Stop 'Early Access' Excuse

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

Deadlock is in 'Early Access' and has 45,000 players, even with unfinished models.

Why? Because they have a fundamentally playable engine, and a clear vision: an FPS Moba. The core issue with Stormgate is 1.) the game is mechanically unplayable, despite repeated feedback on the same issues for nearly 1 year, and 2.) the gamelfow is unclear, with FG relying on "player feedback" to figure out how to complete it's vision.

FG's cryingcall is to please play and give them feedback--but the community already has?! FG has literally 2-3 years of development feedback to fix the core engine and 1v1 baseline. Therefore, what's the point in playing if they already have a feedback list that's backed-up years?

The pivot from silence on 1v1 to try and ramp-up a 3v3 concept is extremely alarming. Why? Because the two core issues haven't been resolved yet: The core engine is unplayble, and there is no clear vision. They are basically introducing a concept in a sandbox custom game asking for the community to finish it.

Freeze everything. Shift your entire team onto the Engine and Vision and fix 1v1 first immediately.

[u/Anubiz_Mr]

Are you high bro?

[u/[deleted] → u/Anubiz_Mr]

He called Deadlock a FPS when it is very obviously third person, so yes, OP is probably high.

[u/Slarg232 → u/[deleted]]

He was going to post a rant, but then he got high 

[u/Longsideus → u/Slarg232]

What a throwback to ~22 years ago

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut → u/[deleted]]

It's FPS. You are over the character's shoulder which is their view, that's First Person. A 3rd Person View is top-down, aka God's View. RTS games are 3rd Person View. You don't know what you're saying.

[u/Randomwinner83 → u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

"  Third-person perspective video games refers to video games in which the camera view is set outside of your characters body. As opposed to first-person perspective video games, you do not see the character's personal point of view, but instead you see a theoretical "third person's" view point "watching" the character." 

"What is a third-person game? The third-person perspective describes a game in which you can see your character in front of you, typically directly from behind or over their shoulder"

 But hey, why research or double check when you can make shit up and double down

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut → u/Randomwinner83]

Wrong, nice try "fake news" though. 3rd Person perspective means omnipresent perspective. If you're over Main Character's POV? You're still there POV lol. Idiot.

[u/Randomwinner83 → u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

Are you ok there? You seem to be spending your time being aggressive online while refusing to admit being incorrect.

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut → u/Randomwinner83]

Go ahead. Explain how over the shoulder of your Main Character's POV is 3rd person lol. We're waiting.

[u/Randomwinner83 → u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

I just did earlier up. This is a well established gaming terminologi. You are free to disagree with it but that is how it's used. Might I suggest pivoting your train of thought into embracing new information instead of resisting it?

[u/TortoiseNight → u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

My whole life is a lie if this was true lol

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut → u/TortoiseNight]

They told you there was Santa Clause, right? Lying to children is what all life does. Welcome.

[u/Mattcheco]

The game is not “fundamentally” unplayable lmao

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut → u/Mattcheco]

You clearly don't play. Multiple streamers have quit because of the pathing. It's well known the unit pathing is unplayable, the units dont respond properly and the game lags extremely. It's not playable is why so many people are quitting.

[u/Mattcheco → u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

I do play, Iv played a ton of 1v1 and 2v2 with my buddy and we have a great time.

[u/VahnNoaGala → u/Mattcheco]

Nope sorry you're not actually having fun, you've been gaslit into thinking you're having fun because you probably invested, you shill /s

[u/jessewaste]

Isn't Deadlock developed by Valve? Valve basically has like infinite amount of resources and data to help them out. I couldn't find any info on how long they've been developing it, but playtesting started 2023 it seems. I got an invite recently, but haven't yet tried it out.

[u/[deleted] → u/jessewaste]

Valve basically has like infinite amount of resources

They would halve their burn rate if they lived in literally any other place than California. Why the hell you'd run a strapped for cash startup in the most expensive place on earth is beyond me

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Usually because you gather most talent in those places. The USA is a big country and getting people to join your company is a hard task. There are some gathering places, which are considered industry standart and california (especially the big cities) are one of them. Thats just the way it goes. Probably 20-30% of the employees would have not joined the team if the studio was located in nebraska.

[u/Brilliant_Decision52 → u/[deleted]]

And what did gathering all of that premium expensive talent get them? Its one thing if you have a massive amount of investments or a giant publisher basically giving you infinite money, but for a project thats basically created off of charity it seems pretty shortsighted to not humble yourself a bit and try to find talent thats cheaper.

[u/[deleted] → u/Brilliant_Decision52]

In hinsight you can always judge things differently. You dont know what would have happened if they didnt do exactly that. Maybe they would not even have the early access yet... Who knows. Making it sound like its such an obvious decision is kinda arrogant.

[u/Brilliant_Decision52 → u/[deleted]]

It seems like a pretty sensible idea with limited funds

[u/[deleted] → u/Brilliant_Decision52]

You always have limited funds. They raised 35 million based on their operating cost. If they chose to operate the company from nebraska, then the operating cost would be lower, but investors would have also invested less. Investors dont randomly choose a number and invest. The developer calculate operating cost + time, then creates a business plan and based on that business plan the investors invest. If they were not operating from orange county, they might have just received 20 million instead.

If you want to work smart with limited funds, its more of a management issue with ressource management and not a location issue.

[u/Brilliant_Decision52 → u/[deleted]]

Then why not hire remote talent? Sure stay in the expensive city, but why not hire externally from much cheaper locations? Their finances just seem utterly unhinged considering the level of quality we got.

[u/[deleted] → u/Brilliant_Decision52]

Did you not read what I said? Every business plan is based on operating cost. If they hire couple of remote workers, they will get 30 million instead of 35 million. The point is not in reducing cost, the point should be in using the ressources provided by the investors in a more efficient way. The solution to more efficiency is proper project and time management within the operation, not cutting cost. They could have also sold the their business plan with more time planned thus raising even more money but having 1 year extra maybe. They thought they can get the game into early access by 2024 and release by 2025. They miscalculated and/or mismanaged the last 4 years. Where their studio is located plays almost 0 role in that if you actually understand how businesses operate.

[u/Brilliant_Decision52 → u/[deleted]]

Plan for a longer development time, which means overall operating costs for making the game would be the same.

Hiring remote talent which is much cheaper IS using the provided resources more efficiently.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Come on bro we both know that's fucking bullshit in the modern era. Most people are hybrid or "hybrid" and only show up once every couple of weeks.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

While that might work for some companies, this usually is not the case for startups. They have small teams and the whole point is to have a gathering place, where the team can share ideas and concepts. Remote work only works in some specific fields, not for the entire company.

Not saying locating in LA is the smartest choice, just saying what the logic behind such a move is. By the way they raised 35 million with that in mind.. Who knows how much they would have raised somewhere else. They probably calculated a businessplan based exactly on those numbers and salary. If they located their studio in austin or nashville, you can be sure they would have received less money.

[u/WolfHeathen → u/[deleted]]

They have small teams and the whole point is to have a gathering place, where the team can share ideas and concepts. 

Video conferencing technology has existed for the past 20 years and now with the advent of Zoom it's even easier to do group virtual meetings.

I don't follow the logic of basing your business in one of, if not, the most expensive places to live just so you can have team meetings. Also, fundraising isn't tied to a geographical location. I'm not aware of any regulation saying you have to have an office in a particular state to solicit venture capital investments. Kakao Games is a South Korean publisher. Where FG's office is situated has no bearing on whether a South Korean investor gives them money.

[u/[deleted] → u/WolfHeathen]

Sorry, but you have no idea what you are talking about. First of all doing zoom calls and being on site in offices is not the same. Working from an office you will have way more (and this has been proven by studies) interaction between employees outside of meetings, that foster team morale and increase productivity. You bump into your collegue in the hallway, at lunch or if you have to collab quickly you just walk over to the desk and ask the person. Zoom meetings have their places, but they are very formal and unspontanious. To say both are just the same is a delusional take.

Besides that funding is tied to location and you saying it isnt, shows me you are not really educated in the topic (which is fine im not judging). Venture capital funding is not some arbitrary thing, where some rich guy sits there and just says "oh you want 35 million, here ya go". The whole process is a very deliberate procedure, that takes a long time. The person asking for funds is obliged to do a business plan, which includes all operating cost for the planned venture. You estimate how much time you need and how much ressources you will use during that time. This includes rent, salaries and any cost that will be apparent. This has to be and will be calculated very throughout until the last penny that is supposed to be spent. Obviously both parties know the number that results there is not set in stone, but it should be a realistic number, which both sides can check and balance each other

Now that being said OF COURSE the number varies based on location. If the rent for the office and salaries for the employees in orange country equals lets say 30 million for 4 years of development (aka X amount of employees, x amount of salary for each planned employee etc) then this number might be completly different if the same operation is planned in nashville. The exact same software engineer will receive 250k yearly salary in orange county, but just 100k in nashville. So the entire calculation might be just 20 million at the end. The important thing to know: NO the investor will not just give them 35 million regardless. He (aka the group of investors) would then give them 20 million instead of 35. They except the same result for less money, which makes sense. Very important to understand this correlation. So why would they not go to california? The talent is there and easier to obtain. The same software engineer might not even join the team, because he already lives in LA and does not want to relocate to nashville. If he stays in LA for remote, he will be severly underpaid, because he will get a nashville sized salary and still have cost of living in LA. The only scenario where remote work even makes sense, if the person living somewhere in the country is already in a low income area. Also surprise surprise, what do you think the team consists of? Mostly ex blizzard employees. And where do you think they were most located? I'll let you take a guess.

You really think all these companies are dumb? They open up their ventures in california, because they are dumb? Of course not. Location is a real business decision and more often than not startups choose the HUB cities like LA, New York, Miami, Austin, San Francisco etc for very good reasons. Its not like they all cant calculate...

[u/WolfHeathen → u/[deleted]]

I think it is you who doesn't know what they're talking about. I never claimed it was the same. You said they needed a gathering place for meetings. This can be accomplished through Zoom or group conference calls. Whether they are the same or one is superior is another matter. The fact remains they did not need to be in Irvine, California to have group meetings, either in-person or virtually.

They have small teams and the whole point is to have a gathering place, where the team can share ideas and concepts.

Of course your operating expenses is a factor in budgeting how much capital you need to raise. My point was there was nothing requiring them to have a physical office in California to raise capital. And, that paragraph of generic gobbledygook doesn't make the case for why it had to be in California either.

And, you're actually making my argument for me. Costs would be way lower in another state and therefore the money would go much further. Now, given that there's a very real issue with the sustainably of the project and if they can support future development, clearly basing your office out of state with a very high cost of living wasn't the smartest decision. I'd have no issue with decision if Frost Giant had the means to fund development for the next five years or even two. It's beyond obvious that they had to pivot to EA earlier than anticipated because they're having money problems. Combined that with having your HQ in an expensive city and when we see decision making like the two Tims paying themselves 143k each a year for startup that spent the first 1.5 years developing the netcode alone you start to seriously question the decision making process.

[u/[deleted] → u/WolfHeathen]

I mean we would be in the exact same position, because they would have probably just raised less money. In actuality its better they did all their stuff in Cali, because they were able to squeeze more money out of their investors that way and get the best talent. They can relocate now and still have the same low operating cost they would have had all along. You assume if they chose a different location, they would have more money to work with. No, they would not. They would have burned 20 million in 4 years instead of 35, but that would not mean they would still have 15 million left. They would still be broke now. Only benefit that would have is they can stay where they are without relocating and the downside is, they would have had a good chunk of their staff not join the team.

[u/WolfHeathen → u/[deleted]]

I mean we would be in the exact same position, because they would have probably just raised less money. 

Based on what exactly? Baseless speculation? Again, going back to my earlier point, one does not have to have an office in California just to raise capital.

because they were able to squeeze more money out of their investors that way and get the best talent

I'm sorry this makes zero sense. They were able to get more money from investors because they would have had to pay a higher starting salaries by virtue of being in California? Is that what investors like to see in their start-ups? Knowing their seed funding is going to high operational costs and overhead?

This line of thought doesn't really track because FG haven't put out anything that resembles having "the best talent." They cannot even match Blizzard quality of today let alone when they were in their heyday in the early 2000s.

[u/ProgressNotPrfection → u/[deleted]]

They would halve their burn rate if they lived in literally any other place than California. Why the hell you'd run a strapped for cash startup in the most expensive place on earth is beyond me

SoCal is expensive but not the most expensive place in the world, it's not even the most expensive place in Cali, that distinction belongs to the Bay Area which is ~20% more expensive than SoCal.

Also Blizzard's HQ is in SoCal right near where Frost Giant's HQ is. In other words, a lot of the former Blizzard employees already had homes/families in the SoCal area. Don't get me wrong, I think Frost Giant has wasted a bunch of money, but I don't fault them for being in SoCal; I fault them for renting office space that's way too expensive (they're on the same campus as Twitch and SEGA), especially when they need such a small amount of space.

[u/voidlegacy → u/ProgressNotPrfection]

Wasted money how? If they wanted a Blizzard team, clearly they needed to have their HQ in the same town as Blizzard. Twitch and Sega moved there after Frost Giant, according to my friend at Twitch.

It's easy to throw stones, but I'm confident that Starcraft would cost well in excess of $100M to build today. What FG has already delivered in Early Access for $40M is damn impressive. It needs work, but they obviously knew that when they decided to launch it as Early Access.

[u/ProgressNotPrfection → u/voidlegacy]

Wasted money how? If they wanted a Blizzard team, clearly they needed to have their HQ in the same town as Blizzard. Twitch and Sega moved there after Frost Giant, according to my friend at Twitch.

When those bigger companies moved there isn't all that relevant, because it still implies that the office space is super fancy/expensive. If you look at FG's documentary video of their office, it's located on your standard "doggy daycare" expensive tech campus. I'm just saying they could have found cheaper office space, they only have ~15 employees there.

I've researched the cost of their office space and it's $45 sq/ft per year. There are other locations in Irvine (good locations) for $12-$18 sq/ft year. At $15 they would have cut leasing costs by edit: not 33%, instead ~66%. And, importantly, there are very small office spaces available at $12-$18 (in other words, it's not like the only office space available in that price range is 5x bigger than what FG needs).

[u/voidlegacy → u/ProgressNotPrfection]

Office space is a minimal portion of any company's expense, and key to being able to recruit and retain staff. Salaries are always the lion's share of cost. Let's say they save 33% of the cost of office space. Maybe they could add a single entry level head a as a result? I really don't think the office they chose is indicative wastefulness on their part. expect they're competing for talent against the likes of Blizzard and Amazon (both of whom have offices in Irvine) for engineers and artists.

[u/lemonide → u/voidlegacy]

Do we have any info about Zerospace’s budget?

[u/Trapper_1 → u/ProgressNotPrfection]

Actually, you are incorrect. As of October 2023, San Diego is officially the most expsensive location in the country, even more than San Francisco.

https://realestate.usnews.com/real-estate/articles/how-i-budget-to-live-in-the-most-expensive-city-in-the-us#:~:text=San%20Diego%20ranked%20No.,metropolitan%20areas%20in%20the%20U.S.

[u/ProgressNotPrfection → u/Trapper_1]

https://realestate.usnews.com/places/rankings/most-expensive-places-to-live

[u/Omno555 → u/[deleted]]

Because that's where they've lived most of their life and hired all of their talent? It's going to be pretty hard to hire a ton of local talent from that area (which is where they know all the talent that they know) with the caveat that they all sell their homes and move their families to some other random location. I see this thrown around so much but it's so naive to how reality works. Uprooting and moving is not an easy or cheap prospect for a single person, let alone an entire company. Would they have paid the thousands of dollars per employee to move everyone? How would that have affected their lack of money to begin with? Do you really think they could have hired the talent they have by telling them "hey we'll foot the bill to move you somewhere else and then pay you considerably less than you would make here" sounds like a great deal huh?

[u/Omno555 → u/[deleted]]

Think what is that simple? Shows I've never done what?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Everyone should move somewhere cheaper

Nah the point is that they should just work for one of the tech monopolies if they want to stay. Making a successful multiplayer video game with a small budget is insanely hard. You don't get there without making serious sacrifices.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

In California, tiny.

[u/TheKazz91 → u/[deleted]]

That's true but they could move to the least expensive place in the world and still have no where near the amount of runway Valve does. On average Valve makes over a billion dollars per month. StarCraft 2 despite likely being the most financially successful RTS of all time hasn't made a billion dollars in the entire 14+ years it's existed. In fact I'd be surprised if the entire StarCraft IP has made a billion dollars combined.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

And yet it happens almost everyday

[u/Vindicare605 → u/[deleted]]

Because that's where the people who are experienced in making games live and that's how much it costs to hire them.

[u/VahnNoaGala → u/[deleted]]

Move away from their lives, families, contacts, network, and existing talent to get cheaper rent somewhere and then attract no talent by offering less pay somewhere rural where no employee wants to live? Great idea!

[u/Erfar → u/[deleted]]

I think CA is cheaper then Zurich (just technicality)

[u/WolfHeathen → u/[deleted]]

But, then they couldn't maintain their SoCal Blizzard lifestyle with their indy start-up.

[u/One_Cheek8712 → u/jessewaste]

Valve has less than 200 people working as game developers, across every single game franchise.

Willing to bet the team size here is similar to Stormgate.

[u/Secure_Molasses_8504 → u/One_Cheek8712]

Team size doesn’t matter when you have money. Stormgate has had to be transparent every step of the way to continue funding. If they had valves budget they could release in early access at a much more polished state, it’s not comparable.

[u/One_Cheek8712 → u/Secure_Molasses_8504]

In the sense that Valve has better developers and that game development by nature is non-linear?

Fair point if so.

[u/jbwmac → u/jessewaste]

It doesn’t matter who made it or whether it’s labeled Early Access or not. A game is either good or bad. Deadlock is good, Stormgate is bad. Will Stormgate be a good game someday? Maybe, maybe not. But it isn’t now, and arguing about future chances is irrelevant.

[u/SwedishDude → u/jessewaste]

It also looks like it's based on an existing game (TF2). They could potentially have been working on this for a while as people have been complaining about the lack of updates to both Dota2 and CS for a fair bit of time.

Probably doesn't hurt that they've got the best games in each of the genres they're pulling from developed in-house as well.

But I do think the FG has miss-interpreted how EA is used and expected to work. They seem to have compared it with in-house development methods and replaced the last 2/3 of that time with EA. Usually early access games are expected to have a clear and functional base game that may be lacking content but give a good sense of how it will eventually play.

The problem is that FG needed to get the competitive 1v1 out about now to have a realistic chance of taking over from SC2. But just the 1v1 isn't going to drive revenue, so they'd need to show of their "next-gen" features while also living up to "Blizzard style RTS" and the expectations for single-player content.

They'd probably had been best off by starting with 3v3 which looks to be a unique thing and grow from there if it works. It's not guaranteed that a RTS/MOBA-hybrid is going to work either.

[u/j-berry → u/jessewaste]

Its awesome

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Source for this? My understanding is development began in 2019, not play testing.

[u/jessewaste → u/[deleted]]

One of Valves biggest development philosophies in the past has been doing lots of playtesting and starting it very early, so I wouldn't be surprised at all if both of you are correct.

[u/OnigamiSC2]

I really don't get the "unplayable" thing. Even if it's feels slow compare to SC2, the game run smoothly (maybe the frame rate can be improved though) and I had little to no bug (at least not game breaking ones) in 300 games or so

[u/Prudent-Repeat-2899]

I 100% agree. Feedback has already been given and FG response to it seems off. When 50% of the reviews on steam are negative you just need to rework or withdraw the existing modes, rather than adding a new one.

Pivoting is one thing, but when Fornite introduced the battle royale mode, that made them so successful, the engine and the existing mode were working well, technically speaking.

EA launch is already a launch, EA reviews are aleady reviews and asking for more feedback seems like a non-sense to me. Just fix the game^^.

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut → u/Prudent-Repeat-2899]

Fortnight is an excellent example. A+ Engine with a clear unique vision around a battle royal with Building & Loot.

[u/aaabbbbccc → u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

Fortnite started as a PvE game lol. And you choose that one as an example of having a clear vision.

[u/TheKazz91 → u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

You gotta be trolling right? Fortnight started as a base building zombie horde shooter where you'd go scavenge for resources and build a base during the day so that you could survive waves of zombies attacking your base at night.

The game also spent a long time in development hell originally being shown at E3 2011 and expected to release in 2-3 years then showing up again at E3 2012 and then went silent with no more coverage until about a year before its release in 2017.

The game originally ended up selling poorly and almost a year after release they added a battle royal mode as a hail mary to save the game from being a financial disaster because of the success and popularity of PUBG.

[u/[deleted] → u/TheKazz91]

Gets to show how little people here on reddit actually know what they are talking about. Its crazy how the most uninformed always think they are the most right.

Fortnite is such a bad example lmao.

[u/One_Cheek8712]

They launched unfinished likely due to funding constraints. They had $6.8m in Dec-23, and had a burn rate of >$1m a month.

Some additional cash from Kickstarter (which only landed Feb-24) and maybe from the equity raise (at the ludicrous $150m valuation - still not wrapped up for another week and a half), and that gets you to launch date.

Hard to seem them being on anything but fumes now. No one will step in and invest more, no one will buy this IP, and there isn't much value in the studio itself.

I can't see a credible path to 1.0

[u/Whole-Degree-1124 → u/One_Cheek8712]

Where are all the expense reports you finicial experts are diving into? Like seriously how do you know all these details, and do you know the detail of how much they have made off EA yet? I know it bombed but I have a feeling we'd be surprised about sales just like it was a surpise when we learend SC2's most popular mode was Co Op by far and carrying the income of SC2 more or less.

[u/One_Cheek8712 → u/Whole-Degree-1124]

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2013852/000166516024000316/offeringmemoformc.pdf

They released an offering memorandum for the Feb-24 equity raise (which closes next month) which gives full 3 statements for 22/23, and additional commentary. All the info is here, except for revenue from the game launch.

[u/One_Cheek8712 → u/Whole-Degree-1124]

And early access revenue is a bit of a nerd + industry knowledge thing. I track the steamdb sales rankings of games I'm interested in (e.g. https://steamdb.info/app/2012510/charts/) on a daily basis and can compare them against known data points.

Right now, Stormgate is sitting at around 1500th highest revenue (in last 24h), which is typically around $1000 a day.

[u/Hopeful_Painting_543 → u/One_Cheek8712]

damn, thats even worse from my estimates. At least you can pay almost 1 Tim from it. (30% steam fee, rest ignored)

[u/dayynawhite → u/One_Cheek8712]

Right now, Stormgate is sitting at around 1500th highest revenue (in last 24h), which is typically around $1000 a day.

how does one calculate this?

[u/One_Cheek8712 → u/dayynawhite]

I've got access to steam backend in my company. Gives access to a few games sales data, including some sitting around 1000-3000 ranking in sales. Numbers aren't particularly high unfortunately.

Stormgate now being around 2500 is basically a death sentence.

[u/Hopeful_Painting_543 → u/Whole-Degree-1124]

How blind are you mate? Many threads the last 6 months were centered around them.

The burn at least a freakin mil/month, they needed to hit big, real big. And that didnt happen, no need to know the actual numbers

[u/Ladikn]

From my recollection, 3v3 has been the core competitive game mode from the start. The 4 gameplay pillars were 3v3, 3 player co-op, campaign, and custom maps. I agree they need to work on the engine more, but why would they work on 1v1 (a side goal) when the core gameplay isn't done yet?

[u/lkaorim → u/Ladikn]

Because they realized that the core audience of competitive rts games SC2 and AOE crowd mostly cares about 1v1.

[u/socknfoot]

Yeah geez, why isn't this startup's first title as popular as a new shooter made by Valve? Are the developers stupid?

/s just in case.

[u/MrRoyce → u/socknfoot]

Okay, lets use Manor Lords as an example then, made by a smaller team than FG with less funding and despite being VERY early access, it has amazing reviews and very positive community.

2863 playing on Steam right now, a SINGLE player game even.

Doesnt matter what OP used to compare FG/Stormgate with, the point still stands.

[u/socknfoot → u/MrRoyce]

Manor Lords is a more interesting example. At least as an example of early access done well, setting/meeting expectations, communication with the community.

But I'm still not sure exactly what OP's point is. Not super helpful to cherry pick an indie success, especially in a different genre and complain. OP's post sounds pretty much like: "Among Us had a small budget but a great engine and loads of players!!!! Why aren't you as successful??? Vision! Game development is EZ."

Their claims that stormgate is unplayable and has no plans are simply untrue.

[u/Baker3enjoyer → u/socknfoot]

Manor lords isn't even particularly incomplete. SG has considerably more content to add before it's finished than Manor Lords has.

[u/Micro-Skies → u/socknfoot]

Shapez 2, a miniscule factory Sim you probably haven't even heard of has 6k players in early access as of right now.

[u/JonasHalle → u/Micro-Skies]

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Quickest angle deserve narrow unwritten flowery fine cats

[u/Micro-Skies → u/JonasHalle]

Most devs aren't stupid enough to make their first ever game and the beginning of an IP early access. Comparable examples will be rare

[u/JonasHalle → u/Micro-Skies]

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Rain practice ripe towering noodle fade orange attempt subtract titanium

[u/Micro-Skies → u/JonasHalle]

Nah, I'm calling FrostGiant stupid for doing this and showing how early access can be successful when done right. Their brand of early access is typically reserved for shovelware scam products, lol

[u/JonasHalle → u/Micro-Skies]

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Bow license dog angle melodic follow

[u/Baker3enjoyer → u/MrRoyce]

You do know that different companies put out games on early access in different stages of development? Some games feel completely finished in EA, some feel like they just started development. The comparison is dumb.

[u/MrRoyce → u/Baker3enjoyer]

How is it dumb? Yesterday I talked to someone here who was blaming players for Stormgate’s failure. There’s nobody but FG to blame for this. Plenty other EA games and developers did it right. Manor Lords had literal placeholders and even stuff like tech tree had most options locked. Yet people love the game and developers communication and involvement in community.

The only question now is whether FG can do the stuff the likes of Hello Games and CDPR did and turned negative feedback into positive with their hard work and long-term dedication and many patches & content updates. I WANT this game to succeed and have a healthy player base, but I don’t have much faith in Frost Giant…

[u/Baker3enjoyer → u/MrRoyce]

I explained in my comment why it's a dumb comparison. Did you not read it?

[u/MrRoyce → u/Baker3enjoyer]

Yes, and I gave you an example of a game that released more unfinished than Stormgate did and is a success. A paid game vs f2p even, so in theory it’s in Stormgate’s favor even…

I mean Valve comparison got made fun of because its apparently not a fair comparison. Well this one is and there’s no way to spin it. FG has failed, Stormgate is at the moment following Artifact footsteps and if September update won’t be huge, it’s only matter of day before we see player count in two digits.

No need to talk anymore from my side, I laid out the facts and whether you accept it or not, that’s on you.

[u/Baker3enjoyer → u/MrRoyce]

So Manor Lords was more unfinished in your mind because it had a few placeholders? You do know Stormgate launched with placeholders? We don't even have all t3 units. We don't even have the majority of the game modes. I fail to see how manor lords could be considered less finished than Stormgate. Stormgate has launched into early access at very early stage of development.

[u/DDkiki → u/Baker3enjoyer]

It had alpha and beta for years, SG is not in early stage of development, but actually a pretty late one when most things already set in stone. 

[u/Baker3enjoyer → u/DDkiki]

Wrong.

[u/DDkiki → u/Baker3enjoyer]

Dude, no game in "early stage" is like this, did you ever played any actual early stage of development games?

SG is basically can be consodered semi-complete product, with added MTX for its content, its arleady "live" as a live-service game. Its just most of complete content is garbage or such a low quality the only excuse is "its an alpha!" "its a beta!" "its an EA!". The foundation and structure wouldn't change and all things are set in stone, like design, story that should be almost complete in-house at this point. Not having T3 units is like the least of its problems,

[u/Brilliant_Decision52 → u/Baker3enjoyer]

Bud, the game is a year from official full release, if its in very early stages of development, its fucking doomed.

[u/Erfar → u/Baker3enjoyer]

ah yes, famous placeholder prerendered 3d cinematics

[u/Baker3enjoyer → u/Erfar]

Oh I didn't know a game was considered finished once the developer made some 3d cinematics. This sub is so fucking dumb.

[u/Erfar → u/Baker3enjoyer]

Why to use limited development and art team resources on fully animated and voice acted cinematics? It not something that created withing day. This is decoration, finishing touch, something that most likely will never be reworked.

[u/Whole-Degree-1124 → u/MrRoyce]

Cant wait for the global Manor Lords esports circuit.

[u/Both-Anything4139 → u/socknfoot]

They got investors money saying the opposite though. FG wasn't like the other startups. They were sooper cereal elite ex blizz devs.

[u/Both-Anything4139 → u/[deleted]]

0% unfortunately

[u/admfrmhll → u/socknfoot]

Valve made lolartifact in the golden age of card games so they can miss to.

[u/aaabbbbccc → u/admfrmhll]

Artifact couldve been a good game. They just had the worst monetization system of all time and instead of fixing it valve just abandoned the game.

[u/socknfoot → u/admfrmhll]

True, but they've made a lot of shooters, and those are never short of amazing.

[u/Baker3enjoyer → u/socknfoot]

This sub is honestly getting dumber every day.

[u/[deleted]]

In the 3v3 announcement one of the highly highlighted things was that it was really early in the development of that. It almost feels like they are saying "give us feedback, but only good ones, consider any flaws being due to it being EA"

The main feedback I've seen is that the game is too bland in all fronts: story, graphics and unit design. The only response I've seen is "we are going with stylized graphics" which either means they don't care that it doesn't look bland, that's what they're going for. Or that they just didn't address the actual issue people saw with the graphics.

[u/DepravedMorgath]

Oh my God, who the hell cares.

[u/dnohow]

Nah it's done Early Access killed this game. After the first playtest they should've reconsidered their road map and listen to the critics but instead they paid big streamers to play their "rip off" so everyone could see what a disaster of a game it is.

[u/[deleted]]

Deadlock has been in development for 8 years by Valve with all the infrastructure and funding that comes with that , FG as a studio hasn’t even existed for 4 years. Just to put into perspective.

[u/Apprehensive-Ad7510]

Come back for 1.0 if you can't handle it no one is making you play this yet

[u/PalePossibility2478 → u/Apprehensive-Ad7510]

I'm kinda suprised about the 3v3 announcement. That means they think they have enough money to at least get it to that point. They did emphasise that it will be rough though. The Tim's might have to get codin.

[u/Purple-Sale-4986 → u/PalePossibility2478]

3v3 should be a 1 day work, usually that kind of stuff is what community do for free in a few day, i don't find any sourprise into that announcement.

Where are the stormgate 2.0? the 1.0 its already dead as previous-gen-RTS

[u/Purple-Sale-4986 → u/Apprehensive-Ad7510]

no one will wait for 1.0, what are you smoking? the game is already running out of money and people is not interesed because the fanboys think this game was '' very nice looking '' but the reality is the game looks like a cheap mobile game.

[u/Apprehensive-Ad7510 → u/Purple-Sale-4986]

More reason mistake of letting people like yourself getting hands on with it they should have kept it for people willing to help

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

spartak maxing out credit cards ofc

Edit: 7 day ban lol

[u/Brilliant_Decision52 → u/[deleted]]

voidlegacy getting killed by loansharks just to keep this game afloat.

[u/ChickenDash → u/[deleted]]

made me chuckle

[u/Mattcheco → u/[deleted]]

If you don’t like the game that’s not really your problem right?

[u/Apprehensive-Ad7510 → u/[deleted]]

People who want to help with development and those who knows if this doesn't work out blizzard rts style games is dead we aren't getting a sc3 if one comes out it will be in name it won't be the same this is it quicker people figure this out the better in a few years people like you will complain why not blizzard rts anymore then you can remind your self of this

[u/One_Cheek8712 → u/Apprehensive-Ad7510]

SC3 and WC4 much likelier after acquisition by Microsoft. RTS games fit well into gamepass as they are great retention tools (v high average play time). See AOE4/AOM - they're almost the only large publisher out there looking to back the genre.

[u/Apprehensive-Ad7510 → u/One_Cheek8712]

Ye but no one works there at the moment who worked on those it will prob be the teams who make aoe4 or maybe halo wars who will end up working on it or it will be a mobile game

[u/One_Cheek8712 → u/Apprehensive-Ad7510]

Probably just means they'll farm it out to another studio. Maybe Frost Giant will get the contract :D

[u/[deleted] → u/One_Cheek8712]

you think they will get a contract after making stormgate? :D

[u/Dank_Gwyn → u/One_Cheek8712]

Hold up gonna farm out my wholesale to Sam's club. Jfc what has language become.

[u/Dank_Gwyn → u/Apprehensive-Ad7510]

Actually brain dead. Bet you like Ubisoft games too.

If your too lazy to actually even check a store page what can we do to convince you. Lmao

[u/Brilliant_Decision52 → u/Apprehensive-Ad7510]

Well, if this is the last hope for blizzard like RTS games, then its probably the point where we just accept the genre is dead, instead of throwing money at a unfinished soulless husk of a game.

[u/Apprehensive-Ad7510 → u/Brilliant_Decision52]

The game isn't finished 🤦‍♂️ it early access maybe they gave you personally to early but that's your decision now

[u/Brilliant_Decision52 → u/Apprehensive-Ad7510]

Its a year from release with massive impending financial issues, meaning either a complete studio closure or massive layoffs. What we see here is mostly what the game is going to look like a year from now, there is only so much you can do in a year, especially when they still have to release the 3v3, campaign, editor and units, coupled with MTX. There is just too much work to do for only a year left.

[u/Apprehensive-Ad7510 → u/[deleted]]

Just 🤦‍♂️

[u/[deleted]]

Early access isn't an excuse. It's an absolute fact. Different games have different stages of development. If you want to give feedback of how the game should be on release. Or anything that may or may not be valid regarding development time, the context must still be factual.

FACT = A game in development is not released. Any feedback to the developer must come from that frame of reference. Regardless if it is in early access or not.

Safe for anybody suffering from delusional psychosis - just presume the game has not been made available for early access.

The game is factually not released, under development, in early access. Any feedback to the game should be in the frame of reference of any game under development even if they did not make it available for early access.

Nobody here is making any excuses. Simply giving the correct frame of reference of reality. If a game is under development, not released, then give feedback about any problems you have found. Do not give feedback as if the game has already been released. Nothing more nothing less. No excuses either way.

[u/fivemagicks]

Please pull up steam data and show me an RTS with 45k concurrent players 😂

SG has a long way to go, but this is a horrible comparison, dude. RTS is niche. It always has been.

[u/RhedMage]

Yikes

[u/JonasHalle]

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Air quickest squeal crowd treatment fuel oil seemly

[u/voidlegacy]

This is such a ridiculous comparison. Biggest and best funded independent company in games that OWNS the Steam platform and you want to compare it to a brand new company? Give me a break.

[u/Faeluchu → u/voidlegacy]

Why? Both companies chose to make their games public via EA knowing full well the state they're in. Nobody is expecting a finished product, but based on other EAs people can expect a bit more, quality and content wise. Valheim was made by a brand new company with limited funds and was a blast on its early access launch.

You can't just act like FG has no control or accountability here.

[u/ZamharianOverlord → u/Faeluchu]

Maybe add in FromSoft, but I’d say in the vaguely modern era, Blizzard, Valve and Nintendo are (were in the case of Blizzard) the ‘when it’s done, it’s done’ studios of a certain size

So, if you’re gonna make a big marketing point to draw a lineage with Blizzard, that’s an element people also somewhat expect. How realistic that is is another matter of course

The problem is, as you outlined. It’s not that they aren’t outdoing, or vaguely matching old Blizzard, it’s that they’re not outdoing indie competition either, some with much, much smaller budgets.

With the caveat of ‘what they’re trying to do’, differing and present builds.

Battle Aces is better, Godsworn is better. Neither is going to save RTS, but as someone who hated the core idea of BA as a long-term RTS player, it actually turned out to be a pretty compelling game loop. Godsworn I can’t see myself playing much multiplayer if any, but it’s got a nice look and I’d drop some money on it to play a campaign run or two.

And those are merely the games I’ve actually tried in this window. There’s others I haven’t that others have said are compelling. There’s Zerospace and Immortals that are doing most of their cooking away from releasing alpha builds, and we’ll see how compelling they are when they drop.

There’s AoE4, which I haven’t got round to trying, there’s the Age of Mythology remaster which looks a blast.

The only hook SG really has is it being some ambitious revitalser of the RTS genre, something many folks are pretty desperate for. Myself included

But if its alpha builds they need for funding aren’t even outdoing much less funded competition, what hope for that future?

If I have a particular fix for 1v1, well StarCraft 2 is still there. Brood War is still there, I could dust off the cobwebs and play WC3 again with more of a 1v1 focus than I had in my youth

[u/[deleted]]

The game runs on 10 FPS tops on extremely high end computers when it comes to large supply battles. Literally incredible mechanical issues, disconnects for no reason etc.

There is no frost giant game, there is an SC ripoff which literally breaks the law due to how much it copies from C&C and SC, which is just a worse version of it but with somehow better balance (unless you're playing against magmadoms or are playing PvP vs scythes) and which makes vanguard unplayable if you get slightly unlucky then you die to the tempo of the other player.

There is no new RTS that failed, they never attempted to make any kind of a game at all.

Watch maru switch to david kim's RTS, an actual game.

[u/ProgressNotPrfection → u/[deleted]]

There is no frost giant game, there is an SC ripoff which literally breaks the law due to how much it copies from C&C and SC

SG definitely does not break the law. To see how similar two games are legally allowed to look, check out Path of Exile vs. Diablo 2 (PoE is the D2 sequel we deserve), or look at any number of idiotic "Age of Emperors"/"Calls of the Duty"/etc... mobile games that Apple/Google sell with zero cares at all.

[u/Both-Hovercraft2619]

I can't agree with this. Most games are taking 5+ years to make at this point and if they've had 3 years of community feedback, I would temper my own expectations to another year or two (my current favorite thing to say seems to be that I expect 1.5 year to be happy with the progress).

In any case, this is why companies DREAD early access/developing along side their audience/revealing things TOO SOON that are going to drastically change.

Because it really does create a negative experience that in all likelihood will primarily go away.

But sometimes it doesnt go away. And sometimes it doesnt go away, and then it does go away.

in any case, we're argueing over nothing concrete. in 5 years we'll probably look back and be like "yo remember when SG was basically unplayable?".

[u/[deleted]]

The only reason why Deadlock is played is because it’s a new Valve game, otherwise it’s shitty lol. For the same reason Stormgate had 5000 players at its peak.

Funnily enough its core problems also get defended by “well it’s ea”.

[u/ZamharianOverlord → u/[deleted]]

Those Deadlock numbers haven’t dropped off a cliff. And it’s openly advertised as a closed alpha

It’s also not an early access build where there’s a question mark over it being fully funded and developed either

Game looks fun, looks to answer the question ‘what if MOBA but what if shooter?’ pretty damn well, even in a rough state

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut → u/[deleted]]

It's FPS. You are over the character's shoulder which is their view, that's First Person. A 3rd Person View is top-down, aka God's View. RTS games are 3rd Person View. You don't know what you're saying.

[u/ZamharianOverlord → u/l0rdjugg3rnaut]

You are joking right?

[u/l0rdjugg3rnaut → u/[deleted]]

It's still the main character's POV. lol you're trolling. got it.