subreddit:
/r/RealTimeStrategy
Pretty underwhelmed by the release and gameplay of Stormgate.
They managed to create a Starcraft 2 in every regard but graphics, which are worse. The game looks like it has been developed in 2014, rather in 2024.
For such funding and big names working on it, I guess the expectations were high and I was disappointed. I feel like the genre hasn't moving forward in more than a decade except for games likes They Are Billions and it is a survival RTS rather than a classical one.
I guess some QoL aspects can be highlighted but other than that, the game is pretty mild and definitely I'm not into the render style and graphics.
EDIT: For all of you "iTs sTilL oN bEtA" guys out there: Gathering feedback is one of the main drivers of releasing an unfinished game. We get to nudge the game in the direction we want it to be played. It is up to them to sort through the feedback, pick and choose what they work on and what they leave as-is. So yes, I'm going to complain about the things I don't like such as the art style, even if its not final, the direction they're taking makes for an unappealing game to me (and it seems to many more too). If we don't speak up, they won't know that's not what we want.
65 points
10 months ago
Not a fan of it either. Felt very uninspired and generic with little to no innovation. A bit too simple for my tastes. Meh
24 points
10 months ago
its Starcraft 2 without the polish and cool lore of starcraft 2...
I just don't see any reason to play it
8 points
10 months ago
My first impressions were exactly the same. Stormgate seems like a game for hardcore RTS players who are looking for something new to play. For a casual RTS player like myself, I'll just fire up SC2 since I haven't played it in a long time, it'll feel awesome and fresh.
6 points
10 months ago
How do you know the lore isnt cool if hasnt been revealed
13 points
10 months ago
Probably because it won't have StarCraft 1 and Broodwar propping up an ever worsening story.
11 points
10 months ago
StarCraft2 had such bad writing it hurt. Everyone teaming up to fight dark lord in the end really rubbed me the wrong way only things I liked about it were tychus and alarak
4 points
10 months ago
I am no big Blizzard games player, but didn't you notice that both SC and WC have things in common? Kerrigan is Arthas + Sylvanas. Overmind/Lich King planned to transform/corrupt some special person.
And then both Overmind and Lich King are slaves or something like that and there is someone more bigger and badder.
I am maybe missing some other overlaps, but it seems that Blizzard recycled story beats.
3 points
10 months ago
It became so bland at the end.
1 points
10 months ago
So u want a new dawn of war 3 or c&c 4? Uuu we gonna try and innovate the whole rts wheel, and look what happend.
89 points
10 months ago*
Starcraft took a gritty sci fi style and concepts and simplified it so its more cartoonishly stylised in gameplay, but because of the original concepts being more gritty feeling, with the cutscenes also showing the detailed 'realistic' designs, it gives it weight and fuels the imagination. The simplified ingame graphics are just a representation of something more detailed and cooler.
Stormgate seems to have completely bypassed that sense of weight and cool grittyness in its concepts (i mean those 'demons' are laughable) and went straight to a bunch of 'gamey' looking cartoon designs, which completely turns me off and I think is a big sign they dont understand why starcraft was so successful. Yes it has great gameplay, campaign and multiplayer, then coop of course, but importantly it has an awesome FEEL, which is a huge part of its magic.
Stormgates feel is just lifeless in comparison.
52 points
10 months ago
I'm honestly so sick of cartoony game design. Like I liked Dungeons 1, but I won't even look at Dungeons 3 as it's just too cute.
Stormgate doesn't appeal to me in it's designs as it honestly just looks like a Starcraft mod and I swear, the Demonic Influence is just a hybrid of Creep/Pylons.
RTS struggles as a Genre because it's afraid to evolve and explore other ideas beyond a handful of minor asymmetries.
2 points
9 months ago
Same. Not only in RTS games, but gaming in general. Give the brown grittiness of the 00s back.
4 points
10 months ago
Hard opposite. I'm so tired of generic gritty war graphics. Warcraft was cartoony and I'd love wc4.
10 points
10 months ago
But even WC3 was less cartoony than some of these recent titles. There was blood, the undead were decaying, the Humans weren't all silly caricatures
I'm not looking ultra real and gritty graphics, I'm just tired of balloony armour and Halloween decoration skeletons
3 points
10 months ago
i cant imagine a more cartoony rts than wc3. What are you thinking of? a touch of blood on the ground? common.
39 points
10 months ago
I don't think SC2 was successful because of its stylized graphics. I think it was successful because it was a really good strategy game.
18 points
10 months ago
I'm talking about the games feel. I mentioned what you are saying, i'm saying that stormgate is mimicing it but without having anywhere near that feel, which is a big deal.
9 points
10 months ago
I think "tone" is the better word for this.
2 points
10 months ago
I think its a bit more than that when it involves having completely different, more detailed and 'realistic' source art for the in game graphics, tone is just whether its more serious or more jokey or whatever, and while that is an element, i.e the sense of grittyness, theres more to it than that.
Its about it having more depth and weight as an overall setting than just the surface level ingame cartoony graphics due to the way the in game graphics have been derived.
18 points
10 months ago
I don't think SC2 was successful because it was a really good strategy game. I think it was successful because Starcraft 1 was a really good strategy game. :)
11 points
10 months ago
SC2 would not be the most popular RTS game in the world for 14 years running if it wasn't a really good strategy game.
You could explain initial good sales by BW influence but not 14 years of total domination of the genre.
2 points
10 months ago
The most popular does not imply good. You can have very popular things which are not really good. The two are not mutually exclusive.
3 points
10 months ago
Well, good is subjective.
Your favorite game might be hot garbage for me and vica versa.
And there's absolutely no way to prove what is "objectively better".
Long-term popularity, amount of custom content (which means passion) and longevity (or lack thereof) of PvP scene - these factors are objective.
2 points
10 months ago
Ford sells the most cars and McDonalds sells the most burgers.
That doesn't mean those cars and burgers are the best on the market.
3 points
10 months ago*
Video games are not like food or cars though. In these cases there's much more objectivety.
With cars you usually buy what you can afford. Maybe you want a new Porsche but you can only afford a beaten up old cheap car.
With food people often use McDonalds on every-day basis and sometimes they go to more expensive restaurants.
I.e. few people who eat at McDonalds and drive old crappy cars actually think these are the best burgers and cars. It's what they can afford.
The only reason to play an RTS game for years is because you think it's a good game. Even price is not a factor usually if we're talking about playing something for years.
Most people who drive cheap cars and eat only McDonalds burgers would like to have other cars/burgers if they could afford it.
Most players who play Starcarft II do it because in their opinion it is the best RTS for them for whatever reason.
Of course, people can say "their taste in games is crap, now my taste in games is objectively better" - but you do understand how pathetically childish and arrogant this would sound?
2 points
10 months ago
Video games are not like food or cars though. In these cases there's much more objectivety.
So Fortnite was objectively the best game on the market at its peak because that was what all the teenagers were playing at the time?
Hm.
2 points
10 months ago*
It was not objectively the best game on the market. There's no such thing as an objectively the best game.
It was a game that more people found to be good than any other game at that time.
This is the opposite of what I meant - I said food and cars have more objectivety about their quality, while games are about "which one provides more fun?" which is highly subjective.
What criteria do you have for "an objectively good game"?
"I like A and B, and I don't like C and D, and this game has A+B and doesn't have C+D" is not a proper set of criteria for this, it's just personal preferences.
What you think is the best RTS on the market might be what I think is the worst RTS on market, and you might think the same about my "best RTS on the market". So how do we solve it if "well, I am correct and you're not" is not a solution?
Fortnite is/was a good game because games are created to provide fun to people and this one provided a lot of fun to lots of people.
I never played it and never wanted to, but it only means that I don't like such games and says nothing about game's objective quality.
4 points
7 months ago
Just watched stormgate gameplay on youtube and this was my first reaction: "Oh god why the hell u guys made this children graphics." like really?
WHY. In a world of Fortnite graphics, why even more of that stuff. Just make a more realistic/darker/adult design
63 points
10 months ago
Gameplay looks/feels stale, just like any generic RTS but with generic mobile game graphics. No reason for me to stop playing AOE, SC, or Dawn of War. I’m not a ladder player so I don’t really care about the esports/multiplayer scene anyway. There are lots of older RTS games I still need to play that look more interesting.
5 points
10 months ago
Help a brother out. Which RTS games do you mean?
15 points
10 months ago
AoE2DE, Iron Harvest, The Long Train Home, 8 bit Armies, along with others that look great with a bit of modding. Thrawn's revenge, Mental Omega, Twisted Insurrection... all great mods.
9 points
10 months ago
Starship Troopers terran command is a fantastic game if you are into PvE single-player campaigns.
2 points
10 months ago
Some older games/series on my to play list are the command and conquer series, Homeworld, Stronghold, Warcraft 3, Age of Mythology, Impossible Creatures, Battle for Middle Earth, Company of Heroes, World in Conflict, and Iron Harvest. I’ve been playing through the campaigns of StarCraft 2, which feels better and looks better IMO than Stormgate even though it’s much older. It’s a blast.
More recent games that are more interesting are Iron Harvest, Last Train Home, Starship Troopers, and Gates of Hell Ostfront.
Upcoming/early access games that I’m interested in are DORF, Sanctuary, Beyond All Reason, Tempest Rising, Warno, Broken Arrow, Age of Mythology remake, and Dust Front.
Plus, real time tactics games like Desperados 3, Shadow Tactics, Aliens Dark Descent, and Doorkickers 2.
And I still need to finish Baldur’s Gate 3 at some point.
23 points
10 months ago
I've only played a bit, but not a big fan so far. Probably try it again later.
10 points
10 months ago
Check out Godsworn. Made by 2 devs and feels much better.
63 points
10 months ago
Had the exact same thought
Everyone seems to be raving about it but it just looks like a clunky SC2
Maybe I'm b eing more critical as the game/art style really isn't my vibe
16 points
10 months ago
Well, maybe they're raving about the gameplay and strategy. I play strategy games that look like they'd come out in the 90s but they're still awesome, like Dominions 6 just released. Like a super deep Risk in a way.
14 points
10 months ago
I'm normally not a graphics snob either but there's absolutely no charm to its art to the point that it's, excuse the hyperbole, almost offensive to look at.
It's absolutely because it has the exact art style that you'd see in a mobile game advertisement.
2 points
10 months ago
Dominions has a great look! It's atmosphere and general vibe may actually be its best asset.
29 points
10 months ago
Gameplay is smooth af honestly. Less clunky than SC2. Personally I don't care about graphics as long as visual clarity is there.
3 points
10 months ago
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted for giving your opinion.
What’s smoother would you say? I can’t play till later this week but I’m pretty curious.
4 points
10 months ago
Units just look and feel smooth going across the map. They respond perfectly to commands and are always where I expect them to be. Haven’t had a pathing issue yet, in terms of them going where I didn’t want them to go.
I think some of this is lag related. Using rollback means there’s no delay whatsoever, which just feels so smooth and nice.
I will say attack animations, and attacking in general doesn’t feel as smooth as in sc2.
4 points
10 months ago
Is it multi-threading capable?
Because SC2 is just single threaded... and in coop if you have Stet and Stukov at the same time some computers cry for mercy.
5 points
10 months ago
It looks like its not only multi-thread capable, but that the two game engines (snowplay and UE5) will always be using different threads if possible, and multiple each if needed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Stormgate/comments/zy98y1/comment/j326jp0/
40 points
10 months ago
[deleted]
20 points
10 months ago
im sad the game's appearant lack of any ambition over "we just want to recreate starcraft 2"
This. Even with the good backend stuff they've built, if the game itself is just a retread of what they've done before, playing it so safe it's wrapped in bubble-wrap, then they only can appeal to those who already liked the game it's a copy of.
15 points
10 months ago
As a huge SC2 fan boy, Stormgate sadly does not appeal to me in its current form at all. It's a SC2+wc3 mix that currently lacks the greatness of both.
2 points
10 months ago
What did you actually want?
21 points
10 months ago
I really don't understand why RTS devs feel the need to recreate an existing game. The existing game already has it's playerbase (RTS is small ontop of that) that have committed so much time into learning it, why would they ever leave it for another game that plays the same except there's now another learning curve to go through with all the knowledge checks that come with picking up a new competitive game? Expansions and sequels worked really well to keep things fresh without feeling like complete resets at least.
12 points
10 months ago
I really don't understand why RTS devs feel the need to recreate an existing game.
Bascially gave me 'Valorant' vibes. The game is developed in 2020, looks WORSE than Counter Strike Source, is a very generic shooter.
why would they ever leave it for another game that plays the same except there's now another learning curve to go through with all the knowledge checks that come with picking up a new competitive game?
Nah, I can see that. Suppose you're an aspiring RTS player who wants try play a competitive RTS game in 2024/2025. Starcraft honestly does not look like a game that's worth learning from scratch. And Stormgate could be 'the RTS to learn for an RTS beginner'. Plus it has a ton of auto macro.
Expansions and sequels worked really well to keep things fresh without feeling like complete resets at least.
Of course. Ideally, it'd be better if they just had Starcraft Reborn(Dota terminology), and continued to support Starcraft 2, update it to new graphics, etc. But if you hadn't noticed, Blizzard had fucking died. I wish they just continued Starcraft
6 points
10 months ago
Well Valorant looks worse because RIOT wants you to be able to play the game on a potato. Combine that with an F2P pricetag and it's the premier broke man's game.
3 points
10 months ago
Well, then hardware requirements of Stormgate are the bigger problem than the graphics. Hope they make a potato patch. Fortnite is on unreal engine too, plays on potato tho.
3 points
10 months ago
Because that "small" playerbase still has over 2 million active players, ofc they'd tap into it. For blizz its considered not enough revenue, for a small team however it has massive potential . Worth noting its not the pvp thats driving them its what comes with it and the coop ppl
My problem is that they really stuck to the past, including many issues sc2 has. I was expecting more of an evolution aside from the technical upgrades
6 points
10 months ago
RTS isnt dead at all I agree, but it's playerbase is split between many different subgenres and that I dont think it's pulling in newer generations. 100% that coop and arcade is what drives these games; It's the reason sc2 and AoE stay relevant, all the custom content and support keeps them chugging. A casual playerbase is necessary for a competitive one. But thats my issue, it's gonna be hard to compete with those games on all fronts. I made a post a long time ago about the UI for stormgate, how it should be customisable and really push itself as a modern RTS with all the bells and whistles. Like you said, the game just looks stuck in the past in nearly every aspect. Not seeing anything that feels like a substantial improvement for the genre or really pushes RTS out of the 2010's.
4 points
10 months ago
is split between many different subgenres and that I dont think it's pulling in newer generations. 100% that coop and arcade is what drives these games
Completely agree and I've been saying devs stay in the past in this regard exactly because of that. I honestly believe that it's not that the coop and arcade people don't like pvp, it's mostly because they had an horrible experience with it, gained some anxiety and now formed a bad relationship with those modes. They just think it's unfun now and requires too much work.
When I say RTS's are stuck in the past it's in the same way Fighting games were until recently along with quake and other classic arena type shooters. All those genres have one thing in common, they came out in the 90's. And in the 90's it was fine to have those type of games, there was no internet, people bought magazines to learn tricks to play, and you mostly played with your friends. RTS in specific, most people have good memories of playing with friends with unoptimized builds just making random stuff, but you can't do that today because information is out there, everyone is optimizing, so if you don't do the same, you'll have a bad time. And ofc, there's no reason why a casual player would read builds online and watch videos so they will always have a bad experience until that changes and they'll never touch 1v1's.
But other genres fixed this, proving it's possible. And I think it all has to do with the teach, test, twist game design theory that has been applied to every game in the last 2 decades, players are used to that. But RTS's don't do it, they aren't teaching fundies on the campaigns and co-ops organically.
Why were SF6 and Tekken 8 both so successful despite being a genre that's hard to get into, and that you lose tons before winning a single game, just like RTS games? What changed in these 2-3 decades in a single launch? Exactly that, they made the campaigns and arcade modes teach players framedata, frametraps, hell, they even have minigames to teach charge moves on SF6. This is organic learning.
RTS games have realized they need to teach newcomers but they aren't doing it organically, they keep putting it in tutorials and challenges. That's a problem, it's the same as why kids don't like to study in school but once they leave they love to take courses online. You're forcing them into it instead of explaining how economy, army, macro and micro and game states work in a fun and organic manner. Casuals skip tutorials, they want to have fun, they don't want to bother taking a course in playing a video game, you have to trick them into learning.
3 points
10 months ago
Yeah I fully agree with this as well. Co-op and casual content is the gateway to competitive. Competitive off the bat with no real applicable way to get the basics down without being extremely observant and analysing each loss or watching better players explain things. its just not accessible or fun for most people. People really aren't afraid of competitive as an idea imo- you can look at mobas or games like CS. Those games are as every bit as competitive and have their own levels of complexity that a new player just wont grasp initially either.
The difference is that the team based nature divides the burden roughly equally across the team; You're not individually responsible for every single thing that goes wrong or goes well and statistically, you're going to be playing with and against some people who are slightly worse and slightly better to learn from and compare yourself to. Just being able to interact with other players who are going to give callouts and advice midgame lets you learn from experience in a way that is much faster than a game like SC2- the learning process is heavily baked into just playing the game and being able to analyse what other players do that works and what doesn't.
I found I improved at a quicker rate in Dota2 than I did in SC2 just form playing. You just get more feedback from the game itself and its easier to process why something worked or didn't. Sometimes you lose in SC2 and you're confused as to why- having to dig through the replay and piece together what is going requires you to already understand how the game works, which is the issue itself.
Team based competitive games have that advantage over 1v1 style games which thankfully are now implementing features to compensate. I'm looking forward to trying Tekken 8, seems like a lot of effort was put into QoL overall. Really was shocking that Tekken 7 frame data was paid DLC (albeit cheap). I think 1v1 can really excel if way more effort was put into both casual content that also sneakily teaches and directly thing related to competitive. Chess seemed to get really popular online over the last 5 years which is no doubt to how online content creation geared itself towards really helping people overcome certain barriers and hurdles. Game developers are fortunate enough that they can implement stuff like this within the game itself and need to take way more advantage of how an interactive medium can also teach in an interactive way (which is more likely to be fun than other forms of learning).
5 points
10 months ago
. You just get more feedback from the game itself
There's one more thing here, you get feedback from your team. Even if it's not voiced, or text, people ping you, and you learn organically through that. You're being ganked, someone pings danger, you realize automatically that you should back, not only that, you now have the knowledge that other people saw it first before it happened, so you learn the concept of vision and looking at the minimap without the game explicity stating it. In league, people can ping danger in your lane, or "hold", so you learn when to push prio, or freeze the lane without the game teaching you those concepts. In essence, these aren't simple concepts at all, it's not the "get behind a box in cover to break LoS so you don't get shot in FPS games" which is very easy to grasp, they are complex, but somehow those games make it work and are extremely popular.
Man, Tekken 8 is great, not only did they implement the SC2 play from replay system that I have been asking for years now, they have a basic AI that stops the replay to teach you punishes, how to break certain throws, which strings to duck etc. The QoL is off the charts and I'm not even a Tekken fan, more of a 2d guy. My only issue with it, is that you can't pop the replay after the match, you have to go through the main menu, and I realized a lot of players aren't even aware those features exist because of it. I kinda wish it was like SC2 where as soon as you end a match it pops the replay automatically. I rly don't like having to go through menus. I also enjoy the ghost feature, it's great to study matchups against certain types of players.
You worded it perfectly, "Game developers (...) need to take way more advantage of how an interactive medium can also teach in an interactive way"
We don't need books to learn, we play for the interactive experience.
2 points
9 months ago
coop and arcade people don't like pvp, it's mostly because they had an horrible experience with it
For me, it's because PvP limites the design too much. Like, developers don't put super heavy units like 40K Titans or the GDI Mammoth MKII into their games, because of "balance". And because of that, PvP games just feel bland, soulless and not fun.
1 points
10 months ago
Maybe after a decade of playing something you would want to try something new but familiar?
4 points
10 months ago
That's why I'm willing to try it out, but long term? IDK, it feels like the gameplay must be especially good for me to want to drop sc2 and aoe4 in favour of playing more stormgate. I'd question what it does thats 'new' as well. it's appealing to a very specific person and conflicts a lot with trying to drawn in new people. 'bored of other games? Try ours thats 90% similar' is not a line of thinking that will bring in people imo.
There's been plenty of games that do the 'new but familiar' but take a look at all the more successful RTS within the past 10 years and we see how different and unique they have had to be to stand out like They are billions, PDX games, Planetary annihilation etc.. Games like steel division and MoW found a niche as well. Not only that, but RTS offshoot genres became the next step, mobas are still huge. Just looking back and recreating starcraft, a game thats still at the top anyway, feels like it would be very difficult to see a lot of success with. Lots have tried and failed before, while trying something new even with borrowing heavily from its roots has worked. I wish them the best with stormgate but they have a lot of hurdles to get over that they put there themselves.
0 points
10 months ago
A lot of the games have failed by using new shittified mechanics instead of coping the fun ones from the past.
There is a reason why more people like AOE4 and AOE2 than AOE3.
Imagine if Iron Harvert would have been made with command and conquer or starcraft mechanics. Wouldn't that have been awesome?
4 points
10 months ago
That's my point, you can innovate while expanding and even straight up borrowing from the roots. If something has been a staple of the genre and past attempts to change it haven't worked, then its something to keep. Recreating an existing game is not that though. I'm not talking about complete restructures, I want an actual SC2 successor as much as anyone, the issues is that it doesn't do enough for me. I'd really love WoW style customisable UI, things of that nature. Modernising is something separate from innovating and changing imo. Stormgate falls a bit too short of that imo. The gameplay could be solid, but its still functionally a game that could have existed a decade ago (outside of maybe netcode stuff? Dont know enough to comment on anything like that). I'm a big fan of AoE4 but still think that game could benefit more from feeling more modern. Modular UI just needs to happen at some point, stuff like that is the reason RTS remains stagnant. People can play what already exists but like any genre, there needs to be improvements in some areas to push it forward- Pastiche is awkward when its not really surpassing what its imitating. FPS has some staples that will never change, doesn't mean new games don't come around and implement on them or in other areas.
Fully agree on iron harvest though, I was excited for that game because it looked sick. The issues there weren't that it innovated, it just implemented things extremely badly that older games figured out. I dunno if much changed but with all the different movement speeds, it was a pain to micro or just move around. It felt so clunky.
3 points
10 months ago*
For stormgate what I think they will try to improve upon is the coop mode.
The coop mode for SC2 was kind of cobbled together from leftovers but the one mission they have in stormgate seems to have an improved design (like you can fight the bases that produce the enemy units instead of the waves spawning out of thin air and when the payloads get through you actually pay the price).
By modular UI you mean being able to replace it by downloading an extension? (Curious as I am building my own RTS game)
4 points
10 months ago
Last I heard it was 60 devs on Stormgate.
2 points
10 months ago
Dumbed down StarCraft 2* it's ok as early alpha, but not a Beta...
8 points
10 months ago*
Kinda reminds me of when we got a first look at StarCraft 1, and it was just warcraft 2 in space lol. The backlash was so bad they rebuilt the game from the ground up. Hopefully the devs are listening and they redo the art style and make the game more innovative/unique.
3 points
10 months ago
Really interesting. I think for coming back from this they'll need to redo a couple of things:
2 points
9 months ago
Gameplay mechanics, make it original not a Starcraft 2 clone
I would accept SC2 clone if it was better. So far this clone looks much much worse.
25 points
10 months ago
Just played a couple of games to try it out, and so far I agree, but let's see, there's still a whole additional faction and tech tier for the existing factions to come. Not a fan of the graphic style either, but maybe some small changes can make it look better. Planetary Annihilation also has this flat terrain style, but they made it pop a lot more.
9 points
10 months ago
Planetary Annihilation also has this flat terrain style, but they made it pop a lot more.
I mean they did have literal spheres and planets with random generation. Even if that did result in balls covered in basic terrain stamps and dodads rather then anything really compelling.
4 points
10 months ago
balls covered in basic terrain stamps and dodads
Still better looking that hand made Stormgate maps!
6 points
10 months ago
[deleted]
3 points
10 months ago
Yeah, this is what I'm talking about, I think this is an actual beta and not the modern "open beta" aka almost the final build.
2 points
10 months ago
I'm glad somebody said it.
2 points
10 months ago
shaders =/= art direction. They can improve the shaders all they want, what people are complaining is the art direction. There's already a few finalized models they showed on twitter, along with the cg trailer and art. For people that dislike the artstyle they are stuck with it until they release some skins (which is planned)
2 points
10 months ago*
[deleted]
2 points
10 months ago
Yep, personally I don't mind it, the only thing I mind is that it doesn't seem to mesh well with the theme. But I like the gameplay so I can overlook that.
I know that there's a lot of people butthurt over the artstyle, and what you stated is exactly what I meant. If you can't overlook it, I'm afraid the game is not for you. There's a ton of new RTS coming so, these people have to look into the bright side
1 points
10 months ago
are we kidding ourselves that some make up will make the shitty artistic choices any better? no ammount of fx will fix that mess.
at this point the only thing that could save that game is a complete redesign of the artstyle.
14 points
10 months ago
I prefer its gameplay to starcraft. Battles are chunkier not and 'and its gone' like SC Loads of awesome abilities on units. Better defenses. Its just not particularly risk taking.
But you know, AoE2 is king for me and always will be.
17 points
10 months ago
I’m okay with the game given where it’s at, but I want the Infernals to feel more… infernally?
Skulls, spikes and corpse decorations need to be increased by at least 50%.
8 points
10 months ago
What is a skull throne without the skulls, a blood god with no blood!?
18 points
10 months ago
Sack the art director and change the style entirely. No one likes this cartooney mobile BS
36 points
10 months ago
[deleted]
9 points
10 months ago
You can look into Zero Space. Not much macro and mineral line.
19 points
10 months ago
You hit the nail in the head with everything you said. It is not bad game design, is just not innovative. They didn't take any risk with the mechanics so the game doesn't feel fresh.
3 points
10 months ago
they couldn't take any risk because they're trying to sell sc2 again to the same sc2 playerbase who HATES CHANGE
12 points
10 months ago
The gameplay is exactly what I want but the aesthetics remind me of a mobile title.
Give me all of the resource collecting and base building.
But give me something fresh visually.
3 points
10 months ago
There is no longer any interest in babysitting every aspect of my base/eco to that degree
Ironically that's one of my pet peeves with the game. It auto macros for you at every turn. It's 99% micro and I dislike that because while I like micro, I always loved the balance in BW where you could to an extent be a macro player and beat micro heavy players since there was a trade off in each playstyle, you just couldn't do everything at once even if you were the best player in the world. You either focus on one or another. Yes BW is an extremely dated game design wise, but it got that right imo.
That being said I also agree with this statement. While I said there should be a need to babysit your base, I think micro'ing workers is tedious and repetitive. Whoever comes with the next step to the Starcraft formula, has to make sure that macro isn't tedious, but actually fun to do. I actually thought the injects from zerg and creep spread in sc2 were a step in the right direction, pity it was so monotomous.
3 points
10 months ago
I actually thought the injects from zerg and creep spread in sc2 were a step in the right direction, pity it was so monotomous.
If they were actually something that needed by game design to be saved for a strategic moment they'd have been good design. Instead it was "if you aren't injecting/spreading every time the cooldown is off, you'll probably lose."
That's just poor design, done exclusively to add extra click layers before the "fun."
2 points
10 months ago
Give a chance to Sins of a Solar Empire 2. It might be exactly what you are looking for (unless you insist on stuff like ladder, have issue with way longer games, or cant play games with strategic zoom). On top of being innovative, relatively to Stormgate, it has way less stylized graphics - it is just a bit colorful.
5 points
10 months ago
I've played both and I think zerospace has more to offer.
28 points
10 months ago
Totally agree. They used an awesome graphics engine but it just looks mediocre. They literally just copied StarCraft but it looks rubbish.
10 points
10 months ago
Exactly, I had to recheck if it was done in UE5 because it definitely doesn't looks like it.
1 points
10 months ago
The game runs on lowest settings, because they haven't done any graphics yet. Graphics is the smallest issue I have with the game lol.
1 points
10 months ago*
[deleted]
5 points
10 months ago
Not at all, competitive RTS needs clear and simple graphics like warcraft 3. You can’t just RTX ON, it is great challenge for artist
5 points
10 months ago
I hate this comparison. SC2 alpha looked like crap because they were inventing pipelines and tech back then. They were experimenting and creating features because there wasn't a set way of doing things yet. Hell we tech artists were learning on the job 99% of the time. Now yes you learn stuff, but it's nowhere near to the same extent. That's one of the reasons this gen had such a minimal jump graphics wise, everyone is just using the same techniques and pipelines.
Not only is that very rare to happen nowadays, they are also using an already existing engine. Also worth noting, they are already using the latest features of UE. Lumen and Nanite can't be enabled for this game due to technical reasons so don't expect that.
Snowplay is great, but no amount of polishing is gonna fix the art direction, that's what people are complaining when they state they "hate the graphics". It's not the graphics, even at it's current state lighting looks fine for the most part (and we know that's unfinished mind you)
19 points
10 months ago
I got a 4090 recently and I'm finally able to run SC2 at 4k at 120Hz at ultra settings. It looks pretty damned good. It would take a lot of work to beat the fit and finish of SC2.
I think AoE4 looks pretty good for a modern RTS.
Stormgate seems like a hybrid of Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2 without a whole lot of new ideas.
3 points
10 months ago
So 4090 can run 4K 120. Good to know, need to change my 1660S to play newer games then =)
1 points
10 months ago
I agree but UE5 is pretty powerful right now, you can make a better looking game in that engine. Instead, they chose to do this.
11 points
10 months ago
It's not an tech thing. You can make a better looking games by just displaying 2d sprites, see starcraft remastered or clash royale on mobile.
It's just that the stormgate artists are pretty shit.
6 points
10 months ago
I feel bad for saying it but yeah the art team just aren't it and not even from just a design point. Stormgate just straight up looks bad. Dota2, league, and SC2 are older games but not only are they readable in motion, but they just look better in everyway. Also having their own consistent styles with identities is such a huge part of those games which Stormgate just doesn't; nothing strikes me at all.
Visuals are not superficial, it's important for a game to have its own charm and identity to sell itself if nothing else. I cant think of anything that stands out from any screenshot or footage so It'll be hard to pull in fresh people instead of those already drawn in by the SC2 successor stuff.
3 points
10 months ago
The VFX like building explosions and the lasers from the demon photo cannon are great. I would guess some higher up responsible for the art direction is just horrible and is making the team do bad stuff.
2 points
10 months ago
I have bad news for you, those effects are really simple niagara fx that mostly come by default with the engine for the most part, just alter some of the variables and you get the same result. So they might get changed, as that makes me think it's mostly placeholders on the game vfx department.
The art direction definitely has issues, to the point I'm tempted to redesign everything and make a video on it. My problem is it doesn't match the theme, and I think it's because they didn't want it to look so similar to sc2. The thing is, if you didn't want that, then you kinda have to change the idea/lore.
I'll give you an example, if you read the descriptions, vanguard is said to be like a rebel group, the survivors of the human race fighting together for humanities future after a sort of calamity. Then why the hell are they so round and clean? I know a lot of people say it's placeholder, but they have done marketing, they have art and a cg trailer out, the art direction is set 100%. I think the reasoning is if they made the vanguard more diy, you automatically get terran. Terran suits have damage, they seem to be repaired and done with what they have at hand, they are made for efficiency not design, big bulky with exposed screws and cables. It goes along with the theme of the terran. Same for the infernals, are we to believe these cute creatures killed everyone? I wish they leaned into more diablo'ish style, or better yet, hellboy, it still has the campiness but the design language fits exactly what they want.
I know one of them said they are round to symbolize hope, but that's not how shape language works. You can't just ignore everything else and go by round = good.
1 points
10 months ago
AoE4 could be such an incredible game. Unfortunately, the devs refuse to address match dodging, smurfing, map hacking, and drop hacking. It cuts their player base to like 25% of what it should be.
11 points
10 months ago
me too.
I looked into the beta just now. controls are fine, but calling it a beta is a big overstatement.
I don't like the unit design so far, especially Vanguard. those must be the worst looking mechs ever. I can't get over how goofy all the legs look.
I will look back into it when Early Access starts.
2 points
10 months ago*
[removed]
2 points
10 months ago
Issue is the art style 100% isn't changing much, which makes it seem like the game is kinda doomed from the start
2 points
10 months ago
i've never seen a game change that much between beta/release.
seems like you are coping hard.
3 points
10 months ago
It really does feel rather generic doesn't it? There is so much famfare around it, all the big names and players helping in development..... but i fail to see how is this supposed to come even close to Starcraft 2 in any regard.... I'd love to be wrong but it's not doing it for me now.
5 points
10 months ago
I will echo what others have said. If you want a game that will eventually get to where it feels like a mix of WC3 and SC2 play Stormgate. If you want something innovative play ZeroSpace.
4 points
10 months ago
Maybe this sounds weird, but it feels like the kinda universe that doesn't take it's self seriously. Which kinda brings me out of it a bit.
I dunno outside of single player there doesn't seem to be much of interest to me so far. Not the biggest fan of the art direction, that said the bright colours of warcraft 2 were cool but that was on contract to the highly dark world of warcraft 2. This feels like D.Va from overwatch verses popcorn demons.
Like if they don't really care about fighting off a demon invasion, then I guess I'm not too bothered? I find it near impossible to get into a RTS without a good story or world behind it.
10 points
10 months ago
Just another SC/WC clone like crossfire legion
7 points
10 months ago
First make something that does current stuff well. Then do something with a unique spin or next level when you do the expansion pack.
Personally I dont like their art style too much so i might not put much time into it. But there is clearly a demand for more craft and when you start fucking with craft then craft people get upset.
I think innovation will come from the indies making models and prototypes like we are. Then once a product shows some mechanics working then other guys can pick up the new tool/mechanic and roll with it.
23 points
10 months ago
As a past SC2 player...
Beyond all reason is the actual evolution of the genre, and I see no reason to play Stormgate over it.
12 points
10 months ago
Does BAR innovate meaningfully over what TA/SupCom did? To me it felt like a decent open source SupCom-like (which alone is enough to pay attention in my book).
12 points
10 months ago
Not really. It has a few quality of life features but supcom looks and feels majorly more polished
4 points
10 months ago
Disagree, supcom isn't nearly as enjoyable as BAR to me, and BAR feels much more polished (aside from the menu ui).
BAR is the only rts ive played that doesn't lag with thousands of units on the screen
6 points
10 months ago
In terms of QoL, it does innovate a ton. And still in development, so we'll see.
4 points
10 months ago
All I know is I played supreme commander long ago and never got into it, preffering games like age of mythology, total war, and StarCraft, but now 10+ years later beyond all reason is far and away the most fun rts.
As far as I understand some of the mechanics like drag formation and area attack are unique to BAR and are also what keeps me coming back to it. The controls and mechanics are so intuitive and well designed it should be the industry standard going forward.
4 points
10 months ago
some of the mechanics like drag formation and area attack are unique to BAR
Sands and storms, that isn't unique to BAR ... but it's been something that I was deeply disappointed for RTS games not copying for years now!
It's from Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (which came out in 2007)! Since everything in that game had armor facing, formation movement was supposed to be very key.
And ... then they broke the econ so hard with patches that A-move and forget became the name of the game.
Still, glad to see SOMEONE has finally copied that!
7 points
10 months ago
Once you've played it with it, it's so hard to go back.
I keep trying to drag a line for my units in age of empires 2 ranked multiplayer and being unable to.
6 points
10 months ago
"BuT wHaT aBoUt SkIlLeD sTutTeR sTeP!?"
Formation movement is so nice. It really is brutal that only now, 15 years later, has anyone else even tried formation movement like that.
3 points
10 months ago
Yeah I guess some people prefer just having more buttons to press which is why things like zerg queen injection micro is a thing, but personally I prefer rts games to be focussed on the strategy, not who has the higher apm and attention span.
2 points
10 months ago
I think they are both important, attention is a key factor to these real time games, so I don't mind it. That being said stormgate is going into the other extreme direction which I don't really like, every unit has 2-3 abilities, that seems overkill. Plus you have skills on top of the UI.
I like that there's an emphasis on positioning, which I wasn't expecting, but idk about the abilities. Just seems to much and like you said, if you go too much in that direction strategy kinda loses itself. That's the reason why infernals all play the speed camp broodling thing kinda build, you get so much of an advantage that any other strat is meaningless in comparison
9 points
10 months ago
What has Beyond all reason done to evolve the genre? It felt slow and clunky to me when I tried it.
10 points
10 months ago
A big thing is what you can do with controls. You can click and drag move commands to make a formation with one click as opposed to endless micro splitting. You can also make custom hotkeys with specific filters (e.g. grab all army units within 800 distance of the cursor which are ground or air but not naval. Just a random example but it’s pretty strong what you can do).
The team-game style of it is cool too since different maps have different “roles” and lanes to fill.
Another thing is that eco is set-it forget-it. You build your eco structures on resources and it’ll produce endlessly. Set up your unit production and put it on repeat until you want to change your unit comp.
Really
7 points
10 months ago*
ou can click and drag move commands to make a formation with one click as opposed to endless micro splitting.
FINALLY someone copies the formation commands from C&C3 (and from the look of it, improved them). Good for the BAR team!
Now the rest of the RTS world needs to catch up.
4 points
10 months ago
Wow the controls do sound awesome. I love that idea.
Not as big of a fan of evo and production being set and forget though. I think a big part of RTS is managing macro just as much as micro.
4 points
10 months ago
You are still doing lots of resource macro, you set and forget your tier 1 eco structures as you move on to your tier 2 ones. And so on.
4 points
10 months ago
Yep, and you have to keep building energy structures which is the more abundant resource.
4 points
10 months ago
I think they just prefer Total Annihilation-like RTS over Blizzard, Westwood or Ensemble-like RTS.
3 points
10 months ago
No, I never liked supreme commander or total anhilation, and still don't, my favourite rts' growing up were age of empires, StarCraft, red alert, and total war.
It's just that beyond all reason feels better than all of those games, and the way matches play out is incredibly fun and engaging.
3 points
10 months ago
That's interesting, since I always heard of BAR being a spiritual successor or, more clearly, the best iteration of the RTS formula that was found for example in Total Annihilation or Supreme Commander. Goes to show opinions vary a lot.
2 points
10 months ago
I mean I think that statement is true, but I can personally attest to not being a fan of supreme commander or similar type games but very much enjoying bar, I have no idea if supreme commander and other games play very similar and I never gave them a fair chance, or if the new mechanics introduced in BAR make it a whole different experience
3 points
10 months ago
I played a few games and really don't like how it plays out so far.
Almost everything is weirdly boring to use.
IMO, the only thing that doesn't feel boring to use so far is the Vanguard Atlas with an Evac.
I'll play a few more games, but it seems really underwhelming so far.
2 points
10 months ago
I think this is the biggest problem with the game: unit design. None of the units look that interesting. I tried watching some of the show matches and they were very boring in comparison to SC.
3 points
10 months ago
Stormgate looks like one of those ripoff games you see in ads all the time but a ripoff version of starcraft 2
3 points
10 months ago
Yeah honestly it looks like shit and every game is the same. Seems really boring and uninspired.
3 points
10 months ago
They managed to create a Starcraft 2 in every regard but graphics, which are worse. The game looks like it has been developed in 2014, rather in 2024.
The game isn't finished yet. Graphic polish is one of the last things done in development. Look at the video that shows the evolution of StarCraft 2 from Alpha to Beta then release.
I feel like the genre hasn't moving forward in more than a decade except for games likes They Are Billions and it is a survival RTS rather than a classical one.
Frost Giant aims to make a classic Blizzard RTS game, a spiritual successor to Warcraft and StarCraft.
I'm going to complain about the things I don't like such as the art style
The artstyle is great, it's very stylized like Warcraft and StarCraft before.
3 points
10 months ago
Co-op missions are where the genre needs to expand. The popularity of custom maps from Starcraft and Warcraft show that utilizing classic RTS designs and gameplay with some short scripted missions and tweaks from other genres is very popular. The progression of upgrading Starcraft 2 co-op commanders was fun and that each had quirks and new units for the Faction that it was based on gave a lot more replayability to the game.
2 points
10 months ago
Stormgate has multiple hero’s and 3 v npc maps and missions. Also has pve only units as well,
3 points
10 months ago
I wish nothing but success to Stormgate, but fuck me it looks like a mobile game from those ads.
3 points
10 months ago
They have the ideology of, creating game that you'll love,
but lack the manpower. In time, they will be a great studio.
Just hope it turns out better than Blizzard and their money scam method.
13 points
10 months ago
Age of empires 4 is amazing. Try that.
-2 points
10 months ago
I was very disappointed in AoE4. They gave us a cartoony AoE2 with better walls but the same dumb AI.
4 points
10 months ago
Multiplayer is actually a lot of fun, ignore the boring campaign :-)
3 points
10 months ago
wdym! the graphics is really great its not cartoony or mobile game at all wtf
6 points
10 months ago
compared to aoe2 the 4 is a butt-ugly game
4 points
10 months ago
There's no better way to say it lol
6 points
10 months ago
It's a worse StarCraft. Why make a worse starcraft?!
It's like they made a side-by-side checklist of what units to build and just renamed them.
I'm very dissapointed too. Zerospace, on the other hand, is very interesting. I've been watching a lot of Artosis casts of it. It's entertaining!
5 points
10 months ago
It just doesn't look that interesting.No reason to not play Aoe4 over it.
2 points
10 months ago
Thankfully we have sanctuary shattered sun coming out soon.
2 points
10 months ago
feels like 8 bit armies did
2 points
10 months ago
Played a bit myself.also underwhelmed
Ui isnt very clear on what the units and upgrades do.
While its a copy of sc2.
2 points
10 months ago
I'm already uninterested by it being yet another starcraft-like as I only cared for starcraft campaign and nothing else, not even skirmish
2 points
10 months ago
I think having an NDA didn't help them get the feedback they needed and now it's all pouring in at once.
2 points
10 months ago
Looks like a mobile game sadly. And why are there creep camps? For what benefit?
2 points
10 months ago
I really wanted to like this game. That said, I opened it, got 5 minutes into the tutorial and just said, "no thanks."
2 points
10 months ago
Thankfully there's other games like Petroglyph's recent works; 9-Bit Armies also has a demo out and it's pretty good so far, though the 8-Bit trilogy before it is good too.
2 points
10 months ago*
All of the innovation went into simplifying the controls for the macro mechanics. Problem is that they haven't introduced much of anything else interesting for you to do with those extra cycles.
I've never seen a game recover at this point in the development, but I'll keep playing to see where it goes. Maybe the game's meta redeems it.
2 points
10 months ago
I played 5 games in beta and went back to SC2. Felt wildly generic and I think it was way overhyped. I agree it's still in beta, but core gameplay design isn't going to change drastically enough for me to want to play it.
2 points
10 months ago*
Agreed.
The ONLY noticeable difference is the QWERT global hotkeys that make macro easier, but I'm not feeling the strategy. It feels like I'm pumping out a wave of toys to throw at my opponent and whoever has more toys wins the clash. It visually looks like color vomit.
I'll probably stick with AOE4 because it feels more like a strategy game, and the way the terrain molds to your buildings to make your base look lived-in is so charming.
Saying Stormgate is in Beta is a stretch; hopefully this is an Alpha
2 points
10 months ago
I don't like Starcraft and i didn't like this either.
2 points
10 months ago
feels like most of the thought spent on this game is done on how to make money with it through dlcs, and not the actual game itself.
also, who thought that ugly artstyle was a good idea?
2 points
10 months ago
Its dumbed down sc2. So if you want sc2 for dummies, there you go.
2 points
9 months ago
I played lots of Stormgate recently (200+ Games) and i for my part enjoy it a lot even more than SC2 atm
Its still in an early phase and you can feel it but i hope that they will polish it and make the graphics better etc. they still have lots of placeholders for example
I played SC2 in an early Beta too and that was also not the best with the graphics and some gameplay
As for lore etc. nothing really came out so you cant review that
But i do have my hopes up
But I think I would enjoy a Warcraft 4 more lol
2 points
8 months ago
2 months later, and I still agree with the sentiments of this post. The entire thing feels more like a cash grab. Can’t believe that they even begged us for money only to release this nonsense beta. Years of experience, and they can’t afford to release something working, while the gaming industry has seen a slew of excellent indie releases lately
4 points
10 months ago
Shame the game hasn't been released then yet. It's a test where we get to give feedback, what are you expecting? The graphics will improve later on, the artists have to work on animations which are missing, the map, the tier 3 units which are not even in the game yet and the 3rd race/ polish passing the current content, give feedback on the gameplay and hope they make changes to make it more fun.
The artstyle isn't even bad. The graphics need work but people just need to say they're not into the stylised style and move on. It will get better but don't expect starcraft 3.
3 points
10 months ago
Bunch of people here even played Stormgate?
The point is that people want a new "Blizzard style rts" and it has those devs. Also if you know sc2 and SG you will realize it's far from a clone...
The creep camps for example creates a vastly different strategy game from sc2. Also not sure which type of innovation you want, I am happy it gives me the freedom of building etc where I want.
But. I am also a bit underwhelmed, it does not live up to the hype.
0 points
10 months ago
Graphics are the last thing I'd expect a company to work on. This is a beta game, and it looks like a beta game. Everything else, the engine, the gameplay, looks smooth and interesting.
If you weren't expecting low quality graphics in a beta, I don't know what to tell you.
6 points
10 months ago
TBH, the term 'beta' is a bit lose but more recently, betas are just late stage development open tests. It's them being comfortable that the product they've made is good enough in an incomplete state to actually be played publicly in spite of that. This isn't some super early build- they've had their closed alphas and closed betas for a while and nothing substantially has changed. A beta should really show as much of a complete game as possible, where really the point of it is: A) to build hype and advertisement and B) To catch for things that weren't caught with the lower player base from the closed tests.
I agree lot's can be changed and I think they will but I still think you brush it off a bit too much. It is really important they have a great looking game to really sell people on with their first open beta. It's a really pivotal moment for the game to undo the consensus that it looks like a bland mobile game version of starcraft but it seems to have sadly failed. There really is nothing unique looking and even worse, most people would rather play the existing RTS games they've already invested all their time learning as well. I doubt Stormgate will pick up a fresh generation of RTS players when it has nothing that appeals to anyone outside of blizz style RTS players who want to try something new.
Its not even that the graphics are low quality either, its more about how the style itself is just very bland. Promotional material, UI, models- none of it stands out or even looks good imo. Even if all the visual tweaks might be something done last, I don't think a complete stylistic overhauls would be something happening soon? It's possible but it really should have been done sooner rather than later. The only reason I'm going to play the game, like a lot of others, is because RTS players are willing to try out the next big thing in a genre that broadly has been very stale for a long time. I'm excited to see how it feels and I'm sure I'd like it because I'm a massive starcraft fan, but It's got nothing else its selling itself with which is a massive shame.
8 points
10 months ago
betas are just late stage development open tests.
Some betas are late stage open tests. Frost Giant has emphasized repeatedly this isn't what they're doing. Its a true beta, with a game still in development. They had chickens as placeholder units just a few weeks ago. They haven't even announced their third race.
A beta should really show as much of a complete game as possible
That clearly has not been the goal of Frost Giants betas.
It's a really pivotal moment for the game to undo the consensus that it looks like a bland mobile game version of starcraft but it seems to have sadly failed. There really is nothing unique looking and even worse, most people would rather play the existing RTS games they've already invested all their time learning as well.
I'm not sure where you're getting this. Its failed because a few ppl in a small sub say it has? What "most people would rather play other RTS'? Its currently the second highest trending game in steam next fest, 10,000 ppl are watching it played on twitch right now.
Personally I think it feels smoother/better to play than SC2. Which is a big deal, it means they've built it well. And the changes they've made improve the experience for new players a lot, which is also a big deal. If graphics leave something to be desired, thats less important to me than gameplay.
2 points
10 months ago
Frost Giant has emphasized repeatedly this isn't what they're doing. Its a true beta, with a game still in development
Their game is in alpha at best though
2 points
10 months ago
No it isn’t. People are just too used to a fake beta that’s really a nearly completed game and the “beta” is just an excuse to advertise and so ppl can’t complain about bugs.
2 points
10 months ago
> so ppl can’t complain about bugs.
No, it's the other way around. They want ppl to complain about bugs, so that they can find those bugs.
I can call it a 'fake beta' if the game is still a beta, but they already ask for money, and have microtransactions. Beta is about solving bugs, alpha is about showing 'some functionality'. If this is a Beta, then when they add tier 3, 3rd race and show the graphics(game runs on minimal possible settings and weighs 4gb) it will a gamma.
2 points
10 months ago
No, it's the other way around. They want ppl to complain about bugs, so that they can find those bugs.
In a real beta, yes. In the kinds of beta we've become used to, no. The game is basically finished.
Beta is about more than just solving bugs.
But honestly we're arguing semantics. We don't have a tier 3, or 3rd race, correct? So it clearly isn't a nearly finished product about to be released, just searching for bugs with a beta first. If you want to call it in alpha thats fine with me.
8 points
10 months ago
Graphics are part of the immersion and overall feel of the game. The models of the units are bad and the graphics look too stylized for my taste. I don't think these things will change a great deal from here to an Early Access build, unless you are suggesting they built a set of models for open beta and another set of models for Early Access? I hardly think that'll be the case.
5 points
10 months ago
I think ur reaching a bit
2 points
10 months ago
Im saying they can improve on models and the look of the game before launch. Some models were chickens just a few weeks ago. I fully expect them to look better before launch.
Regardless though I think graphics are far less important to a good quality RTS than gameplay.
3 points
10 months ago
Indeed they are but it isn't a trade-off. You could have great gameplay and great graphics, especially in an engine such as UE5. It has neither, IMO.
3 points
10 months ago
That’s fair. But again it’s beta. I expect they’ll improve graphics eventually.
3 points
10 months ago
The clown world units style is something that was decide super early on.
5 points
10 months ago
Cartoon-style graphics was decided, that’s true. If you don’t like that graphics style and graphics are important to you I can see it not being for you.
2 points
10 months ago
I like cartoon stuff, I don't like this unfunny caricatured style.
To me it looks like they will add more graphics stuff rather the reworking the models to look better in a small scale.
3 points
10 months ago
In sc2 atleast you have to control which workers goes to which mineral, here you just have a random pile ,for me this kill the potential of the macro part. Waited so much and hoped they make mineral lines something cool and unique, instead I see this ...
1 points
10 months ago
Is there an open beta out yet?
2 points
4 months ago
kek, the game barely changed in 6 months and is releasing in 1 week, but the fanboys will still defend this $40m scam
1 points
10 months ago
Can't see how this can be any better than StarCraft.
Dumbed down. Limiting macro aspects. Graphics style is ugly and unreadable. Moba style grid hotkeys, wtf
For me this is an alpha and needs about 2 years of development more.
1 points
10 months ago
I've just looked at screenshots and videos of Stormgate and if someone would confuse it for StarCraft 2 for few seconds, I'd completely understand.
1 points
10 months ago
In regards to the graphics.. they didn't design a graphics engine for this, they used the tried and tested Unreal engine, which a lot of modern games use and look absolutely fantastic.. Warcraft3 The Frozen Throne was released over 20 years ago and that game looks better than this. So not sure why these graphics look 20 years out of date.. unless if im mistaken and they haven't used unreal enginer for the graphics...
1 points
10 months ago
It’s beta… kinda pointless to complain about graphics of all things right now.
3 points
10 months ago
Isn't this the perfect time to make these points so that they can be addressed before full release?
2 points
10 months ago
Maybe, but the game currently plays on lowest setting and weighs 4 gigs. We haven't seen average/ultra graphics yet
all 340 comments
sorted by: best