than just 1000 (concurrent) that checked out the game at launch. Still, the retention seems to be horrible.
|
On August 25 2025 19:50 Miragee wrote:I don't think we have that number, do we? Just concurrent peak. That means a lot more players in total than just 1000 (concurrent) that checked out the game at launch. Still, the retention seems to be horrible.
I used 3-rd party website. Like https://gamalytic.com/game/2012510. It's not very accurate, but at least some numbers.
~5,7k weekly downloads with 234 average daily concurrent users. Seems believable.
Still my speculation, but it's based on *some* numbers. Sadly, I don't have a screenshot for the launch week.
|
On August 25 2025 17:34 TelecoM wrote:
I was wondering how the current ladder and game activity was going right now, is it relatively easy to find a game at the moment?
I still play most days, a few ladder games per session. I've never had an issue finding a game within 30 seconds or less. Although I went on a nice tear and hit 1800 MMR, then it took some time to find a game (and since then I've mostly got stomped by higher MMR players who were probably waiting for longer than me).
Despite all the discussion and drama regarding it, the game is still fun to me, but it definitely needs some more dopamine/spiky moments to actually draw in more people (not enough cool plays). The game needs a lot of work in many areas.
|
On August 25 2025 13:40 ETisME wrote:
This is what I found on discord
"stormgate had 1,243 average concurrent users in august last year. Tim M is on the record saying that the same timeframe had 300k unique users"
"There were more than 300k players who played during EA. That was just the number in the first month. Those also seem to be achievements from earlier missions. I don't have them for example because I started from mission 7 as I finished the first 6 during EA."
This gets into the wild and woolly debate about how to calculate daily concurrent users (CCU), daily active users (DAU), and monthly active users (MAU), and what those numbers even mean.
Steam helpfully gives us the CCU figures, but DAU and MAU are only known internally, so you sort of have to guess how many people logged in each day as a multiple of CCU, and how many people logged in each month as a multiple of DAU. The problem is that it depends greatly on usage patterns: are people likely to log in only once a month? For an RTS focused on 1v1, that seems unlikely.
But in any case, if you take an average 1,243 CCU for August 2024 (the month of EA launch) and multiply it by, say, 12, you get about 15,000 DAU. Then if you multiply that by 20, you get 300,000 MAU, which is what Frost Giant reported.
The problem for Frost Giant was that almost all of those people left after the first month and never returned. The second problem was that of those 100 or so remaining daily CCU (approx 24,000 MAU by the same estimates), most of them were playing 1v1 and there was literally nothing for them to purchase from the in-game store. So, great, 24K monthly users, but no actual income. Most of their income from game sales came from the EA launch month, which was an average of $3 per monthly user. It's pretty easy to see how this became unsustainable without constant infusions of cash from investors, which had to dry up at some point.
Not sure where 25000 came to but it's referenced on discord, maybe that's for the next fes?
I searched, and the only place that 25,000 comes up in relation to Stormgate is from a Kickstarter update, where they are celebrating reaching 25,000 backers. The campaign ended with just over 28,000 backers. I'm pretty sure this is the number being referenced in Discord.
|
We're flogging a dead horse at this point, but I cannot believe FG has been radio silent for three weeks since launch without saying a word nor patching the game. Will likely dip below 100 concurrent overnight today for the first time, back to the trough of EA numbers, as everyone predicted would occur once the 1k people who bought the campaign finished up. Yikes!
|
United Kingdom20323 Posts
On August 26 2025 08:02 Gescom wrote:
We're flogging a dead horse at this point, but I cannot believe FG has been radio silent for three weeks since launch without saying a word nor patching the game. Will likely dip below 100 concurrent overnight today for the first time, back to the trough of EA numbers, as everyone predicted would occur once the 1k people who bought the campaign finished up. Yikes!
At this point we are just waiting to see if the game is going to be bricked or not when they pack up
|
I'm pretty sure Tim will try one more time with 3v3.
Of course it will be underbaked like the rest of the modes.
I predict 300-500 CCU spike, 150 CCU 2 weeks after.
|
On August 26 2025 08:02 Gescom wrote:
We're flogging a dead horse at this point, but I cannot believe FG has been radio silent for three weeks since launch without saying a word nor patching the game. Will likely dip below 100 concurrent overnight today for the first time, back to the trough of EA numbers, as everyone predicted would occur once the 1k people who bought the campaign finished up. Yikes!
Having worked for companies that ran out of money, I can guess what's going on inside Frost Giant at the moment. Unless a miracle happens and Tim Morten's "encouraging conversations" turn into actual money, everyone is probably just sitting around updating their resumes. There would be no point in doing any work on the actual game if a new "potential partner" might suddenly show up and announce that most of them are laid off and the rest will be working on something totally different.
But the radio silence does make me doubt that we'll ever see the magical 3v3 mode that was supposed to save the day. Frost Giant promoted it endlessly right from the start, but when they did a closed beta a while back the overall feedback was "meh", and then we never heard anything about it again. Even before the launch disaster, the plan was to release it into "Sigma Labs", aka the "we're not even remotely done with this mode" section. I can't imagine that there is any energy or drive right now to make that happen, though.
|
There is a decent chance the engine simply cannot handle the unit count of a 3v3.
It would explain why the biggest feature setting SG apart from its competitors is missing.
|
How much actual idea behind the 3v3 has been revealed? What I mean is that SC2 has 3v3 and it kinda sorta works, but isn't really that much fun in the longer run.
I recall at some point it had talk about heroes and such, but was there ever any clear concept on how the 3v3 was supposed to tie in the players long term? I can see plenty of ideas that could work - but just like the campaign, implementing stuff is a lot of work on top of developing and maintaining all the other stuff they've already committed themselves into.
|
TBH I'm surprised there's so few public communication from the FGS team.
I'd expect them to do everything they can and keep people in loop if things are rough and they need people to keep playing and supporting the game.
Have they given up?
|
The 3v3 mode is supposed to be 100 supply per player, so the same overall as 1v1 (which is 300 supply per player).
I think they've mostly got their heads down and are working away. They'll probably start promoting the next patch when it's closer.
I don't think anyone is surprised the player count is what it is, after the small number of casuals that beat the campaign and play a few co-op missions and realize it's largely unfinished... no tournaments or big esports scene to attract talent for players to compete.
With so many polished options out there, I'm not really sure what they expected.
I'm still having fun laddering 1v1 and I look forward to trying 3v3 when it hopefully comes out next patch!
|
On August 26 2025 17:14 ScoutWBF wrote:
TBH I'm surprised there's so few public communication from the FGS team.
I'd expect them to do everything they can and keep people in loop if things are rough and they need people to keep playing and supporting the game.
Have they given up?
It's possible that they have. There is such a huge gap between the fantasy that Tim Morten kept pushing versus the reality of what happened at launch. It has to be demoralizing for the team.
It's not like anything they do at this point can raise enough money to keep them going. Their fate was sealed when launch peaked at 1,000 CCU.
|
Tim Morten's C&C: Generals 2 was planned to be a 3v3 focused game before it's cancelled, with each general or subfaction only having a small and incomplete set of units, so the players have to pick complementary subfactions to form a effective team. This way monetizable content will be much easier to make, whether it's subfactions or subfaction skins, just like a MOBA.
Stormgate's 3v3 or Team Mayhem was planned to have subfactions with access to only 5 unit types, so it seems the plan was the same as Generals 2, not sure if it's changed now.
The earliest attempt to make a MOBA-like RTS was probably C&C4: Tiberian Twilight, which during development was a multiplayer-only game named C&C: Arena. C&C4 has subfactions with the roles of defense/offense/support, but the player can switch to another subfaction in game if the main base is destoryed or self-destructed. It's certainly more flexible than Generals 2's system.
Beyond All Reason (and its predecessor Balanced Annihilation) also have team games with division of labour on some maps, but it's emergent gameplay and not because the players don't have access to some of the units. I think it's arguably more interesting this way.
|
On August 27 2025 11:36 qwerty4w wrote:
Tim Morten's C&C: Generals 2 was planned to be a 3v3 focused game before it's cancelled
The levels of foreshadowing are incredible, particularly if Stormgate ends up being cancelled before the 3v3 even comes out.
Someone on Reddit pointed out that the team never even answered the question of how the mode would be monetized. Right now the heroes are used only for co-op, and are all paid except for one. But that would essentially make the 3v3 mode pay-to-win. Someone had asked Frost Giant about that a year or so ago and they had only a vague answer.
|
On August 28 2025 02:54 Jeremy Reimer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2025 11:36 qwerty4w wrote:
Tim Morten's C&C: Generals 2 was planned to be a 3v3 focused game before it's cancelled The levels of foreshadowing are incredible, particularly if Stormgate ends up being cancelled before the 3v3 even comes out. Someone on Reddit pointed out that the team never even answered the question of how the mode would be monetized. Right now the heroes are used only for co-op, and are all paid except for one. But that would essentially make the 3v3 mode pay-to-win. Someone had asked Frost Giant about that a year or so ago and they had only a vague answer.
Damn, I miss those days when you paid a full price and got every mission, hero, and skin.
Damn Todd and his horse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
