Support NeoGAF

[kpopSuperstar]

The StarCraft inspired free-to-play RTS is out of early access.

I think it's a fine game, people take the hate too far on decent games. It's not the savior of RTS, but it's an ok game worth trying if you are into RTS's.

Anyone here played it recently and got any opinions on the full release? has it improved over time? are there enough players to find matches?

 

[Yoshichan]

Been watching this for an hour or so, first "real" Stormgate tournament

Looks 10000000x better (I backed it up from start and got to play the 0.1 version and it played and looked horribly). But the thing is, even if it DOES look and play 100000x better, there are so few players actually playing the game... hopefully they can make the turn-around

 

[Yoshichan]

Actually, anyone solid at RTS games (SC2 masters or diamond) want to do a couple of games and figure out the game together on Thursday?

 

[Corian33]

They've made improvements in leaps and bounds, but it's hard to say if they will be able to get a player base going.

 

[SRTtoZ]

Isn't this game, like, dead? Not trying to be mean but I remember hearing that the player numbers were awful and not launching with a meaty campaign is kind of a huge miss. The MP/tournament scene players is such a small sample size of players to build around so I'm not really suprised tbh. They should have built a game like a cheaper version of SC2, based around a campaign so that casuals like me would BUY IT and beat the campaign, play a couple games on the ladder and then check in at a later date, replay the campaign (or add DLC) etc etc. Their plan to just pack in a couple missions just wasn't a good idea. That's not enough to pull in the casuals. You need to sell the game to those types of people to make your money back on the game, then it's the hardcore MP guys who keep the game alive while selling new expansions and other STORE DLC items. It was really mismanaged from the very begiining IMO. Also, I have to say it but the art style is NOT it. I don't even know what you would call that.

 

[blitz64]

IGN review is out. 8/10

 

[IbizaPocholo]

IGN review is out. 8/10

Stormgate reviewed by Leana Hafer on PC.As a competitive RTS, Stormgate is what's next. Or at least, I hope it is. It pushes that classic basecraft formula forward with a veteran's eye for what works and what doesn't, and gets me pumped to queue up again right after I finish a match – win or lose – in a way I haven't been since the early days of Wings of Liberty. The campaign has come a long way since the rough state it was in for the Early Access launch, while it still has some rough edges. The road ahead still feels long, and I genuinely hope it has the chance to become everything it wants to be some day. It's already a special game, though, combining the familiar and the fresh into a satisfying RTS experience.

 

[SomeNorseGuy]

Layoffs looking likely at Stormgate studio Frost Giant

Article:

It would appear that layoffs are on the cards at Frost Giant Studios.

That's according to CEO and production director Tim Morten, who told Game Developer that its debut project – Stormgate – had failed to meet expectations. The RTS title has managed a peak of 1,000 concurrent players on Steam, well below the 5,000 it hit during its Early Access period.

"We're at 20 per cent of what we saw during early access, and that is not a sustainable place for us to be. So either we find a partner or we have get smaller," Morten admitted.

Source: https://www.pcgamesinsider.biz/news/75370/layoffs-looking-likely-at-stormgate-studio-frost-giant/

 

[TheSHEEEP]

This is too bad, really.

But also entirely their own fault - anyone could've told them their release was WAAAAAYYYYYYY too early. You only get to make a first impression once, and theirs was so deservedly disastrous it wrecked the game before it really started.
Honestly, the state was awful even for Early Access standards.
Especially in the RTS genre, where standards are so high, and doubly so for RTS games with a multiplayer focus (you are competing with SC, SC2, AoEs and Warcraft here).

And now there might just not be enough people left who care to even give it a second chance, regardless of how good it might be now.

 

[ElFenomeno]

Ouch, its tough. There is so much entertainment, not just games, and distractions right now competing for people's already limited time.

 

[amigastar]

So whats the consensus on the game, is it dead?

 

[Success]

So whats the consensus on the game, is it dead?

The game is dead dead.

The CEO posted on LinkedIn about the game's failure.

Most of the senior leaders removed Frost Giant from their current job role.

There has been radio silence for weeks.

They have a documented $1 million monthly burn rate, and they only have sub-100 concurrent players at a time.

 

[Hudo]

So whats the consensus on the game, is it dead?

It's like the Hellgate: London of Blizzard-style RTS games. Team at Blizzard that worked on a successful game (in this case StarCraft II), go and found a new studio to make a similar game that is shit.

 

[amigastar]

The game is dead dead.

The CEO posted on LinkedIn about the game's failure.

Most of the senior leaders removed Frost Giant from their current job role.

There has been radio silence for weeks.

They have a documented $1 million monthly burn rate, and they only have sub-100 concurrent players at a time.

I'm speechless honestly, they burned so much money on the game and there are games which probably had less money and the product was much better, Sins of a Solar Empire 2 comes to my mind.

 

[TexMex]

They had the talent. Bought in day one. Warcraft 3 is my favorite game and I wanted this to be successful so bad, and they gave it a good shot, but that late 90s/easly 2000s RTS glory is just impossible to recapture.

 

[Arsic]

They had the talent. Bought in day one. Warcraft 3 is my favorite game and I wanted this to be successful so bad, and they gave it a good shot, but that late 90s/easly 2000s RTS glory is just impossible to recapture.

This is where I think completely different.

They had the money. They had the support of fans and even more money. They had acquired component employees.

Did they have talent? Hell fucking no. Whoever is the real talent behind SC1&2, WC3, was not at this studio. This was an ego job and money scam at best.

They simply did not know how to make a RTS or launch early access etc.

Talentless studio that fooled people to give them money.

 

[TexMex]

This is where I think completely different.

They had the money. They had the support of fans and even more money. They had acquired component employees.

Did they have talent? Hell fucking no. Whoever is the real talent behind SC1&2, WC3, was not at this studio. This was an ego job and money scam at best.

They simply did not know how to make a RTS or launch early access etc.

Talentless studio that fooled people to give them money.

I mean, they had Tim Morten and Tim Campbell, both key creatives for SC2 and WC3. Among others. Certainly wasn't nothing. Just didn't execute.

Just because you created something amazing before doesn't mean you have that same creative spark a couple of decades later. People fall off. Happens.

 

[Arsic]

I mean, they had Tim Morten and Tim Campbell, both key creatives for SC2 and WC3. Among others. Certainly wasn't nothing. Just didn't execute.

Just because you created something amazing before doesn't mean you have that same creative spark a couple of decades later. People fall off. Happens.

Lightning in a bottle. Plus, how is creating the game now versus then prioritized?

It's all speculation but a guy like Kojima made great games with his Konami studio and his new KP team.

These guys lack vision and direction for team. Amassing talent won't matter if you yourself aren't talented enough to guide them.

Oh well. The RTS revolution will happen someday but for now we have Age 2 to learn the charge.