EPTStormgate/Frost Giant Megathread - Page 64
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44896 Posts
| ||
|
Topin
Peru10085 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44896 Posts
On December 18 2023 02:40 Topin wrote: Moon is still active playing tons of wc3 so i guess he didnt have a lot of time to practice I guess they invited him because of his famous WC3 history then? As opposed to inviting a top Stormgate beta player who doesn't have the same popularity? | ||
|
Topin
Peru10085 Posts
On December 18 2023 02:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I guess they invited him because of his famous WC3 history then? As opposed to inviting a top Stormgate beta player who doesn't have the same popularity? i think so too, having Moon playing SG should be great PR for the game in KR/China | ||
|
AmericanUmlaut
Germany2578 Posts
| ||
|
Miragee
8566 Posts
Positives - lengths of fights is good - lots of back and forth - unit abilities seem strategically interesting so far; they are not "stim-buttons" in a sense, that there is no choice but to press them as soon as you enter combat - some interesting map mechanics (catapult etc.) Unsure - defenders advantage: There seem to be some systems in place, such as worker boost and defensive minions in controlled camps, however I'm not sure it's enough. A huge part of defender's advantage seems to be that production is nearby and fights take a long time so it makes a big difference. To me it looks weird that players just walk into the enemy base all the time. Maybe that's coming from me being accustomed to Starcraft but I still feel like there is stuff missing like wall-offs, high ground etc. Negatives - general visuals: to me this game just looks super generic and uninteresting from a design point of view. The choices of colours, colour-depth/-contrast, unit/building/doodadd design just don't appeal to me at all. It reminds me more of a design targeted towards young children. - visual clarity: I think everyone agrees on this by now. This wasn't so much the case during the initial reveal but the second time they showed off the game, this was already an issue. I wasn't really sure what the problem was until people here started talking about the desaturated colours and I think this is accurate. More saturated colours would lead to better distinction. The highest saturated colour is actually the green of the health bars, which make visual clarity even worse instead of improving it. I would also add that it lacks contrast/colour-contrast. The colours are not only desaturated but also light. There are basically no dark colours, so contrast is lacking. Light brown and light violet don't really contrast each other well at all for example. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On December 18 2023 01:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Totally agree. I think they need to saturate the colors more to show a greater, more bold, contrast between teal/gray and purple/gray, and then also get rid of the neutral secondary colors for each unit. Less gray for each unit, and more purple (or teal). I think they definitely need more distinct colours than teal vs purple, but I think they said they're working on that. Yellow vs Red I always felt worked really well back in SC1 Proleague when they used it. Red vs Blue was ok too but if you're colourblind it can be difficult to tell. Even Red vs White would be good too. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44896 Posts
On December 18 2023 04:28 Qikz wrote: I think they definitely need more distinct colours than teal vs purple, but I think they said they're working on that. Yellow vs Red I always felt worked really well back in SC1 Proleague when they used it. Red vs Blue was ok too but if you're colourblind it can be difficult to tell. Even Red vs White would be good too. Yeah I think there are a lot of modifications and color variations/pairings they could work with, as long as: 1. The colors are bolder / more saturated; 2. They use fewer neutral / non-player colors - like how some units have almost all gray on their armor/weapons or almost all brown on their skin/fur. I felt like there was about 70% (or more) of these neutral colors, making the player-colors (purple or teal) barely a noticeable highlight. The purple and teal don't have to just be the trim imo. Just a thought. | ||
|
Branch.AUT
Austria853 Posts
Team games not being included at launch would be a big disappointment. | ||
|
Miragee
8566 Posts
On December 18 2023 07:56 Branch.AUT wrote: I didn't quite catch the demo games at Esl today. Were they fun to watch? Team games not being included at launch would be a big disappointment. They said 3v3 vs AI and Coop Campaign with up to 3 players will be in but not 3v3 pvp. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
Saturation and more color-markers on units is easier to implement than for example finishing a potential 3rd fraction for early release. I understand thats an issue for people but I think its also easy to understand that this is lower priority right now | ||
|
Monochromatic
United States998 Posts
On December 18 2023 03:05 Miragee wrote: - general visuals: to me this game just looks super generic and uninteresting from a design point of view. The choices of colours, colour-depth/-contrast, unit/building/doodadd design just don't appeal to me at all. It reminds me more of a design targeted towards young children. At first I agreed with you on the visuals, but I've come to realize that children are a key market for this game. Personally, I was introduced to RTS as a child and I loved it. Base building rts games are inherently a sandbox. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany6976 Posts
On December 16 2023 09:23 Hider wrote: Yes, that actually could be an improvement. To make macro eveneasier, my thinking is to take a little bit of "freedom" away in the granularity of unit construction. So when you press a button to build a 1 supply unit, that builds 6 units. When you press a button to build a 3 supply unit it builds 2 etc. But obviously this idea probably wouldn't work with how Stormgate is currently designed with an early game with low unit-counts. In my rts-vision of a game I imagine larger unit-counts in the early game and generally large army sizes in which case I think this could work. I can't remember exactly how Stormgate works in this regard, but I wouldn't want players to have to build multiple infastructure buildings to be able to produce units. Supply buildings are removed as well. The only thing limiting production is income. I wouldn't remove construction of buildings though. I think construction of buildings/static defense to secure positions around the map is a very interesting part of an RTS, and I would add even more options relative to Sc2. This is why it's so difficult to make a good RTS for a wide audience. I don't like anything of what you envision for your perfect RTS. I want a small army skirmishes, every unit matters, every micro matters kinda game and not two big blobs fighting in the middle of the map, deciding a 20 minute game in a matter of seconds with 1-2 good spells/ skills | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16859 Posts
Red Alert 3 is 15+ years old and still going strong. | ||
|
gTank
Austria2584 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9405 Posts
On December 18 2023 19:56 Harris1st wrote: This is why it's so difficult to make a good RTS for a wide audience. I don't like anything of what you envision for your perfect RTS. I want a small army skirmishes, every unit matters, every micro matters kinda game and not two big blobs fighting in the middle of the map, deciding a 20 minute game in a matter of seconds with 1-2 good spells/ skills Agree you can't make an RTS that satisfies everyone. You need to figure out the potential target group and go all in making the best game that fits their need better than any other game currently out there. What I am quite sure will not work is the jack of all trades master of None approach. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16859 Posts
On December 19 2023 02:07 gTank wrote: I loved Red Alert 3, dont know why it has had not more success. EA was no where near as good at promoting and monetizing RTS games as Activision-Blizzard. SC2 is far and away the best monetized RTS game of all time. Activision did a great job. And, SC2 is a better game. When Tim Morten came over to SC2 he put a lot of the best stuff from RA3 into SC2. | ||
|
Miragee
8566 Posts
On December 19 2023 04:18 JimmyJRaynor wrote: EA was no where near as good at promoting and monetizing RTS games as Activision-Blizzard. SC2 is far and away the best monetized RTS game of all time. Activision did a great job. And, SC2 is a better game. When Tim Morten came over to SC2 he put a lot of the best stuff from RA3 into SC2. SC2 also piggy-bagged off of Korean BW. Blizzard had a huge marketing opportunity here with an already well established, autonomic esport scene and used it well. They also coerced everyone to move from BW to SC2... | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES50527 Posts
On December 19 2023 01:19 JimmyJRaynor wrote: The diversity of tastes are why we have CoH2, C&C3, AoE2 and SC2. All are very different and all have a very hard core super long time fan base. Red Alert 3 is 15+ years old and still going strong. RA2 is also doing decently well thanks to the mental omega mod | ||
|
sidasf
88 Posts
| ||
| ||
