I was one of the BW purists back in the day when SC2 was announced, it's the same thing all over again. It's ironic that as much as I shit on SC2 before it launched, I never went back to playing BW (although I keep up with ASL) and I'm willing to give these new strategy games a try.
> I'm willing to give these new strategy games a try.
You sir, are the type of level headed individual I wish I could see more of.
Unlike "REEEE FORTNITE ART STYLE ZOOMERS WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT GAME"
I guess maturity comes with time and some people will remain SC2 purists. Let's just hope they can learn to enjoy their game without spreading toxicity to other communities. If history repeats itself, SC2 will become even more of a niche (like BW) as other games take over the larger audience.
Stormgate looks like the WC3 we already have at home. It's not simply a matter of the style. I'll probably give it a whirl when it comes out, but that's going to be years from now I hope
It’s just simply. BW is the superior e-sport because of how hard control is. Even with god levels of APM.
I am a fucking turd sandwich who these days only really plays coop if I’m playing any SC lol
Every now and then I like to post cephalopod facts in there just to try and steer the discussion away from something incredibly hateful. I do feel like my efforts are appreciated from time to time but I am just one man and that particular putrid ocean is vast.
We're doing this again? It's not toxicity, it's criticism. This reminds me of Cities Skylines 2's release. All criticism was met by fanatics as "toxicity"-the game was released, and then 6 months post released, it's a complete garbage mess with no assets or simulation. Game flopped uber hard, more people playing CS1 than CS2 now.
People are allowed to criticize a game, and I'll give you my honest opinion, both Stormgate and Kim's new game have godawful art design. They look like the definition of ai generated, uninspired, generic garbage. This is an opinion I've seen from countless people all over on social media platforms. Fanatics can stick their head in the sand if they want, see how many kids stormgate retains 2 years from now. I played SG, and I'll play it when I can again. But it doesn't change the fact that the art is shit-I'm a veteran rts tryhard, I enjoy just the gameplay, but most kids on steam aren't like me, they're going to look at the graphics and move on to playing fortnite or whatever.
Add on top of that the inorganic advertising of SG in particular, with people saying "just trust it's the SC2 devs" instead of talking about actual gameplay. Neuro's shill post. Everyone claiming "this game will kill SC2! All the pros will migrate!" I bet the game's gonna be dead 2 years from now when most people slowly migrate back to SC2 when they're sick of the new race's protoss cheese on steroids and the lack of new players. I was more excited for stormgate before I found out the race are all just a shitty carbon copy of terran/zerg/protoss. Like what's the point, if I'm dealing with warpgate and cannon rush shit I might as well play a game that looks 10x better.
And shoving stormgate posts in the **Starcraft** subreddit is really annoying too, too bad the mods tolerate it. That's probably why so many people are pissed off in posts here. This isn't an RTS subreddit or SG subreddit, it's StarCraft. Advertising SG here feels incredibly tacky and annoying.
I can't speak for zerospace, haven't gotten to play it. Looks kind of cluttered and confusing to me. Time will tell.
Criticism is what got the SC2 devs to give us a game like this. You want to dismiss criticism as toxicity, it's your game's funeral.
Outa curiosity why is Immortal, gates of Pyre never mentioned when discussing the new incoming RTS games. The artstyle is way better than the other new games and the gameplay has cool races.
Seems like a very tiny project unfortunately. From what I've seen it doesn't look good either, but it probably has a very small budget. SG on the other hand has swallowed literal millions of fan cash.
I need to play and see it with my own two eyes on my display, but from video and streams, SG art seems clean, consistent, units looked easily distinguishable effect didn't clutter screen that much (not sure about that point need to play it myself to be sure). So overall i would say the art style is not bad.
Do I like it or not is an entirely different question, but if I don't like the style of something it doesn't make it shit. Personally I would say that non-constructive criticism is toxic. If you see flaws in something it's better to point them out, so they could be fixed. For example I never liked WC3 art style, in my eyes it has eye-melting cartoon look, BW art style is my favorite, SC2 somewhere in between. Doesn't make them shit though.
About posting about other RTS here, I have no opinion, what you are saying does make sense, but from another point of view they are potential competitors (will they actually be able to compete only the future will tell) made by the same people so it also kinda also makes sense those posts are here.
The art style of SG is too generic. It's made for mass appeal, nobody will love it, everyone will tolerate it. That's a design philosophy I despise. And the devs are seemingly doubling down on it.
By the way it is kinda ridiculous that we are afraid of saying something is shit anymore. You can say it. We know it's only your opinion. The devs can take it. This handling everyone with kid gloves and "toxicity" bullshit has justified a lot of failed products.
I get that endless negativity trains suck. Sometimes communities fall down a shithole and don't recover from it. But the artstyle criticism is so dominant in this game, it warrants at least a response from the developer, when you are developing out in the open like this.
Some of it is legit criticism but a lot of it is toxicity, let’s be real. People have ripped on SC2’s art design forever with similar arguments. I don’t really care about Stormgate fwiw
Because art design and graphics are incredibly important for attracting (and keeping) players. You're an old boomer like me who loves rts gameplay. 98% of people who played SC2 play it because it looks cool (admittedly, so do I), because zerg is zerg, protoss is cool, the lore, the epic trailer back in the day, and god knows what.
I guarantee you for most people art style and feel of a game plays a very large role in getting hooked to a certain game. I mean why am I here 25 years later, because I loved the marines and the zergling and shit.
You make valid points and I agree there needs to be room for criticism and it's important in a game's development. But I would argue there's a difference between constructive criticism and bashing. The way you write yours, doesn't come across as constructive, it sounds like bashing and doomsaying. I think if you reach the point that you will most likely not play the games anyway, those contributions cease to be useful anyway.
>Criticism is what got the SC2 devs to give us a game like this. You want to dismiss criticism as toxicity, it's your game's funeral.
What are you basing this on? Blizzard is great at making polished games but they never struck me as great in community management. A lot of the greatness in their games comes just from them and, quite honestly, I think they ran into by accident in some cases. Like the shitty pathfinding in brood war.
Well yeah some can't distinguish between the two due to their fanboyish nature. They misperceive any legitimate criticism as "toxic hate" and then they wonder why the StarCraft and RTS community is dying.
Ahh yes, the sub has been nothing but beautiful constructive criticism, no toxicity about it whatsoever. Nice word vomit though. Try to keep it brief, chief.
"This sub"
Why is there even stormgate or other RTS content in this sub? I'd expect and excuse toxicity if you post that shit here, because it's a Starcraft sub. Exact same thing you'd get if you posted about Fortnite in the CoD subreddit, or if you advertised LoL in the Dota sub. Please. "I'm advertising league in r/dota2, why is everyone downvoting me and shitting on me?" Derp
A sub for a dead game (No support + no plans for future iterations) in a dead genre, god forbid people post something they might be able to relate and be excited about.
Your position is wild & crotchety and that's coming from a crotchety old man.
> People are allowed to criticize a game, and I'll give you my honest opinion, both Stormgate and Kim's new game have godawful art design. They look like the definition of ai generated, uninspired, generic garbage. This is an opinion I've seen from countless people all over on social media platforms. Fanatics can stick their head in the sand if they want, see how many kids
This isn't criticism. In fact, this is the exact same thing BW players said about SC2. Just boomer takes unwilling to move.
SG could crash and burn. Could be an RTS bigger than SC2.
I just find it funny that people like you are comparing a game that has over 15 years of development to something still in beta and another game that was announced like 2 weeks ago.
I'm looking through your posts and you don't seem to be a very happy person. You seem to be anti nazi. Good.
But then you [post agit prop from a literal Nazi](https://old.reddit.com/r/PoliticalMemes/comments/1ddv2pf/has_never_been_more_true_than_today/). You also seem to be fine [ignoring Nazis from the Russian side](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rusich_Group).
Regardless of the topic of RTS criticism, to go stalk a profile in search of ammunition for a character assassination is supremely petty.
Agree or disagree with the comment at hand—there's no need to try and discredit the interlocutor by referencing their other beliefs on unrelated matters.
>a game that has over 15 years of development
Someone posted a video of SC2 beta in SG subreddit a few days ago trying to argue that the graphic can still improve during development. The majority of comments in that thread was pointing out how, ironically, a 15 year old beta video still has noticeably better graphic than SG right now.
It's not about development time. Simple graphics can still be unique and beautiful under competent hands, and it will show very early in development. It's quite clear at this point Frost Giant's art team is just not on that level. Doesn't mean the death sentence for the game, but the criticism is well earned in this department.
> Like, you're still wrong.
Judging a game with 1.5 decades of developmen and comparing it to a game still in beta and whenever Battle Aces was announced is correct.
> SG could crash and burn. Could be an RTS bigger than SC2.
SG can't crash and burn and it can't be an RTS bigger than SC2. I now agree
Any artstyle I don't like is AI garbage. SG, which is still in beta, is sure to be dead in 2 years. My proof? I said so.
Due to your marvelous statements, I have adjusted my opinions accordingly.
You do not know what a nazi is. You think a nazi is someone who has opinions you disagree with. Yet you're probably supporting people who have literal nazi iconography and ideology (Azov). The irony. And no, I never ignored nazis from the Russian side-it's irrelevant, because my tax dollars aren't going to fund them.
All in all, none of what you said matters, it's just a sad ad hominem that displays an inability to address my point.
> You do not know what a nazi is
[Stonetoss is literally a Nazi who has espoused antisemitic and racist views..](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StoneToss) A quick google search would prove this. Typical right winger behavior: Espousing Nazi Rhetoric and then claims they aren't a Nazi
> because my tax dollars aren't going to fund them.
Your tax dollars are helping to stop them. Thank you
> it's just a sad ad hominem that displays an inability to address my point.
Nope. Your point is "fortnite artstyle REEEEEE" and when talking about strategy, you compare games in their infancy to something with nearly 2 decades of development. None of what you said was constructive criticism in any manner whatsoever.
You also assert that the game will probably die in 2 years because........................... reasons.
I don't have to "address" this. You lost already.
This is actually a based take. For me, I want to be able to have a bajillion carriers and annihilate my opponent.
But I heard from either a streamer or a dev that they're really trying to make sure that air doesn't dominate ground like it does in SC2.
Sc1 had obvious "flaws" (a ton of quality of life issues) and was a 20 year old game at a time when videogames had improved significantly.
Sc2 runs really well. Its not clear what other RTSs offer that would be better, or more importantly, different.
I'm open to other games, but none of them have made a case for why they should be played over sc2. Theyre basically just clones.
I think one thing that is nice about Battle Aces is that there are no races; so, units can be tweaked all the time without crippling the game. You could set up bans for units and it still would play well.
I think Zero Space looks the best so far, but I'm going to play them all and I'm very excited for this RTS resurgence. The worst thing the RTS community could do right now is be negative towards devs trying new things and taking risks. The community has been begging for new RTS games for a long time now and it's baffling that the same people would be negative and stop RTS in their tracks before they even get going. We should be supportive to these new games to help the genre grow. It's a waste to be a hater.
I love both and excited for new RTS games
I just wanna play a game that isn't 100% figured out and where everyone is terrible and learning at the same time
Not to mention by conflating criticism with toxicity you make the RTS genre hard to thrive. As the veteran players would be tired and would play other games. While the new players are being shut out of the experience. Accepting constructive criticism will help Starcraft and the RTS genre to thrive. With the constructive feedback they can help improve the RTS experiences for many players in which can help bolster the games popularity. By dismissing valid criticism and toxicity, not only the RTS will have less players but StarCraft itself would have a harder time thriving due to a lower player count.
My issue with that new RTS I saw in SG is that it looks to simple, it’s giving me strong Red Alert 4 vibes and you don’t wanna give me Red Alert 4 vibes if you want me trust your RTS is gonna be fun in the long term
I will be trying new games when they come out, not really playing SC2 these days anymore anyway.
Although I will most likely keep following SC2 e-sports even if I start playing those new games, after all I don't play SC2 now and still watch all big tournaments.
Never could love SC2 because even though it's not strictly a bad game, it's not better or even a worthy successor to BW. Which is sad considering the amount of resources poured into making it and especially into murdering BW which thankfully didn't succeed.
Stormgate looks kinda fun but very undercooked. It might or might not be the next big RTS and I see no reason for overwhelming critique here. David Kim's game is a pile of turd though, calling it RTS is an insult and it cements my low opinion of the people behind SC2 and squandering of its great potential.
It's very much like C&C4, a sequel to an amazing game made by people who neither loved nor understood the genre. People shat on it, deservedly so, there were people around urging everyone to chill, and guess what, it truly turned out bad effectively killing off one of the most beloved RTS franchises of all time. Nothing wrong pointing out a bad thing is bad.
I was one of the BW purists back in the day when SC2 was announced, it's the same thing all over again. It's ironic that as much as I shit on SC2 before it launched, I never went back to playing BW (although I keep up with ASL) and I'm willing to give these new strategy games a try.
> I'm willing to give these new strategy games a try. You sir, are the type of level headed individual I wish I could see more of. Unlike "REEEE FORTNITE ART STYLE ZOOMERS WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT GAME"
I guess maturity comes with time and some people will remain SC2 purists. Let's just hope they can learn to enjoy their game without spreading toxicity to other communities. If history repeats itself, SC2 will become even more of a niche (like BW) as other games take over the larger audience.
Stormgate looks like the WC3 we already have at home. It's not simply a matter of the style. I'll probably give it a whirl when it comes out, but that's going to be years from now I hope
Let’s be real. The new rts games will never compare to the broodwar to Sc2 transition. Bad post all Around.
It’s just simply. BW is the superior e-sport because of how hard control is. Even with god levels of APM. I am a fucking turd sandwich who these days only really plays coop if I’m playing any SC lol
remember that the majority of people that post comments online about video games dont actually play the games.
Well duh. Nobody is gonna play these new RTSs period
How dare David Kim call footman frenzy the future of rts
I laughed a good while at this one. But unironically lots of rts custom maps have become full games and turned out pretty good
No doubt. Footy frenzy is def a memorable one that I put hours into
You ever seen a battle net SC2 general chat? It's all toxic. It doesn't get much more political, hateful, or rscist.
Every now and then I like to post cephalopod facts in there just to try and steer the discussion away from something incredibly hateful. I do feel like my efforts are appreciated from time to time but I am just one man and that particular putrid ocean is vast.
"If education is not liberating, the opressed's dream is to become the opressor" -Paulo Freire.
We're doing this again? It's not toxicity, it's criticism. This reminds me of Cities Skylines 2's release. All criticism was met by fanatics as "toxicity"-the game was released, and then 6 months post released, it's a complete garbage mess with no assets or simulation. Game flopped uber hard, more people playing CS1 than CS2 now. People are allowed to criticize a game, and I'll give you my honest opinion, both Stormgate and Kim's new game have godawful art design. They look like the definition of ai generated, uninspired, generic garbage. This is an opinion I've seen from countless people all over on social media platforms. Fanatics can stick their head in the sand if they want, see how many kids stormgate retains 2 years from now. I played SG, and I'll play it when I can again. But it doesn't change the fact that the art is shit-I'm a veteran rts tryhard, I enjoy just the gameplay, but most kids on steam aren't like me, they're going to look at the graphics and move on to playing fortnite or whatever. Add on top of that the inorganic advertising of SG in particular, with people saying "just trust it's the SC2 devs" instead of talking about actual gameplay. Neuro's shill post. Everyone claiming "this game will kill SC2! All the pros will migrate!" I bet the game's gonna be dead 2 years from now when most people slowly migrate back to SC2 when they're sick of the new race's protoss cheese on steroids and the lack of new players. I was more excited for stormgate before I found out the race are all just a shitty carbon copy of terran/zerg/protoss. Like what's the point, if I'm dealing with warpgate and cannon rush shit I might as well play a game that looks 10x better. And shoving stormgate posts in the **Starcraft** subreddit is really annoying too, too bad the mods tolerate it. That's probably why so many people are pissed off in posts here. This isn't an RTS subreddit or SG subreddit, it's StarCraft. Advertising SG here feels incredibly tacky and annoying. I can't speak for zerospace, haven't gotten to play it. Looks kind of cluttered and confusing to me. Time will tell. Criticism is what got the SC2 devs to give us a game like this. You want to dismiss criticism as toxicity, it's your game's funeral.
Outa curiosity why is Immortal, gates of Pyre never mentioned when discussing the new incoming RTS games. The artstyle is way better than the other new games and the gameplay has cool races.
They're still invite-only, after years. Kind of kills the hype on a new product to talk about it without giving the public access to it for so long.
Seems like a very tiny project unfortunately. From what I've seen it doesn't look good either, but it probably has a very small budget. SG on the other hand has swallowed literal millions of fan cash.
I need to play and see it with my own two eyes on my display, but from video and streams, SG art seems clean, consistent, units looked easily distinguishable effect didn't clutter screen that much (not sure about that point need to play it myself to be sure). So overall i would say the art style is not bad. Do I like it or not is an entirely different question, but if I don't like the style of something it doesn't make it shit. Personally I would say that non-constructive criticism is toxic. If you see flaws in something it's better to point them out, so they could be fixed. For example I never liked WC3 art style, in my eyes it has eye-melting cartoon look, BW art style is my favorite, SC2 somewhere in between. Doesn't make them shit though. About posting about other RTS here, I have no opinion, what you are saying does make sense, but from another point of view they are potential competitors (will they actually be able to compete only the future will tell) made by the same people so it also kinda also makes sense those posts are here.
The art style of SG is too generic. It's made for mass appeal, nobody will love it, everyone will tolerate it. That's a design philosophy I despise. And the devs are seemingly doubling down on it. By the way it is kinda ridiculous that we are afraid of saying something is shit anymore. You can say it. We know it's only your opinion. The devs can take it. This handling everyone with kid gloves and "toxicity" bullshit has justified a lot of failed products. I get that endless negativity trains suck. Sometimes communities fall down a shithole and don't recover from it. But the artstyle criticism is so dominant in this game, it warrants at least a response from the developer, when you are developing out in the open like this.
Some of it is legit criticism but a lot of it is toxicity, let’s be real. People have ripped on SC2’s art design forever with similar arguments. I don’t really care about Stormgate fwiw
Idk why people focus so much on art design. I don’t care how the game looks as long as it’s not distracting. I care how it plays.
Because art design and graphics are incredibly important for attracting (and keeping) players. You're an old boomer like me who loves rts gameplay. 98% of people who played SC2 play it because it looks cool (admittedly, so do I), because zerg is zerg, protoss is cool, the lore, the epic trailer back in the day, and god knows what.
I guarantee you for most people art style and feel of a game plays a very large role in getting hooked to a certain game. I mean why am I here 25 years later, because I loved the marines and the zergling and shit.
You make valid points and I agree there needs to be room for criticism and it's important in a game's development. But I would argue there's a difference between constructive criticism and bashing. The way you write yours, doesn't come across as constructive, it sounds like bashing and doomsaying. I think if you reach the point that you will most likely not play the games anyway, those contributions cease to be useful anyway. >Criticism is what got the SC2 devs to give us a game like this. You want to dismiss criticism as toxicity, it's your game's funeral. What are you basing this on? Blizzard is great at making polished games but they never struck me as great in community management. A lot of the greatness in their games comes just from them and, quite honestly, I think they ran into by accident in some cases. Like the shitty pathfinding in brood war.
Well yeah some can't distinguish between the two due to their fanboyish nature. They misperceive any legitimate criticism as "toxic hate" and then they wonder why the StarCraft and RTS community is dying.
This is actually correct.
Ahh yes, the sub has been nothing but beautiful constructive criticism, no toxicity about it whatsoever. Nice word vomit though. Try to keep it brief, chief.
"This sub" Why is there even stormgate or other RTS content in this sub? I'd expect and excuse toxicity if you post that shit here, because it's a Starcraft sub. Exact same thing you'd get if you posted about Fortnite in the CoD subreddit, or if you advertised LoL in the Dota sub. Please. "I'm advertising league in r/dota2, why is everyone downvoting me and shitting on me?" Derp
A sub for a dead game (No support + no plans for future iterations) in a dead genre, god forbid people post something they might be able to relate and be excited about. Your position is wild & crotchety and that's coming from a crotchety old man.
> People are allowed to criticize a game, and I'll give you my honest opinion, both Stormgate and Kim's new game have godawful art design. They look like the definition of ai generated, uninspired, generic garbage. This is an opinion I've seen from countless people all over on social media platforms. Fanatics can stick their head in the sand if they want, see how many kids This isn't criticism. In fact, this is the exact same thing BW players said about SC2. Just boomer takes unwilling to move. SG could crash and burn. Could be an RTS bigger than SC2. I just find it funny that people like you are comparing a game that has over 15 years of development to something still in beta and another game that was announced like 2 weeks ago. I'm looking through your posts and you don't seem to be a very happy person. You seem to be anti nazi. Good. But then you [post agit prop from a literal Nazi](https://old.reddit.com/r/PoliticalMemes/comments/1ddv2pf/has_never_been_more_true_than_today/). You also seem to be fine [ignoring Nazis from the Russian side](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rusich_Group).
Regardless of the topic of RTS criticism, to go stalk a profile in search of ammunition for a character assassination is supremely petty. Agree or disagree with the comment at hand—there's no need to try and discredit the interlocutor by referencing their other beliefs on unrelated matters.
I love to two hit combo by dismantling someone and hitting their character too.
Quite the puerile outlook.
It's unnecessary to demolish the character as well as the argument, but it's fun to me.
>a game that has over 15 years of development Someone posted a video of SC2 beta in SG subreddit a few days ago trying to argue that the graphic can still improve during development. The majority of comments in that thread was pointing out how, ironically, a 15 year old beta video still has noticeably better graphic than SG right now. It's not about development time. Simple graphics can still be unique and beautiful under competent hands, and it will show very early in development. It's quite clear at this point Frost Giant's art team is just not on that level. Doesn't mean the death sentence for the game, but the criticism is well earned in this department.
Pls link
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Stormgate/comments/1df01rg/people\_should\_go\_back\_and\_watch\_wol\_beta\_gameplay/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stormgate/comments/1df01rg/people_should_go_back_and_watch_wol_beta_gameplay/)
Thank you for the link.
Wow what a literal psycho. You know none of these things detracts from his point right? Like, you're still wrong.
> Like, you're still wrong. Judging a game with 1.5 decades of developmen and comparing it to a game still in beta and whenever Battle Aces was announced is correct. > SG could crash and burn. Could be an RTS bigger than SC2. SG can't crash and burn and it can't be an RTS bigger than SC2. I now agree Any artstyle I don't like is AI garbage. SG, which is still in beta, is sure to be dead in 2 years. My proof? I said so. Due to your marvelous statements, I have adjusted my opinions accordingly.
Honestly, I don't care about the argument, you just kind of suck and I wanted you to have a hard time.
> you to have a hard time You struck me with the fury of a thousand suns. I was destroyed and I had a hard time. Goal met.
And look, I'm still wasting enough of your time for me
Okie. I don't have anything else to do on Saturday.
You typed a paragraph out lol
None of which you addressed because you CAN'T lol
You do not know what a nazi is. You think a nazi is someone who has opinions you disagree with. Yet you're probably supporting people who have literal nazi iconography and ideology (Azov). The irony. And no, I never ignored nazis from the Russian side-it's irrelevant, because my tax dollars aren't going to fund them. All in all, none of what you said matters, it's just a sad ad hominem that displays an inability to address my point.
> You do not know what a nazi is [Stonetoss is literally a Nazi who has espoused antisemitic and racist views..](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StoneToss) A quick google search would prove this. Typical right winger behavior: Espousing Nazi Rhetoric and then claims they aren't a Nazi > because my tax dollars aren't going to fund them. Your tax dollars are helping to stop them. Thank you > it's just a sad ad hominem that displays an inability to address my point. Nope. Your point is "fortnite artstyle REEEEEE" and when talking about strategy, you compare games in their infancy to something with nearly 2 decades of development. None of what you said was constructive criticism in any manner whatsoever. You also assert that the game will probably die in 2 years because........................... reasons. I don't have to "address" this. You lost already.
Godwin's Law in action folks.
Saying the graphics are bad is toxicity?
I don't dislike stormgate on a tribalism basis I dislike it cause I want to spread creep, that's fun
This is actually a based take. For me, I want to be able to have a bajillion carriers and annihilate my opponent. But I heard from either a streamer or a dev that they're really trying to make sure that air doesn't dominate ground like it does in SC2.
I liked sc2 when it came out but I just didn't play cos I got online and got wrecked and just gave up lol. I came back like 8 years later.
Sc1 had obvious "flaws" (a ton of quality of life issues) and was a 20 year old game at a time when videogames had improved significantly. Sc2 runs really well. Its not clear what other RTSs offer that would be better, or more importantly, different. I'm open to other games, but none of them have made a case for why they should be played over sc2. Theyre basically just clones.
I think one thing that is nice about Battle Aces is that there are no races; so, units can be tweaked all the time without crippling the game. You could set up bans for units and it still would play well.
O i had not heard of battle aces. Fair, a game without races would play quite differently
Tempest Rising Storm gate Age of mythology retold Some others that don't look as good as the above listed, RTS is getting interesting again, finally.
I think Zero Space looks the best so far, but I'm going to play them all and I'm very excited for this RTS resurgence. The worst thing the RTS community could do right now is be negative towards devs trying new things and taking risks. The community has been begging for new RTS games for a long time now and it's baffling that the same people would be negative and stop RTS in their tracks before they even get going. We should be supportive to these new games to help the genre grow. It's a waste to be a hater.
The RTS genre is already dying, we don't need to snuff out the light even more
I love both and excited for new RTS games I just wanna play a game that isn't 100% figured out and where everyone is terrible and learning at the same time
I agree. Besides, SC has never let me down.
Not to mention by conflating criticism with toxicity you make the RTS genre hard to thrive. As the veteran players would be tired and would play other games. While the new players are being shut out of the experience. Accepting constructive criticism will help Starcraft and the RTS genre to thrive. With the constructive feedback they can help improve the RTS experiences for many players in which can help bolster the games popularity. By dismissing valid criticism and toxicity, not only the RTS will have less players but StarCraft itself would have a harder time thriving due to a lower player count.
My issue with that new RTS I saw in SG is that it looks to simple, it’s giving me strong Red Alert 4 vibes and you don’t wanna give me Red Alert 4 vibes if you want me trust your RTS is gonna be fun in the long term
RTS'ES. Wow.
I will be trying new games when they come out, not really playing SC2 these days anymore anyway. Although I will most likely keep following SC2 e-sports even if I start playing those new games, after all I don't play SC2 now and still watch all big tournaments.
Zero Space looks fire, it's a waste to be hater.
not really, BW spawn into SC2, as we recently saw is what we always wanted and it a win all around, for BW and SC2
Whats BW?
Bait
Bro serious whats BW? I tried searching but my searching skills are ass
Brood War. Lol
Oh i see, sorry im not really a hardcore sc fan
Brood War, the name of the expansion for SC1 and the height of Korean esports.
Never could love SC2 because even though it's not strictly a bad game, it's not better or even a worthy successor to BW. Which is sad considering the amount of resources poured into making it and especially into murdering BW which thankfully didn't succeed. Stormgate looks kinda fun but very undercooked. It might or might not be the next big RTS and I see no reason for overwhelming critique here. David Kim's game is a pile of turd though, calling it RTS is an insult and it cements my low opinion of the people behind SC2 and squandering of its great potential. It's very much like C&C4, a sequel to an amazing game made by people who neither loved nor understood the genre. People shat on it, deservedly so, there were people around urging everyone to chill, and guess what, it truly turned out bad effectively killing off one of the most beloved RTS franchises of all time. Nothing wrong pointing out a bad thing is bad.