|
On August 23 2023 23:25 parkin wrote:
I think all the NDA contracts, secrecy and silence is actually hurting them. For me it is a warning flag when companies do stuff like that instead of transparency.
It would be better to let the content creators talk about the game for publicity even with a few unpolished things that can be fixed eventually.
I am split on this. Looking at how hardly they are judged based on snippets I would absolutely not agree with your sentiment.
I do agree that it hurts them since they are stretching the line between people wanting more and people losing interest. But showing too much early on when it clearly still lacks fundamentals would probably be not great either
|
They don't necessarily have to show more but what they show has to be good and it isn't. It's mostly average. I understand the dilemma they're dealing with since their budget is limited and they still want to hype up the game but they're not dealing with it well.
|
- Alternatively, build a rich and powerful 'sandbox' rts (more innovative and still partly within blizzard spirit) and let the community build mods and have its own popularity contest
Could be great, except it's a free to play game.They've already stated map editor will ship with the game.
So if the public can make free campaigns and mods where does the monetisation come from, skins? More clarification is needed on how they will make enough money from the game.
|
|
|
Mexico2170 Posts
Just saw the infernal host trailer. The gameplay looked coo, with some interesting units.
But I agree infernal host is a terrible name. It's like calling Protoss "golden armada" you can use the term and it¿s cool in some context, but not as the name of the faction.
And I do think they need better marketing, simply because as we see with the cmments, a lot of people here aren't liking the five 3 second clips sticked together as a trailer every few months.
|
On August 28 2023 18:00 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Could be great, except it's a free to play game.They've already stated map editor will ship with the game.
So if the public can make free campaigns and mods where does the monetisation come from, skins? More clarification is needed on how they will make enough money from the game.
Yeah unclear to me as well. I was also suggesting that purely selfishly. It sounds abstractly right that a sandboxy game is even worse for f2p. Perhaps spin it as a platform for user generated content and share revenue :D (not that I seriously think it would work)
|
Northern Ireland25875 Posts
On August 29 2023 06:19 teapot_ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2023 18:00 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Could be great, except it's a free to play game.They've already stated map editor will ship with the game.
So if the public can make free campaigns and mods where does the monetisation come from, skins? More clarification is needed on how they will make enough money from the game. Yeah unclear to me as well. I was also suggesting that purely selfishly. It sounds abstractly right that a sandboxy game is even worse for f2p. Perhaps spin it as a platform for user generated content and share revenue :D (not that I seriously think it would work)
Fortnite does plenty of that and last I heard that was pretty successful. Different demographic and type of game of course, and they’re doubling down on some of it.
I think ultimately if the game kicks ass it’ll hit a sweet spot and niche that many are kinda desperate for and will probably support, and hopefully bring some new converts.
The release model and whatnot though does feel tricky. F2P for at least multiplayer feels the way to go, but monetising it subsequently is tough as RTS can only do so much with skins, distinguishing units being so crucial and all,
I think I threw down like 150 quid or so overall on SC2 through its lifespan as well I love RTS and it was a great game, and I’m sure I’m not alone.
I’m also intrigued as to how locked down this game will be. Will it be like SC2 and completely tied to the developer and their server system, or will some room for community solutions be there.
I think the folks in here are being a bit hyper-critical at times, no bad thing I believe it exemplifies quite how much of an appetite there is for such a title if it ends up being any good
|
yeah the infernal host sounds like a hot chick who brings you to your table at applebees.
|
Northern Ireland25875 Posts
On August 29 2023 09:48 RogerChillingworth wrote:
yeah the infernal host sounds like a hot chick who brings you to your table at applebees.
Did laugh at that, if not it’s almost certainly an account on Onlyfans anyway
That said amongst all the criticisms here it strikes me as the most nitpicky. Folks will just call them the infernals or infs or whatever
Could be something unique that rolls off the tongue and be better sure, Zerg and Protoss kind of thing. Equally WC3 literally had humans and undead (who calls them the Scourge?) and it was one of the RTS GOATs
|
Haha, i agree that the chat about monetization is more interesting. I'm still thinkin up a good name tho. a lot of the good ones are taken. The Flood from Halo was great. Even the Covenant was sweet. But see, the word following "The" needs to be singular, or rather an uncountable noun—an amorphous collection of stuff. otherwise like Phantom said it just gets icky in certain contexts.
We belabored this in the last page so i won't keep harping on it but i'm gonna be in the background, laying in bed like a frozen hotdog, bug-eyed like Oppenheimer, cookin up a good name to replace applebees lady.
|
On August 29 2023 09:34 WombaT wrote:
Fortnite does plenty of that and last I heard that was pretty successful. Different demographic and type of game of course, and they’re doubling down on some of it.
But this is probably something you grow into if the game is massively successful, not something you can realistically start with.
I hope they make enough money with pay to play single player campaigns to break even. If they introduce additional QoL/cosmetic changes behind a subscription model or one time purchase it's also fine. I Just hope they don't introduce smelly ingame economics with a virtual currency of some sorts.
For long term support they can always beg for money (wikipedia model / recent sc2 tournaments) if they had only a limited commercial success and a passionate community.
On August 29 2023 09:34 WombaT wrote:
I’m also intrigued as to how locked down this game will be. Will it be like SC2 and completely tied to the developer and their server system, or will some room for community solutions be there.
With f2p I see it unlikely that it wouldn't be locked down. Perhaps they could transition if they move to the beggar business model :p
|
Afaik they will sell campaing chapters periodically as well as "Warchests/ battlepass" with cosmetics you have to play and pay and probably some extra special skins
|
hmmm yeah, we've heard that single player content is gonna be monetized, but maybe co-op stuff will be too? i'm not too familiar with it but i know co-op commander did well in sc2.
when it comes to monetizing user generated content, it feels a bit like 11D chess. i would hate to see the vibe of the community of map makers turn into some profit-motivated competition. i think it'd be sweet if things were open and collaborative--but all that becomes tricky when you introduce the promise of some juicy $$ into the equation. but i also think we're probably past the point of people pouring hundreds of hours into maps without -some- kind of incentive structure. i feel like this element of monetization, if there will be one for ugc at all, is very complex and should be handled with care.
admittedly, i plan on making some pretty involved stuff inside the stormgate editor, if things go well and people end up playing the game, so i'm very interested to see how this develops. to me, the editor feels like the part of the iceberg that's underwater, where the other pillars of the game are the top part. just so much to think about and explore there.
|
I think it's safe to say Stormgate is looking to be the best game of the shown in production RTS. The level of polish is unparalleled!
|
Surely you are payed by them, no?
|
On September 04 2023 06:32 CicadaSC wrote:
I think it's safe to say Stormgate is looking to be the best game of the shown in production RTS. The level of polish is unparalleled!
Zerospace actually looks quite a bit further along in pretty much all aspects so far...
and Tempest Rising is a bit too much C&C for my taste but the critics say it will at least be the next best thing for singleplayer RTS experience
|
Northern Ireland25875 Posts
On September 04 2023 17:46 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2023 06:32 CicadaSC wrote:
I think it's safe to say Stormgate is looking to be the best game of the shown in production RTS. The level of polish is unparalleled! Zerospace actually looks quite a bit further along in pretty much all aspects so far... and Tempest Rising is a bit too much C&C for my taste but the critics say it will at least be the next best thing for singleplayer RTS experience
DORF is the clear front runner despite having the worst name I can remember a game having.
There’s a fair few RTS projects that look to have the potential to be good and give a few tens or hundreds of hours of fun.
Only Stormgate looks thus far to have the potential to give years of it, and it may yet drop the ball there.
In the same sense the the Bethesda Dooms, or a game like Warhammer 40K Boltgun were excellent playthroughs but they haven’t really lead to a long term resurgence of those kind of games.
|
On September 04 2023 17:46 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2023 06:32 CicadaSC wrote:
I think it's safe to say Stormgate is looking to be the best game of the shown in production RTS. The level of polish is unparalleled! Zerospace actually looks quite a bit further along in pretty much all aspects so far... and Tempest Rising is a bit too much C&C for my taste but the critics say it will at least be the next best thing for singleplayer RTS experience
Sure, but when i look at zerospace it looks more like a mod tbh, while further along and playable already, it just doesn't look "polished". Stormgate on the other hand didn't have certain things in place yet and done, but what they showed certainly has a certain 'blizzard polish' to it, where it actually looks and feels pretty professional.
It's imo a little like comparing a low budget scifi film which has to cut corners quite a bit to sell the illusion, vs a high budget film which can allocate ressources a lot more effectively.
I understand that some people simply don't like the graphic style of stormgate and that is fair enough, but when i look at the things showcased it feels cohesive and well realized, zerospace cannot compete vs that. It might play better (hard to say), but imo it's not even close when it comes to production value.
|
i'd like them to charge an annual fee to play one of their ladders. they can have a separate ladder that is F2P. this allows them to ban hackers and keep them off the paid mode of play. a high ranking on the paid ladder will be taken more seriously because it is carefully policed. The annual fee pays for the oversight.
|
On September 04 2023 22:12 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
i'd like them to charge an annual fee to play one of their ladders. they can have a separate ladder that is F2P. this allows them to ban hackers and keep them off the paid mode of play. a high ranking on the paid ladder will be taken more seriously because it is carefully policed. The annual fee pays for the oversight.
A two-class society, hell yeah!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
