EPTOn June 13 2022 06:03 Swisslink wrote:
Well, at least we saw the pictures in movement now... I guess.
Well, at least we saw the pictures in movement now... I guess.
Wait, is this the "more on Sunday" that was promised?
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread - Page 6
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Fanatic-Templar
Canada5819 Posts
Wait, is this the "more on Sunday" that was promised? | ||
|
TheDougler
Canada8320 Posts
That said, one of my IRL buddies loved it, so maybe different strokes for different folks. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
Yes the trailer was bad but it has nothing to do with the game and likely will be completely redone when the game releases. The success of the game will not depend on this trailer. Winters interview with the lead game designer was very good and we learned a lot about how he thinks about game design. | ||
|
Ashwag
2 Posts
| ||
|
TheSayo182
Italy243 Posts
we are proud to welcome the Stormgate's designers negationists | ||
|
Ashwag
2 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6343 Posts
On June 13 2022 18:20 Ashwag wrote: Great judgement. Because me doubting them based off what they presented and not believing in the "WE TELL YOU EVERYTHING YOU WANNA HEAR" is basically on the same level as denying genocide That escalated quickly... In any case all my hype has died down after the reveal to be honest. I have little to no expectations now that the game will be decent. Which is kind of a good thing, I won't be dissapointed but I can be pleasantly surprised if its good. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4445 Posts
What’s the rationale, make the user base as large as possible then sell them campaigns, missions, co-op modes etc? | ||
|
abuse
Latvia1945 Posts
The trailer did nothing for me. The screenshots look good and bad at the same time.. I like the art/colors but the camera is zoomed in too much and honestly - that's a deal-breaker. Even if you can zoom out, then the fact that they decided to show it at this zoom level already speaks volumes about the vision of what the gameplay is meant to be like. I just want big armies smashing against each other, with unit counters, worker harrassment and expanding, and have it done well. This doesn't look like that, sadly.. I'd be glad to be wrong in the end, but overall I'm cautiously pessimistic. EDIT: The F2P model is concerning but kind of understandable. For a RTS to be successful they need a lot of people to get into it, and F2P is by far the best way to make it happen. I'm just hoping they don't go overboard with it, but if I've learned anything from gaming over the past many years - that's a very naive thing to hope for. | ||
|
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
On June 13 2022 19:57 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Not a fan of making it Free to Play. What’s the rationale, make the user base as large as possible then sell them campaigns, missions, co-op modes etc? I think so. Their focus is making the RTS experience social. A big barrier of entry to social games is the price, so step 1 was removing that. | ||
|
Ludwigvan
Germany2371 Posts
*We see two dropships, each in the color of the marine it drops. So maybe a dropship can only carry one marine right now. The dropships fly down to drop the units. And then they fly away pretty fast. So maybe the dropships arent units. Maybe you can call down the mech like a MULE. Or like in C&C where new units are being brought by plane. Maybe the dropdown is one of the mechs abilities. *There are Tier 1 units. On the terran side these are soldiers. They dont have a high fire rate right now like the mechs. Maybe they have shotguns. * On the demon side the tier 1 units are some wolf like animals. They dont shoot and seem to be melee. They are fast units. *The demon might be a hero. He has some kind of battlecry. Maybe an attackspeed buff or something like that, maybe it affects the tier1 units around him as well. We dont see him fighting but he seems to be a meelee unit (trailer). * the mechs might be heroes as well but they dont use any spell. They just fire their machine guns. they have a very high fire rate. * We haven't seen buildings or resources yet. * The bottom cliffs are really high. But this only looks that way because we are closer to the ground than the game will probably be. | ||
|
TheSayo182
Italy243 Posts
they just built some units and make them move/shoot to show something, probably related to single player campaign too they don't even need to make fake promises because it's a free to play game, no day1 or pre-order bullshit are needed to scam players | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
It's about listening to an interview and it being clear that lead game designer has some clue about RTS game design. In contrast if you look at all other past RTS game developed since Sc2 the lead game designers had no clue what they were doing - hence making it very easy to predict they will fail. As I wrote in another post, every one of these other RTS games, it was so easy to predict they would fail far ahead of release - because everything about the game and the statements by the design team indicated so. That said; I have some concerns around lethality and army sizes. I personally prefer lethality closer to Sc2 and with regards to army size I am more inclined to increase it as opposed to going closer to Wc3. But I think their approach can work if the execution is good enough. Hence there is at least a possibility it can be a good game. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
I just want big armies smashing against each other, with unit counters, worker harassments and expanding, and have it done well. This doesn't look like that, sadly.. If I had to guess it also appear to me they are doing something that's a mix between Sc2 and Wc3. I am quite sure they will be able to create a good mix but it's not exactly my ideal game either. My ideal game would contain larger armies, fast movement and reaction speed with action and harassment all over the map. High lethality is only a concern if you cannot afford to lose your units, e.g. you look away for 1 second and lose your army --> GG. However, with fast production speed + defenders advantage, you can lose a portion of the game, survive and quickly rebuild to challenge the opponent again. It's possible they believe that large army sizes + fast paced game are too difficult too control for newer players and they may have a point. But I think that's really only true if macro still requires APM/focus. If you are developing a game where players control large armies and multitasking + even more micro potential than Sc2 --> you need to fully automate the macro-part if you want to appear to casuals. And I don't think they are doing such a drastic reinvention of RTS mechanics. Instead, I think they appear slightly more conservative and rather wants to improve upon what's already existing while finding a way to make it somewhat more appealing to a wider audience. | ||
|
Legan
Finland588 Posts
| ||
|
Miragee
8707 Posts
On June 13 2022 22:20 Hider wrote: If I had to guess it also appear to me they are doing something that's a mix between Sc2 and Wc3. I am quite sure they will be able to create a good mix but it's not exactly my ideal game either. My ideal game would contain larger armies, fast movement and reaction speed with action and harassment all over the map. High lethality is only a concern if you cannot afford to lose your units, e.g. you look away for 1 second and lose your army --> GG. However, with fast production speed + defenders advantage, you can lose a portion of the game, survive and quickly rebuild to challenge the opponent again. It's possible they believe that large army sizes + fast paced game are too difficult too control for newer players and they may have a point. But I think that's really only true if macro still requires APM/focus. If you are developing a game where players control large armies and multitasking + even more micro potential than Sc2 --> you need to fully automate the macro-part if you want to appear to casuals. And I don't think they are doing such a drastic reinvention of RTS mechanics. Instead, I think they appear slightly more conservative and rather wants to improve upon what's already existing while finding a way to make it somewhat more appealing to a wider audience. DoW2 did the "macro needs no focus" and it was complete garbage. I don't think you need to automate the macro part to appear to casuals. Casuals like building their bases and army in strategy games. The 20 minute no rush meme exists for a reason as it is really not that much of a meme. | ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey459 Posts
and with regards to army size I am more inclined to increase it as opposed to going closer to Wc3. Unless I missed something, they didn't say anything about having smaller armies on average. They talked about having a bigger variance in army sizes based on the faction you pick, ie. some armies will be bigger than the biggest armies in SC2 and some armies will be smaller than the smallest late game armies. Time-Stamped Source. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On June 14 2022 01:49 _Spartak_ wrote: Unless I missed something, they didn't say anything about having smaller armies on average. They talked about having a bigger variance in army sizes based on the faction you pick, ie. some armies will be bigger than the biggest armies in SC2 and some armies will be smaller than the smallest late game armies. Time-Stamped Source. That sounds pretty good tbh. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On June 13 2022 23:56 Miragee wrote: DoW2 did the "macro needs no focus" and it was complete garbage. I don't think you need to automate the macro part to appear to casuals. Casuals like building their bases and army in strategy games. The 20 minute no rush meme exists for a reason as it is really not that much of a meme. DoW2 did fast paced, responsive units, large scale armies with lots of multitasking and high skill cap micro? No that game looks like shit. That's why I always preface by saying the most essential part of the game is getting the great feeling of controlling the units right. If the "engine"/unit control feeling sucks - nothing else matters about the game - it will fail. And I like that Frost Giant seems to understand that the necessity. In contrast I think Immortals Gates of Pyre is dead on arrival because the unit control looks slow and uninspiring. A mistake I think every single past RTS studio has made is thinking that you can maintain the skillcap of a game like Sc2 by "reducing the speed of everything". However, the skillcap is generally correlated with the speed of primarily unit movement speed +responsiveness but also too some extent lethality. So if you both take away macromechanics and slow down everything, the game becomes uninteresting. It's definitely a possibility that Stormgate will fall into the same trap. If they make everything move and die much slower, they will have to compensate with more ability/spell-casting (wc3 micro) which I am not a fan of. As long as they maintain high movement speed of units and don't decrease lethality too much I think it can work though. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
| ||
