On October 22 2023 02:42 Slydie wrote: Sorry for being the devil's advocate here, but I have problems seeing how the game is better than SC2 in terms of both graphics and physics. It has been 13 years, and I want it to show!
Maybe they could have struck a deal making it in the SC2 engine, saving a LOT of time?
Are my expectations too high, or can these things be improved a lot before release?
Why do you think physics and graphics matter?
Like a lot of life, how attractive something is only draws you to that thing in the first place. This is why we see studios cheat on their trailers to make their games look better than they actually do (Pretty easy to look up examples of Ubisoft doing this!). Sure, it's good for sales and makes sense to do, but dev resources are limited and I'd respect if Stormgate is putting resources more directly into 'actual game dev' than graphical polish at this point.
With that said, I think your expectations are too high. Physics was a 'selling feature' in SC2's release because Blizzard had the dev budget to fit it in and it was a novel feature to sell as an improvement over its prequel. Physics itself has zero gameplay interaction and is purely aesthetic. While aesthetics do have value, -design- is where the efforts should be focused imo, as all of us RTS-heads are gonna care a fuckload more about readability and clarity in fights than we are ragdoll physics. Given that clarity and readability are design focuses, there's a limited amount you can do with typical 'graphical fidelity' with those design constraints. WC3 reforged is an excellent example - it simultaneously looks 'better' and like complete shit at the same time.
There's room for the game to look better, but those are graphical DESIGN issues, which isn't something made easier by 13 years having passed.
Thanks for the responses.
So essentially, this game might have been better if it were a mod of a 13 year old game?
Looking at the amazing improvements in other games, I have to say it is a bit sad if RTS graphics/physics peaked 13 years ago.
Given that resources and that gameplay and strategy are core elements, I understand that making more graphic Bells and whistles than sc2 might be hard, but looking worse than sc2 feels a bit cheap to me, and tells me this will struggle to reach a broad audience.
I think you can only say something about how good the engine handling is once you played the game yourself. They stated their goal was to make it more responsive than SC2 and people who have touched the game seem to agree that even in the state right now it is at least as responsive as SC2. They also wanted to change some of the unit behavior, movement etc. which led to some problems in SC2. I think a mod in SC2 at most could have had some bandaid fixes, which could be seen in the BW mod in SC2.
I don't think there is an excuse for the graphics though, also most of it is a design choice I just personally don't like at all. To me it also looks much worse than SC2 and SC2 didn't even have good graphics, but very good design imho.
On October 22 2023 02:42 Slydie wrote: Sorry for being the devil's advocate here, but I have problems seeing how the game is better than SC2 in terms of both graphics and physics. It has been 13 years, and I want it to show!
Maybe they could have struck a deal making it in the SC2 engine, saving a LOT of time?
Are my expectations too high, or can these things be improved a lot before release?
Why do you think physics and graphics matter?
Like a lot of life, how attractive something is only draws you to that thing in the first place. This is why we see studios cheat on their trailers to make their games look better than they actually do (Pretty easy to look up examples of Ubisoft doing this!). Sure, it's good for sales and makes sense to do, but dev resources are limited and I'd respect if Stormgate is putting resources more directly into 'actual game dev' than graphical polish at this point.
With that said, I think your expectations are too high. Physics was a 'selling feature' in SC2's release because Blizzard had the dev budget to fit it in and it was a novel feature to sell as an improvement over its prequel. Physics itself has zero gameplay interaction and is purely aesthetic. While aesthetics do have value, -design- is where the efforts should be focused imo, as all of us RTS-heads are gonna care a fuckload more about readability and clarity in fights than we are ragdoll physics. Given that clarity and readability are design focuses, there's a limited amount you can do with typical 'graphical fidelity' with those design constraints. WC3 reforged is an excellent example - it simultaneously looks 'better' and like complete shit at the same time.
There's room for the game to look better, but those are graphical DESIGN issues, which isn't something made easier by 13 years having passed.
Thanks for the responses.
So essentially, this game might have been better if it were a mod of a 13 year old game?
Looking at the amazing improvements in other games, I have to say it is a bit sad if RTS graphics/physics peaked 13 years ago.
Given that resources and that gameplay and strategy are core elements, I understand that making more graphic Bells and whistles than sc2 might be hard, but looking worse than sc2 feels a bit cheap to me, and tells me this will struggle to reach a broad audience.
Imo it's all too big to effectively control. Vampire Survivors is a shitty looking indie game and blew up because it's good/addictive and got streamed/shared. They Are Billions got traction in RTS spheres and looks fine/good, but hardly revolutionary artistically. Simply put, I don't think visuals matter as much for overall sales these days below AAA spheres because the game simply being good/fun will push it further.
-e- also, mod of another game no. Built in UE4/5 or something sure, but that's afaik a business level decision more than anything.
I think we reached the pinnacle of RTS physics on the SC2 underwater maps where a blown up roach streams upwards towards the user :D What more do you want of physics?
Stormgate is pretty competitive already with organized Alpha tournaments and stuff. Best player right now seems to be BigBoyParting
Hi all, I'm back on TL.net after 9 years because of Stormgate after leaving because of SC2.
Anyway, I was wary of yet another RTS but am now cautiously optimistic after watching Artosis's interview with Monk and Torch. Found myself actually generally agreeing with their approach as opposed to how David Browder and David Kim interpreted TL's feedback during WoL development. To me it always felt like they missed the point entirely when TL gave feedback on SC2.
As far as I can tell, this is the only RTS trying to create a real successor to Brood War. Every other RTS seems to be catering more towards strategy-minded folks. Brood War is more like a fighting game than a strategy game, so I'm stoked to see them pay attention to what made Brood War tick.
On October 29 2023 14:33 LunarC wrote: Hi all, I'm back on TL.net after 9 years because of Stormgate after leaving because of SC2.
Anyway, I was wary of yet another RTS but am now cautiously optimistic after watching Artosis's interview with Monk and Torch. Found myself actually generally agreeing with their approach as opposed to how David Browder and David Kim interpreted TL's feedback during WoL development. To me it always felt like they missed the point entirely when TL gave feedback on SC2.
As far as I can tell, this is the only RTS trying to create a real successor to Brood War. Every other RTS seems to be catering more towards strategy-minded folks. Brood War is more like a fighting game than a strategy game, so I'm stoked to see them pay attention to what made Brood War tick.
It looks more like a mix of Warcraft economy and sc2. There will never be a successor to BW because the game is as good as it could be. If you somehow managed to make a game 90% as good and a "successor" with most of the things that made BW great, people would just play BW anyway. It s a lazy target.
I don't want a successor to BW, i want a great RTS that i can play along BW. It needs to be good in its own way, and not merely a tribute that somehow gets good.
Get a good lore, get a good campaign, graphics/mechanics, good online platform (let s face it bnet 2.0 is terrible and lonely), good multiplayer modes to play with friends. And the game will take off. I don't like the fallacy of making a solid esport title from scratch. If the game is good it ll become good esport, but developing for esport just means giving out cash to artificially prop a game, and being too touchy on endless patches as soon as something looks slightly broken.
On October 29 2023 14:33 LunarC wrote: Hi all, I'm back on TL.net after 9 years because of Stormgate after leaving because of SC2.
Anyway, I was wary of yet another RTS but am now cautiously optimistic after watching Artosis's interview with Monk and Torch. Found myself actually generally agreeing with their approach as opposed to how David Browder and David Kim interpreted TL's feedback during WoL development. To me it always felt like they missed the point entirely when TL gave feedback on SC2.
As far as I can tell, this is the only RTS trying to create a real successor to Brood War. Every other RTS seems to be catering more towards strategy-minded folks. Brood War is more like a fighting game than a strategy game, so I'm stoked to see them pay attention to what made Brood War tick.
It looks more like a mix of Warcraft economy and sc2. There will never be a successor to BW because the game is as good as it could be. If you somehow managed to make a game 90% as good and a "successor" with most of the things that made BW great, people would just play BW anyway. It s a lazy target.
I don't want a successor to BW, i want a great RTS that i can play along BW. It needs to be good in its own way, and not merely a tribute that somehow gets good.
Get a good lore, get a good campaign, graphics/mechanics, good online platform (let s face it bnet 2.0 is terrible and lonely), good multiplayer modes to play with friends. And the game will take off. I don't like the fallacy of making a solid esport title from scratch. If the game is good it ll become good esport, but developing for esport just means giving out cash to artificially prop a game, and being too touchy on endless patches as soon as something looks slightly broken.
I agree with your points, I was imprecise using the word "successor". I was specifically referring to what makes Brood War micro/macro fun to execute. It seems the designers are taking lessons from Brood War when it comes to how it feels to actually physically play the game. And no, I'm not advocating for carpal tunnel-inducing APM requirements, I'm talking about how snappy the game feels overall.
On October 29 2023 14:33 LunarC wrote: Hi all, I'm back on TL.net after 9 years because of Stormgate after leaving because of SC2.
Anyway, I was wary of yet another RTS but am now cautiously optimistic after watching Artosis's interview with Monk and Torch. Found myself actually generally agreeing with their approach as opposed to how David Browder and David Kim interpreted TL's feedback during WoL development. To me it always felt like they missed the point entirely when TL gave feedback on SC2.
As far as I can tell, this is the only RTS trying to create a real successor to Brood War. Every other RTS seems to be catering more towards strategy-minded folks. Brood War is more like a fighting game than a strategy game, so I'm stoked to see them pay attention to what made Brood War tick.
It looks more like a mix of Warcraft economy and sc2. There will never be a successor to BW because the game is as good as it could be. If you somehow managed to make a game 90% as good and a "successor" with most of the things that made BW great, people would just play BW anyway. It s a lazy target.
I don't want a successor to BW, i want a great RTS that i can play along BW. It needs to be good in its own way, and not merely a tribute that somehow gets good.
Get a good lore, get a good campaign, graphics/mechanics, good online platform (let s face it bnet 2.0 is terrible and lonely), good multiplayer modes to play with friends. And the game will take off. I don't like the fallacy of making a solid esport title from scratch. If the game is good it ll become good esport, but developing for esport just means giving out cash to artificially prop a game, and being too touchy on endless patches as soon as something looks slightly broken.
I agree with your points, I was imprecise using the word "successor". I was specifically referring to what makes Brood War micro/macro fun to execute. It seems the designers are taking lessons from Brood War when it comes to how it feels to actually physically play the game. And no, I'm not advocating for carpal tunnel-inducing APM requirements, I'm talking about how snappy the game feels overall.
It’s been what, 2 or 3 years that they have been at it, and the latest gameplay is the result? Prime example of trying to be everything, everywhere, and please everyone, yes it makes for a cute comfortable game that you would enjoy over a weekend and then not open again. What made all the best strategy games of all time great was that they where not focused on trying to be great but rather they where focused on doing there own thing, their own storyline, their own idea, their own concept. This game here is not original in any aspect, and it shows in the gameplay. Copy pasting even really old concepts will only get you so far
On November 10 2023 16:31 RickyHorny456 wrote: Not interesting at all. Skip this game
RickyHorny456's other reviews:
"bad" "ARRIVED BROKEN!!!" "wish it came in cornflower blue" "ahwef shity" "HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO SHAVE W/ THIS" "WAY worse than transformers 4" "site said these were velcro.." "made me bleed from my $^&#$^" "zack snyder's best"
On October 31 2023 08:51 pebble444 wrote: It’s been what, 2 or 3 years that they have been at it, and the latest gameplay is the result? Prime example of trying to be everything, everywhere, and please everyone, yes it makes for a cute comfortable game that you would enjoy over a weekend and then not open again. What made all the best strategy games of all time great was that they where not focused on trying to be great but rather they where focused on doing there own thing, their own storyline, their own idea, their own concept. This game here is not original in any aspect, and it shows in the gameplay. Copy pasting even really old concepts will only get you so far
I think what is going to make SG great is the pathing and the engine. Usually new RTS games focus too much on mechanics and unit abilities, just for them to move awfully. The best RTS games even old ones had the best engines of their time. SG started at this by creating their own engine which works with Unreal Engine 5 graphics. Creating their own engine which allows units to flow through obstacles like water, which is incredible. We both play brood war where getting up a ramp is a skill, but I think we can appreciate the work that went into the engine, and that took majority of the time so far. I think the game as you have said is going to be a mix of WC3 and SC2, I'd hope the gameplay becomes more complex with time and development of other races. The gameplay that we have seen is akin to a TvT sadly
On November 16 2023 06:03 Mutaller wrote: The best RTS games even old ones had the best engines of their time.
Starcraft1 was the best RTS game from 1999 to 2003 and it was not the"best engine" of its time. It was jammed together by a hermit coder in a matter of weeks. It had a bazillion problems. Patrick Wyatt chronicled these issues quite well in a blog series called "code of honor".
On November 16 2023 06:03 Mutaller wrote: The best RTS games even old ones had the best engines of their time.
Starcraft1 was the best RTS game from 1999 to 2003 and it was not the"best engine" of its time. It was jammed together by a hermit coder in a matter of weeks. It had a bazillion problems. Patrick Wyatt chronicled these issues quite well in a blog series called "code of honor".
Thanks for mentioning that blog, it was an interesting read.
However, I didn't interpret it the way you do. That it might have been crippled with issues that made the programmers' life hard makes it 'bad' for that aspect. But the engine was worked on for multiple years and it can still be the 'best' from a gamer's perspective.
Also noteworthy, Patrick Wyatt is someone more provably worth following than the stormgate ppl. Turns out he's working on "Spellcraft" (lol) which should be playable already. It's also in alpha. But it's not exactly an rts, it's a real-time battler of some sorts.
EDIT: well checked out the steam page today for the first time, they are discontinuing the spellcraft game (breaking news from today). So much for that.
On November 16 2023 06:03 Mutaller wrote: The best RTS games even old ones had the best engines of their time.
Starcraft1 was the best RTS game from 1999 to 2003 and it was not the"best engine" of its time. It was jammed together by a hermit coder in a matter of weeks. It had a bazillion problems. Patrick Wyatt chronicled these issues quite well in a blog series called "code of honor".
Thanks for mentioning that blog, it was an interesting read.
However, I didn't interpret it the way you do. That it might have been crippled with issues that made the programmers' life hard makes it 'bad' for that aspect. But the engine was worked on for multiple years and it can still be the 'best' from a gamer's perspective.
Also noteworthy, Patrick Wyatt is someone more provably worth following than the stormgate ppl. Turns out he's working on "Spellcraft" (lol) which should be playable already. It's also in alpha. But it's not exactly an rts, it's a real-time battler of some sorts.
EDIT: well checked out the steam page today for the first time, they are discontinuing the spellcraft game (breaking news from today). So much for that.
Guess hermit coding can only do so much, or is a thing of the past.
On November 16 2023 06:03 Mutaller wrote: The best RTS games even old ones had the best engines of their time.
Starcraft1 was the best RTS game from 1999 to 2003 and it was not the"best engine" of its time. It was jammed together by a hermit coder in a matter of weeks. It had a bazillion problems. Patrick Wyatt chronicled these issues quite well in a blog series called "code of honor".
Thanks for mentioning that blog, it was an interesting read.
However, I didn't interpret it the way you do. That it might have been crippled with issues that made the programmers' life hard makes it 'bad' for that aspect. But the engine was worked on for multiple years and it can still be the 'best' from a gamer's perspective.
Also noteworthy, Patrick Wyatt is someone more provably worth following than the stormgate ppl. Turns out he's working on "Spellcraft" (lol) which should be playable already. It's also in alpha. But it's not exactly an rts, it's a real-time battler of some sorts.
EDIT: well checked out the steam page today for the first time, they are discontinuing the spellcraft game (breaking news from today). So much for that.
Guess hermit coding can only do so much, or is a thing of the past.
Compare it to someone like Stephen King who wrote while drunk and doing cocaine. It's a creative process, but you can't replicate it or survive doing it long term.
I just watched an interesting take on what makes a good RTS game. Most of you probably know it, but here it is anyway:
Some key points:
-Most players by a huge margin will not play competetively, but will be drawn in by a strong campaign. Make a great campaign!
-Fine-tuning balance and high-level mechanics is important for hardcore and vocal players, but they are few. It is more important to be able to do awesome, powerful things, particularly in the campaign.
-A free editor inviting players to make their own mods is crucial. It certainly was for both SC, WC3 and SC2, but now games like Minecraft and Roblocks have taken over the market for creative, young gamers. He claims RTS should stand for Real Time Sandbox.
For the new RTS games, I stand by that how the game will feel to play is going to be very important. I loved that part with SC2 from the very first time I touched the game. I am not convinced from what I have seen so far.
EPT
