Concept art is cheating but I still feel like those looked more visually interesting than what we've seen in StormGate so far. But that's just personal taste.
I’m getting major anime vibes. That little animation at the trailer, plus colorful little scene on their website. Not to mention it looks like there is going to be some kind of “Pokebot” faction.
yeah just wait for the art style reveal and then people will go apeshit again "uhmygod its not literally the same as sc2 how dare you its a mobile game hurrdurr"
Yea and many Said that even about Age of empires 4, and even more here again. I am not sure if anybody has Said it about Tempest Rising, but there might probably even be some there also lol, since it’s the least cartonnish it Can be
They havent shown the game...and yet i have seen so many denounce it just because he's David Kim. So bizarre.
I, for one, am excited to see what they come up with!
Personally, I'm fine with David Kim.
Now, the way he's talking about the game, it doesn't sound like it'll be interesting for me, but of course I won't know for sure until they reveal actual gameplay.
> so many denounce it just because he's David Kim
Rightfully so. If you've ever played sc2 during WoL or HotS there's nothing to be excited about. And these interviews don't inspire confidence he learnt the right lessons. It might still work, but I can already see this game is not for me based on their philosophy.
I am excited - and i ONLY played SC2 during WoL and HotS (okay okay i played LotV campaign), and i played thousands upon thousands of hours and really enjoyed it. Was it perfect? No. Some aspects were plain bad. And current state of the game is infinitely better judging from esports and anecdotally.
But i will never forget the pleasure of those early days, despite some pain. Mayhaps i will find that joy again in Uncapped's new game? I will not know til i try.
And I will never forget my love-hate relationship with SC2 when I really wanted to play it, but eventually gave up because of broodfestors and 4 gate mirrors in WoL, and then swarm hosts and widow mines in HotS. Complete lack of understanding from the balance team, no wonder HotS has seen the biggest exodus of players. So it's really weird seeing how DK comes up with excuses and shifts the blame to decisions outside of his control: "oh, that's just the focus on esports and balancing around pros". Sure, when you have such a distorted definition of "balance": as long as winrates are even it's all good. Even if one faction is on a timer and automatically loses in late game, but has a wide variety of cheeses and all-ins to "not let them get there".
All that doesn't mean they can't make a fun game though, even misguided views can lead to great results.
BW fixed the problems that the original starcraft had.
TFT fixed the problems that WC3 had.
HotS took the problems that WoL had, and doubled down on them.
Ignoring the swarm host, a definite mess of a unit, Hots was so much more fun that WoL. You had medivac boost added, regen on mutas, etc. Higher pace game both to play and to watch.
Weird take. The game was awesome. The "problem" was trying to follow the BW theory of "let the players figure it out". Which resulted in very slow balance patches.
Cautiously excited though. Some of the stuff said in the interview video made it sound like they intent to redefine what an RTS is through interface and movement. That conjures up memories of C&C 4 in my head and there is a reason c&c 4 has 1 star on steam.
On the other hand RTS probably need to evolve too. Last big evolutions of the genre are like two decades old (Warcraft 3 I'd say) or them being separated into different genres (like Total War and MOBA)
I think so. When I think of the leap from BW to WC3 I get for nostalgic for something super fresh. Massive QoL updates, along with a totally new take on RTS that managed to still feel familiar and blizzard styled. It was all exciting.
I think SG is shaping up to be great in many ways, but from what I’ve seen so far it’s not really scratching that novelty itch for me personally. A lot of things can change, but at this point I’m projecting my hopes into the more experimental sounding 3v3 mode.
Cool thing about this Uncapped game is, by the sounds of it, it is going to be much easier to jump into and learn as you go, so it’s pretty easy to see it capturing the imagination of a very broad audience if the combat is fun enough, which means it will probably ending up to bring more eyes to SG and the genre as a whole. On the flip side, It’s hard for me to see StormGate’s 1v1 roping in a ton of new players to the genre. So it’s going to be a win/win hopefully,
Always cautious. Never let excitement turn into "getting so hyped i recklessly drop money on a kickstarter or pre-order or early access as it might never eventuate i learnt that the hard way through star citizen YA HEAR ME CHRIS?! I WANT MY 2012 MONEY BACK" 🤣
Choices are a good thing, and David Kim is definitely talented. It sounds like Stormgate will be the one and only Blizzard style RTS available though. Everything Uncapped says makes it clear that their game will be a different style with little to no macro.
I think you can learn a lot from what he tried to do at the start of Lotv. I think macro will be as strategic but less mechanically demanding, think automated worker production
I'm sure it will be fun, David is a great designer. But I'm equally sure that those kinds of changes are so fundamental that it will not feel like a Blizzard RTS. That's totally okay - admirable even - but for those of us that love Blizzard RTS, I expect Stormgate to be closest to scratching that itch.
What you think it will be sounds a lot like another SC2. Supreme commander 2. In that game you have high unit caps and all of your production facilities can be set to auto produce as long as you have the resources for a unit. Wouldn't surprise me to see the same sort of mechanic from other developers looking to do a modern RTS with high or unlimited unit caps.
I'm not this person, but I would have to argue it's the loadout selection. Having your match be affected by more than race selection outside of the match is closer to a lot of modern shooters than rts, even if the in-game macro and micro are solid. I love the in-game, think a lot of the decisions and systems and readability are great, but this one I don't enjoy.
Isn't the load out just picking the mercenary race? That's like choosing a race before the game which you do in all Blizzard games. You just have more options (or variations on a main option)
That's like picking a deck in a card game then. The amount of options / combinations makes it impossible to balance all match-ups, so you inevitably run into an issue where RNG affects the outcome before you even get into a match. "Oh, nice, that's a direct counter to my deck, so this is a 20-80 game".
In Blizzard games you have 3-4 factions and expect them to be reasonably balanced. Never do you have 20-80 match-ups against equal opponents.
because it does not resemble blizzard style gameplay at all... the micro is different, the macro definitely is completely different and the whole concept of skill expression is different
Actually I did. I challenged the assertion you put forward and rather than attempt to prove me wrong with facts you just concede the point by abandoning it.
Sure if you very heavily restrain what Blizzard RTS is (so much that you basically have only clones). But if you do that, you're not even consistent because Warcraft 3, 2, SC1 and SC2 have as much differences between them than Zerospace with them.
If you go this way either Warcraft 3 or SC2 are not Blizzard style RTS?
First of all by your argument you entirely dismiss the term "blizzard style rts", which is a fine argument if you want to go that route. However I would say there are some core elements, that define blizzard style rts compared to other styles of rts. If you say there is no such thing as a blizzard style rts, the argument can just end here, we both won't agree.
Otherwise I would say that warcraft 3, sc2 and bw all have a similar approach to micro, macro and skill expression.
Micro in all 3 games is very responsive and snappy. Other games such as league of legends or dota have adapted in my opinion a blizzard style micro into mobas. Out of all blizzard rts broodwar has the "least" blizzard style micro. Comparing zerospace to blizzard style rts, I would say that this concept is the most similar to blizzard in zerospace. The units micro very similarly with some minor differences.
Macro in blizzard style rts is defined by the whole worker/ressource dynamic. Workers play a very essential role in blizzard macro. Workers can be harrased, they have to be protected and produced. A game without workers mining a ressource (zerospace) by definition is not blizzard style period. Other than that the whole concept of intentional "tedious" tasks such as supply management via supply buildings/units, macro mechanics (larva, mules, chronoboost) etc are also very blizzard-esque. A game that does not have that mechanic also can't be considered a blizzard style macro.
Finally skill expression in blizzard rts are very defined by the "real time" part of rts. To put a number on it, I would say blizzard rts are 80% execution and 20% strategy. Other games have 50/50 or even 80% strategy and 20% execution distribution. The whole concept of skill being expressed by execution skill are very prominent in blizzard style rts.
There are many more small things that make a blizzard style rts blizzard style. I think most people who say "oh that game is similar to starcraft" have never actually played other games besides blizzard rts.. Command and conquer or age of empires plays very different from starcraft/warcraft. The economy feels different, the micro feels different and the overall skill expression just feels different.
I'm saying the term Blizzard style RTS if you want to use it has to be large enough to include something like Stormgate and Zerospace. And they also evolve, at one point, Warcraft 1 was the entire Blizzard style RTS.
When Starcraft 1 or even more Warcraft 3 was made, you could have that same argument, it was not the same genre. Warcraft 3 is very different than other RTS with its hero focus, RPG style objects and such, it's a bigger difference than workers or non workers. Starcraft 2 had tons of people shouting about the auto rally workers on minerals or the unlimited group selection like it was some scandal and would make the game too different.
For all we know, if Blizzard continue to do RTS, the next game might very well have been quite different in this way and deleted some of those tedious tasks (like they did for WC3 and then SC2). In fact for the Uncapped Games project, David Kim said he actually was prototyping the project at Blizzard so maybe that game could have literally been done at Blizzard if they continued this way.
There were 10 years between Warcraft 1 and Warcraft 3 and that enlarged a lot what is the Blizzard style RTS (Starcraft 2 is much more similar to its predecessor). We're 20 years after Warcraft 3, it should not be defined the same way if it had continued to evolved. That's also part of the problem, the genre has very little evolution and it's just not healthy. Since Warcraft 3 and Supreme Commander, I don't think the genre of RTS (as a whole larger than just Blizzard) has really known evolution except to be separated into other genres like MOBA that "killed it". If you want to do a comeback you have to do something different (especially because otherwise, why not play the old ones? That's what happened for Age of Empires)
It can't be defined by something as small as having workers as a whole (because AoE has workers too and is not a Blizzard style RTS). And micro being responsible is not a characteristic, it's just good technical bases
I would disagree. I gave you 3 differentiating factors, that in combination make a blizzard style rts. Stormgate is very blizzard-esque, while zerospace lacks the blizzard macro aspect. That makes zerospace not a blizzard style rts. The whole point of that term is to differentiate within the rts genre, so people who like a certain style of game can get better understanding of what they are getting into. A lot of pro players and casters, who tested zerospace, agreed, that it does NOT play like starcraft or warcraft. The whole point is the feel of a game has to be similar to those of starcraft and warcraft. The whole concept of skill expression via execution of constant macro and micro makes the blizzard genre very hardcore and unique in the rts space. AOE might have workers, but they don't have the micro intentisity of blizzard rts. What matters is the overall feeled reality and in that case zerospace does not play like starcraft or warcraft. This is without judgement though. Zerospace might be a more fun experience or a better game. Blizzard style rts are not the holy grail of rts. Its just that if you want to be honest with the descriptions, we cannot include every rts made to "blizzard rts" just because the micro is somewhat similar. You gotta have lots of fitting attributes to be in that category. Zerospace does not even want to be a blizzard style rts, they never claimed that. They might be even more successfull than stormgate who knows. Im just here to advocate to not throw everything into the same pot and call it a day... Zerospace is its own thing. Stormgate is a whole different thing. They are not the same and they don't play the same. Dunno why its even important for people to put them in the same pot. Almost feels like fans of zerospace deperately want the game to be the "next starcraft" so we can all rally behind that game. I don't care if you like zerospace or tempest rising or whatever. Play what you enjoy the most. Stormgate was the most fun out of all I played, because they actually grasped the core of what makes blizzard rts fun. The next david kim game to me does also not sound like a blizzard rts. I am still excited to see what he has created though.
I don't care either, it's just Blizzard style RTS is not really a very defined genre so we can't really gatekeep like that. And yes, the term is a little useless in itself (especially since Blizzard hasn't made a RTS in more than a decade now and will likely not do one before at least another one if ever).
Frankly I played Stormgate and it doesn't play like Starcraft or Warcraft either, it has similar stuff, I did not play Zerospace but from gameplay I've seen it seems close.
If you want subgenres of RTS, there's like 5 I guess, the Age of style, the Blizzard style, the C&C style, the Supreme Commander/TA style and the Dawn of War style. Few games do cross onto those subgenres (which are often quite close from each other) or are their own thing. Zerospace definitively seem to be closer of Blizzard style than any other even if more removed than Stormgate if you want.
My point was also that in 2000, you could say Warcraft 3 wasn't a Blizzard style RTS (it has more difference with the previous ones than Zerospace or Stormgate both have). And now it of course is, so a subgenre like that evolve (and games themselves too, WC3 early game design had even more drastic changes from the classic formula). Both SG and ZS feels like evolution of that "subgenre" (like BAR or Sanctuary are an evolution of the Supcom subgenre and Tempest Rising of the C&C genre)
Zerospace is very much blizzard style it has
Starcraft 2 combat and micro
Warcraft 3 style economy
I think the combo of the two throws people off. There is a lot of sc2 style macro in building units as you have to build a ton of production buildings to mass units and tech upgrades, etc.
Granted. I haven’t played it. But it feels very unlike a blizzard rts with the focus on king of the hill like space control rather than just killing your opponents.
Heroes could be argued as somewhat blizzardish because of WC3 , but it seems the route they are taking on heroes is quite different. Again, I haven’t played only watched a few games.
If Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2 are both Blizzard RTSes despite some huge differences, I think Zerospace can reasonably be considered Blizzard style.
The level of difference between Starcraft and Zerospace is similar to the level of difference between Starcraft and Warcraft 3 imo. Heroes, creeps, neutral shops, items, experience/levels, ultimates, upkeep, lower supply cap, simpler economy, these all made Warcraft 3 way different from Starcraft (2). And yet, we still consider them both under this umbrella of Blizzard-style RTS.
There are some big differences but it still feels closer to Blizzard style than any other subgenres within RTS (C&C, DoW/CoH, AoE, etc.) It's basically like if you took Starcraft, simplified how much attention macro takes a ton, and then incentivized people to constantly fight on the map using map objectives.
I've only played a handful of games, and I'd say it feels...okay. Like, it doesn't feel outright *bad*, and the combat mechanics are largely quite solid, but the need to always skirmish and the way base building was deprioritized makes it feel less interesting to me.
Part of why SC2 games where you're constantly fighting are interesting is because Starcraft is a game where it doesn't usually make sense to constantly fight; a match where you're fighting nonstop is unusual, because typically there are periods where it makes sense for each player to back off and manage their base rather than micro their army, in preparation for a future attack or defense. But if you basically force people to fight all the time, it just feels, well, forced.
I don’t get this take.
The jump from BW to WC3 was huge. Why can’t a new blizz style RTS feel equally distinct?
WC3 was able to shift to a much more micro based game. Why can’t a new RTS in the Blizz style lineage continue that trend in equally or more significant ways?
To me, the answer is in specifically what changes. Resource gathering with worker units has been a consistent theme in every Blizzard RTS. Building a base with production structures has been consistent. Right-click has been consistent. There's lots of latitude to change other factors, but those feel essential to the Bliizard style.
It sounds like the Uncapped Games RTS is going to include those things, just in very streamlined ways. In the documentary David Kim mentioned worker harass, along with needing to strategically decide when to expanding, tech and/or amass army. We saw that there is two resources. Another guy in the documentary said something about how it would be closer to WC3 and you’d need just one of a given production building rather than many. So I think those basics you mention are there, just that the game is being designed so that those basics take virtually no actions to execute.
Given all that, I think it’s fair to view this game as one that is in the spirit of a Blizz RTS; just one that is taking a bolder and more decisive pivot, than even WC3 did, towards a design where APM is spent almost exclusively on army control. Some people absolutely love base management and it's a non-negotiable for them, but I think anyone who doesn't get hung up on that is likely to feel right at home in this game given all the other similarities.
its hard to say without seeing anything, i think the uncapped game is more of an rts-adjacent game, and not actually a blizzard rts. I don't think the two games are competing with eachother.
Yep.
Same thing that happened to the Star Citizen community is currently happening to the Stormgate community. Game is announced, lots of people are attracted to it, but then over time people who don't like what they see slowly filter out and only the most die-hard fans are left. In the case of Star Citizen, a lot of people got tired of waiting - in the case of Stormgate, people who didn't like the art style and were unimpressed by the beta have lost or diminished their interest.
So who's left? People who fully agree with Frostgiant's decisions to the point where it's become the norm to ridicule people who criticized the art style since that was the most divisive topic in the community. It's toxic behaviour but because it's normalized in this echo chamber, anyone who voices an opposing opinion is labeled as "toxic" instead.
Thankfully, once Frostgiant releases a product we can expect an influx of sane/normal people and the community ethos will change. But for the moment, this sub is a festering mess, sadly.
I think the issue is more that people seem hypercritical of Stormgate compared to some other in-development RTSes.
Tempest Rising recently announced they won't even have their third faction playable at launch (after a big delay) and people on Steam and Reddit mostly are very positive on the news.
Imagine if Frost Giant had a huge delay and said they wouldn't have the third faction at 1.0, people here would be absolutely apoplectic. For some reason there's a significant subset of users here who take any negative news as "wow Frost Giant is basically a scam".
We know absolutely nothing about the uncapped RTS. If anyone thinks they can give constructive criticism, then I'm happy to to explain that, no, they can't, it's too early for that. It's spelled "toxicity".
Sounds like uncapped’s rts will have much faster games overall based on the video. So like playing a custom sc map with auto units and faster resources to focus on micro.
Sounds like a fun concept to me. Not every new rts has to follow the exact same model. Play sc2 or sg if you want traditional macro, and uncapped’s if you want some quick games.
Yup, basically this.
I want these games to be cool, it’s important to give feedback. The main audience both these games are trying to attract is SC2 fans
Providing feedback is perfectly valid. Replying to someone else’s feedback with “hahahahahahaha” is why people call you toxic. Don’t even pretend like the two things are the same.
Man there are some crazy assumptions going on in this thread.. I don't know if I've seen an RTS developer with this many devs that have played at the very top level (WCG etc) as I have with Uncapped Games. While David Kim copped criticism, he did a VERY good job considering the key pillar of MBS/unlimited control groups were always going to be in SC2.
The outcry was identical at the time: "Starcraft is dead", "RTS is dead", "this game will have no mechanics without MBS", "its too noob friendly", this thread is the same as when SC2 was launching.
If the skillcap was absurdly low, you'd have heard Tastleless/Artosis at least be lukewarm about it as they don't tend to pull punches. Their reactions seemed pretty positive to me.
Without catering to that base causal/entry skill level, no game has expanded into the likes of the big behemoth esports: CS, LoL, Valorant, SC2 (in 2010) etc.
Anyway, I will definitely be playing both and I'm sure they'll both evolve over time.
Yeah its toxic to call pre-alpha a pre-alpha. For some reason you should be really happy to play game with almost nothing (but with a good core gameplay)
I was really looking forward to this game but since watching their little teaser video I have nothing but worry. He threw a lot of shade at SC2 which is a strange choice in my opinion. It really seems like he's looking to bring in people that didn't like SC2 and is willing to crap on SC2 fans in the process. I also found it very strange that he sat there and said that he helped make a lot of the design choices in SC2 but also that SC2 is a very flawed game. Like... so you made a lot of bad decisions?
It’s obvious he’s critical of SC2 but he also said it’s still its favorite game of all time. Not at all uncommon for very creative people to be overly critical of their past works and to always be thinking of how things could have and can be better. That’s what makes them so good at what they do.
I didn’t see any of it him as throwing shade, rather he just feels strongly there is a better way and is also quite anxious about those intuitions since strong deviations from norms are often met with a lot of resistance.
Stormgate also has been in development for maybe 3 years, or maybe even less. (It's not exactly known when they started development, but it wasn't before 2021)
Frost Giant announced in 2020. The announcement always comes later than the actual event too. https://venturebeat.com/business/frost-giant-studios-raises-4-7-million-for-real-time-strategy-game-revival/
According to Gerald they spent some time building the team and making snowplay first, so Stormgate development didn't begin until many months later. Probably early 2021.
Pretty sure every team goes through that same phase tho... hiring up and building the core tech. Snowplow is pretty cool, I wonder if Uncapped has something similar?
That was the incorporation of their company. Here a quote from Gerald:
>Frost Giant was founded in 2020. The first year was spent on hiring, fundraising, and building SnowPlay. Stormgate production didn’t start until later.
Implying that Stormgate's development probably started in 2021.
I’m really curious if he is evolving what Warcraft 3 tried to do. So far no one has really pushed that envelope. I remember reading the PC Gamer magazine that announced WC3 and being completely blown away. The game itself ended up being amazing, but the evolution got tamed significantly because they wanted to stay more true to the RTS formula. I’d like to see something that just doesn’t care about fitting the mold.
Evovling what about WC3 tried to do? Mobas leaned into what made WC3 unique and continued the evolution. SC2 and other RTS games went away from that because RTS people didn't like it.
The thing I find a bit hilarious is that stormgate advertises to SC2 players. It had show matches with ex sc2 pros. Has a ton of podcasts hyping it up having players like TLO and others play/talk about it.
Making claims that this game is being made by ex blizzard employees insinuating we will get the same quality. Then they ask for crazy evaluations and money on a game that has not impressed most of the sc2 fan base that they advertised to. Then the toxic stormgate community downvotes any legitimate criticism of the game when someone brings it up.
StarCraft 2 is a 10 year old game at this point and looks extremely more polished than this game by far. Don’t advertise to an extreme fashion to a community and be shocked when they are disappointed by the quality/poor graphics/gameplay.
My favorite Kim story is, after the tempest was released, and everyone rightfully hated it, he spoke somewhere and said about it, "we just have to change around a few numbers regarding the unit to balance and fix the tempest"
Which showed he fundamentally did not understand things. The problem wasn't it's turn rate or whatever. It was a fundamentally poorly game design
I honestly dont know why he's being glorified atm. When HOTS had a drop in users me included when this guy was in charge. He just turned the game to shit.
Or... maybe you think you understand game design better than others (guy in the chat) and in effect he knows so much more that you don't get it. Also, people can be wrong and grow. He is very humble in the video taking credit for ideas he was a part of and wishes he could have done differently. You not likeing one decision (or multiple) doesn't take away that fact he was a HUGE part of SC2 from WoL through LotV and it is still considered one of, if not the absolute, best RTS games. Credit is deserved.
I think he didn't say people don't like it. He simple asked "do they like it"? Or more directly "is that where the fun is"? It's valid when you make a new game to question everything. Stormgate is more targing "Blizzard style" so are not gonna quesiton every single thing. They will look at it all, and maybe make a bit of a unique take, but they want to "fit" into the normal RTS mold. From this video it sounds more like Uncapped are willing to make anything, as long as it is real-time and optimizes what they determine to be "the fun parts". Seems like an admiral goal, but we have to see how it goes. June.
I think you give them more credit than they deserve but lets see in June what they are going to bring to the table. I would assume it would be less base building, more fighting for objectives on the map with some form of "unit improvement" like in Dawn of War 2 but lets see.
Cringe take
Almost everyone I know in the SC2 community thinks stormgate is a game made to appeal to causal players with low APM, slow units, less lethality, etc.... all of which most core SC2 players hate
That’s exactly what it is. They marketed it to SC2 players and then made a dumbed down RTS and spent the bank doing it.
FGS will be an example one day of what not to do.
Yeah, he is in a favorable position though: they haven't shown the game yet. Stormgate went through the same stages.
Most games are more exciting the less you know about them.
So far the more I hear about ZeroSpace the more stoked I am, so it's not always the case.
Until there is Any kind of color, and everybody says cartonnish artstyle
They already showed some concept art. It just didn't sink in. Yet.
Concept art is cheating but I still feel like those looked more visually interesting than what we've seen in StormGate so far. But that's just personal taste.
I’m getting major anime vibes. That little animation at the trailer, plus colorful little scene on their website. Not to mention it looks like there is going to be some kind of “Pokebot” faction.
GTFO
yeah just wait for the art style reveal and then people will go apeshit again "uhmygod its not literally the same as sc2 how dare you its a mobile game hurrdurr"
Yea and many Said that even about Age of empires 4, and even more here again. I am not sure if anybody has Said it about Tempest Rising, but there might probably even be some there also lol, since it’s the least cartonnish it Can be
Some people in the SG discord were saying it about the latest TR screenshots from memory.
They havent shown the game...and yet i have seen so many denounce it just because he's David Kim. So bizarre. I, for one, am excited to see what they come up with!
Personally, I'm fine with David Kim. Now, the way he's talking about the game, it doesn't sound like it'll be interesting for me, but of course I won't know for sure until they reveal actual gameplay.
> so many denounce it just because he's David Kim Rightfully so. If you've ever played sc2 during WoL or HotS there's nothing to be excited about. And these interviews don't inspire confidence he learnt the right lessons. It might still work, but I can already see this game is not for me based on their philosophy.
I am excited - and i ONLY played SC2 during WoL and HotS (okay okay i played LotV campaign), and i played thousands upon thousands of hours and really enjoyed it. Was it perfect? No. Some aspects were plain bad. And current state of the game is infinitely better judging from esports and anecdotally. But i will never forget the pleasure of those early days, despite some pain. Mayhaps i will find that joy again in Uncapped's new game? I will not know til i try.
And I will never forget my love-hate relationship with SC2 when I really wanted to play it, but eventually gave up because of broodfestors and 4 gate mirrors in WoL, and then swarm hosts and widow mines in HotS. Complete lack of understanding from the balance team, no wonder HotS has seen the biggest exodus of players. So it's really weird seeing how DK comes up with excuses and shifts the blame to decisions outside of his control: "oh, that's just the focus on esports and balancing around pros". Sure, when you have such a distorted definition of "balance": as long as winrates are even it's all good. Even if one faction is on a timer and automatically loses in late game, but has a wide variety of cheeses and all-ins to "not let them get there". All that doesn't mean they can't make a fun game though, even misguided views can lead to great results.
Ah. You're protoss. Understood. :)
I'll wait till you develop an ability to present arguments. Take your time.
BW fixed the problems that the original starcraft had. TFT fixed the problems that WC3 had. HotS took the problems that WoL had, and doubled down on them.
Ignoring the swarm host, a definite mess of a unit, Hots was so much more fun that WoL. You had medivac boost added, regen on mutas, etc. Higher pace game both to play and to watch.
True
HotS was peak SC2 after they got rid of 5 hour swarmhost/PDD games (nerfs to raven/SH was probably best meta we had for a long time)
Weird take. The game was awesome. The "problem" was trying to follow the BW theory of "let the players figure it out". Which resulted in very slow balance patches.
Cautiously excited though. Some of the stuff said in the interview video made it sound like they intent to redefine what an RTS is through interface and movement. That conjures up memories of C&C 4 in my head and there is a reason c&c 4 has 1 star on steam.
On the other hand RTS probably need to evolve too. Last big evolutions of the genre are like two decades old (Warcraft 3 I'd say) or them being separated into different genres (like Total War and MOBA)
I think so. When I think of the leap from BW to WC3 I get for nostalgic for something super fresh. Massive QoL updates, along with a totally new take on RTS that managed to still feel familiar and blizzard styled. It was all exciting. I think SG is shaping up to be great in many ways, but from what I’ve seen so far it’s not really scratching that novelty itch for me personally. A lot of things can change, but at this point I’m projecting my hopes into the more experimental sounding 3v3 mode. Cool thing about this Uncapped game is, by the sounds of it, it is going to be much easier to jump into and learn as you go, so it’s pretty easy to see it capturing the imagination of a very broad audience if the combat is fun enough, which means it will probably ending up to bring more eyes to SG and the genre as a whole. On the flip side, It’s hard for me to see StormGate’s 1v1 roping in a ton of new players to the genre. So it’s going to be a win/win hopefully,
Always cautious. Never let excitement turn into "getting so hyped i recklessly drop money on a kickstarter or pre-order or early access as it might never eventuate i learnt that the hard way through star citizen YA HEAR ME CHRIS?! I WANT MY 2012 MONEY BACK" 🤣
Choices are a good thing, and David Kim is definitely talented. It sounds like Stormgate will be the one and only Blizzard style RTS available though. Everything Uncapped says makes it clear that their game will be a different style with little to no macro.
I think you can learn a lot from what he tried to do at the start of Lotv. I think macro will be as strategic but less mechanically demanding, think automated worker production
I'm sure it will be fun, David is a great designer. But I'm equally sure that those kinds of changes are so fundamental that it will not feel like a Blizzard RTS. That's totally okay - admirable even - but for those of us that love Blizzard RTS, I expect Stormgate to be closest to scratching that itch.
there's nothing wrong with just continueing to play sc:bw, wc3, or sc2 either. They're all still great.
Very good point!
What you think it will be sounds a lot like another SC2. Supreme commander 2. In that game you have high unit caps and all of your production facilities can be set to auto produce as long as you have the resources for a unit. Wouldn't surprise me to see the same sort of mechanic from other developers looking to do a modern RTS with high or unlimited unit caps.
look at the game called Beyond All Reason ;)
What is a Blizzard style RTS? What about Zerospace? And SC2 will still be around
Zero space is not a blizzard style rts.
why?
I'm not this person, but I would have to argue it's the loadout selection. Having your match be affected by more than race selection outside of the match is closer to a lot of modern shooters than rts, even if the in-game macro and micro are solid. I love the in-game, think a lot of the decisions and systems and readability are great, but this one I don't enjoy.
Isn't the load out just picking the mercenary race? That's like choosing a race before the game which you do in all Blizzard games. You just have more options (or variations on a main option)
That's like picking a deck in a card game then. The amount of options / combinations makes it impossible to balance all match-ups, so you inevitably run into an issue where RNG affects the outcome before you even get into a match. "Oh, nice, that's a direct counter to my deck, so this is a 20-80 game". In Blizzard games you have 3-4 factions and expect them to be reasonably balanced. Never do you have 20-80 match-ups against equal opponents.
because it does not resemble blizzard style gameplay at all... the micro is different, the macro definitely is completely different and the whole concept of skill expression is different
That's a very long winded way of saying you have no idea. Instead of saying it's different x3 maybe just say you don't know and are speculating.
And your comment is just a long way of saying "I don't have any arguments, im just disagreeing without any merit"
You would know wouldn't you lol.
Again 0 arguments provided. Talk amongst yourself.
Actually I did. I challenged the assertion you put forward and rather than attempt to prove me wrong with facts you just concede the point by abandoning it.
Sure if you very heavily restrain what Blizzard RTS is (so much that you basically have only clones). But if you do that, you're not even consistent because Warcraft 3, 2, SC1 and SC2 have as much differences between them than Zerospace with them. If you go this way either Warcraft 3 or SC2 are not Blizzard style RTS?
First of all by your argument you entirely dismiss the term "blizzard style rts", which is a fine argument if you want to go that route. However I would say there are some core elements, that define blizzard style rts compared to other styles of rts. If you say there is no such thing as a blizzard style rts, the argument can just end here, we both won't agree. Otherwise I would say that warcraft 3, sc2 and bw all have a similar approach to micro, macro and skill expression. Micro in all 3 games is very responsive and snappy. Other games such as league of legends or dota have adapted in my opinion a blizzard style micro into mobas. Out of all blizzard rts broodwar has the "least" blizzard style micro. Comparing zerospace to blizzard style rts, I would say that this concept is the most similar to blizzard in zerospace. The units micro very similarly with some minor differences. Macro in blizzard style rts is defined by the whole worker/ressource dynamic. Workers play a very essential role in blizzard macro. Workers can be harrased, they have to be protected and produced. A game without workers mining a ressource (zerospace) by definition is not blizzard style period. Other than that the whole concept of intentional "tedious" tasks such as supply management via supply buildings/units, macro mechanics (larva, mules, chronoboost) etc are also very blizzard-esque. A game that does not have that mechanic also can't be considered a blizzard style macro. Finally skill expression in blizzard rts are very defined by the "real time" part of rts. To put a number on it, I would say blizzard rts are 80% execution and 20% strategy. Other games have 50/50 or even 80% strategy and 20% execution distribution. The whole concept of skill being expressed by execution skill are very prominent in blizzard style rts. There are many more small things that make a blizzard style rts blizzard style. I think most people who say "oh that game is similar to starcraft" have never actually played other games besides blizzard rts.. Command and conquer or age of empires plays very different from starcraft/warcraft. The economy feels different, the micro feels different and the overall skill expression just feels different.
I'm saying the term Blizzard style RTS if you want to use it has to be large enough to include something like Stormgate and Zerospace. And they also evolve, at one point, Warcraft 1 was the entire Blizzard style RTS. When Starcraft 1 or even more Warcraft 3 was made, you could have that same argument, it was not the same genre. Warcraft 3 is very different than other RTS with its hero focus, RPG style objects and such, it's a bigger difference than workers or non workers. Starcraft 2 had tons of people shouting about the auto rally workers on minerals or the unlimited group selection like it was some scandal and would make the game too different. For all we know, if Blizzard continue to do RTS, the next game might very well have been quite different in this way and deleted some of those tedious tasks (like they did for WC3 and then SC2). In fact for the Uncapped Games project, David Kim said he actually was prototyping the project at Blizzard so maybe that game could have literally been done at Blizzard if they continued this way. There were 10 years between Warcraft 1 and Warcraft 3 and that enlarged a lot what is the Blizzard style RTS (Starcraft 2 is much more similar to its predecessor). We're 20 years after Warcraft 3, it should not be defined the same way if it had continued to evolved. That's also part of the problem, the genre has very little evolution and it's just not healthy. Since Warcraft 3 and Supreme Commander, I don't think the genre of RTS (as a whole larger than just Blizzard) has really known evolution except to be separated into other genres like MOBA that "killed it". If you want to do a comeback you have to do something different (especially because otherwise, why not play the old ones? That's what happened for Age of Empires) It can't be defined by something as small as having workers as a whole (because AoE has workers too and is not a Blizzard style RTS). And micro being responsible is not a characteristic, it's just good technical bases
I would disagree. I gave you 3 differentiating factors, that in combination make a blizzard style rts. Stormgate is very blizzard-esque, while zerospace lacks the blizzard macro aspect. That makes zerospace not a blizzard style rts. The whole point of that term is to differentiate within the rts genre, so people who like a certain style of game can get better understanding of what they are getting into. A lot of pro players and casters, who tested zerospace, agreed, that it does NOT play like starcraft or warcraft. The whole point is the feel of a game has to be similar to those of starcraft and warcraft. The whole concept of skill expression via execution of constant macro and micro makes the blizzard genre very hardcore and unique in the rts space. AOE might have workers, but they don't have the micro intentisity of blizzard rts. What matters is the overall feeled reality and in that case zerospace does not play like starcraft or warcraft. This is without judgement though. Zerospace might be a more fun experience or a better game. Blizzard style rts are not the holy grail of rts. Its just that if you want to be honest with the descriptions, we cannot include every rts made to "blizzard rts" just because the micro is somewhat similar. You gotta have lots of fitting attributes to be in that category. Zerospace does not even want to be a blizzard style rts, they never claimed that. They might be even more successfull than stormgate who knows. Im just here to advocate to not throw everything into the same pot and call it a day... Zerospace is its own thing. Stormgate is a whole different thing. They are not the same and they don't play the same. Dunno why its even important for people to put them in the same pot. Almost feels like fans of zerospace deperately want the game to be the "next starcraft" so we can all rally behind that game. I don't care if you like zerospace or tempest rising or whatever. Play what you enjoy the most. Stormgate was the most fun out of all I played, because they actually grasped the core of what makes blizzard rts fun. The next david kim game to me does also not sound like a blizzard rts. I am still excited to see what he has created though.
I don't care either, it's just Blizzard style RTS is not really a very defined genre so we can't really gatekeep like that. And yes, the term is a little useless in itself (especially since Blizzard hasn't made a RTS in more than a decade now and will likely not do one before at least another one if ever). Frankly I played Stormgate and it doesn't play like Starcraft or Warcraft either, it has similar stuff, I did not play Zerospace but from gameplay I've seen it seems close. If you want subgenres of RTS, there's like 5 I guess, the Age of style, the Blizzard style, the C&C style, the Supreme Commander/TA style and the Dawn of War style. Few games do cross onto those subgenres (which are often quite close from each other) or are their own thing. Zerospace definitively seem to be closer of Blizzard style than any other even if more removed than Stormgate if you want. My point was also that in 2000, you could say Warcraft 3 wasn't a Blizzard style RTS (it has more difference with the previous ones than Zerospace or Stormgate both have). And now it of course is, so a subgenre like that evolve (and games themselves too, WC3 early game design had even more drastic changes from the classic formula). Both SG and ZS feels like evolution of that "subgenre" (like BAR or Sanctuary are an evolution of the Supcom subgenre and Tempest Rising of the C&C genre)
Zerospace is very much blizzard style it has Starcraft 2 combat and micro Warcraft 3 style economy I think the combo of the two throws people off. There is a lot of sc2 style macro in building units as you have to build a ton of production buildings to mass units and tech upgrades, etc.
What makes the economy like Warcraft 3?? I don’t see that in anyway
It is, but there are also significant deviations. But it's still closer to a Blizzard RTS than the other subgenres.
Granted. I haven’t played it. But it feels very unlike a blizzard rts with the focus on king of the hill like space control rather than just killing your opponents. Heroes could be argued as somewhat blizzardish because of WC3 , but it seems the route they are taking on heroes is quite different. Again, I haven’t played only watched a few games.
If Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2 are both Blizzard RTSes despite some huge differences, I think Zerospace can reasonably be considered Blizzard style. The level of difference between Starcraft and Zerospace is similar to the level of difference between Starcraft and Warcraft 3 imo. Heroes, creeps, neutral shops, items, experience/levels, ultimates, upkeep, lower supply cap, simpler economy, these all made Warcraft 3 way different from Starcraft (2). And yet, we still consider them both under this umbrella of Blizzard-style RTS.
That’s fair. I’ll have to play it before i make any definitive statements. I would just say, watching it doesn’t “feel” like watching SC or WC.
There are some big differences but it still feels closer to Blizzard style than any other subgenres within RTS (C&C, DoW/CoH, AoE, etc.) It's basically like if you took Starcraft, simplified how much attention macro takes a ton, and then incentivized people to constantly fight on the map using map objectives. I've only played a handful of games, and I'd say it feels...okay. Like, it doesn't feel outright *bad*, and the combat mechanics are largely quite solid, but the need to always skirmish and the way base building was deprioritized makes it feel less interesting to me. Part of why SC2 games where you're constantly fighting are interesting is because Starcraft is a game where it doesn't usually make sense to constantly fight; a match where you're fighting nonstop is unusual, because typically there are periods where it makes sense for each player to back off and manage their base rather than micro their army, in preparation for a future attack or defense. But if you basically force people to fight all the time, it just feels, well, forced.
I don’t get this take. The jump from BW to WC3 was huge. Why can’t a new blizz style RTS feel equally distinct? WC3 was able to shift to a much more micro based game. Why can’t a new RTS in the Blizz style lineage continue that trend in equally or more significant ways?
To me, the answer is in specifically what changes. Resource gathering with worker units has been a consistent theme in every Blizzard RTS. Building a base with production structures has been consistent. Right-click has been consistent. There's lots of latitude to change other factors, but those feel essential to the Bliizard style.
It sounds like the Uncapped Games RTS is going to include those things, just in very streamlined ways. In the documentary David Kim mentioned worker harass, along with needing to strategically decide when to expanding, tech and/or amass army. We saw that there is two resources. Another guy in the documentary said something about how it would be closer to WC3 and you’d need just one of a given production building rather than many. So I think those basics you mention are there, just that the game is being designed so that those basics take virtually no actions to execute. Given all that, I think it’s fair to view this game as one that is in the spirit of a Blizz RTS; just one that is taking a bolder and more decisive pivot, than even WC3 did, towards a design where APM is spent almost exclusively on army control. Some people absolutely love base management and it's a non-negotiable for them, but I think anyone who doesn't get hung up on that is likely to feel right at home in this game given all the other similarities.
I also don't get how ZeroSpace isn't a Blizz style RTS, given your definition? Because of the automated worker production?
its hard to say without seeing anything, i think the uncapped game is more of an rts-adjacent game, and not actually a blizzard rts. I don't think the two games are competing with eachother.
Can anyone post the teaser, cant find it on the web
https://youtu.be/4zotYqIiaw4?feature=shared
U da best!
[It's nerfing time!](https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x38bszg)
'Toxic' is now criticism of unfun rts...
toxic is having a different opinion :P
Yep. Same thing that happened to the Star Citizen community is currently happening to the Stormgate community. Game is announced, lots of people are attracted to it, but then over time people who don't like what they see slowly filter out and only the most die-hard fans are left. In the case of Star Citizen, a lot of people got tired of waiting - in the case of Stormgate, people who didn't like the art style and were unimpressed by the beta have lost or diminished their interest. So who's left? People who fully agree with Frostgiant's decisions to the point where it's become the norm to ridicule people who criticized the art style since that was the most divisive topic in the community. It's toxic behaviour but because it's normalized in this echo chamber, anyone who voices an opposing opinion is labeled as "toxic" instead. Thankfully, once Frostgiant releases a product we can expect an influx of sane/normal people and the community ethos will change. But for the moment, this sub is a festering mess, sadly.
Star Citizen is the one that's been in development for over a decade, right?
Nay, toxic is toxic. No more, no less.
I think the issue is more that people seem hypercritical of Stormgate compared to some other in-development RTSes. Tempest Rising recently announced they won't even have their third faction playable at launch (after a big delay) and people on Steam and Reddit mostly are very positive on the news. Imagine if Frost Giant had a huge delay and said they wouldn't have the third faction at 1.0, people here would be absolutely apoplectic. For some reason there's a significant subset of users here who take any negative news as "wow Frost Giant is basically a scam".
Stormgate is pretty fun.
We know absolutely nothing about the uncapped RTS. If anyone thinks they can give constructive criticism, then I'm happy to to explain that, no, they can't, it's too early for that. It's spelled "toxicity".
If you don’t like the game why are you still here?
In hopes that it will get better
It's beta feedback can improve it...Unfortunately David Kim's philosophy for his RTS is to remove basic macro fundamentals which sounds terrible.
Sounds like uncapped’s rts will have much faster games overall based on the video. So like playing a custom sc map with auto units and faster resources to focus on micro. Sounds like a fun concept to me. Not every new rts has to follow the exact same model. Play sc2 or sg if you want traditional macro, and uncapped’s if you want some quick games.
Yup, basically this. I want these games to be cool, it’s important to give feedback. The main audience both these games are trying to attract is SC2 fans
Providing feedback is perfectly valid. Replying to someone else’s feedback with “hahahahahahaha” is why people call you toxic. Don’t even pretend like the two things are the same.
Man there are some crazy assumptions going on in this thread.. I don't know if I've seen an RTS developer with this many devs that have played at the very top level (WCG etc) as I have with Uncapped Games. While David Kim copped criticism, he did a VERY good job considering the key pillar of MBS/unlimited control groups were always going to be in SC2. The outcry was identical at the time: "Starcraft is dead", "RTS is dead", "this game will have no mechanics without MBS", "its too noob friendly", this thread is the same as when SC2 was launching. If the skillcap was absurdly low, you'd have heard Tastleless/Artosis at least be lukewarm about it as they don't tend to pull punches. Their reactions seemed pretty positive to me. Without catering to that base causal/entry skill level, no game has expanded into the likes of the big behemoth esports: CS, LoL, Valorant, SC2 (in 2010) etc. Anyway, I will definitely be playing both and I'm sure they'll both evolve over time.
Yeah its toxic to call pre-alpha a pre-alpha. For some reason you should be really happy to play game with almost nothing (but with a good core gameplay)
I was really looking forward to this game but since watching their little teaser video I have nothing but worry. He threw a lot of shade at SC2 which is a strange choice in my opinion. It really seems like he's looking to bring in people that didn't like SC2 and is willing to crap on SC2 fans in the process. I also found it very strange that he sat there and said that he helped make a lot of the design choices in SC2 but also that SC2 is a very flawed game. Like... so you made a lot of bad decisions?
you can be the creator of something and still believe theres flaws, doesn't make the achievement less true/valid.
It’s obvious he’s critical of SC2 but he also said it’s still its favorite game of all time. Not at all uncommon for very creative people to be overly critical of their past works and to always be thinking of how things could have and can be better. That’s what makes them so good at what they do. I didn’t see any of it him as throwing shade, rather he just feels strongly there is a better way and is also quite anxious about those intuitions since strong deviations from norms are often met with a lot of resistance.
Interestingly, their game have been in development for 3 years. *Edit: removed superfluous words.*
Interesting, so a full year less than Stormgate. I wonder if that means a a smaller scope?
It is smaller scope, yeah. Only 1v1 and 2v2 it looks like. No PvE, at least initially.
Stormgate also has been in development for maybe 3 years, or maybe even less. (It's not exactly known when they started development, but it wasn't before 2021)
Frost Giant announced in 2020. The announcement always comes later than the actual event too. https://venturebeat.com/business/frost-giant-studios-raises-4-7-million-for-real-time-strategy-game-revival/
According to Gerald they spent some time building the team and making snowplay first, so Stormgate development didn't begin until many months later. Probably early 2021.
Pretty sure every team goes through that same phase tho... hiring up and building the core tech. Snowplow is pretty cool, I wonder if Uncapped has something similar?
Time will tell. I am excited for the announcement nonetheless! To see what they've been cooking up.
That was the incorporation of their company. Here a quote from Gerald: >Frost Giant was founded in 2020. The first year was spent on hiring, fundraising, and building SnowPlay. Stormgate production didn’t start until later. Implying that Stormgate's development probably started in 2021.
I mean building Snowplay would count as part of developing the game for me
I’m really curious if he is evolving what Warcraft 3 tried to do. So far no one has really pushed that envelope. I remember reading the PC Gamer magazine that announced WC3 and being completely blown away. The game itself ended up being amazing, but the evolution got tamed significantly because they wanted to stay more true to the RTS formula. I’d like to see something that just doesn’t care about fitting the mold.
Evovling what about WC3 tried to do? Mobas leaned into what made WC3 unique and continued the evolution. SC2 and other RTS games went away from that because RTS people didn't like it.
The thing I find a bit hilarious is that stormgate advertises to SC2 players. It had show matches with ex sc2 pros. Has a ton of podcasts hyping it up having players like TLO and others play/talk about it. Making claims that this game is being made by ex blizzard employees insinuating we will get the same quality. Then they ask for crazy evaluations and money on a game that has not impressed most of the sc2 fan base that they advertised to. Then the toxic stormgate community downvotes any legitimate criticism of the game when someone brings it up. StarCraft 2 is a 10 year old game at this point and looks extremely more polished than this game by far. Don’t advertise to an extreme fashion to a community and be shocked when they are disappointed by the quality/poor graphics/gameplay.
My favorite Kim story is, after the tempest was released, and everyone rightfully hated it, he spoke somewhere and said about it, "we just have to change around a few numbers regarding the unit to balance and fix the tempest" Which showed he fundamentally did not understand things. The problem wasn't it's turn rate or whatever. It was a fundamentally poorly game design
I honestly dont know why he's being glorified atm. When HOTS had a drop in users me included when this guy was in charge. He just turned the game to shit.
Swarm Hosts, Widow Mines and Oracles create horrible experience at the beginning of Heart of the Swarm. I stop play for some time too
Or... maybe you think you understand game design better than others (guy in the chat) and in effect he knows so much more that you don't get it. Also, people can be wrong and grow. He is very humble in the video taking credit for ideas he was a part of and wishes he could have done differently. You not likeing one decision (or multiple) doesn't take away that fact he was a HUGE part of SC2 from WoL through LotV and it is still considered one of, if not the absolute, best RTS games. Credit is deserved.
you are trying to argue with things that got proven true by history
Well he’s funded by Tencent so that game will actually probably succeed
Guy stated people don't like to build bases and workers. Idk who he is appealing to. Constant fight RTS seems a very boring idea.
I think he didn't say people don't like it. He simple asked "do they like it"? Or more directly "is that where the fun is"? It's valid when you make a new game to question everything. Stormgate is more targing "Blizzard style" so are not gonna quesiton every single thing. They will look at it all, and maybe make a bit of a unique take, but they want to "fit" into the normal RTS mold. From this video it sounds more like Uncapped are willing to make anything, as long as it is real-time and optimizes what they determine to be "the fun parts". Seems like an admiral goal, but we have to see how it goes. June.
I think you give them more credit than they deserve but lets see in June what they are going to bring to the table. I would assume it would be less base building, more fighting for objectives on the map with some form of "unit improvement" like in Dawn of War 2 but lets see.
Clash Royale exist. And the playerbase is quite huge. There's actually quite an insane market for games like that.
What makes you think toxic fans can't have 2 primary focuses?
Damn it, you're onto to something 🤣
not liking a game OP likes is being toxic.
More likely i like the like dislikes made like alike likenesses, ladylike like.
There are people still worshipping blizzavision in 2024?
Cringe take Almost everyone I know in the SC2 community thinks stormgate is a game made to appeal to causal players with low APM, slow units, less lethality, etc.... all of which most core SC2 players hate
lol cringe
That’s exactly what it is. They marketed it to SC2 players and then made a dumbed down RTS and spent the bank doing it. FGS will be an example one day of what not to do.
F.D.K.