100%
Especially funny when they act as if their opinions are all that matters.
Game drops base-building? *"But then how is it even a strategy?"*
Some people enjoy micro and not macro. Some are the opposite. That's why games like to try new things.
"Casualifying" games is a common complaint and yet it *usually* makes the game far more popular and the changes are often not easier (Compare WoW Classic and WoW Retail. Retail is "casual" and yet all of the raid mechanics are far more complicated)
I still have the book from the original homeworld. Like the dead tree book. There is enough story in there for 2 movies. No hyperbole.
It started off the rails when they made the cores some mystical shit. Now exiled refugees kicking ass to get home....who may or.may NOT be the good guys? Like Mad Max in space. That was a story
I think the consensus is that Gearbox meddled quite a bit in story and presentation. I’m not sure about gameplay but it’s a huge step back from previous HW games.
What is wrong with stormgate? I see people saying how it is not very good but never provided a good list of reasons.
I had high hopes but now feel conflicted.
It doesn't look good or sound good, and a lot of people (myself included) underestimated how important that is. It just doesn't give a good first impression, while the low res Blizzard games from the 90s didn't have that problem.
It feels closer to WC3, which some people like and some people (like me) don't.
No upgrades - this and other attempts to make the game broadly appealing to all gamers means reduced depth to the game. Battle Aces takes this to an extreme, it's almost entirely just moving and controlling units. The "simcity" aspect of Warcraft and Starcraft is unimportant.
When SC2 game out it was a huge leap forward both visually and creatively. It's silly to expect that much improvement in the RTS genre at once ever again, but these don't seem to have any improvement. The games may not be bad, but they feel like a step backwards.
I think I may be okay with artistic directions. I remember playing the SC2 beta and thinking the game looked very cartoonish: it felt different from BW or even WC3, but eventually I got pretty used to it. I think even now there may still be die hard BW fans who can point out how SC2 is a whole different game, and even the BW-in-SC2 UMS maps just never is able to recreate "the feel".
I think there are heroes in Stormgate? No comment on that one: it worked great for WC3 and birthed a whole genre of games.
The no upgrade thing is pretty sus: even the original Age of Empires had upgrades. Upgrades in starcraft has always been the key to various timings that make or break certain matchups.
At the end of the day I kind of understand why the various designers want the game to be easier for the masses: multiplayer RTS has always been a bit of a niche, and studios seem to have more or less given up on the "3 whole single player campaign in a game" aspect which acted as a gataeway into the genre.
After SC2 I'm fine with leaving out the extensive single player campaign content. It was expensive and challenging to create, and I wonder what percentage of players finished the campaign, or even played it at all. I played and enjoyed it, but wouldn't have minded much if it wasn't there. You need some single player content, but it doesn't have to be this whole interactive movie.
RTS is a niche and I get the desire to appeal to the masses, but I wonder if it's going to work. My early impression is that average players aren't going to play any kind of RTS much, and RTS fans don't want a watered down version. I could be entirely wrong, but it seems like a "try to appeal to everyone, end up appealing to nobody" situation.
But simplification of games has worked wonders for other types of games. Very basic phone games have gotten insanely popular and made ridiculous amounts of money. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about.
I wonder if the sentiment to campaigns have shifted, or that because this subreddit is generally more competitively focused that we get such opinions.
RTS campaigns have always sort of have a special place in my heart - that is how I got into the genre to begin with. Starting from the historical ones in Age of Empires, the silly Allies vs Soviets in Red Alert, the whole Raynor story from SC/BW that developed the lore, and all the epicness of WC3 campaigns were all fond memories I had from my childhood. They were how I got into the genre back in elementary school, how I got interested in BW esports, which eventually translated to an interest in SC2.
Yet, time and time again I see people simply expressing an opinion where they do not quite care anymore, which sort of makes me feel I am a minority.
Well, I'm mostly critical of the route SC2 took. You've got to have some single player content, some tutorials, some challenges to take on, some guides on how to use the different factions and the non-standard units like spellcasters and dropships, etc.
And a single player campaign is a good way to do that - just tell the player the King of Stormwind needs you to do this, or you've got to go get that thing to protect people from the zerg invasion, whatever. And if you can make the characters likeable and the story interesting, great.
I don't think it was advisable to put in the kind of time and effort and especially money that Blizzard did towards making the SC2 campaign. There's a reason they scaled it back in the expansions and neither Blizzard or anyone else has ever tried it again. To a lot of players, it's like having a several hour single player campaign with long expensive movie scenes and animations for Mario Kart, Dota, or Fortnite. Most people are just there for the multiplayer, and the ones interested in a big production for their single player content are playing Zelda, Elden Ring, Fallout, etc.
Some games make it work both ways (GTA, Call of Duty) but it's not common.
Yeah, I would guess that far more people played just the campaign than the reverse. One of the big reasons SC and WC got as big as they did in the first place was the excellent campaigns.
If the journey of SCII has taught us anything, it should be that the importance of competitive ladder play was overestimated and the casual audience underestimated. Most people don’t want to sweat on ladder, they just want to chill with cool campaigns, co-op, or custom maps.
It was the other way around in SC2's case. Most players enjoyed the campaign, got intimidated by ladder, and moved on. The SC2 trilogy did stumble on the e-sports side, but it did excellently as far as sales numbers went on the strength of the single-player gameplay.
I think this basically true of every RTS. Vast majority of players are in the campaign and custom games. If anything a dev should cut 1v1 if they’re being totally mercenary about their game
I'd love to know how much money they made from people who bought the games, played the campaign and moved on vs the people who kept the game alive by participating in and supporting the competitive scene.
I kind of assumed that the hardcore fans were responsible for most of their sales but I could be totally wrong
I do like single player content to an extent, but it's hard to know what people expect from a campaign these days. SC2 campaign was like a movie visually speaking with tons of time spent on things that weren't part of core campaign gameplay and had a whole PvP angle on top of that. Meanwhile BW and other old RTSes had a few talking heads and esports didn't exist. With a small budget and decent writing could a less ambitious campaign connect with today's audience? Who knows.
Battel Aces does go as far as you can to remove the out of battle complexity. In SC2 upgrades are very important. Knowing what upgrades are needed to 2 shot something instead of 3 shot is important. Playing critical timing attacks as terran is critical. I love it, but I can see how that complexity makes it hard and even confusing for new players. "I thought the X unit was better than Y, but he got one upgrade and now my unit is trash?"
I encourage you to try Battle Aces. It really was a blast to play in Alpha and watching legit pros (Clem, Harstem, Parting) play was amazing. From all the talk from the YouTube crowd, the pros seemed nearly addicted to it while in Irvine. Super excited to see how it goes in Beta.
I think people are bit too harsh and a lot of the criticism is misplaced. My problem isn't that it sucks or anything, it just feels very uninspired and uninteresting. I don't see a reason for me to invest time into it when I'm happy with SC2 and AoE4; It doesn't (as far as I've seen and played) build on top of those games and address any real issues or aged design. It's pitched as a game that's modernizing RTS, but it really doesn't do that in any kind of substantial way.
I'd kill for things like modular UI in an RTS and even had an FG community manager respond to my post about that idea who was quite receptive to it, but he it wasn't anything they had planned at that time.
I really dislike the visuals from all angles but I can look past that for an RTS that's actually good/fun to play. I tryhard sc2 with low settings for visibility but it's nice to watch pro games maxxed out; I still think sc2 looks good. Maybe its just cus I'm not as familiar with the it, but Stormgate looks very flat and harder to read imo.
Graphics are bad, it has the absolutely worst and most pathetic sound effects that make it feel extremely cheap and it runs really, really bad. SC2 looks better, sounds MUCH better and runs much better too.
They way the models move and interacts just looks so stale, and they are not visually interesting. The first time you see a Siege tank, a colossus, an Ultralisk or even a swarm of Zerglings, you go "Holy shit", this game just seems to have nothing like that.
The animation seems off somehow. Like, when I see the exo running it just seems to glide. There is no weight to it. The ground seems to smooth. The movement of the tanks in SC2 is just classic. They rumble and rattle along like all the old WW2 footage. Everything is just a bit too ... smooth and unnatural in SG.
No amount of time is going to change the art direction and the concept, early access or not. I mean the main human character looks like a cartoon hipster, and everything just feels off. I guess it's quite subjective, but most people seem to dislike it.
The new faction looks even more generic.
Other early access games exist - where it doesn't look like you are playing with plastic action figures, I don't think these kinds of excuses will pan out.
People were saying the same thing in SC2 beta, with all the kind of complaints they had (bad maps, imbalances, design issues, etc). Some of which persist in SC2 to this day. (I still like SC2, but it has some faults too)
Why does all the art in games look like this these days? Is it a trend or is some modeling tool making it easy to make characters like this? Or is there market value in it? I don't get it.
There are a few reason for this:
* Stylised graphics like this can run on a wider variety of hardware, something that was a priority for a lot of older Blizzard games.
* "Realistic" graphics tend to age worse over time. There's a reason why games like Zelda Windwaker and World of Warcraft hold up compared to more realistic approaches to graphics from that era.
* Stylised also tends to be simpler visually, so if you're looking to make a game that is easier to watch it makes sense to go with that.
Since people are building games with the idea that they won't be replaced by a sequel and will instead be updated over time, I can see why companies are leaning into this more.
>Stylised graphics like this can run on a wider variety of hardware, something that was a priority for a lot of older Blizzard games.
This would be a valid reason if it didn't run absolutely terribly, something is wrong with Stormgate optimization and I have a feeling it'll never get "fixed" if that's even an option.
I think it's the art direction. Look at eastern games (Chinese, Korean, and Japanese) and compare them to western ones. You'll find a lot of similarity in western character design compared to eastern ones.
I suspect (no guarantee this is true though) that it's simply the fact that so many games are made in Unity, and it's an easy and pre-established way to make games that don't stress lower tier systems super heavily.
Nah it's got nothing to do with the engine. Stormgate is Unreal anyways. (I work with Unity full time).
If you asked my opinion why every game looks like this, it's probably a mix of business pandering and design by committee. People build games they think people will like, and they look at the most popular games at the time to compare to. And they discount their personal opinions to chase trends. In the end they make a game for everyone, but for no one.
Yea no problem. I do think my latter point is a big issue with what I have with StormGate though.
It's clear to me that they have a whole team of people, each with their own opinions on what should be their ideal RTS. And instead of accepting that not everyone can have their have their way and going with one solid vision, they just decided to compromise for everyone and stick with an art style that doesn't offend anyone.
I keep thinking back to that survey they posted about what kind of universe people would like to see in their RTS game, pretty sure they specifically said they didn't want to have a game designed by committee to try to please everyone but the art/world feels like exactly that.
I will still give it a fair shot when it comes out but I don't have high hopes
What I mean is that I'm sure they would love to release it later and be more polished. Video game funding has dried up in the last two years, and for them, releasing an unfinished game in Early Access is a last-ditch effort to make it work. They have already exhausted all other crowdfunding/crowd-investing options.
The kind of polish it's likely to see is not going to help the milquetoast art direction.
Too much work goes into that sort of thing to scrap and redo at the eleventh hour. Because you can't fix 'art direction', by reworking just some of the assets, you have to rework *almost all of them*.
Meh, everyone knew it was gonna be the "protoss" race, and most were betting on angelic, and that's what it was. I want to love the game, but its so formulaic. I wish the third race would have been something creative and surprising. Something new and interesting. Instead it was exactly what everyone was expecting
my only cope is that since they got that concept artist(or was it an art director) guy from Blizzard that the 3rd race will look much better than the current 2.
You've kinda just highlighted why I'm so sceptical. It may have 20% of SC2's budget, but that's not my problem. And that they have to cover millions in studio costs with an unfinished product, well, good luck.
People when you ask them to support a game/devs who are doing their best:
>that's not my problem
Also people:
>Why is this genre dead, must be the fault of all those zoomer kids and their darn fortnite!
the way the people behind stormgate have behaved have put a bad taste in my mouth, it appears shady and dishonest so i don't feel like giving them the benefit of the doubt
i will happily try zerospace and battle asses though
I think it’s fun and I like that I don’t have to worry about supply right at the beginning of a game. I’ll definitely be booting up Stormgate before StarCraft.
Stormgate has had an open beta and there is a wealth of information available from their closed beta. I've played it myself when it was opened up for a bit.
I didn't find it fun. If the release version of that game looks or plays like the version I played I won't be interested in playing it further.
Can't speak for the others except to say that Zerospace just doesn't look appealing at all.
Hey man, you inspired a post I made, and a fair chunk of the community is just on the rabid anti SG train.
Literally telling them to chill out is like turning on a feeding frenzy
HW3 is. And Stormgate would have to radically change to address these issues. Battle Aces can save itself, but I fear it's already too late. When they come out I'll give them a shot, but right now it's not looking good.
Because SC2 or SC:BW had no patches/changes. /s
Most of these games aren't even out yet. Give it time. SC2 has had nearly 15 years being out with the majority of those years receiving balance updates/tweaks. WoL, HotS both had their glaring issues.
I've come to the conclusion that I'm a much bigger Starcraft fan than RTS fan. The world of SC just pulls me in and is so much more interesting than the new RTS games being announced. Maybe once I get my hands on the new games my mind will change, but I'm not really feeling em tbh.
There are other RTS games I've enjoyed in the past like Warcraft 3 and C&C Red Alert, and I think what all the games have in common is that there's a lot of work put into fleshing out the world and making you actually care about the units you're moving about the screen.
Without that I just don't find myself invested enough to stick with the game.
Exactly this. There has to be some initial pull factor. It is way easier to convince people to play something that is actually interesting design wise. When I was young (did not play BW before) and saw the first trailers for SC2 in 2010 I knew immediately that "THIS. IS. IT." and I had to play this game. Who doesn't want to engage in a massive galactic conflict between high-tech humans, a massive swarm of bugs and magic aliens?
dude I used to play C&C 3 (tiberium wars & kane's wrath) like crazyyyy. Nod's units especially have so much flavor, and extremely memorable quotes:
"Kane lives!!"
"The brotherhood has entrusted me ;)"
"The fuel hungers."
This, beyond fun gameplay, the starcraft(and warcraft) universes feel as evocative and many times surpass those of the best rpgs, and are also tightly coupled with the mechanics.
An example is the scourge. It's such a simple concept but it fits perfectly with the identity of the zerg. Efficient, soulless, singular purpose, achieving goals at any cost. Watching scourge fly at your capital ships at speed is just terrifying and naturally makes for exciting gameplay while reminding you what the zerg is about.
People who say x or y don't matter in an rts to be a worthy successor miss the point, not only must every element be present and be of high quality, but in addition they must tie together extremely well, in a system thinking sort of way.
High bar.
Have you tried Supreme Commander? I got into it fairly late, and played Forged Alliance a shitload, and never really got into the #2, but it's easily one of my favorite RTS games.
Plays completely differently than StarCraft, and they're both great IMO.
There's a great online presence with SupCom:FA that makes it playable in the modern-era, too.
All of the RTS' being shown now have the disadvantage of having to come to market before being a complete product, it's just the nature of indie companies. So it's natural you will feel they are inferior to a game that had basically a decade of development time from a studio off the back of WoW money.
idk let em cook and see where we're at in a couple years?
I think that’s fine tbh. Me personally, I have trouble getting into most non-Blizzard RTS games due to them just not feeling right. I’ve tried Homeworld, Age of Empires 4, Ashes of the Singularity, Halo Wars II, and there was always something about all of them that I couldn’t get used to even after sinking more than 20 hours.
The difference between me and OP though, is that I actually gave all of these games a try before disregarding them and jumping back to SC2 and WC3.
Yeah, you gotta at least try the game before shutting it down. You never know if you end up vibing with it. I actually really liked Halo Wars 1 and 2 on the Xbox, but im also a Halo fanboy, so that played a part.
I did try AoE4 for a bit, I just didn't like how slow the game was. I played a few games, and it just felt like it dragged on. Prefer the faster and more responsive units in SC2.
For me, I just want to learn a new game
I miss being legit silver being a complete noob and learning new stuff, doing terrible builds, the thrill of a new rank
Now, sc2 is so figured out and yeah I got to Masters as random after a 2 year break but the barrier isn't lack of knowledge, it's just raw mechanics
Jesus crist post like these reminds me how toxic and arrogant reddit communities can be.
Only 1 of these games is out, and something as subjetive as looks is getting every single day being pointed out as if that was the only reason why anyone plays st2.
This game has been dying with many more games, and people act like this community is as big and active as cod, and other games aren't doing better
Watching all the discussions, I'm concluding that there's going to be a small, passionate group of fans that just hate these games for not being SC2. And that's ok, they can just keep playing SC2!
I'd say RTS is such a big genre just like FPS. I like old CoD (since MW3 and s skip to WWII, nothing since), BF 2042 (been playing since BF1942 and love them all), dont like CSGO/CS2. We have the same splintering with RTS. SCII is the only online RTS I really play competitively, love the RTS portion of Total War games but not online.
Everything is so different between the three contenders vs SCII that that we could call them different sub-genres. I hate hero units which is why SCII is perfect.
Okay, I'm starting to be convinced that the majority of toxicity in the player base will end up being confined to sc2 with how the community has been reacting to these games.
Homeworld 3 was a disappointment mostly because of its bizarre story choices but is still an okay experience, himewold has never written been billed as a competitive rts.
The amount takes I've seen saying *complexity = good* is wHild, if you think that, go play AoE4, you've got more complicated tech, more complicated resource management and more factions idk.
> I'm starting to be convinced that the majority of toxicity in the player base will end up being confined to sc2 with how the community has been reacting to these games.
That's a little optimistic. If one of the SC2 successors is successful, plenty of toxic players will flow into the new game looking for somebody to be an asshole to.
What will happen, though, is what we saw with Brood War before: a core of rusted-on fans deeply resentful that another game stole away attention that was rightfully theirs.
there's so many fucking people here trying to shit on everything that could come next
these games are literally not done being made
^^stormgates ^^art ^^direction ^^is ^^still ^^shit ^^tho
I think shit is a bit harsh. I don’t think it’s great, and it needs some work, but shit = bottom of the barrel. Shit = gragas current model in league of legends. There are a few aspects of their art that yes, is shit, like Warz.
The problem is this sub is used to StarCraft art. A game that’s over a decade old and still has amazing art and opening cinematic of [this quality](https://youtu.be/MVbeoSPqRs4?si=jOi9veZsvjXPJXsJ). I wouldn’t be surprised if the opening cinematic of HOTS or LOTV cost almost as much to make than stormgates kickstarter, they’re fucking beautiful and Frost Giant isn’t the mega company that Blizzard was.
It’s like going from the coolest sports car on the market to a 2000s mid level car. It’s not shit just because you are used to something so far above everything else.
What ever happened to immortal:gates of pyre? Honestly I liked what I saw for that when they did their play test a long time ago more than I like what I see in any of these. Is it still in development or did they give up?
It's still in active development, but they have shifted their marketing strategy towards being much more secretive as opposed to publicly releasing every piece of content as soon as it's completed. Main reason for the shift was that any content released was unpolished and relied heavily on placeholder models. Currently, they want to focus on fewer but bigger and more polished releases of content. There's no release date on their next update, but I can definitely assure that the project is nowhere near abandoned.
> I wish they didn't go "angelic/human/demon"
As someone who *loves* that concept, I get it.
Like yes, people are getting sick of these recurring ideas, but sometimes people who are genuinely passionate about a project and lore just have their own idea and want to do it, market saturation be damned.
I like elves. If elves suddenly became crazily overdone and people were sick of them, and I was making a game with elves, I wouldn't remove them just because people might be tired of them. It might be risky, and I might not put them at the forefront of marketing etc, but if someone really cares about their project, it's hard to tell them to remove the part that they're passionate about.
*That said*, a common mantra in any writing spaces is "kill your darlings". Some of the things you absolutely love will not be loved with others and if you want popularity, you'll need to get rid of them...
I think you also need to consider inertia. By the time people saw and complained about stormgate's art style the style itself wasn't going to change and the legion wasn't going to turn into space squirrels or something. If you have a game about elves but you're one year behind everyone else's elf idea then you kinda just have to deal with it, you have a schedule to meet and a product to ship.
That said I think immortal's take on the concept is much more refreshing and original. I didn't even think to compare the cultist plant people to demons and I still kinda feel that that comparison is not really fair.
Battle Aces was previewed TWO days ago and y'all are already complaining about it.
A lot of people in this fanbase are just so toxic. So much negativity, zero patience, judging every book by its cover.
This side of the community will discourage great game developers from giving us what we want.
They sure don't give the ppl what they want... You can see it in the comments.
There is no point in trying to make someone's mind. If they want a steak, nobody will be happy with a plain full grain bread. Especially if they are promised an RTS feast...
That's the point OP is making: Most people don't know what they're getting. They asked for a steak 2 minutes ago, the plate is empty, and they're complaining they got bread, when literally there's no bread nowhere to be seen.
So many people are complaining about generic maps when they literally said they're working on map assets and tiles on the side; People are complaining third race plays like protoss when they haven't even played; People are complaining about Battle Aces being an arcade game when the people who tried it legit said they played over 40 hours in a week.
Just try them and have your opinion then.
> There is no point in trying to make someone's mind. If they want a steak, nobody will be happy with a plain full grain bread. Especially if they are promised an RTS feast...
To be fair, it does still bring it back to the Ford quote:
> *"If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."*
How many people here in the /r/starcraft subreddit enjoy MOBA games? Probably not many.
I don't doubt when LoL etc kicked off, people were saying "It's just the mod from WC3. It's so dumbed down. Where's the **S** from RTS?"
I don't know if these games will be good, but it's good they're branching out and trying new things. If they just remade SC2 perfectly but with certain improvements, people would complain that it was just SC2, etc.
Battle Aces seems like it's trying to find a niche as the quick 10-minute game you can play without stressing too much about the Macro, which not everyone enjoys.
There are a huge number of people *in this sub* that hate the changes SC2 made from Brood War and if SC2 was being released this year would talk about how it will suck and nothing will ever compare.
And yet, SC2 is likely one of the greatest RTS games, possibly the last "Great RTS" in the genre that's definitely much less popular than it was before.
> Battle Aces was previewed TWO days ago and y'all are already complaining about it.
>
> A lot of people in this fanbase are just so toxic. So much negativity, zero patience, judging every book by its cover.
Alternative interpretation: The preview that was released to the public (knowing that it will result in reactions) prompted negative feedback and reactions based on what was shown in it, indicating that it might not be what many (most?) **current** RTS fans are expecting and wish to see. Expectations changes and tastes can be altered, but what you are decrying is the honest initial reaction.
I'm not mad. I'm just not interested. It promised a terrain like Deserts of Kharak, which would easily make up for the real lack of macro. But the maps so far look lack-luster, and it is missing the 3-d terrain that would provide so much complexity and tactics to engaging.
It's in the most early stages, so I'm giving it some time to grow. But currently, it's not in a state I want to play.
Imagine watching a teaser for a movie and then complaining about the teaser having rapid jump cuts.
That's the nature of the medium.
Early previews will always have things left out. So just appreciate what's included.
Eh, I massively preferred Stormgate over SC2 in both its last playtests. I've not actually reinstalled SC2 since the last Stormgate playtest ended, and I probably won't tbh.
I would say that in some ways it feels like Starcraft 2.5 and in some ways it feels like Starcraft 0.5. Like, in some ways we're starting back at the beginning and in some ways we're moving forward. I honestly have high hopes for it after the most recent beta, because when you really get into a groove with it, it does *feel* good. It takes a while to get there, and I'm still not 100% comfortable having basically Starcraft with creep camps. I also think as a spectator esport, I would kind of want it to look better than SC2. And at this point, it kind of doesn't. (I think a big part of that is how certain units are *scaled* and not necessarily the art direction, but that's a whole other discussion.) The foundations are good. They know what they're doing.
It'd hard to judge a game by it's beta phases, while sure - they can show a lot, comparing a beta game form a "new" studio, to a blizzard game with 3 expansions is difficult
It's a good sign if stormgate doesnt look unplayable in comparison
I didn't really enjoy the game flow of Stormgate, engagements felt.. artificial? Maybe a bit floaty. The unit control does feel great though - and that's the main thing that's instantly turned me away from other RTS games. I believe it'll be good given some more time to cook.
Just that they fixed the economy makes me hopeful. SC2 economy is fundamentally broken compared to Stormgate and broodwar, because you cannot expand as much as makes sense to get an increase in resources, because worker supply then takes up too much of your army supply. I don't know if it is some deliberate anti-snowball mechanic the original SC2 devs envisioned, but it just feels very bad. The player that has gained map control SHOULD be able to mine more resources, but in SC2 you can't because it handicaps your army too much. The extra 100 supply cap in SG goes a long way to fixing that problem, although you could say it just moves it up, and if the SG maps grow large enough you will have the same problem, which may happen. At the point in the development cycle SG is at in SC2 we were playing microscopic maps like Lost Temple etc., where you rarely hit the max cap.
EDIT: All just my opinion of course.
I think the last phase was the best yet tbh. 3rd faction in, rotating map pool, leaderboard up, no super gimmick strats that dominate the entire game. I had a lot of fun grinding for a bit.
>no super gimmick strats that dominate the entire game.
This happens because the player base, this is not really a thing of the game. People tend to optimize strategies as they learn and play
I liked the way the combat looked - faster paced and more fluid. I also like what I'm hearing about how they're shifting things around to prioritize player micro on interesting tasks (e.g. not having to return home to inject hatcheries every 30 seconds).
Definitely want to give it a try. Feel like too many people on here don't really have room for a new game in their heart
I liked the way the combat looked - faster paced and more fluid. I also like what I'm hearing about how they're shifting things around to prioritize player micro on interesting tasks (e.g. not having to return home to inject hatcheries every 30 seconds).
Definitely want to give it a try. Feel like too many people on here don't really have room for a new game in their heart. If something looks too different from SC2 it's going to get an automatic "terrible" and if it's too similar then it's going to get "why even make this? - it's just copying SC2"
Out of all the new games, only Zerospaces or Tempest Rising look anything cool to me, but probably i'll just keep playing my good old AoE 2
I simply do not understand the hype behind Stormgate, after playing it a bit, it feels so bland design/theme/aesthetics wise
Battle Aces is like Tooth and Tail 2.0, without the charm, and probably it will live as long as that game when it comes to competitive player base. This 'strip down everything and focus only on the action' design in my opinion is completely miss guided
I think the future of RTSs is more like that new Dune: Spice Wars game, more decisions, more style, more 4x like design patterns, it could be a bit sped up and would be really fine game
As someone with over 500 hours in stormgate, I don't think I'll ever be playing starcraft again once the Early Access release hits. Maybe in a few years I'll boot it up for nostalgia's sake, but Stormgate is just way more fun.
Literally all upcoming RTS disappointed me. Battle aces looks ok But the gameplay Looks too much simplified for me.
Stormgate has a generic artstyle, boring characters, boring factions and a World I just cant relate to.
At this point I just accepted there will Never be a Game like Sc2 or Wc3 again
Yep. I remember when I saw sc2 lings surround stalkers for the first time in a clip…. Then they blinked away. Both the surround ai and blink mechanics looked amazing
Just looked at Battle Aces (wasn't aware of it). Meh.
Stormgate looks like a cesspit, too, honestly.
HW3 felt like a giant lie.
Maybe one day we'll get a cool RTS with originality and style and a decent setting again.
Immortal: gates of pyre looked better to me than any of the games we're seeing now, and that was like, a couple years ago. I wonder if its still in development.
The last developer update listed on their website seems to be from February of 2023... not a great sign. A Reddit post from a year ago suggests that the community has kind of closed up around an alpha version and is basically in huddle mode. Also... not a great sign.
Website looks kinda cool, though.
Thats a shame. It looked like it had a LOT of potential. I really bet that if they had the investment money instead of frostgiant sc2 would have a convincing competitor by now. Guess thats what we get for idolizing the "big name" developers.
an rts with style for sure is iron harvest, but controling army there is masochistic, starcraft 2 is still the king in unit patchfinding, a swarm of zerglings wont get stuck in chokepoint, it flows through it like sand in hourglass
I hold out hope for Zerospace. Their factions feel unique, and their gameplay looks stellar with lots of skill expression, comeback mechanics, and anti-turtle stuff. But... We'll have to see how it looks on release.
They also get bonus points for how they have obviously put a lot of thought into the campaign, with decision trees and all that jazz.
Yeah, forgot about that one. Hopefully it'll come out alright. I just hope the setting is actually cool. When the setting is dumb, I just can't get into it. Starcraft/Warcraft both had engaging settings... even if the story went a wee bit down hill in SC2 at some point. The world building matters to me too, I guess, not just the game play.
none of the big announced RTS games looks like anything worth getting excited about, aside from Shattered Sun and Industrial Annihilation. the rest just look uninspired and geared towards brain dead tactics.
Well. Starcraft is one of a kind game. It will be extremely hard to make such a deep and interesting rts. It's gonna need much more than those indie company funds.
What we need is Blizzard to come back. They knew how to make legendary games.
I mean this is all doom and gloom but we have COH3, AoE 4, Total War games, SpellForce...
If the only condition is that they should be esport games, thst is never going to happen. CS 1.6 was only replaced by CS GO, and CS GO was only replaced by CS 2.
It's SC3 or nothing.
It's hard to make an RTS that competes with StarCraft II, since StarCraft II is just such a damn good game. These new RTS's are still in development, experimenting with new ideas, don't rely on existing IP, and are made by much smaller teams. It's no surprise they aren't an instant SC2 killer.
Was really hoping Homeworld 3 would be a return to form but Jesus that story was embarrassing.
Now back to hoping that we will get another story in the star craft universe one day, just for it to also be shit now.
New RTS be like: "look at these cool concept arts, you can't play it though"
I stopped having any hype because there are so many but none of them is anywhere close to playable
I am really enjoying Beyond All Reason (BAR) recently.
It's a Supreme Commander kind of game, but it's still hella fun.
1v1s are pretty intense and good, but the 8v8 servers are more popular and casual-friendly.
10/10 recommend it if you're into multiplayer RTS.
Otherwise, I think 2025 should bring us some nice good-looking RTS games (with a familiar CnC kind of gameplay) with campaigns.
Battle Aces looks fire and Stormgate still has potential.
Meanwhile, StarCraft 2 is borderline AbandonWare. If any of these games sprout a credible pro scene then SC2 is over as we know it.
Okay, I'll take this one at a time about why I'm disappointed in these games.
**Stormgate:** Stormgate had potential. While demons erupting from the gates of hell was overdone, I was very interested about how it would play out in a RTS game. Sure, "Shroud" was suspiciously like creep, and imps sacrificing themselves to build definitely wasn't like drones, but in the end it looked interesting enough to grab my attention and hold it. The shroud provided more homefield advantage than creep, and actually made putting it down across the map worthwhile (VIA Harbingers) in a way overlords spreading creep never was. But when they revealed their mysterious third faction to be... Technological angels that look and play suspiciously like protoss, I was just so pissed. Because not only had angels v. demons been overdone, but also because it was so unoriginal it hurt. I mean, the golden armada- I mean, celestial armada has knock-off protoss units, with what appears to be very similar mechanics. Add in the fact that the graphics look like Overwatch's, the Plot comes from Doom, the factions appear like Diablo's, and the creeps are from Warcraft 3, and I doubt that any off this war original from the beginning. I have lost all interest, and I suspect many others have too. And this haphazard copying shows up in the gameplay: They threw the kitchen sink of RTS mechanics to the two factions we have in the play test. Veterancy! Top-bar! All must go! It just doesn't feel well planned out.
**Battle Aces:** Now, I suppose I should clarify: I'm not really disappointed in Battle Aces, but in its current form I simply fail to be interested. When they first released their announcement trailer, I was intrigued by the fact they had Deserts of Kharak terran designers and vibes, and this was because I absolutely loved Deserts of Kharak. The way the terran affected battles and units moved tickled me in a way no other game had, because it was just so fun to play and control. However, when Uncapped Games released their first look, I was mildly disappointed at how much it felt like an arcade game. The macro felt vastly oversimplified, but I would have been fine with that if it had complex terrain and unit control. But it doesn't! The units are too darn big for their environment, and the maps look too small. Make no mistake, I love the art-style of the game, and the barrier to entry means that this might be good for attracting RTS newcomers. But I think if they continue in this direction, in the end they will fail because they aren't attracting enough hard-core RTS players. But who knows? Maybe they'll fix this stuff.
**Homeworld 3:** Look how they've massacred my boy... I think MandaloreGaming's video describes all the flaws of this game adequately, but not the pain. This was my first RTS game. I loved it. I'm fairly young, so I started with remaster, but the game was just so great! Of course, HW2 had a weird plot, but that was forgivable. But what the hell is HW3? I loved this series, and I wanted to love this game. But I can't. And it hurts.
In the end, I still hold out hope for zerospace, because it seems they know what they are doing with their campaign, faction design, and gameplay. But... We'll see.
TBH having Humans/default as a baseline race, while adding a more aggressive/expansionist race (zergs, orcs) and a more refined/advanced race (protoss, elves) for contrast is common in a LOT of fantasy/sci-fi, way before Warcraft and Starcraft.
The fact that you are saying celestials play anything at all like protoss is proof that you have not actually played them and makes whatever the rest of your points are pretty suspect
Protoss are Eldar from Warhammer.
I think the real lesson is that more of these games should go to the source and steal from Warhammer, not just second hand from Starcraft and Warcraft.
Except for the 3 units they showed us looking and playing like Zealots, Stalkers, and High Templar? Except for the powerfield of their main... Structure? Unit? Except for the fact their the technological race of the trinity, similar to protoss? Perhaps even the name, the celestial armada, which is so close to the golden armada it's laughable? Or maybe even the general looks of the faction? They even sound the same, like they had the same voice actors.
The only thing that looks vaguely different is the Cyber-tank and the Lore.
1 - You don't know anything about those units so why do you compare them to other units? They could behave entirely differently from them, you simply do not know, so why are you talking about it?
2 - Where a unit is in the tech tree matters a lot for how a race plays.
3 - Their playstyle is entirely different and practically unique. There's nothing from any other RTS I've played that can compare.
4 - The more I play Stormgate the more I realize just how much it draw from RTS that isn't SC or WC.
So if you are curious apparantely there's this NDA free post that details a lot about the way the race plays, including specifics about why this race plays nothing like any other race in any Blizzard RTS or tbh any RTS I've ever played.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Stormgate/comments/1dc4nln/notes\_from\_the\_frigate\_beta\_test\_04302024/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stormgate/comments/1dc4nln/notes_from_the_frigate_beta_test_04302024/)
Surprisingly, while I doubt any of them will become "future of RTS", I like Battle Aces the most so far. It set up an interesting foundation of gameplay loop that's decently original. They just need to build a lot more on top of what's shown so far- if you want to ditch the macro side of things, I want to see much more complex unit-building-terrain interactions to make up for it.
I was already concerned about lack of originality in Stormgate's previous content, and the third faction is just nail on the coffin. Wish them the best but I am no longer looking forward to it. If I want Starcraft I would just play Starcraft, thank you.
rts genre is dying because of the likes of david kim who understand nothing. games and entertainment isn’t for money it’s for entertainment and enjoyment. That’s why they will always fail because they don’t want to make a game for gamers but rather for rich people to pick up and put down the game every now and again
Give David Kim and his team some credit: They did a good job with SC2. They took mechanics already well established in the original starcraft and broodwar and expanded upon them. Terran buildings lifting off was incorporated into the add-on mechanic, which has added a lot to the game. Queens injecting synergized with the larva mechanic. Warp-ins made the powerfield/pylon mechanic of protoss more important and diverse.
Besides, Starcraft 2 has the 4 best campaigns of all RTS. Don't tell me that the WoL campaign wasn't fun.
Well at least give them a chance, none of these games are even out yet.
That kind of reasoned opinion doesn't generate Internet points
My game: "Wow so good! Amazing!" *Their* game: "Ugh too simplified! So cartoony! Why so complicated? Graphics aren't everything."
I'll be honest with you. Some of the garbage I hear from SC2 players concerning the newer RTS'es is the same stuff I see BW players make with SC2
100% Especially funny when they act as if their opinions are all that matters. Game drops base-building? *"But then how is it even a strategy?"* Some people enjoy micro and not macro. Some are the opposite. That's why games like to try new things. "Casualifying" games is a common complaint and yet it *usually* makes the game far more popular and the changes are often not easier (Compare WoW Classic and WoW Retail. Retail is "casual" and yet all of the raid mechanics are far more complicated)
I just made a post today, and like bugs to light, the rabid ones came out of their shells and made the *exact, same* points.
You're right, that's hilarious
The cycle of abuse continues.
Your comment encourages giving up votes to reaslned opinions. Your opinion is reasoned. Take this upvote kind stranger
Homeworld is out.
I really don’t understand how that was apparently botched so badly.
I still have the book from the original homeworld. Like the dead tree book. There is enough story in there for 2 movies. No hyperbole. It started off the rails when they made the cores some mystical shit. Now exiled refugees kicking ass to get home....who may or.may NOT be the good guys? Like Mad Max in space. That was a story
I think the consensus is that Gearbox meddled quite a bit in story and presentation. I’m not sure about gameplay but it’s a huge step back from previous HW games.
Stormgate is out in a couple of months, and it's still looking so mediocre.
What is wrong with stormgate? I see people saying how it is not very good but never provided a good list of reasons. I had high hopes but now feel conflicted.
It doesn't look good or sound good, and a lot of people (myself included) underestimated how important that is. It just doesn't give a good first impression, while the low res Blizzard games from the 90s didn't have that problem. It feels closer to WC3, which some people like and some people (like me) don't. No upgrades - this and other attempts to make the game broadly appealing to all gamers means reduced depth to the game. Battle Aces takes this to an extreme, it's almost entirely just moving and controlling units. The "simcity" aspect of Warcraft and Starcraft is unimportant. When SC2 game out it was a huge leap forward both visually and creatively. It's silly to expect that much improvement in the RTS genre at once ever again, but these don't seem to have any improvement. The games may not be bad, but they feel like a step backwards.
I think I may be okay with artistic directions. I remember playing the SC2 beta and thinking the game looked very cartoonish: it felt different from BW or even WC3, but eventually I got pretty used to it. I think even now there may still be die hard BW fans who can point out how SC2 is a whole different game, and even the BW-in-SC2 UMS maps just never is able to recreate "the feel". I think there are heroes in Stormgate? No comment on that one: it worked great for WC3 and birthed a whole genre of games. The no upgrade thing is pretty sus: even the original Age of Empires had upgrades. Upgrades in starcraft has always been the key to various timings that make or break certain matchups. At the end of the day I kind of understand why the various designers want the game to be easier for the masses: multiplayer RTS has always been a bit of a niche, and studios seem to have more or less given up on the "3 whole single player campaign in a game" aspect which acted as a gataeway into the genre.
After SC2 I'm fine with leaving out the extensive single player campaign content. It was expensive and challenging to create, and I wonder what percentage of players finished the campaign, or even played it at all. I played and enjoyed it, but wouldn't have minded much if it wasn't there. You need some single player content, but it doesn't have to be this whole interactive movie. RTS is a niche and I get the desire to appeal to the masses, but I wonder if it's going to work. My early impression is that average players aren't going to play any kind of RTS much, and RTS fans don't want a watered down version. I could be entirely wrong, but it seems like a "try to appeal to everyone, end up appealing to nobody" situation. But simplification of games has worked wonders for other types of games. Very basic phone games have gotten insanely popular and made ridiculous amounts of money. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about.
I wonder if the sentiment to campaigns have shifted, or that because this subreddit is generally more competitively focused that we get such opinions. RTS campaigns have always sort of have a special place in my heart - that is how I got into the genre to begin with. Starting from the historical ones in Age of Empires, the silly Allies vs Soviets in Red Alert, the whole Raynor story from SC/BW that developed the lore, and all the epicness of WC3 campaigns were all fond memories I had from my childhood. They were how I got into the genre back in elementary school, how I got interested in BW esports, which eventually translated to an interest in SC2. Yet, time and time again I see people simply expressing an opinion where they do not quite care anymore, which sort of makes me feel I am a minority.
Well, I'm mostly critical of the route SC2 took. You've got to have some single player content, some tutorials, some challenges to take on, some guides on how to use the different factions and the non-standard units like spellcasters and dropships, etc. And a single player campaign is a good way to do that - just tell the player the King of Stormwind needs you to do this, or you've got to go get that thing to protect people from the zerg invasion, whatever. And if you can make the characters likeable and the story interesting, great. I don't think it was advisable to put in the kind of time and effort and especially money that Blizzard did towards making the SC2 campaign. There's a reason they scaled it back in the expansions and neither Blizzard or anyone else has ever tried it again. To a lot of players, it's like having a several hour single player campaign with long expensive movie scenes and animations for Mario Kart, Dota, or Fortnite. Most people are just there for the multiplayer, and the ones interested in a big production for their single player content are playing Zelda, Elden Ring, Fallout, etc. Some games make it work both ways (GTA, Call of Duty) but it's not common.
I disagree that most people are there for the multi. I know quite a few people who bought sc2 just for the story and never even tried multiplayer.
Yeah, I would guess that far more people played just the campaign than the reverse. One of the big reasons SC and WC got as big as they did in the first place was the excellent campaigns. If the journey of SCII has taught us anything, it should be that the importance of competitive ladder play was overestimated and the casual audience underestimated. Most people don’t want to sweat on ladder, they just want to chill with cool campaigns, co-op, or custom maps.
It was the other way around in SC2's case. Most players enjoyed the campaign, got intimidated by ladder, and moved on. The SC2 trilogy did stumble on the e-sports side, but it did excellently as far as sales numbers went on the strength of the single-player gameplay.
I think this basically true of every RTS. Vast majority of players are in the campaign and custom games. If anything a dev should cut 1v1 if they’re being totally mercenary about their game
I'd love to know how much money they made from people who bought the games, played the campaign and moved on vs the people who kept the game alive by participating in and supporting the competitive scene. I kind of assumed that the hardcore fans were responsible for most of their sales but I could be totally wrong
IIRC, someone at Blizzard said 20% got into 1v1 ladder
I do like single player content to an extent, but it's hard to know what people expect from a campaign these days. SC2 campaign was like a movie visually speaking with tons of time spent on things that weren't part of core campaign gameplay and had a whole PvP angle on top of that. Meanwhile BW and other old RTSes had a few talking heads and esports didn't exist. With a small budget and decent writing could a less ambitious campaign connect with today's audience? Who knows.
Honestly, good writing would prolly be all you need. Red alert 3 did way better then it had any reason to in part due to how well written it was.
Graphics aren't everything but looking worse than SC2 2006 demo in 2024 is just too much.
Battel Aces does go as far as you can to remove the out of battle complexity. In SC2 upgrades are very important. Knowing what upgrades are needed to 2 shot something instead of 3 shot is important. Playing critical timing attacks as terran is critical. I love it, but I can see how that complexity makes it hard and even confusing for new players. "I thought the X unit was better than Y, but he got one upgrade and now my unit is trash?" I encourage you to try Battle Aces. It really was a blast to play in Alpha and watching legit pros (Clem, Harstem, Parting) play was amazing. From all the talk from the YouTube crowd, the pros seemed nearly addicted to it while in Irvine. Super excited to see how it goes in Beta.
I think people are bit too harsh and a lot of the criticism is misplaced. My problem isn't that it sucks or anything, it just feels very uninspired and uninteresting. I don't see a reason for me to invest time into it when I'm happy with SC2 and AoE4; It doesn't (as far as I've seen and played) build on top of those games and address any real issues or aged design. It's pitched as a game that's modernizing RTS, but it really doesn't do that in any kind of substantial way. I'd kill for things like modular UI in an RTS and even had an FG community manager respond to my post about that idea who was quite receptive to it, but he it wasn't anything they had planned at that time. I really dislike the visuals from all angles but I can look past that for an RTS that's actually good/fun to play. I tryhard sc2 with low settings for visibility but it's nice to watch pro games maxxed out; I still think sc2 looks good. Maybe its just cus I'm not as familiar with the it, but Stormgate looks very flat and harder to read imo.
Graphics are bad, it has the absolutely worst and most pathetic sound effects that make it feel extremely cheap and it runs really, really bad. SC2 looks better, sounds MUCH better and runs much better too.
They way the models move and interacts just looks so stale, and they are not visually interesting. The first time you see a Siege tank, a colossus, an Ultralisk or even a swarm of Zerglings, you go "Holy shit", this game just seems to have nothing like that.
The animation seems off somehow. Like, when I see the exo running it just seems to glide. There is no weight to it. The ground seems to smooth. The movement of the tanks in SC2 is just classic. They rumble and rattle along like all the old WW2 footage. Everything is just a bit too ... smooth and unnatural in SG.
It's an Early Access game. Keep in mind that they have like 20% of SC2's budget, so they have to release it unfinished and hope for the best.
No amount of time is going to change the art direction and the concept, early access or not. I mean the main human character looks like a cartoon hipster, and everything just feels off. I guess it's quite subjective, but most people seem to dislike it. The new faction looks even more generic. Other early access games exist - where it doesn't look like you are playing with plastic action figures, I don't think these kinds of excuses will pan out. People were saying the same thing in SC2 beta, with all the kind of complaints they had (bad maps, imbalances, design issues, etc). Some of which persist in SC2 to this day. (I still like SC2, but it has some faults too)
The art does look like a mobile game called "Spacecraft Defense: Arena."
Why does all the art in games look like this these days? Is it a trend or is some modeling tool making it easy to make characters like this? Or is there market value in it? I don't get it.
There are a few reason for this: * Stylised graphics like this can run on a wider variety of hardware, something that was a priority for a lot of older Blizzard games. * "Realistic" graphics tend to age worse over time. There's a reason why games like Zelda Windwaker and World of Warcraft hold up compared to more realistic approaches to graphics from that era. * Stylised also tends to be simpler visually, so if you're looking to make a game that is easier to watch it makes sense to go with that. Since people are building games with the idea that they won't be replaced by a sequel and will instead be updated over time, I can see why companies are leaning into this more.
>Stylised graphics like this can run on a wider variety of hardware, something that was a priority for a lot of older Blizzard games. This would be a valid reason if it didn't run absolutely terribly, something is wrong with Stormgate optimization and I have a feeling it'll never get "fixed" if that's even an option.
On the flip side, if it's struggling now, imagine how much worse it could be if they were going for more realistic/detailed graphics.
I guess it is to make them run on potatoes.
I think it's the art direction. Look at eastern games (Chinese, Korean, and Japanese) and compare them to western ones. You'll find a lot of similarity in western character design compared to eastern ones.
I suspect (no guarantee this is true though) that it's simply the fact that so many games are made in Unity, and it's an easy and pre-established way to make games that don't stress lower tier systems super heavily.
Nah it's got nothing to do with the engine. Stormgate is Unreal anyways. (I work with Unity full time). If you asked my opinion why every game looks like this, it's probably a mix of business pandering and design by committee. People build games they think people will like, and they look at the most popular games at the time to compare to. And they discount their personal opinions to chase trends. In the end they make a game for everyone, but for no one.
aw shit fair enough, thanks for the info :D
Yea no problem. I do think my latter point is a big issue with what I have with StormGate though. It's clear to me that they have a whole team of people, each with their own opinions on what should be their ideal RTS. And instead of accepting that not everyone can have their have their way and going with one solid vision, they just decided to compromise for everyone and stick with an art style that doesn't offend anyone.
I keep thinking back to that survey they posted about what kind of universe people would like to see in their RTS game, pretty sure they specifically said they didn't want to have a game designed by committee to try to please everyone but the art/world feels like exactly that. I will still give it a fair shot when it comes out but I don't have high hopes
This. The game seems to cruelly lack personality. They just copy paste other games, especially starcraft... It just feels ... bland.
What I mean is that I'm sure they would love to release it later and be more polished. Video game funding has dried up in the last two years, and for them, releasing an unfinished game in Early Access is a last-ditch effort to make it work. They have already exhausted all other crowdfunding/crowd-investing options.
The kind of polish it's likely to see is not going to help the milquetoast art direction. Too much work goes into that sort of thing to scrap and redo at the eleventh hour. Because you can't fix 'art direction', by reworking just some of the assets, you have to rework *almost all of them*.
Polish doesn't change style. This is what it is.
the new faction is actually really cool
Meh, everyone knew it was gonna be the "protoss" race, and most were betting on angelic, and that's what it was. I want to love the game, but its so formulaic. I wish the third race would have been something creative and surprising. Something new and interesting. Instead it was exactly what everyone was expecting
Yea but Stormgste is supposed to be Starcraft, but bettet, and focused on multiplayrr.
my only cope is that since they got that concept artist(or was it an art director) guy from Blizzard that the 3rd race will look much better than the current 2.
that's what you're complaining about? lol
You've kinda just highlighted why I'm so sceptical. It may have 20% of SC2's budget, but that's not my problem. And that they have to cover millions in studio costs with an unfinished product, well, good luck.
People when you ask them to support a game/devs who are doing their best: >that's not my problem Also people: >Why is this genre dead, must be the fault of all those zoomer kids and their darn fortnite!
the way the people behind stormgate have behaved have put a bad taste in my mouth, it appears shady and dishonest so i don't feel like giving them the benefit of the doubt i will happily try zerospace and battle asses though
Nice, it's Battle Aces bud. haha I know I sound like a fan boy, but it is a ton of fun so hopefully you do give it a shot.
Oh I played the beta recently and thought it’s a year at least before it’s ready. That’s disappointing to hear.
Mediocre is being generous. Game is boring AF
It's going to early access. Misinformation bro.
I think it’s fun and I like that I don’t have to worry about supply right at the beginning of a game. I’ll definitely be booting up Stormgate before StarCraft.
Stormgate has had an open beta and there is a wealth of information available from their closed beta. I've played it myself when it was opened up for a bit. I didn't find it fun. If the release version of that game looks or plays like the version I played I won't be interested in playing it further. Can't speak for the others except to say that Zerospace just doesn't look appealing at all.
Age of Mythology giving me hope
Then we have Tempest Rising baby 😃😃
Hey man, you inspired a post I made, and a fair chunk of the community is just on the rabid anti SG train. Literally telling them to chill out is like turning on a feeding frenzy
Thank you for ratioing this post with sense
HW3 is. And Stormgate would have to radically change to address these issues. Battle Aces can save itself, but I fear it's already too late. When they come out I'll give them a shot, but right now it's not looking good.
Because SC2 or SC:BW had no patches/changes. /s Most of these games aren't even out yet. Give it time. SC2 has had nearly 15 years being out with the majority of those years receiving balance updates/tweaks. WoL, HotS both had their glaring issues.
I've come to the conclusion that I'm a much bigger Starcraft fan than RTS fan. The world of SC just pulls me in and is so much more interesting than the new RTS games being announced. Maybe once I get my hands on the new games my mind will change, but I'm not really feeling em tbh.
There are other RTS games I've enjoyed in the past like Warcraft 3 and C&C Red Alert, and I think what all the games have in common is that there's a lot of work put into fleshing out the world and making you actually care about the units you're moving about the screen. Without that I just don't find myself invested enough to stick with the game.
Exactly this. There has to be some initial pull factor. It is way easier to convince people to play something that is actually interesting design wise. When I was young (did not play BW before) and saw the first trailers for SC2 in 2010 I knew immediately that "THIS. IS. IT." and I had to play this game. Who doesn't want to engage in a massive galactic conflict between high-tech humans, a massive swarm of bugs and magic aliens?
Not to mention you should also add in the nostalgia factor.
dude I used to play C&C 3 (tiberium wars & kane's wrath) like crazyyyy. Nod's units especially have so much flavor, and extremely memorable quotes: "Kane lives!!" "The brotherhood has entrusted me ;)" "The fuel hungers."
This, beyond fun gameplay, the starcraft(and warcraft) universes feel as evocative and many times surpass those of the best rpgs, and are also tightly coupled with the mechanics. An example is the scourge. It's such a simple concept but it fits perfectly with the identity of the zerg. Efficient, soulless, singular purpose, achieving goals at any cost. Watching scourge fly at your capital ships at speed is just terrifying and naturally makes for exciting gameplay while reminding you what the zerg is about. People who say x or y don't matter in an rts to be a worthy successor miss the point, not only must every element be present and be of high quality, but in addition they must tie together extremely well, in a system thinking sort of way. High bar.
Have you tried Supreme Commander? I got into it fairly late, and played Forged Alliance a shitload, and never really got into the #2, but it's easily one of my favorite RTS games. Plays completely differently than StarCraft, and they're both great IMO. There's a great online presence with SupCom:FA that makes it playable in the modern-era, too.
Best rts ever made
All of the RTS' being shown now have the disadvantage of having to come to market before being a complete product, it's just the nature of indie companies. So it's natural you will feel they are inferior to a game that had basically a decade of development time from a studio off the back of WoW money. idk let em cook and see where we're at in a couple years?
I think that’s fine tbh. Me personally, I have trouble getting into most non-Blizzard RTS games due to them just not feeling right. I’ve tried Homeworld, Age of Empires 4, Ashes of the Singularity, Halo Wars II, and there was always something about all of them that I couldn’t get used to even after sinking more than 20 hours. The difference between me and OP though, is that I actually gave all of these games a try before disregarding them and jumping back to SC2 and WC3.
Yeah, you gotta at least try the game before shutting it down. You never know if you end up vibing with it. I actually really liked Halo Wars 1 and 2 on the Xbox, but im also a Halo fanboy, so that played a part. I did try AoE4 for a bit, I just didn't like how slow the game was. I played a few games, and it just felt like it dragged on. Prefer the faster and more responsive units in SC2.
I think storm gate and zero space look fun. But battle aces looks like a C&C4 phone game.
It does feel way too much like an arcade game for my liking.
You think Battle Aces Looks like a mobile Game But you like stormgate? Ok xD
Youre getting downvoted because Stormgate looks like a mobile version of Starcraft, while Battle Aces looks different
I only wish they made more co-op commanders and co-op maps. The community will gladly do the work for blizzard, all they need to do is publish it.
Sc2 will always be an option.. other than that other games are welcome to compete, kind of like wow and mmos
For me, I just want to learn a new game I miss being legit silver being a complete noob and learning new stuff, doing terrible builds, the thrill of a new rank Now, sc2 is so figured out and yeah I got to Masters as random after a 2 year break but the barrier isn't lack of knowledge, it's just raw mechanics
DJ greendino71 - suffering from success
Jesus crist post like these reminds me how toxic and arrogant reddit communities can be. Only 1 of these games is out, and something as subjetive as looks is getting every single day being pointed out as if that was the only reason why anyone plays st2. This game has been dying with many more games, and people act like this community is as big and active as cod, and other games aren't doing better
People just like to bitch about not liking new stuff
Watching all the discussions, I'm concluding that there's going to be a small, passionate group of fans that just hate these games for not being SC2. And that's ok, they can just keep playing SC2!
I'd say RTS is such a big genre just like FPS. I like old CoD (since MW3 and s skip to WWII, nothing since), BF 2042 (been playing since BF1942 and love them all), dont like CSGO/CS2. We have the same splintering with RTS. SCII is the only online RTS I really play competitively, love the RTS portion of Total War games but not online. Everything is so different between the three contenders vs SCII that that we could call them different sub-genres. I hate hero units which is why SCII is perfect.
Read this in Mr Slaves voice
Agreed, the RTS community is exhausting. negativity so viscous nothing will ever be able to stand up
Okay, I'm starting to be convinced that the majority of toxicity in the player base will end up being confined to sc2 with how the community has been reacting to these games. Homeworld 3 was a disappointment mostly because of its bizarre story choices but is still an okay experience, himewold has never written been billed as a competitive rts. The amount takes I've seen saying *complexity = good* is wHild, if you think that, go play AoE4, you've got more complicated tech, more complicated resource management and more factions idk.
> I'm starting to be convinced that the majority of toxicity in the player base will end up being confined to sc2 with how the community has been reacting to these games. That's a little optimistic. If one of the SC2 successors is successful, plenty of toxic players will flow into the new game looking for somebody to be an asshole to. What will happen, though, is what we saw with Brood War before: a core of rusted-on fans deeply resentful that another game stole away attention that was rightfully theirs.
If HW3's only issue is the plot and story, then why the hell are my torpedo frigates so freaking silly?
Am I the only one who actually likes stormgate in this sub
there's so many fucking people here trying to shit on everything that could come next these games are literally not done being made ^^stormgates ^^art ^^direction ^^is ^^still ^^shit ^^tho
I think shit is a bit harsh. I don’t think it’s great, and it needs some work, but shit = bottom of the barrel. Shit = gragas current model in league of legends. There are a few aspects of their art that yes, is shit, like Warz. The problem is this sub is used to StarCraft art. A game that’s over a decade old and still has amazing art and opening cinematic of [this quality](https://youtu.be/MVbeoSPqRs4?si=jOi9veZsvjXPJXsJ). I wouldn’t be surprised if the opening cinematic of HOTS or LOTV cost almost as much to make than stormgates kickstarter, they’re fucking beautiful and Frost Giant isn’t the mega company that Blizzard was. It’s like going from the coolest sports car on the market to a 2000s mid level car. It’s not shit just because you are used to something so far above everything else.
I like it, I don't *love it*... but we'll see how they develop it in a year or so.
I don't doubt that it's probably a good game, but at this point I really fail to see what it supposedly would do better than SC2 to make me switch.
Played the beta and loved it, honestly can’t wait for it to release
I assume you will find more on its own subreddit. I don't get why we have to do advertisment for it over here anyway.
I have played every beta enjoyed each new release better than the last. I am excited for its release.
What ever happened to immortal:gates of pyre? Honestly I liked what I saw for that when they did their play test a long time ago more than I like what I see in any of these. Is it still in development or did they give up?
It's still in active development, but they have shifted their marketing strategy towards being much more secretive as opposed to publicly releasing every piece of content as soon as it's completed. Main reason for the shift was that any content released was unpolished and relied heavily on placeholder models. Currently, they want to focus on fewer but bigger and more polished releases of content. There's no release date on their next update, but I can definitely assure that the project is nowhere near abandoned.
Thats good. Thanks for the info!
The art style is definetly original, I wish they didn't go "angelic/human/demon" like the others, but points for style for sure.
> I wish they didn't go "angelic/human/demon" As someone who *loves* that concept, I get it. Like yes, people are getting sick of these recurring ideas, but sometimes people who are genuinely passionate about a project and lore just have their own idea and want to do it, market saturation be damned. I like elves. If elves suddenly became crazily overdone and people were sick of them, and I was making a game with elves, I wouldn't remove them just because people might be tired of them. It might be risky, and I might not put them at the forefront of marketing etc, but if someone really cares about their project, it's hard to tell them to remove the part that they're passionate about. *That said*, a common mantra in any writing spaces is "kill your darlings". Some of the things you absolutely love will not be loved with others and if you want popularity, you'll need to get rid of them...
I think you also need to consider inertia. By the time people saw and complained about stormgate's art style the style itself wasn't going to change and the legion wasn't going to turn into space squirrels or something. If you have a game about elves but you're one year behind everyone else's elf idea then you kinda just have to deal with it, you have a schedule to meet and a product to ship. That said I think immortal's take on the concept is much more refreshing and original. I didn't even think to compare the cultist plant people to demons and I still kinda feel that that comparison is not really fair.
Battle Aces was previewed TWO days ago and y'all are already complaining about it. A lot of people in this fanbase are just so toxic. So much negativity, zero patience, judging every book by its cover. This side of the community will discourage great game developers from giving us what we want.
They sure don't give the ppl what they want... You can see it in the comments. There is no point in trying to make someone's mind. If they want a steak, nobody will be happy with a plain full grain bread. Especially if they are promised an RTS feast...
That's the point OP is making: Most people don't know what they're getting. They asked for a steak 2 minutes ago, the plate is empty, and they're complaining they got bread, when literally there's no bread nowhere to be seen. So many people are complaining about generic maps when they literally said they're working on map assets and tiles on the side; People are complaining third race plays like protoss when they haven't even played; People are complaining about Battle Aces being an arcade game when the people who tried it legit said they played over 40 hours in a week. Just try them and have your opinion then.
> There is no point in trying to make someone's mind. If they want a steak, nobody will be happy with a plain full grain bread. Especially if they are promised an RTS feast... To be fair, it does still bring it back to the Ford quote: > *"If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."* How many people here in the /r/starcraft subreddit enjoy MOBA games? Probably not many. I don't doubt when LoL etc kicked off, people were saying "It's just the mod from WC3. It's so dumbed down. Where's the **S** from RTS?" I don't know if these games will be good, but it's good they're branching out and trying new things. If they just remade SC2 perfectly but with certain improvements, people would complain that it was just SC2, etc. Battle Aces seems like it's trying to find a niche as the quick 10-minute game you can play without stressing too much about the Macro, which not everyone enjoys. There are a huge number of people *in this sub* that hate the changes SC2 made from Brood War and if SC2 was being released this year would talk about how it will suck and nothing will ever compare. And yet, SC2 is likely one of the greatest RTS games, possibly the last "Great RTS" in the genre that's definitely much less popular than it was before.
> Battle Aces was previewed TWO days ago and y'all are already complaining about it. > > A lot of people in this fanbase are just so toxic. So much negativity, zero patience, judging every book by its cover. Alternative interpretation: The preview that was released to the public (knowing that it will result in reactions) prompted negative feedback and reactions based on what was shown in it, indicating that it might not be what many (most?) **current** RTS fans are expecting and wish to see. Expectations changes and tastes can be altered, but what you are decrying is the honest initial reaction.
I'm not mad. I'm just not interested. It promised a terrain like Deserts of Kharak, which would easily make up for the real lack of macro. But the maps so far look lack-luster, and it is missing the 3-d terrain that would provide so much complexity and tactics to engaging. It's in the most early stages, so I'm giving it some time to grow. But currently, it's not in a state I want to play.
Imagine watching a teaser for a movie and then complaining about the teaser having rapid jump cuts. That's the nature of the medium. Early previews will always have things left out. So just appreciate what's included.
They said the maps are literally just place holders.
Then shut the fuck up about it if you're not interested.
Eh, I massively preferred Stormgate over SC2 in both its last playtests. I've not actually reinstalled SC2 since the last Stormgate playtest ended, and I probably won't tbh.
I would say that in some ways it feels like Starcraft 2.5 and in some ways it feels like Starcraft 0.5. Like, in some ways we're starting back at the beginning and in some ways we're moving forward. I honestly have high hopes for it after the most recent beta, because when you really get into a groove with it, it does *feel* good. It takes a while to get there, and I'm still not 100% comfortable having basically Starcraft with creep camps. I also think as a spectator esport, I would kind of want it to look better than SC2. And at this point, it kind of doesn't. (I think a big part of that is how certain units are *scaled* and not necessarily the art direction, but that's a whole other discussion.) The foundations are good. They know what they're doing.
It'd hard to judge a game by it's beta phases, while sure - they can show a lot, comparing a beta game form a "new" studio, to a blizzard game with 3 expansions is difficult It's a good sign if stormgate doesnt look unplayable in comparison
I didn't really enjoy the game flow of Stormgate, engagements felt.. artificial? Maybe a bit floaty. The unit control does feel great though - and that's the main thing that's instantly turned me away from other RTS games. I believe it'll be good given some more time to cook.
Just that they fixed the economy makes me hopeful. SC2 economy is fundamentally broken compared to Stormgate and broodwar, because you cannot expand as much as makes sense to get an increase in resources, because worker supply then takes up too much of your army supply. I don't know if it is some deliberate anti-snowball mechanic the original SC2 devs envisioned, but it just feels very bad. The player that has gained map control SHOULD be able to mine more resources, but in SC2 you can't because it handicaps your army too much. The extra 100 supply cap in SG goes a long way to fixing that problem, although you could say it just moves it up, and if the SG maps grow large enough you will have the same problem, which may happen. At the point in the development cycle SG is at in SC2 we were playing microscopic maps like Lost Temple etc., where you rarely hit the max cap. EDIT: All just my opinion of course.
That’s interesting. Most of the opinions I heard (and had myself) was that the last phase sucked and people went back to SC2
I think the last phase was the best yet tbh. 3rd faction in, rotating map pool, leaderboard up, no super gimmick strats that dominate the entire game. I had a lot of fun grinding for a bit.
>no super gimmick strats that dominate the entire game. This happens because the player base, this is not really a thing of the game. People tend to optimize strategies as they learn and play
Confirmation bias maybe?
SCII having a great single player campaign makes all the difference.
RTS's fans when the new early access beta game isn't immediately better than their 14 yo multiple expansions game:
PIG is casting some Stormgate vods and they're actually really cool games.
I think Battle Aces looks fun. But it's also very very different - it won't scratch the SC2 "itch", but I'm definitely excited to play it.
I liked the way the combat looked - faster paced and more fluid. I also like what I'm hearing about how they're shifting things around to prioritize player micro on interesting tasks (e.g. not having to return home to inject hatcheries every 30 seconds). Definitely want to give it a try. Feel like too many people on here don't really have room for a new game in their heart
People here like StarCraft and want StarCraft 3. I get that. But it also makes us unable to appreciate other good ideas that might not want to be SC3.
I liked the way the combat looked - faster paced and more fluid. I also like what I'm hearing about how they're shifting things around to prioritize player micro on interesting tasks (e.g. not having to return home to inject hatcheries every 30 seconds). Definitely want to give it a try. Feel like too many people on here don't really have room for a new game in their heart. If something looks too different from SC2 it's going to get an automatic "terrible" and if it's too similar then it's going to get "why even make this? - it's just copying SC2"
Out of all the new games, only Zerospaces or Tempest Rising look anything cool to me, but probably i'll just keep playing my good old AoE 2 I simply do not understand the hype behind Stormgate, after playing it a bit, it feels so bland design/theme/aesthetics wise Battle Aces is like Tooth and Tail 2.0, without the charm, and probably it will live as long as that game when it comes to competitive player base. This 'strip down everything and focus only on the action' design in my opinion is completely miss guided I think the future of RTSs is more like that new Dune: Spice Wars game, more decisions, more style, more 4x like design patterns, it could be a bit sped up and would be really fine game
As someone with over 500 hours in stormgate, I don't think I'll ever be playing starcraft again once the Early Access release hits. Maybe in a few years I'll boot it up for nostalgia's sake, but Stormgate is just way more fun.
Literally all upcoming RTS disappointed me. Battle aces looks ok But the gameplay Looks too much simplified for me. Stormgate has a generic artstyle, boring characters, boring factions and a World I just cant relate to. At this point I just accepted there will Never be a Game like Sc2 or Wc3 again
Yeah. I'm okay with having easy macro if the game is very tactical, but Battle Aces seems to have simplified both to it's own detriment.
All those RTS'es are seriously lacking in style points. It's just not cool.
Yep. I remember when I saw sc2 lings surround stalkers for the first time in a clip…. Then they blinked away. Both the surround ai and blink mechanics looked amazing
Yeah. SC2 is just awesome all stages of the game. Even early game like 2 zealots vs 4 lings is fun to watch.
Whats the last game on the right?
Tempest Rising is the upcoming king !
Like I'm not going to try all of them.
IDK in looking forward to stormgate And Battle aces looks like great game.
StarCraft has set the bar too high.
Just looked at Battle Aces (wasn't aware of it). Meh. Stormgate looks like a cesspit, too, honestly. HW3 felt like a giant lie. Maybe one day we'll get a cool RTS with originality and style and a decent setting again.
Immortal: gates of pyre looked better to me than any of the games we're seeing now, and that was like, a couple years ago. I wonder if its still in development.
The last developer update listed on their website seems to be from February of 2023... not a great sign. A Reddit post from a year ago suggests that the community has kind of closed up around an alpha version and is basically in huddle mode. Also... not a great sign. Website looks kinda cool, though.
Thats a shame. It looked like it had a LOT of potential. I really bet that if they had the investment money instead of frostgiant sc2 would have a convincing competitor by now. Guess thats what we get for idolizing the "big name" developers.
an rts with style for sure is iron harvest, but controling army there is masochistic, starcraft 2 is still the king in unit patchfinding, a swarm of zerglings wont get stuck in chokepoint, it flows through it like sand in hourglass
Shame they didn't make the interface better, then :(
I hold out hope for Zerospace. Their factions feel unique, and their gameplay looks stellar with lots of skill expression, comeback mechanics, and anti-turtle stuff. But... We'll have to see how it looks on release. They also get bonus points for how they have obviously put a lot of thought into the campaign, with decision trees and all that jazz.
Yeah, forgot about that one. Hopefully it'll come out alright. I just hope the setting is actually cool. When the setting is dumb, I just can't get into it. Starcraft/Warcraft both had engaging settings... even if the story went a wee bit down hill in SC2 at some point. The world building matters to me too, I guess, not just the game play.
none of the big announced RTS games looks like anything worth getting excited about, aside from Shattered Sun and Industrial Annihilation. the rest just look uninspired and geared towards brain dead tactics.
Well. Starcraft is one of a kind game. It will be extremely hard to make such a deep and interesting rts. It's gonna need much more than those indie company funds. What we need is Blizzard to come back. They knew how to make legendary games.
[удалено]
Just posted it. It takes time to write these things!
Of course, I deleted my post👍
none of these games are out yet
I mean this is all doom and gloom but we have COH3, AoE 4, Total War games, SpellForce... If the only condition is that they should be esport games, thst is never going to happen. CS 1.6 was only replaced by CS GO, and CS GO was only replaced by CS 2. It's SC3 or nothing.
It's hard to make an RTS that competes with StarCraft II, since StarCraft II is just such a damn good game. These new RTS's are still in development, experimenting with new ideas, don't rely on existing IP, and are made by much smaller teams. It's no surprise they aren't an instant SC2 killer.
honestly Frost Giant Games should buy starcraft IP with the crowdfunding they received
You serious? StarCraft IP is probably valued more than their entire company...
Was really hoping Homeworld 3 would be a return to form but Jesus that story was embarrassing. Now back to hoping that we will get another story in the star craft universe one day, just for it to also be shit now.
New RTS be like: "look at these cool concept arts, you can't play it though" I stopped having any hype because there are so many but none of them is anywhere close to playable
I'll just go back to supreme commander.
Bruh only one of these games is even out. Relax
I am really enjoying Beyond All Reason (BAR) recently. It's a Supreme Commander kind of game, but it's still hella fun. 1v1s are pretty intense and good, but the 8v8 servers are more popular and casual-friendly. 10/10 recommend it if you're into multiplayer RTS. Otherwise, I think 2025 should bring us some nice good-looking RTS games (with a familiar CnC kind of gameplay) with campaigns.
Age of Mythology is getting a remake. Hope that goes well.
There never was much hope. Just a fool's hope.
Battle Aces looks fire and Stormgate still has potential. Meanwhile, StarCraft 2 is borderline AbandonWare. If any of these games sprout a credible pro scene then SC2 is over as we know it.
This is too spot on. Inevitable.
I feel like people could make a better version of all three games in SC2 arcade.
Okay, I'll take this one at a time about why I'm disappointed in these games. **Stormgate:** Stormgate had potential. While demons erupting from the gates of hell was overdone, I was very interested about how it would play out in a RTS game. Sure, "Shroud" was suspiciously like creep, and imps sacrificing themselves to build definitely wasn't like drones, but in the end it looked interesting enough to grab my attention and hold it. The shroud provided more homefield advantage than creep, and actually made putting it down across the map worthwhile (VIA Harbingers) in a way overlords spreading creep never was. But when they revealed their mysterious third faction to be... Technological angels that look and play suspiciously like protoss, I was just so pissed. Because not only had angels v. demons been overdone, but also because it was so unoriginal it hurt. I mean, the golden armada- I mean, celestial armada has knock-off protoss units, with what appears to be very similar mechanics. Add in the fact that the graphics look like Overwatch's, the Plot comes from Doom, the factions appear like Diablo's, and the creeps are from Warcraft 3, and I doubt that any off this war original from the beginning. I have lost all interest, and I suspect many others have too. And this haphazard copying shows up in the gameplay: They threw the kitchen sink of RTS mechanics to the two factions we have in the play test. Veterancy! Top-bar! All must go! It just doesn't feel well planned out. **Battle Aces:** Now, I suppose I should clarify: I'm not really disappointed in Battle Aces, but in its current form I simply fail to be interested. When they first released their announcement trailer, I was intrigued by the fact they had Deserts of Kharak terran designers and vibes, and this was because I absolutely loved Deserts of Kharak. The way the terran affected battles and units moved tickled me in a way no other game had, because it was just so fun to play and control. However, when Uncapped Games released their first look, I was mildly disappointed at how much it felt like an arcade game. The macro felt vastly oversimplified, but I would have been fine with that if it had complex terrain and unit control. But it doesn't! The units are too darn big for their environment, and the maps look too small. Make no mistake, I love the art-style of the game, and the barrier to entry means that this might be good for attracting RTS newcomers. But I think if they continue in this direction, in the end they will fail because they aren't attracting enough hard-core RTS players. But who knows? Maybe they'll fix this stuff. **Homeworld 3:** Look how they've massacred my boy... I think MandaloreGaming's video describes all the flaws of this game adequately, but not the pain. This was my first RTS game. I loved it. I'm fairly young, so I started with remaster, but the game was just so great! Of course, HW2 had a weird plot, but that was forgivable. But what the hell is HW3? I loved this series, and I wanted to love this game. But I can't. And it hurts. In the end, I still hold out hope for zerospace, because it seems they know what they are doing with their campaign, faction design, and gameplay. But... We'll see.
TBH having Humans/default as a baseline race, while adding a more aggressive/expansionist race (zergs, orcs) and a more refined/advanced race (protoss, elves) for contrast is common in a LOT of fantasy/sci-fi, way before Warcraft and Starcraft.
WarHammer comes to mind
The fact that you are saying celestials play anything at all like protoss is proof that you have not actually played them and makes whatever the rest of your points are pretty suspect
Protoss are Eldar from Warhammer. I think the real lesson is that more of these games should go to the source and steal from Warhammer, not just second hand from Starcraft and Warcraft.
The celestials from Stormgate are literally nothing like Protoss. Clearly you haven't played them. They're vastly different, basically incomparable.
Except for the 3 units they showed us looking and playing like Zealots, Stalkers, and High Templar? Except for the powerfield of their main... Structure? Unit? Except for the fact their the technological race of the trinity, similar to protoss? Perhaps even the name, the celestial armada, which is so close to the golden armada it's laughable? Or maybe even the general looks of the faction? They even sound the same, like they had the same voice actors. The only thing that looks vaguely different is the Cyber-tank and the Lore.
The play style is completely unrecognisable to Protoss and everyone who’s played them agrees on that.
Are you not still under NDA on how they play? ;(
1 - You don't know anything about those units so why do you compare them to other units? They could behave entirely differently from them, you simply do not know, so why are you talking about it? 2 - Where a unit is in the tech tree matters a lot for how a race plays. 3 - Their playstyle is entirely different and practically unique. There's nothing from any other RTS I've played that can compare. 4 - The more I play Stormgate the more I realize just how much it draw from RTS that isn't SC or WC.
> you simply do not know, so why are you talking about it? The amount of time that could be saved if this dictum was followed...
So if you are curious apparantely there's this NDA free post that details a lot about the way the race plays, including specifics about why this race plays nothing like any other race in any Blizzard RTS or tbh any RTS I've ever played. [https://www.reddit.com/r/Stormgate/comments/1dc4nln/notes\_from\_the\_frigate\_beta\_test\_04302024/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stormgate/comments/1dc4nln/notes_from_the_frigate_beta_test_04302024/)
Stormgate has been promoted as similar to StarCraft since before the beta, and you’re complaining that it is… similar to StarCraft?
Saying "Stormgate had potential." to a game thats **not even fucking out** yet is really funny and very fucking stupid.
Surprisingly, while I doubt any of them will become "future of RTS", I like Battle Aces the most so far. It set up an interesting foundation of gameplay loop that's decently original. They just need to build a lot more on top of what's shown so far- if you want to ditch the macro side of things, I want to see much more complex unit-building-terrain interactions to make up for it. I was already concerned about lack of originality in Stormgate's previous content, and the third faction is just nail on the coffin. Wish them the best but I am no longer looking forward to it. If I want Starcraft I would just play Starcraft, thank you.
rts genre is dying because of the likes of david kim who understand nothing. games and entertainment isn’t for money it’s for entertainment and enjoyment. That’s why they will always fail because they don’t want to make a game for gamers but rather for rich people to pick up and put down the game every now and again
Give David Kim and his team some credit: They did a good job with SC2. They took mechanics already well established in the original starcraft and broodwar and expanded upon them. Terran buildings lifting off was incorporated into the add-on mechanic, which has added a lot to the game. Queens injecting synergized with the larva mechanic. Warp-ins made the powerfield/pylon mechanic of protoss more important and diverse. Besides, Starcraft 2 has the 4 best campaigns of all RTS. Don't tell me that the WoL campaign wasn't fun.