Stormgate - sci-fi/fantasy RTS from ex-Blizzard devs - now on Early Access

[RaggleFraggle]

Early games generally were able to get by just by relying on cinematic cliches, which worked well, because those cliches were pretty good:

That’s still style over substance. It has that 90’s edgelord vibe, but ultimately it’s equally as shallow as that stormgate cinematic.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Early games generally were able to get by just by relying on cinematic cliches, which worked well, because those cliches were pretty good:

That’s still style over substance. It has that 90’s edgelord vibe, but ultimately it’s equally as shallow as that stormgate cinematic.

Disagree. Using cliches can be an art in itself, and not all cliches are equal. That Brood War intro is literally Citizen Kane compared to the Marvel slop that is that Stormgate shit (and a lot of SC2 cinematics as well).

 

[Vlajdermen]

If your interest is single player only I don't think there's any reason to follow this. It is obvious you cannot expect good story or atmosphere from it.

And what if I expect fun missions? What then, smart guy?

 

[Multidirectional]

And what if I expect fun missions? What then, smart guy?

Well then I am completely befuddled. I see no way out of this conundrum. You are on your own, I'm afraid.

Though yeah, I wouldn't understand. RTS in single player doesn't work for me. I managed to finish total 3 RTS campaigns, tried a bunch more but always dropped not far into it. Warcraft 3, Starcraft/Broodwar and Starcraft II. And yeah SC II single player is carried by more fun than usual mission design, not story or atmosphere, you win. Though wouldn't want to replay any of them now. Once I got a proper taste of 1v1 that was it for me.

 

[Vlajdermen]

And what if I expect fun missions? What then, smart guy?

Well then I am completely befuddled. I see no way out of this conundrum. You are on your own, I'm afraid.

Though yeah, I wouldn't understand. RTS in single player doesn't work for me. I managed to finish total 3 RTS campaigns, tried a bunch more but always dropped not far into it. Warcraft 3, Starcraft/Broodwar and Starcraft II. And yeah SC II single player is carried by more fun than usual mission design, not story or atmosphere, you win. Though wouldn't want to replay any of them now. Once I got a proper taste of 1v1 that was it for me.

Then stop telling us about single player rts. I'm sick of this notion that games can either be multiplayer or storyfaggotry.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

Early games generally were able to get by just by relying on cinematic cliches, which worked well, because those cliches were pretty good:

That’s still style over substance. It has that 90’s edgelord vibe, but ultimately it’s equally as shallow as that stormgate cinematic.

Disagree. Using cliches can be an art in itself, and not all cliches are equal. That Brood War intro is literally Citizen Kane compared to the Marvel slop that is that Stormgate shit (and a lot of SC2 cinematics as well).

In all likelihood that cinematic was made by the cinematic team acting alone and Chris Metzen was later forced to write a story around it. I’ll concede that it’s better written than the rest, because it was in all likelihood written by the cinematic team, but that’s not saying much about RTS in general.

Nonetheless, one potentially interesting story hook that goes nowhere isn’t strong. You need an entire plot that is consistently strong.

Then stop telling us about single player rts. I'm sick of this notion that games can either be multiplayer or storyfaggotry.

Most players, 80% roughly, don’t even touch multiplayer and it doesn’t bring in the money either. RTS has a huge untapped market for SP and co-op content. Devs are fucking morons who keep chasing esports rather than focusing on a confirmed source of revenue.

Unfortunately, making decent campaigns requires investment. SC2 had a hundred million dollar budget, so it’s set an impossible standard for missions. On the other hand, it’s gimmicky as fuck and tries to focus too hard on MOBA and RTT style.

I don’t need amazing storytelling, just something that isn’t completely stupid. What I would love is a campaign with evolution missions, the bugs are alien, and they’re antagonists to the other armies. Or maybe dogmatic alien romans bringing peace, bread and circuses to the galaxy. Or maybe space cowboy samurai jockeying for control of resources. Something!

Not yet another lame ripoff where captain cowboy cornbread fucks his way through chicks wearing tentacle wigs.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Blizzard cinemaics were good throughout the entirety of Starcraft, first game as well as Broodwar, and most of the Diablo games up to a few cheesy ones towards the end of Diablo 2.

Warcraft 3 is when they started to drop in quality, but they were still fairly cinematic. Talking about the actual cinematics here not the ingame cutscenes, which ranged from adequate to absolutely retarded.

 

[BlackAdderBG]

Nah, Warcraft 3 had the best cinematics of all Bilzzard games. Human ending and Frozen throne ones are their best.

 

[Vlajdermen]

Frozen Throne's ending was retarded wrist-cutting.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

Blizzard cinemaics were good throughout the entirety of Starcraft, first game as well as Broodwar, and most of the Diablo games up to a few cheesy ones towards the end of Diablo 2.

Fun fact: the Starcraft cinematics were made separately from the scripts and the scripts were modified to account for them.

But in any case, this is irrelevant to my point. Starcraft’s writing sucks ass and I’ve been waiting 26 years for decent RTS storytelling. I’m tired of waiting.

 

[Cyberarmy]

Nah, Warcraft 3 had the best cinematics of all Bilzzard games. Human ending and Frozen throne ones are their best.

My favorites are Starcraft 1s ending and Wrath of the Lich King opening

 

[Venser]

meh

 

[Alienman]

Pretty lame.

 

[La vie sexuelle]

meh

Lame, but there is no cancer. I appreciate it.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

For all FGS's talk about the importance of storytelling, this trailer is cartoony, cliched, and derivative. Who is this for? This would've been great 20 years ago, but the kids who played warcraft 3 has grown up, some even have kids of their own now, and the pop culture landscape is completely different. We live in times after Games of Thrones redefined the fantasy genre. I was hoping for better given the benefit of hindsight but... oh well. On the bright side, the trailer is getting pushback for this.

 

[Multidirectional]

I guess they made it just because they think they need to make it. It's clear their real interest is in making multiplayer RTS but they think they need to include story to have any shot at drawing in normies. It was obvious long ago that story will be generic boring crap. I wish they focused all their energy and resources on the thing they actually want to make but oh well..

 

[RaggleFraggle]

I guess they made it just because they think they need to make it. It's clear their real interest is in making multiplayer RTS but they think they need to include story to have any shot at drawing in normies. It was obvious long ago that story will be generic boring crap. I wish they focused all their energy and resources on the thing they actually want to make but oh well..

80% of RTS players never touch competitive multiplayer. It's totally viable to make a game aimed at that 80%. Campaign and mission DLC, co-op DLC, etc. would all be viable products.

No RTS created specifically for esports has succeeded, aside from maybe Starcraft 2 and that's only due to being grandfathered in. Esports scenes arise organically. Furthermore, MOBA and RTT are vastly preferable if you want to do esports anyway. Why do they keep trying?

The only bright spot is that their story probably won't be as bad as Blizz' storytelling. Which isn't a high bar to begin with. Seriously, the demon leader, Dagon or something, is a painfully stereotypical Saturday morning cartoon supervillain and his design is absurdly humanoid for what should be the leader of the demons.

 

[duke nukem]

meh

I think its bit too scary! I wonder if the winged humanoid demon is a Lucifer? I wonder if the third race is also based on the bible.

 

[-M-]

The only bright spot is that their story probably won't be as bad as Blizz' storytelling.

Metzen is co-writing the story, so the bright spot is about as bright as a black hole.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

The only bright spot is that their story probably won't be as bad as Blizz' storytelling.

Metzen is co-writing the story, so the bright spot is about as bright as a black hole.

Sigh. Figures.

I just want an RTS story with proper attention given to it and which I can discuss without turning my brain off. I think the RTS format has unique opportunities when it comes to conveying military and political thriller genres. I'm frustrated that devs still have yet to take advantage of that even after the genre has existed for three decades or so.

 

[Tyranicon]

Oh wow, someone told me this was dollar-store Blizzard and that sounds pretty accurate.

 

[Cohesion]

Games of Thrones redefined the fantasy genre.

Triggered. GoT is shit and wasn't even popular before the show. Muh redifinition.

 

[Baron Tahn]

Just on the esports topic they don't design games that way because of the 'sport' or because it's what gamers want, They do it because of advertising and sponsorship bux. Even more so these days because of influencers and online transactions being the norm.

While most players prefer good SP, there are few windows to turn that into lucrative advertising contracts with doritos or mountain dew, No team shirts to slap sponsors on, etc

 

[Johannes]

Just on the esports topic they don't design games that way because of the 'sport' or because it's what gamers want, They do it because of advertising and sponsorship bux. Even more so these days because of influencers and online transactions being the norm.

While most players prefer good SP, there are few windows to turn that into lucrative advertising contracts with doritos or mountain dew, No team shirts to slap sponsors on, etc

Esports isn't lucrative directly for the company making the game, it easily costs them if they would be the ones funding and hosting the tournaments. Rather it's a way to market the game.

 

[Tyranicon]

Just on the esports topic they don't design games that way because of the 'sport' or because it's what gamers want, They do it because of advertising and sponsorship bux. Even more so these days because of influencers and online transactions being the norm.

While most players prefer good SP, there are few windows to turn that into lucrative advertising contracts with doritos or mountain dew, No team shirts to slap sponsors on, etc

Esports isn't lucrative directly for the company making the game, it easily costs them if they would be the ones funding and hosting the tournaments. Rather it's a way to market the game.

Is catering to the esports crowd even good marketing anymore? For the amount of effort you need to pump into it, it seems like RTS devs would be better served catering to nostalgic older players instead.

I haven't done any research, but I feel like a lot of RTS enthusiasts mostly just buy these games for the campaign without really touching multiplayer.