My biggest issue is that they describe the humans as a post infernal apoc survivor group who gather tech relics. 'Scrappy' is the word they used... now that polished overwatch looking design doesnt fit their description at all... neither of their units look old, rugged or battleworn from previous encounters with the demons
it is scrappy/make-do overall but an efficient way; using modern tech they managed to save or develop to deal with the problems of lacking everything ordinary- not more power than they did- so there is no oil and it is hard to grow agricultural crops, so they have this solar panel, geodome etc. technologyn they use to be able to have other things functions post apocalyptic isnt necessarily mad max
@@mareksicinski449 i wouldnt go to madmax levels of postapoc but more scraped paint, less shine, less smooth edges and parts that look reused. I'd expect the polished shiny look from the new angel faction. Like...id move the look of the Vulcan mech to look more like the mechsuits from Avatar movies away from overwatch dva mech if that makes sense
My understanding is that when a movie looks cheap, badly planned lighting is the main culprit, 99%. What Stell said gives me a lot of hope that they'll be aiming for a more cinematic feel by release.
Additionally, the terrain shaders, which I guess could be considered part of lighting, aren't finished yet. As an example, someone went into the sc2 cutscene editor and tweaked shader settings, and managed to get it looking far worse than how stormgate currently looks.
Yeah I think the units look fine but the maps need more detail and differing lighting to bring it all together. Right now with the super simple, repetitive terrain and bright, flat lighting the more detailed units and structures look disconnected from the game world almost like they are floating on the map. It's good that the devs seem to recognize this and I look forward to the community getting the map editor.
The art director will die on the art style hill, it's too big of an admission of failure to change it at this point. We'll see how this game does despite this, but I think it's a big mistake. Tweaking lighting and elevation is just putting lipstick on a pig.
Great sumamry but correction: When SC1 was first demo'd on discs that I believe were available with Diablo 1? I forget. Anyway, the zerg in the demo mission weren't called "zerg" they were called "Xenomorphs" (a la the Aliens movies and in WH40K the Space Marines call all aliens "Xenos") SC was also labeled a Starship Troopers knockoff when it came out. It also got remarked on even more frequently for its similarity to Warhammer 40K (just as Warcraft had for Warhammer Fantasy). Especially since the first Tyranid codex was 1995. It really felt like ok the main unit for the terrans is a marine in power armor with a big blasty gun (Space Marines) who are treated as expendable by leaders with strong russian overtones (Imperial Guard - see Commissar). The second faction are a hive minded buggy swarm (Tyranid). And the third faction are ancient and wise psychic aliens (Eldar). The difference back then is most people just didn't care that it wasn't super original or anything. Most games didn't even really try to be original. They were just trying to bring all these things we loved to this new medium of videogames and make them more and more closely resemble the way we all imagined it. So yeah, Starcraft took a lot from WH40K and Starship Troopers, so what? It was fun and was clearly made with care for the game and the fantasy first. Before the internet the guy poopooing Starcraft for "ripping off" 40K just wasn't invited to your LAN party. Now all those guys patrol reddit and youtube comments thirsting for an opportunity to tear down anybody feeling joy over something.
@@ZombieApocalypse09 to add, even in sc2 when we watched pros play they completely redesigned the spine crawler for final release. Even they were more flexible. They didn't just say it was stylized and call it a day
Funny how you mention Starcraft of all things, cause the proof of concept version of SC was heavily criticised for it's ugly artstyle, poor readability and lackluster UI, lambasting it as "Warcraft in Space". This prompted Blizzard redesign SC, and got to the artstyle we all know and love today.
My personal problem is I'm not seeing a compelling story out of the faction designs. The moment they involved demons in the game's design they crossed a threshold. Now all of the game's design must consider the demons because if any part of the game doesn't consider this then they aren't actually demons from hell, they're just somewhat scary red dudes. The demons in hellgate, to me, are just scary looking red dudes because the humans don't seem to me to care to enough to change their culture, architecture or military to be opposed to actual demons from hell. Then they introduced the Celestials which is a whole other bucket of problems. I get the impression that the devs don't have a strong grip on what kind of story they want their game to tell and why we should care enough to spend time in their fantasy world. This storytelling is what I think, above all else, RTS games from the 90's and early 00's nailed perfectly.
Indeed, this is a big chunk. Warcraft managed to make it fairly clear. Stone castles of civilization vs wooden nomadic inspired structures of a people in movement, turns out from another world! Two races but how they built stuff told the story
They keep calling it a futuristic style game, yet its orcs and the paw patrol running around a well groomed national park. It's not that the art is bad, it isn't fit for purpose.
Remember how Starcraft had like 3 different versions of the Zergling between various concepts, cutscene renders, then final sprite? That was because there were multiple artists fighting for the ultimate "cool" thing they could contribute to the game. Personally I don't see the appeal of the artstyle they've landed on, but maybe the process has something to do with that. It doesn't seem as scrappy, and "rule of cool" focused.
I'm pretty sure the zergling cutscene render was done the way it was because they felt it was easier to just copy paste the hydralisk head ontop of it. That's the source i've heard from blizzard employees. It wasn't really ever meant to have the large shield plate and face like the hydra but they went with it for the rest of the renders to keep it consistent between them. So yeah, it was to save time, not because artists were arguing about wanting their spin on things. It would arguably be very strange if an artist designed the iconic hydralisk look and then somehow demanded the face of the zergling to also have it, for contribution? They made the hydra. So if they had more time with the cinematic models, the zergling would've looked very different. I mean, there is a reason you only ever see zerglings, hydras and the flyers in the cinematics. A weird tradition they kept up in Sc2 for some reason...
The game is going to fail. How stubborn and dumb do you have to be to see the feedback for that awful art, and say no, the customers are wrong, and continue?
There is not a single thing in this game presentation that makes me think: "a new crack-like game that will keep me in front of my screen for days on end". I can only muster a mere "meh" at this almost mediocre game.
@@ScarletEdge That's EXACTLY what I thought. I still went ahead and wanted to play 1-2 games of Celestials because they looked cool to play. I played 150 games in 3 days, and it's been a long long time since the last time that happened. So my advice would really be to check it out once it goes f2p.
The ground looks like cardboard and that's their response? I play mostly indie games that literally don't have an art department. Yet this is the first game I wont purchase because it looks UGLY AS FUCK. If this is their answer it will flop hard. Brood War had better graphics 25 years ago
I've played a lot of co-op and the campaign on brutal and they both kinda suck tbh. The campaign is really boring map design and story wise. It's going to cost $10 per 3 missions. I was so desperate for an rts but this wasn't it.
Starcraft took Warhammer 40k material to reskin it to make a different genre of game then grew from there. Stormgate is taking Starcraft material and making a worse game of the same genre. What's the goal here? They're like 10 years too late on this genre. They aren't bringing any new ideas. They are just trying to scoop up some of Sc2's players. Starcraft definitely attracted players that weren't already 40k fans. I'm not convinced that Stormgate is going to get any people that aren't already Sc2 fans. Even if you're copying the theming like Starcraft did to 40k you can't just reproduce the same game, but less developed and hope to succeed.
Readability can use some improvement from a spectator perspective. Vanguards have the clearest unit and army silhouette so far, and that's probably due to the amount of time and iteration spent on them. The Exo and Vulcan units are pretty iconic and can easily be recognizable as the faces of the race. However, the Imps and Brutes of the Infernal Host seem to have a lot murkier design language. Compared to Zerglings and Hydralisks, the Infernal Hosts need units with much stronger character, movement, and army cohesion. As it stands, when you see an Infernal Host army, they look like a mish-mash of SC2 critters and WC3 creeps. The Celestials have slightly better silhouettes with the Argents, Sabers, and Arcship. However, when the Argents are clumped up in an army, they do become a little hard to read with all of the busy details. Oftentimes, it's hard to tell which direction the Argents are facing and how many are on screen. As it stands, both the Infernal Host and Celestials need their refined version of an iconic unit to be their face of the race.
Thats my big issue. Readability. Not just in how the units look, but animations. Telling when a unit is attacking lets you know how to plan out an encounter, but many times those animations are...not clear. Watching unit HP just magically vanish without seeing a reliable and repeated attack animation feels like the game is just arbitrarily choseing your units to die.
None of those are really constructive feedback. Listening to people that'd don't like the similarity to SC2 would be madness. They could never be pleased.
@@RJavier007how is the art style any different than wc3? Aside from the expensive AF cinematics wc3 is cartoony. Do you not like the unit/building designs or the futuristic setting? Genuinely curious not trying to rip on you.
@@Bagginsess It's very different, wc3 is just as cartoony, but in a more gritty way. The art styles also don't clash with the terrain and background. Stormgate looks shiny, and bright and everything is rounded and floaty. It doesn't look like the units actually interact with the map. There's a very fortnite feel to it. Where as WC3 feels more real and grounded, despite being also cartoony. Hopefully many of these things are fixed as they finish. The art style bothers me less than how the units move and interact with each other though.
people complain that the game looks unpolished and that's because it is literally unpolished. The team didn't want to spend time polishing if there was a possibility the design direction could change, they said as much in previous interviews. We will see more details, doodads, tune ups, and improvements as more of the decisions are set in stone. It's mostly been about game mechanics and the foundational tech that makes the game work, now they can put paint and gloss on the game to make it look good.
Stormgate looks to me like a Warcraft version of SC2 in slower. The maps are huge and the units are some melee and most ranged, then they clash and that's all. Something I loved about Broodwar was that it was about map control, holding areas and preventing the enemy from moving. If there are 43298123 million pathways for anyone to take, like in SC2, this significantly losees importance and thus the game becomes less strategic.
Thank you very much for the interesting video! I'm glad they started talking about a fourth race and more variety of maps. The graphics of the game, of course, are controversial, but overall they will do. The main thing is to get rid of the terrible deer, chickens and beetles as soon as possible. They must be replaced with normal neutral units that will enrich the environment, such as marauders or mutants created due to infernal magic.
Honestly, in my opinion on the art, stormgate looks ok now? The terrain and lighting sucks right now, but most of the units and structures for vanguard and infernal look great, and for celestial, it sounds like there needs to be a few art tweaks, especially with units such as the vector, but otherwise I think celestial still looks nice.
There are infinite ways to stylize, from abstract-cartoon, all the way to semi-photo-realistic. If abstract-cartoon was -50, and photo-realism was +50, stormgate would be -10. People are not asking for a +50 photo-realistic game, they just want a +10 stylized game. The problem is too far gone though, because the main issue isn't just simplified textures, it's the overall cute/round aspect to all the 3D models, as well as a 1:1 unit aspect ratio. RTS fans are older and playing a game that looks like baby toys isn't as appealing. The best we can hope for is that they add more props like rocks and shrubs around the edges of the terrain like sc2 so the terrain feels more dense and call it a day.
Idk, Battle Aces has been well-received, and it's mostly just animal-shaped toy robots responding with quips. I think people saw the demons and thought it was going to be Diablo.
saying that it's a copy of starcraft 2 is one of the most insane criticisms. Like... it's made by the same devs. And in my opinion there's more in common with warcraft 3, but whatever. But criticizing people who made a game for making a game that looks like another game they made is one of the goofiest things I've ever heard. Imagine if that was applied across the board. "Diablo 4 looks too much like diablo 3!" "mass effect 2 looks too much like mass effect 1!" I've never seen people hate on a game as much as I've seen them hate on stormgate. It's just crazy. It's like they want it to fail because it threatens their precious 13 year old RTS that nobody plays anymore. Instead of finding something positive like the fact the RTS genre is finally getting attention after all these years, they just complain
My dude, they are complaining as this game looks and feels worse than warcraft or starcraft. So the story/campaign needs to carry the game a fuck ton or else it will sink vs the older games that came out ages ago which also have dedicated modding community
The person who was interviewed has a long history of toxic fallout when it comes to microtransactions. I had a back and forth with him during Command and Conquer 5 (the Generals 2 version) --- he wanted people to pay for colors, choosing maps, and the type of game style you played i.e. 1v1/2v2/3v3/4v4. He called this a "living subscription model" the forums FLAMED HIM after our public debate where he freaked out and started attacking his own player base then a moderator took over attempting to reword his posts. DO NOT TRUST HIM -- He failed as a leader in CNC,SC2 with the short stories which were crap + disgustingly overpriced skins ppl purchased, and now Stormgate. What this guy touches die. You were warned here.
the artstyle is just not cool. It looks childish. It even dont fit the narrative of demons/celestial. If they look too cartoonish they are not demons they are toys. There are very few ppl that will like that.
They're going to have to do a hell of a lot more than this to compete with Zerospace and Battle Aces. The art looks like something out of toy soldiers.
@@mr.leanflakes-highlights1556 remind me to check those player count numbers come December ;) I’m no David Kim advocate but it’s night and day if you think these two games are currently at the same level of design or quality
Yeah, it's not just because the graphics are bad. The art design is the same as mobile games. I don't think it 'looks' like a mobile game it's too high fidelity for that. But it definitely has that 'mobile game' 2020 art style.
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"... so I can grab an instrument, make some random noise, call myself a musician and when you call me out on my BS, I go: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" Oh I wish things were that easy but, alas, reality disagrees. And it will disagree with Frost Giant too.
My favorite criticism is people saying it looks like a moba or mobile game (many of which copy mobas) even though mobas look the way they do because they were based on warcraft 3. My second favorite criticism is that it looks unfinished with them proceeding to say "betas are suppose to look finished." If you don't like the artstyle fair enough but it's a game and the gameplay is pure gold. And sorry but Blizzard is dead and in order for these devs to make a new RTS they needed a new IP. It is not starcraft 3 or warcraft 4 and it never will be but it is the closest we'll get.
Imo it is too stylized. I would have been happier with something in-between SC2 and WC3 but this feels even more stylized than WC3. I hope that when they are adding more textures and detail to the maps they decrease the degree of stylization a bit. Ultimately, it is not a deal breaker, I will still play the game and gameplay will be my judgement.
@@Navhkrin the polish will help a lot but it'll be like going from the OG evangelion anime to the HD movies, it'll still be cartoony AF. Warcraft got away with it because at the time many franchises that jumped to 3D took the cartoon approach over realism. I won't play fornite or valorant because of their style but I like dota, warcraft, and the finals similar to how I don't like the look of flapjack and adventure time but I like the OG batman cartoon and OG loony tunes. I get it though some people just don't like the cartoony style. I can see fan made overhaul mods for it being popular for this reason.
Battle Aces shits all over this game in terms of graphics and game play and releases sooner. Stormgate is going to flop hard if they think playing on cardboard is an acceptable art style
They didn't make their own engine, they're just using Unreal. They didn't advance their art style much. They didn't make their own RTS races, they just made terran/zerg/protoss again with different names. I was very excited for SG, but having played it a bunch, It's just not passing the "vibe check", The gameplay isn't quite jiving and neither is the art style. I hope the next version has some big changes b/c I did pay into their startup thing, I had hope. Between SG, BA and ZS, I think SG's probably in 2nd place for me... and honestly they're all tainted by MOBA ideas, which I don't enjoy, so I might just stick to starcraft until they stop trying to appeal to the wrong audience.
If you think you can make a comparable game using unreal I would love to see it. Theres no way you could build anything as responsive without a ton of customization
So, the game is deadborn from the very start and all of the shitty artstyle. And yeah, Stormgate Central, let's be hones: there are no people in the entire rts community that said like "oh, just a AWESOME artstyle". No, the style is described in negative or neutral (is not that bad guys...) and thus is THE MISSTAKE. Let's looks at the fact: when the game was announced it had full support of entire rts community and had hundreds of thousands of views. What now? News, casts and videos can't even make 3k views at max. This is a disaster. And for those who compare the budgets:this is not about the money it is about lack of talent. How much money did the Iron harvest had? How much money has Tempest rising? How much money has God sworn? How much money has DUST FRONT, which looks A THOUSAND times more interesting? All of these games had less money than SG and every single one of them is looking better in terms of artstyle.
I got up to campaign mission 5 and did one co-op mission yesterday (damn you adult stuff) and so far I absolutely love how the game feels in terms of QoL hotkeys, and unit responsivness. However, I just can't get over how ugly the characters look, except blockade who looks pretty dope. BUT... while the models do look unfinished and could easily be fixed up in the future, let's not forget how the dragons in Baldurs Gate 3 were shooting red squares of fire on early access day one. I will definitely keep playing this regardless, cause it's just so damn fun.
*Art's* definitely in rough shape currently, but I wasn't aware that it was _just_ early access people are playing, so it's fair if they're saying it'll improve with time. Reminds me of the Slay the Spire method of game dev, where they really rough-sketched in some early ideas, and more and more shading/detail got added to characters/enemies/etc over time as the game got closer to launch. As a designer myself, this method makes a lot of sense in terms of quickly roughing things in, trying out how they play, and not throwing away tons of time if you decide to abandon an idea because you didn't commit the full art-hours towards Final Art for any given troop. *Campaign* stuff I'm generally very positive on their thoughts there. One concern (again, from a designer point of view) is shorter cycles makes it quite a lot harder to do unique mechanics like we saw with each Starcraft 2 campaign. It won't be impossible (and honestly they weren't _that_ unique apart from presentation), but I'd expect a loss of quality by having things release more frequently. But that isn't to say the strength they mentioned (avoiding player dropoff) won't be a strength -- it definitely will if the quality is good. *Coop* is what I'm most hyped for, and honestly I hope they get ambitious there. Basically the coop main campaign is nice, but it doesn't have a lot of legs to it (it'll likely feel very much the same each play through). Whereas Coop done right has tons of variety match to match. SC2 had a decent amount of that; if you chose the same level each time, you'd still get some randomization to enemy factions and forces (the latter being the main way they varied things; sometimes the enemy was very air-heavy, sometimes a horde of weak units, sometimes fewer higher-quality troops; sometimes mech; sometimes bio; etc.) The way I'd double down is to add roguelike elements that add dramatic bonuses * you fight through part of the coop mission * at various points you loot a special item that gives your side a roguelike choice * so then you pick like 1 out of the 2-3 rewards you're offered * it's significant stuff like "Zealots are 50% cheaper, but deal 25% less damage" * the choices should be very impactful both (A) in regards to the enemy composition, so you can adapt to the enemy being "swarmy" by going with plentiful spammed zealots, or (B) in regards to your own faction or your previous roguelike choices, like if you previous chose a "each time your zealots attack the enemy takes 2 damage" (so it's a flat damage increase that isn't reduced by the 25% less damage, and therefore stacks really well with them being 50% cheaper). While the multiplicative complexity gets a little tricky dev-side (because if they're doing (A) coop commanders with distinct playstyles plus (B) big meaty roguelike choices, then that results in a lot of combinations of things which can be tricky to balance), it's very much a reasonable complexity since you can just track which faction/roguelike combos have the craziest win rates (and the worst) and buff what needs help and balance the OP stuff.
Game dev here: don't worry about performance issues until launch. Optimization is usually the LAST part of development. As they said, you can't optimize a moving target.
I don't see this ever taking Sc2's spot. It's not that it looks like blizzard stuff, that's fine. It just doesn't look good, the units and buildings look super generic.
This game will die immediately once it goes off. It has nothing unique about it. The only thing that's good about it is the marketing. People will hop back into starcraft or other rts which have unique features.
I know it's a dead horse at this point, but the style has actually put me off. I didn't particularly like the style at first, but was willing to deal with it if the gameplay was great (which I didn't get hooked by yet either tbf), however seeing their intro cinematic completely quelled any interest I had. I like multiplayer, but the core of RTS is a compelling campaign and the Overwatch / Pixar thing just... ugh. Don't understand it. Who are they aiming for? The enormous teen girl war game fanbase? You really telling me this is what men in their 20s-40s want to watch between battle? Even the Battle Aces intro, though anime, had some edge to it and actually makes the guns and tanks and stuff look badass. Was holding onto this as the RTS revival too. Maybe a good platform for mods still though.
Wat they say is right. U can't pls everyone. But the problem is. A vast majority complain about the style. So that should be enough feedback to change the style. This graphic style looks horrible
Sad to hear that they're standing firm on the graphics. I know art is subjective, but I've personally yet to meet a single person IRL who liked it, every single person I know who is interested in storm gate has told me at some point that they are interested "inspite" of the graphics, which I legitimately can't think of another game where I've had so many people tell me that, and I've lived through Pokemon Scarlet/Violet, that Hunter x Hunter fighting game, and that King of Fighters 3d reboot that both had graphics multiple generations behind current gen on release. As for myself, I don't hate it as much as some, but its definitely not visually appealing to me either, its more just one of those things you learn to live with more then it "grows on you".
I would like an ultra realistic gritty looking game but I also like the blizzard cartoon style. But in competitive games many people turn the gfx to lowest so would you rather have a blocky looking low settings game that struggles to run or smooth high FPS game with clear visuals? Plus think of all the games that put gfx before gameplay and lead to a buggy mess: cyberpunk, COD, Halo Infinite, Battlefield 2042, Star Wars Jedi Survivor, Starfield, Mass Effect Andromeda, Homeworld 3, Tarkov Arena, etc
General people are confused about artstyle and graphics because they're 2 completely different things. The artstyle in stormgate is good, but the graphics need work. But it's to be expected when they're testing gameplay first and want to get players involved early so that they can make the best game they can. Better animations, better lighting and detail for the ground, shading and particles will transform the game and they clearly haven't done a pass on those yet, but artstyle is set and looks good. I'd be more worried if next year they haven't done a full visual pass on the graphics and animations.
@@DrawAndErase there are definitely people confused on that but a lot also don't like the cartoony style and know that's separate from graphical polish that will come later.
the art style is really anonymous. How can you think in 2024 to present a black guy in a spacesuit as a hero? How dare you? Sorry to say, but Battle Ace has a much more inspired art style, and it is developed by an independent company too so i don't think money is the issue here. I appreciate that frostgiant is listening to the criticism and wish them good luck
I am just looking forward to having a SC2 game that is actually alive with updates and new units and maybe even new races and things like that being added over time.
I really like many effects in SG like Saber or Hellborn shots, I can't wait for new lightning and tilesets, I think that SG visuals will be really good after some time. I definitely see improvements making by FG over time
3:00 as a shallow critic who really doesn't like the art of the units / buildings - WE KNOW this is a game being made for Esports. The Story as many will parrot "Doesn't Matter"... well lo and behold it DOES. When things are like this for no reason, when the terran marines (that's what they look like) carry spears for no reason, when there are dogs for no reason, when some units float and some crawl and some are different and others are the same - - I want to have at least an IDEA about WHY that is. Starcraft introduced each unit in a mission of the campaign, you heard the voice lines, a character you are aligned with gives them to you, introduces the unit to you and gives you a chance to use it, this goes a LONG WAY to winning hearts.
StormGates art problem is that it is cannibalizing past blizzard art styles without adding anything new. Both StarCraft and Warcraft were inspired by Warhammer, but StarCraft 1 had heavy Aliens influence and Warcraft had its unique for the time cartoony visuals. But now StormGate is just, what if we combined Warcraft, StarCraft, and Overwatch Art directions. They are not pulling from other sources or from anything unique. They also don’t have the budget to make the visuals work, so this feels like a cheep knock off or parody.
What i see is Overwatch, not starcraft. I get it overwatch is super popular, but i never liked its tone, dont like this either. But i can live with it. The price model is the deal breaker. Its overwatch again. F2P and theyll release PVE content 3 missions at a time. NOPE! F... off! SC2 released with 30 single player missions day one for 60 bucks, and that still kinda sucked since it was terran only (after 12 years of hype, they scrapped P and Z, cause greed, what if the expansions never came out?) Now we get 3-4 missions for 40 smacks, or 9-10 for 60( but at some point? WHAT? Yeah, they are trying to do OW again. Yeah NOOOOOOO.
@@allanshpeley4284 yep.. everyone on the stormgate reddit kept criticizing the artstyle, they wouldn't respond to any of the criticism. I only saw them respond to proposed ideas, people glazing the game and funny posts. All criticism was ignored straight up
Honestly, I have no issues with the artstyle. People who say it'll hurt the game seem to forget that almost every super-popular game nowadays has it. Fortnite, Dota, League of Legends, Overwatch, even Apex Legends to a degree. Also it'll make the game age far more gracefully than if they went uber-realistic and gritty. People here just love to complain.
The art style is ok. It's just an overall presentation. It does not make you feel immersed, The writing is boring at best and annoying at worst, the design is not coherent, story and lore are some weird amalgamation of WC, SC and Diablo. My biggest gripe is when I play it (online or sp), I feel nothing. No immersion. It feels plastic, janky, without grit and cheap. 3/10.
I personally really like the art style. It’s very accessible to a younger audience and like most of us sc2 fans, I have kids now that I want to get into blizzard style rts. I think when it’s more polished it’ll look really beautiful.
I really hope the game is successful. That being said, I'm probably going to give it a miss. From what I've seen in every gameplay video is that the game looks like a Starcraft 2 mod. The sound effects, the movement, and certain visuals all just make me feel like I'm playing Starcraft 2 with a skin. I'm going to stick to Starcraft 1 and WC3 for my RTS gameplay for now.
to remind people starcraft was mean to be a 40k game and the 3 race come from that origin saying that stormgame is ripping starcraft race is just stupid when you know the origin of starcraft race
The difference between starcraft and 40k maybe similar but it's different. Only really identical is the zerg and tyranid. The guard aren't hill Billy convicts and the protoss aren't unpolished necrons dynasties. Starcraft made an identity that is different from 40k not in artstyle and units but lore and story. What does stormgate have?
This is a unfortunate mixup. Warcraft 1 was supposed to be a Warhammer game. There is no evidence that Starcarft was ever, at any stage, supposed to be a WH40k game. You can see some inspirations, sure. Like Warhammer, and any media ever, it took inspiration from the genre. But, as far as we know, Starcraft was its own thing.
To remind people that "StarCraft was originally 40k" is a complete myth that is only perpetuated because 40k is more popular than Warhammer Fantasy/Old World. WarCraft was the one that was originally going to be a Warhammer game, StarCraft was its own thing that unintentionally ended up looking like "WarCraft in space" in pre-release alpha builds and getting mocked for it.
It would have been great to see the game appear more realistic rather than cartoony. It closely looks like planetary annihilation, which did fail for many reasons mind you, appearance being one of them--could not attract an audience. In addition, the terrain of each map should have been more stylized rather than cliche. Every RTS game has similar terrain. It would have been more appealing to see something different and innovative. Such as maybe a rocky world that looks like the spiky asteroid from the movie Armageddon--just a thought. All that said, I'll still watch from the sidelines to see if the game continues to evolve to my appeal. If not, hey, I just won't play it as its not for me which is np.
Worse thing about this game is the art style, huge downgrade from both Starcraft & Warcraft character designs and models.. I bought the ultimate pack because I love RTS games, but I honestly cannot get into these characters at all.. and I wonder if it will be enough to pull me from SC2 which I still have installed.. I like the mechanics of all 3 races and how they work, but just the unit designs themselves hurt to look at.
I see what they are saying, its very possible they have set up so much that inherently just can't shine until the final polish and pulling together of the seams. But until then the visuals and style doesn't look distinct in general, just pass over generic 3-d, and it does make people think of StarCraft at first and second glance. So I will turn up for release and hope it works out, I really do want RTS to come out of cult classic status and at least be between that and mainstream numbers (I don't think that is possible for anyone to do) but getting over invested does nothing to help or hinder it.
Partially it gives me ''I have a bad feeling about this'' that there is so much promo before the release. FGS has secured founds to get this going so... give us the game already and let us decide ourselves if we like it. Diablo 4 got good only after players told them whats wrong with it.
I mean, not really . From what i see, there realy isn't much promo before the game releases. Whats going on is just small things like these QnAs and small showmatches and a bit of casting from the closed beta, which only matter to people closely following the game. It's not constant bombardment with adds on 7 platforms or a million sponsorships. It's bassically just a devlog. Additionally, they have given the game to a lot of people for closed beta tests, and are working on the feedback that those people gave to them. They will be doing an open beta when they feel like it, but theres no point in just releasing an unfinished game to get a ton of free bugtesting from players when they know they can keep working on it before they release it to improve and expand the game, without the gigantic amount of negative press every game which releases in an unfinished state gets, which 100% absolutely does negatively affect a games long term performance. Stuff like noans sky and cyberpunk 2077 could have twice there current playercounts if they didn't have as shit a release as they did.
@@Santisima_Trinidad I keep my fingers crossed for SG, after beta I was giving them 2:1 chances for creating something worth calling SC2 successor. Right now I just can't wait to lay my hands on it, more hoping it will not be a year or two till they get it right. Fingers crossed even harder ;) cheers
What I really dislike is how all the units look the same. SC2 had the same problem to a lesser extent. All the units from BW were unique and fun to look at while they matched around.
The art style will keep the game fresh for many years to come. Many of the old games that tried to have "realistic" graphics now look really outdated while games with their own artstyle (like WoW) still look ok.
This Q&A Feedback seems hollow and in bad faith and I feel they will not address anything on a serious way. My biggest problem its not art style but gameplay and balance as the faction are looking incredible same-y and boring with mistake other RTS already did before but applied on this fresh game ( ex: medivec + siege tank drop issue ). I honestly fear this game will be another Petroglyph rts style game: Promising the world and a bit more but delivering a boring, dull and DOA game that will be forgotten at the shade of another future RTS release. They need change and add ALOT of gameplay refinements and changes to the current and delay as much as necessary or this will be another dead game on production that will be beat by 15 old SC2 "unsupported" current ruler or other stable old games ( AOE2 , kane wrath, company of heroes 2, etc).
For me the ground texture is by far the worst part. There's something so bland, blurry and flat about it. Theres also very evident tiling in a lot of areas at the moment. The factions also all look extremely similar, like theyre all using the same technology even though theyre supposed to be distinctive.
The problem is not that the graphics are stylized. A lot of gorgeous games have varying degrees of stylization. The problem is that the unit and building designs are just very poor and don't match the themes of the game. The animations are lackluster. The terrain doesn't have any details or doodads. These are all problems the stylized Blizzard RTS games of old didn't have, going back as far as Warcraft II. I'm sorry to say, but I think Frost Giant just seems to lack artistic vision and talent.
I'm neutral on the art style, but imo legibility is not good atm. With bigger armies I just have no idea what I'm looking at. Maybe it will get better as we get used to units more.
It's really not. It is Unreal Engine 5 running the graphics. However, a better engine does not equate to a better looking game. StarCraft 2 had basically years more of development time than Stormgate when both were shown off to the public. Also, unlike SC2 which is a AAA game SG is an indie game. There will be budget cuts to make production feasible.
@@Frozen_Death_Knight Indeed, SC2 went through many iterations, and SG should do the same, while gameplay is what matters the most, these MOBA/mobile graphics are simply unacceptable for a game claiming to be a successor to SC/WC. Also consider that its 2024, small studio and all that are not acceptable excuses. They need to do better.
Just watch this video and t hen immediately go watch an Artosis cast of a Brood War game and be blown away just how much better stuff looks. Clearer and more interesting.
I played SC2 since it's release with gaps. TBH this Diablo injected WC-SC setting is still not sold to me. Also I'm sure that there will be improvements in gameplay and controls, but the readibility in the current state is quite terrible at the moment. I hope that this will be evolve over time as the design will be finalized.
I honestly think the game would go much far i its would be either totally sci fi or totally fantasy. I would say after 14 years of SC2 probably total fantasy would be the way to go. I love infernals, and I would reather see dwarwesm frost giants (lol), mages on horses and thing like these than a mix of everything.
I really don't like most of the graphics except for a couple of units. The mining part also looks pretty cheaply made. But the only thing i really don't like are the camps, it's something extra for strategy that i don't have the IQ for it or the patience to learn to deal with.
The game releases only with 1v1 but didn't they say that 3v3 and social playing was the main selling point of the game? If this is not the case, there will be the same goddamn players playing those god tier 1v1 games with the same goddamn commentators and that game died already. Something new and different please...
They so much underestimate the value of polished graphics of the game Before early-access. So many people will be terrified with how junky it looks (especially cliffs) and just go away. And just few % of the pro-gamers left cause of gameplay. And the reason to play SG because SC2 is not supported is inadequate, you can't promote it like this
The problem for me isn’t “realistic looking” it’s that these designs are bland. I have seen indie games with way more interesting and unique designs and aesthetics.
@@commanderwookiecopc806 me too, I like some of vanguard and infernal designs (but not all). And I reaaaally dont like how Celestials turned out to be. They look mostly bulky and we already have two bulky-looking factions.
I have no problem with the Comic-Art Style. I'm sure it can be improved to look less "Smurfs" (la la lalala la) like. I HAVE a problem with Stormgate and SC1 and SC2 in regard of it's units and building being not made with the same scale. I realy hate people that are bigger than tanks and buildings! It's just weird! I wished they would have taken some lessons from C&C Generals when it comes to scale of units and buildings. Then I wished that "Air" Units would get weather terrain.... "wind" and "view"
The game looks ugly to me, but i tend to play rts on the lowest graphics settings anyways. As long as the game is fun and expressive I'll get over it. Someone will release a mod with better visuals if that's what we need.
Dammm that footage of the game from 2022 development then cutting to the 2023 footage... makes me excited to see what they will be bringing for EA in 2024!
This game is gonna fucking fail.... "Were very much putting our heart into all of the time. and it make us SAD TO SEE CRITICISM" And they cant fucking handle it.....And this engine.......The saving grace will be the engine.....BUT IT WILL BE LOSS. IF PEOPLE DONT BUY IT
From a design, graphic perspective : having not an intial appeal for most players is already killing any hopes of being a world hit. if they are fine having a niche success : good. If they plan on being a world wide hit : sorry to break it to you guys, but your design is NOT appealing as SC1, Warcraft, SC2, C&C, DOW, as they were back in the days.
This cartoonish art style breaks the game for me . Terrible art design choice. Yes there are solid core mechanics but most of us dont do pro level game play with all details on low to squeeze extra fps.
My biggest issue is that they describe the humans as a post infernal apoc survivor group who gather tech relics. 'Scrappy' is the word they used... now that polished overwatch looking design doesnt fit their description at all... neither of their units look old, rugged or battleworn from previous encounters with the demons
Scrappy feels closer to SC1 terran.
it is scrappy/make-do overall but an efficient way; using modern tech they managed to save or develop to deal with the problems of lacking everything ordinary- not more power than they did- so there is no oil and it is hard to grow agricultural crops, so they have this solar panel, geodome etc. technologyn they use to be able to have other things functions
post apocalyptic isnt necessarily mad max
@@mareksicinski449 i wouldnt go to madmax levels of postapoc but more scraped paint, less shine, less smooth edges and parts that look reused.
I'd expect the polished shiny look from the new angel faction.
Like...id move the look of the Vulcan mech to look more like the mechsuits from Avatar movies away from overwatch dva mech if that makes sense
100%
My understanding is that when a movie looks cheap, badly planned lighting is the main culprit, 99%. What Stell said gives me a lot of hope that they'll be aiming for a more cinematic feel by release.
Additionally, the terrain shaders, which I guess could be considered part of lighting, aren't finished yet. As an example, someone went into the sc2 cutscene editor and tweaked shader settings, and managed to get it looking far worse than how stormgate currently looks.
If playing on a sheet of cardboard is a decision they made on purpose I wont be playing it. The game looks UGLY as sin
Yeah I think the units look fine but the maps need more detail and differing lighting to bring it all together. Right now with the super simple, repetitive terrain and bright, flat lighting the more detailed units and structures look disconnected from the game world almost like they are floating on the map. It's good that the devs seem to recognize this and I look forward to the community getting the map editor.
The art in general is stealed from fortnite.
They are really going to regret not changing the art style
?????
@@nocturne2172 they said they aren't changing the look of the game. Nobody likes it, people are either neutral or disapproving of it.
They will change the graphics they wont change the stile and its probably gona look way better with liting particles better models and etc
You literally in this vid have clear answers that they will be improving graphics now and all the way to 1.0 release...
The art director will die on the art style hill, it's too big of an admission of failure to change it at this point. We'll see how this game does despite this, but I think it's a big mistake. Tweaking lighting and elevation is just putting lipstick on a pig.
No matter what they or anyone else says, I still can't get over the artstyle. It looks like Red Alert 3 but without the humor.
Even red alert 3 looks better and consistent
I disagree that it's a copy of starcraft2 it looks nothing alike it. It's a copy of bad ripoff mobile rts games.
Great sumamry but correction:
When SC1 was first demo'd on discs that I believe were available with Diablo 1? I forget.
Anyway, the zerg in the demo mission weren't called "zerg" they were called "Xenomorphs" (a la the Aliens movies and in WH40K the Space Marines call all aliens "Xenos")
SC was also labeled a Starship Troopers knockoff when it came out.
It also got remarked on even more frequently for its similarity to Warhammer 40K (just as Warcraft had for Warhammer Fantasy). Especially since the first Tyranid codex was 1995. It really felt like ok the main unit for the terrans is a marine in power armor with a big blasty gun (Space Marines) who are treated as expendable by leaders with strong russian overtones (Imperial Guard - see Commissar). The second faction are a hive minded buggy swarm (Tyranid). And the third faction are ancient and wise psychic aliens (Eldar).
The difference back then is most people just didn't care that it wasn't super original or anything. Most games didn't even really try to be original. They were just trying to bring all these things we loved to this new medium of videogames and make them more and more closely resemble the way we all imagined it. So yeah, Starcraft took a lot from WH40K and Starship Troopers, so what? It was fun and was clearly made with care for the game and the fantasy first.
Before the internet the guy poopooing Starcraft for "ripping off" 40K just wasn't invited to your LAN party. Now all those guys patrol reddit and youtube comments thirsting for an opportunity to tear down anybody feeling joy over something.
@@ZombieApocalypse09 to add, even in sc2 when we watched pros play they completely redesigned the spine crawler for final release. Even they were more flexible. They didn't just say it was stylized and call it a day
Funny how you mention Starcraft of all things, cause the proof of concept version of SC was heavily criticised for it's ugly artstyle, poor readability and lackluster UI, lambasting it as "Warcraft in Space". This prompted Blizzard redesign SC, and got to the artstyle we all know and love today.
@@unimportantcommenter4356 even as a kid we joked it was Warcraft in space. But no kid had complaints once they sieged up their first siege tank
well said.
@@Pangora2 Probably because they didn't play with the proof of concept, but with the finished product.
My personal problem is I'm not seeing a compelling story out of the faction designs. The moment they involved demons in the game's design they crossed a threshold. Now all of the game's design must consider the demons because if any part of the game doesn't consider this then they aren't actually demons from hell, they're just somewhat scary red dudes. The demons in hellgate, to me, are just scary looking red dudes because the humans don't seem to me to care to enough to change their culture, architecture or military to be opposed to actual demons from hell. Then they introduced the Celestials which is a whole other bucket of problems. I get the impression that the devs don't have a strong grip on what kind of story they want their game to tell and why we should care enough to spend time in their fantasy world. This storytelling is what I think, above all else, RTS games from the 90's and early 00's nailed perfectly.
Indeed, this is a big chunk. Warcraft managed to make it fairly clear. Stone castles of civilization vs wooden nomadic inspired structures of a people in movement, turns out from another world! Two races but how they built stuff told the story
This game has no story, that's the substance that makes it cool.
They keep calling it a futuristic style game, yet its orcs and the paw patrol running around a well groomed national park.
It's not that the art is bad, it isn't fit for purpose.
There's something about mentioning Paw Patrol as a descriptor for this game that just hits.
Remember how Starcraft had like 3 different versions of the Zergling between various concepts, cutscene renders, then final sprite? That was because there were multiple artists fighting for the ultimate "cool" thing they could contribute to the game. Personally I don't see the appeal of the artstyle they've landed on, but maybe the process has something to do with that. It doesn't seem as scrappy, and "rule of cool" focused.
where can I see the differents versions? I didnt know that
I'm pretty sure the zergling cutscene render was done the way it was because they felt it was easier to just copy paste the hydralisk head ontop of it. That's the source i've heard from blizzard employees. It wasn't really ever meant to have the large shield plate and face like the hydra but they went with it for the rest of the renders to keep it consistent between them. So yeah, it was to save time, not because artists were arguing about wanting their spin on things. It would arguably be very strange if an artist designed the iconic hydralisk look and then somehow demanded the face of the zergling to also have it, for contribution? They made the hydra.
So if they had more time with the cinematic models, the zergling would've looked very different. I mean, there is a reason you only ever see zerglings, hydras and the flyers in the cinematics. A weird tradition they kept up in Sc2 for some reason...
They’re going to regret not altering course on the art.
The game is going to fail. How stubborn and dumb do you have to be to see the feedback for that awful art, and say no, the customers are wrong, and continue?
@@AudreyandmeAu changing artstyle is a lot of time and money. I bet they will improve as time go by like they did in sc2.
blows my mind that you guys blew thru literal millions and still have only this to show
There is not a single thing in this game presentation that makes me think: "a new crack-like game that will keep me in front of my screen for days on end". I can only muster a mere "meh" at this almost mediocre game.
@@ScarletEdge That's EXACTLY what I thought. I still went ahead and wanted to play 1-2 games of Celestials because they looked cool to play.
I played 150 games in 3 days, and it's been a long long time since the last time that happened. So my advice would really be to check it out once it goes f2p.
@@Mysterio2243 Glad you had fun, no sarcasm.
@@Mysterio2243 yeah your inputs appreciated on that actually. I may have to check out the updates myself
The ground looks like cardboard and that's their response? I play mostly indie games that literally don't have an art department. Yet this is the first game I wont purchase because it looks UGLY AS FUCK. If this is their answer it will flop hard. Brood War had better graphics 25 years ago
Good thing it's F2P so you needn't purchase it.
@@HighLanderPonyYT I can also give stormgate a 1 star review for free
I hope that the coop and story are good
I already like how the game plays and looks and I just want the story to be interesting and the coop to be fun
I've played a lot of co-op and the campaign on brutal and they both kinda suck tbh.
The campaign is really boring map design and story wise.
It's going to cost $10 per 3 missions.
I was so desperate for an rts but this wasn't it.
To be fair people absolutely criticized StarCraft for cribbing off Warhammer 40k
True Story
I believe sc the was originally wh but the deal fell through during development.
And now they look like idiots, just like people who criticize sg art
Starcraft took Warhammer 40k material to reskin it to make a different genre of game then grew from there. Stormgate is taking Starcraft material and making a worse game of the same genre. What's the goal here? They're like 10 years too late on this genre. They aren't bringing any new ideas. They are just trying to scoop up some of Sc2's players.
Starcraft definitely attracted players that weren't already 40k fans. I'm not convinced that Stormgate is going to get any people that aren't already Sc2 fans.
Even if you're copying the theming like Starcraft did to 40k you can't just reproduce the same game, but less developed and hope to succeed.
But Warhammer isn't a sole rts.
Readability can use some improvement from a spectator perspective. Vanguards have the clearest unit and army silhouette so far, and that's probably due to the amount of time and iteration spent on them. The Exo and Vulcan units are pretty iconic and can easily be recognizable as the faces of the race.
However, the Imps and Brutes of the Infernal Host seem to have a lot murkier design language. Compared to Zerglings and Hydralisks, the Infernal Hosts need units with much stronger character, movement, and army cohesion. As it stands, when you see an Infernal Host army, they look like a mish-mash of SC2 critters and WC3 creeps.
The Celestials have slightly better silhouettes with the Argents, Sabers, and Arcship. However, when the Argents are clumped up in an army, they do become a little hard to read with all of the busy details. Oftentimes, it's hard to tell which direction the Argents are facing and how many are on screen.
As it stands, both the Infernal Host and Celestials need their refined version of an iconic unit to be their face of the race.
Thats my big issue. Readability. Not just in how the units look, but animations. Telling when a unit is attacking lets you know how to plan out an encounter, but many times those animations are...not clear. Watching unit HP just magically vanish without seeing a reliable and repeated attack animation feels like the game is just arbitrarily choseing your units to die.
I appreciate seeing actual constructive criticism in a see of, "art bad," and, "copied Star Craft."
None of those are really constructive feedback.
Listening to people that'd don't like the similarity to SC2 would be madness. They could never be pleased.
I come from wc3. Stormgate looks like garbage
@@RJavier007 That right there, what are you doing? What do you want Stormgate to be? It's not even clear if you're talking about graphics or gameplay.
@@RJavier007how is the art style any different than wc3? Aside from the expensive AF cinematics wc3 is cartoony. Do you not like the unit/building designs or the futuristic setting? Genuinely curious not trying to rip on you.
@@Bagginsess It's very different, wc3 is just as cartoony, but in a more gritty way. The art styles also don't clash with the terrain and background. Stormgate looks shiny, and bright and everything is rounded and floaty. It doesn't look like the units actually interact with the map. There's a very fortnite feel to it. Where as WC3 feels more real and grounded, despite being also cartoony. Hopefully many of these things are fixed as they finish. The art style bothers me less than how the units move and interact with each other though.
Guess what - most of the people who are interested in this game are wc3 and sc2 players...
people complain that the game looks unpolished and that's because it is literally unpolished. The team didn't want to spend time polishing if there was a possibility the design direction could change, they said as much in previous interviews. We will see more details, doodads, tune ups, and improvements as more of the decisions are set in stone. It's mostly been about game mechanics and the foundational tech that makes the game work, now they can put paint and gloss on the game to make it look good.
Stormgate looks to me like a Warcraft version of SC2 in slower. The maps are huge and the units are some melee and most ranged, then they clash and that's all.
Something I loved about Broodwar was that it was about map control, holding areas and preventing the enemy from moving. If there are 43298123 million pathways for anyone to take, like in SC2, this significantly losees importance and thus the game becomes less strategic.
Ok so Stormgate will stay unwatchable. Definatly won't watch that as an esport.
😂😂
Thank you very much for the interesting video! I'm glad they started talking about a fourth race and more variety of maps. The graphics of the game, of course, are controversial, but overall they will do. The main thing is to get rid of the terrible deer, chickens and beetles as soon as possible. They must be replaced with normal neutral units that will enrich the environment, such as marauders or mutants created due to infernal magic.
Ya those were just placeholders, there is concept art for the final units
Honestly, in my opinion on the art, stormgate looks ok now? The terrain and lighting sucks right now, but most of the units and structures for vanguard and infernal look great, and for celestial, it sounds like there needs to be a few art tweaks, especially with units such as the vector, but otherwise I think celestial still looks nice.
There are infinite ways to stylize, from abstract-cartoon, all the way to semi-photo-realistic. If abstract-cartoon was -50, and photo-realism was +50, stormgate would be -10. People are not asking for a +50 photo-realistic game, they just want a +10 stylized game. The problem is too far gone though, because the main issue isn't just simplified textures, it's the overall cute/round aspect to all the 3D models, as well as a 1:1 unit aspect ratio. RTS fans are older and playing a game that looks like baby toys isn't as appealing. The best we can hope for is that they add more props like rocks and shrubs around the edges of the terrain like sc2 so the terrain feels more dense and call it a day.
Idk, Battle Aces has been well-received, and it's mostly just animal-shaped toy robots responding with quips. I think people saw the demons and thought it was going to be Diablo.
@@Frodonsake24 Maybe I don't, but maybe I do. We'll see how well this game does once it comes out.
saying that it's a copy of starcraft 2 is one of the most insane criticisms. Like... it's made by the same devs. And in my opinion there's more in common with warcraft 3, but whatever. But criticizing people who made a game for making a game that looks like another game they made is one of the goofiest things I've ever heard. Imagine if that was applied across the board. "Diablo 4 looks too much like diablo 3!" "mass effect 2 looks too much like mass effect 1!"
I've never seen people hate on a game as much as I've seen them hate on stormgate. It's just crazy. It's like they want it to fail because it threatens their precious 13 year old RTS that nobody plays anymore. Instead of finding something positive like the fact the RTS genre is finally getting attention after all these years, they just complain
Good comment, but Sc2 is still the most played rts above Aoe 2 and 4? So what you mean by nobody plays?
My dude, they are complaining as this game looks and feels worse than warcraft or starcraft. So the story/campaign needs to carry the game a fuck ton or else it will sink vs the older games that came out ages ago which also have dedicated modding community
Maybe people aren't saying mass effect 4 looks too much like mass effect 3 because it's literally the exact same franchise?
The person who was interviewed has a long history of toxic fallout when it comes to microtransactions.
I had a back and forth with him during Command and Conquer 5 (the Generals 2 version) --- he wanted people to pay for colors, choosing maps, and the type of game style you played i.e. 1v1/2v2/3v3/4v4.
He called this a "living subscription model" the forums FLAMED HIM after our public debate where he freaked out and started attacking his own player base then a moderator took over attempting to reword his posts.
DO NOT TRUST HIM -- He failed as a leader in CNC,SC2 with the short stories which were crap + disgustingly overpriced skins ppl purchased, and now Stormgate. What this guy touches die. You were warned here.
the artstyle is just not cool. It looks childish. It even dont fit the narrative of demons/celestial. If they look too cartoonish they are not demons they are toys.
There are very few ppl that will like that.
They're going to have to do a hell of a lot more than this to compete with Zerospace and Battle Aces. The art looks like something out of toy soldiers.
@@unagiandroe battle aces sure. But zerospace units looks like toys too.
@@MikoGot true true
Battle aces is no competition lol
@@mr.leanflakes-highlights1556 remind me to check those player count numbers come December ;) I’m no David Kim advocate but it’s night and day if you think these two games are currently at the same level of design or quality
@@unagiandroe Yea because battle aces is a mobile game
Thanks for keeping us updated.
Wow! Must say im very pleased with the anwsers given in the qna! Cant wait!
"You can't please everybody" but i think MOST people don't like the look of it.
"We can't please anybody"
Ultra settings on Stormgate is basically Low on SC2
Yeah, it's not just because the graphics are bad. The art design is the same as mobile games. I don't think it 'looks' like a mobile game it's too high fidelity for that. But it definitely has that 'mobile game' 2020 art style.
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"... so I can grab an instrument, make some random noise, call myself a musician and when you call me out on my BS, I go: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" Oh I wish things were that easy but, alas, reality disagrees. And it will disagree with Frost Giant too.
My favorite criticism is people saying it looks like a moba or mobile game (many of which copy mobas) even though mobas look the way they do because they were based on warcraft 3. My second favorite criticism is that it looks unfinished with them proceeding to say "betas are suppose to look finished."
If you don't like the artstyle fair enough but it's a game and the gameplay is pure gold. And sorry but Blizzard is dead and in order for these devs to make a new RTS they needed a new IP. It is not starcraft 3 or warcraft 4 and it never will be but it is the closest we'll get.
Imo it is too stylized. I would have been happier with something in-between SC2 and WC3 but this feels even more stylized than WC3.
I hope that when they are adding more textures and detail to the maps they decrease the degree of stylization a bit.
Ultimately, it is not a deal breaker, I will still play the game and gameplay will be my judgement.
@@Navhkrin the polish will help a lot but it'll be like going from the OG evangelion anime to the HD movies, it'll still be cartoony AF. Warcraft got away with it because at the time many franchises that jumped to 3D took the cartoon approach over realism. I won't play fornite or valorant because of their style but I like dota, warcraft, and the finals similar to how I don't like the look of flapjack and adventure time but I like the OG batman cartoon and OG loony tunes. I get it though some people just don't like the cartoony style. I can see fan made overhaul mods for it being popular for this reason.
the game play is not that great and they are running out of money.
Battle Aces shits all over this game in terms of graphics and game play and releases sooner. Stormgate is going to flop hard if they think playing on cardboard is an acceptable art style
They didn't make their own engine, they're just using Unreal. They didn't advance their art style much. They didn't make their own RTS races, they just made terran/zerg/protoss again with different names. I was very excited for SG, but having played it a bunch, It's just not passing the "vibe check", The gameplay isn't quite jiving and neither is the art style. I hope the next version has some big changes b/c I did pay into their startup thing, I had hope. Between SG, BA and ZS, I think SG's probably in 2nd place for me... and honestly they're all tainted by MOBA ideas, which I don't enjoy, so I might just stick to starcraft until they stop trying to appeal to the wrong audience.
I have seen better looking games in Unreal 3, and lol they're using Unreal 5.
If you think you can make a comparable game using unreal I would love to see it. Theres no way you could build anything as responsive without a ton of customization
Your mapping things you know onto things you don’t know. A great way for you to learn, but not how reality works.
So, the game is deadborn from the very start and all of the shitty artstyle. And yeah, Stormgate Central, let's be hones: there are no people in the entire rts community that said like "oh, just a AWESOME artstyle". No, the style is described in negative or neutral (is not that bad guys...) and thus is THE MISSTAKE. Let's looks at the fact: when the game was announced it had full support of entire rts community and had hundreds of thousands of views. What now? News, casts and videos can't even make 3k views at max. This is a disaster.
And for those who compare the budgets:this is not about the money it is about lack of talent. How much money did the Iron harvest had? How much money has Tempest rising? How much money has God sworn? How much money has DUST FRONT, which looks A THOUSAND times more interesting? All of these games had less money than SG and every single one of them is looking better in terms of artstyle.
I got up to campaign mission 5 and did one co-op mission yesterday (damn you adult stuff) and so far I absolutely love how the game feels in terms of QoL hotkeys, and unit responsivness. However, I just can't get over how ugly the characters look, except blockade who looks pretty dope. BUT... while the models do look unfinished and could easily be fixed up in the future, let's not forget how the dragons in Baldurs Gate 3 were shooting red squares of fire on early access day one. I will definitely keep playing this regardless, cause it's just so damn fun.
Devs: Check out our stylized art!
Us: It looks like WC3 on a smartphone
Devs: It's SUPPOSED to look like that!
Go easy guys; criticism makes them sad.
Which is why they love hanging out on reddit😂
The redditors is R/stormgate would never criticize the game
I thought units in AoE 4 looked like they were made out of play doh. Then I played the game and none of that mattered
Sadly the art style is soo bad... I dont know anyone who liked it, for real. Looks too childish and mixed with anime things but low budget.
I like it.
@@user-ur4nl6dq2xthen your a mobile gamer
I like the art style as well
I hate it
I dislike the art
*Art's* definitely in rough shape currently, but I wasn't aware that it was _just_ early access people are playing, so it's fair if they're saying it'll improve with time. Reminds me of the Slay the Spire method of game dev, where they really rough-sketched in some early ideas, and more and more shading/detail got added to characters/enemies/etc over time as the game got closer to launch. As a designer myself, this method makes a lot of sense in terms of quickly roughing things in, trying out how they play, and not throwing away tons of time if you decide to abandon an idea because you didn't commit the full art-hours towards Final Art for any given troop.
*Campaign* stuff I'm generally very positive on their thoughts there. One concern (again, from a designer point of view) is shorter cycles makes it quite a lot harder to do unique mechanics like we saw with each Starcraft 2 campaign. It won't be impossible (and honestly they weren't _that_ unique apart from presentation), but I'd expect a loss of quality by having things release more frequently. But that isn't to say the strength they mentioned (avoiding player dropoff) won't be a strength -- it definitely will if the quality is good.
*Coop* is what I'm most hyped for, and honestly I hope they get ambitious there. Basically the coop main campaign is nice, but it doesn't have a lot of legs to it (it'll likely feel very much the same each play through). Whereas Coop done right has tons of variety match to match. SC2 had a decent amount of that; if you chose the same level each time, you'd still get some randomization to enemy factions and forces (the latter being the main way they varied things; sometimes the enemy was very air-heavy, sometimes a horde of weak units, sometimes fewer higher-quality troops; sometimes mech; sometimes bio; etc.)
The way I'd double down is to add roguelike elements that add dramatic bonuses
* you fight through part of the coop mission
* at various points you loot a special item that gives your side a roguelike choice
* so then you pick like 1 out of the 2-3 rewards you're offered
* it's significant stuff like "Zealots are 50% cheaper, but deal 25% less damage"
* the choices should be very impactful both (A) in regards to the enemy composition, so you can adapt to the enemy being "swarmy" by going with plentiful spammed zealots, or (B) in regards to your own faction or your previous roguelike choices, like if you previous chose a "each time your zealots attack the enemy takes 2 damage" (so it's a flat damage increase that isn't reduced by the 25% less damage, and therefore stacks really well with them being 50% cheaper).
While the multiplicative complexity gets a little tricky dev-side (because if they're doing (A) coop commanders with distinct playstyles plus (B) big meaty roguelike choices, then that results in a lot of combinations of things which can be tricky to balance), it's very much a reasonable complexity since you can just track which faction/roguelike combos have the craziest win rates (and the worst) and buff what needs help and balance the OP stuff.
Just hearing the intro the game is doomed.-
Game dev here: don't worry about performance issues until launch. Optimization is usually the LAST part of development. As they said, you can't optimize a moving target.
I don't see this ever taking Sc2's spot. It's not that it looks like blizzard stuff, that's fine. It just doesn't look good, the units and buildings look super generic.
The UI gives off mobile port vibes too
This game will die immediately once it goes off. It has nothing unique about it. The only thing that's good about it is the marketing. People will hop back into starcraft or other rts which have unique features.
I also think it looks generic, but they defend it as stylized. Generic can be a style, but that doesn't mean you can't improve it
I know it's a dead horse at this point, but the style has actually put me off. I didn't particularly like the style at first, but was willing to deal with it if the gameplay was great (which I didn't get hooked by yet either tbf), however seeing their intro cinematic completely quelled any interest I had. I like multiplayer, but the core of RTS is a compelling campaign and the Overwatch / Pixar thing just... ugh. Don't understand it. Who are they aiming for? The enormous teen girl war game fanbase? You really telling me this is what men in their 20s-40s want to watch between battle? Even the Battle Aces intro, though anime, had some edge to it and actually makes the guns and tanks and stuff look badass. Was holding onto this as the RTS revival too. Maybe a good platform for mods still though.
Wat they say is right. U can't pls everyone. But the problem is. A vast majority complain about the style. So that should be enough feedback to change the style. This graphic style looks horrible
And we aren't saying Change it! We're saying "it needs more work"
Awesome update as always. Thanks for the stormgate content ❤
They need to fix sounds so bad
I honestly think the game looks aweful. It is a very ugly RTS. But if it plays well I can live with me not liking the art.
I think the best thing that could happen to frost giant is a secretly 4th race...
Where can I post Stormgate feedback anyway?
The subreddit or discord are great places for that!
@@Stormgate_Central I wish people would take steam forums more seriously.
I think Frost Giant needs 2-3 more years to polish and reiterate this RTS game. Complex games like RTS requires more time to make than simple games.
Agree
@@allanshpeley4284 Does it mean that Stormgate is made by a bunch of tired old men, and we just need new blood?
they need to add blood and gore, also dont go the fortnite style
Sad to hear that they're standing firm on the graphics. I know art is subjective, but I've personally yet to meet a single person IRL who liked it, every single person I know who is interested in storm gate has told me at some point that they are interested "inspite" of the graphics, which I legitimately can't think of another game where I've had so many people tell me that, and I've lived through Pokemon Scarlet/Violet, that Hunter x Hunter fighting game, and that King of Fighters 3d reboot that both had graphics multiple generations behind current gen on release. As for myself, I don't hate it as much as some, but its definitely not visually appealing to me either, its more just one of those things you learn to live with more then it "grows on you".
i'm hoping for customizable shaders. Maybe thru mods even. I just want to look at the game thru a celshader 😀
I would like an ultra realistic gritty looking game but I also like the blizzard cartoon style. But in competitive games many people turn the gfx to lowest so would you rather have a blocky looking low settings game that struggles to run or smooth high FPS game with clear visuals? Plus think of all the games that put gfx before gameplay and lead to a buggy mess: cyberpunk, COD, Halo Infinite, Battlefield 2042, Star Wars Jedi Survivor, Starfield, Mass Effect Andromeda, Homeworld 3, Tarkov Arena, etc
@@Broockleif people put squidward in warcraft 3 I can't imagine they wouldn't put cellshaded cat girls in stormgate.
General people are confused about artstyle and graphics because they're 2 completely different things. The artstyle in stormgate is good, but the graphics need work. But it's to be expected when they're testing gameplay first and want to get players involved early so that they can make the best game they can. Better animations, better lighting and detail for the ground, shading and particles will transform the game and they clearly haven't done a pass on those yet, but artstyle is set and looks good. I'd be more worried if next year they haven't done a full visual pass on the graphics and animations.
@@DrawAndErase there are definitely people confused on that but a lot also don't like the cartoony style and know that's separate from graphical polish that will come later.
It looks terrible.. SC rip..
I prefer WC3 TFT
the art style is really anonymous. How can you think in 2024 to present a black guy in a spacesuit as a hero? How dare you? Sorry to say, but Battle Ace has a much more inspired art style, and it is developed by an independent company too so i don't think money is the issue here.
I appreciate that frostgiant is listening to the criticism and wish them good luck
Be good if they pleased anyone (instead of everyone) with the artsyle.
i dont really understand the hardware requirements for stormgate´s visuals. i doesnt look better than sc2(except explosion effects maybe)
It's probably because nothing is optimized yet.
I wanted to play it but I don't even want to look at it.
I am just looking forward to having a SC2 game that is actually alive with updates and new units and maybe even new races and things like that being added over time.
I really like many effects in SG like Saber or Hellborn shots, I can't wait for new lightning and tilesets, I think that SG visuals will be really good after some time. I definitely see improvements making by FG over time
3:00 as a shallow critic who really doesn't like the art of the units / buildings - WE KNOW this is a game being made for Esports. The Story as many will parrot "Doesn't Matter"... well lo and behold it DOES. When things are like this for no reason, when the terran marines (that's what they look like) carry spears for no reason, when there are dogs for no reason, when some units float and some crawl and some are different and others are the same - - I want to have at least an IDEA about WHY that is. Starcraft introduced each unit in a mission of the campaign, you heard the voice lines, a character you are aligned with gives them to you, introduces the unit to you and gives you a chance to use it, this goes a LONG WAY to winning hearts.
That and removing the dogs lol or give us an official reskin for units - I think SC2 did something similar.
StormGates art problem is that it is cannibalizing past blizzard art styles without adding anything new. Both StarCraft and Warcraft were inspired by Warhammer, but StarCraft 1 had heavy Aliens influence and Warcraft had its unique for the time cartoony visuals. But now StormGate is just, what if we combined Warcraft, StarCraft, and Overwatch Art directions. They are not pulling from other sources or from anything unique. They also don’t have the budget to make the visuals work, so this feels like a cheep knock off or parody.
What i see is Overwatch, not starcraft. I get it overwatch is super popular, but i never liked its tone, dont like this either. But i can live with it. The price model is the deal breaker. Its overwatch again. F2P and theyll release PVE content 3 missions at a time. NOPE! F... off!
SC2 released with 30 single player missions day one for 60 bucks, and that still kinda sucked since it was terran only (after 12 years of hype, they scrapped P and Z, cause greed, what if the expansions never came out?) Now we get 3-4 missions for 40 smacks, or 9-10 for 60( but at some point? WHAT? Yeah, they are trying to do OW again. Yeah NOOOOOOO.
If you are an RTS game developer, and the community feedback is this, what are you going to do?
@@allanshpeley4284 yep.. everyone on the stormgate reddit kept criticizing the artstyle, they wouldn't respond to any of the criticism. I only saw them respond to proposed ideas, people glazing the game and funny posts. All criticism was ignored straight up
Honestly, I have no issues with the artstyle. People who say it'll hurt the game seem to forget that almost every super-popular game nowadays has it. Fortnite, Dota, League of Legends, Overwatch, even Apex Legends to a degree. Also it'll make the game age far more gracefully than if they went uber-realistic and gritty. People here just love to complain.
The art style is ok. It's just an overall presentation. It does not make you feel immersed, The writing is boring at best and annoying at worst, the design is not coherent, story and lore are some weird amalgamation of WC, SC and Diablo. My biggest gripe is when I play it (online or sp), I feel nothing. No immersion. It feels plastic, janky, without grit and cheap. 3/10.
This game has much more generic and bland art than those
I personally really like the art style. It’s very accessible to a younger audience and like most of us sc2 fans, I have kids now that I want to get into blizzard style rts. I think when it’s more polished it’ll look really beautiful.
I really hope the game is successful. That being said, I'm probably going to give it a miss. From what I've seen in every gameplay video is that the game looks like a Starcraft 2 mod. The sound effects, the movement, and certain visuals all just make me feel like I'm playing Starcraft 2 with a skin.
I'm going to stick to Starcraft 1 and WC3 for my RTS gameplay for now.
Why do I feel like this is just an ad?
TL;DW nothing's going to change, like it or lump it
to remind people starcraft was mean to be a 40k game and the 3 race come from that origin saying that stormgame is ripping starcraft race is just stupid when you know the origin of starcraft race
The difference between starcraft and 40k maybe similar but it's different. Only really identical is the zerg and tyranid. The guard aren't hill Billy convicts and the protoss aren't unpolished necrons dynasties. Starcraft made an identity that is different from 40k not in artstyle and units but lore and story. What does stormgate have?
This is a unfortunate mixup. Warcraft 1 was supposed to be a Warhammer game. There is no evidence that Starcarft was ever, at any stage, supposed to be a WH40k game. You can see some inspirations, sure. Like Warhammer, and any media ever, it took inspiration from the genre. But, as far as we know, Starcraft was its own thing.
To remind people that "StarCraft was originally 40k" is a complete myth that is only perpetuated because 40k is more popular than Warhammer Fantasy/Old World. WarCraft was the one that was originally going to be a Warhammer game, StarCraft was its own thing that unintentionally ended up looking like "WarCraft in space" in pre-release alpha builds and getting mocked for it.
It would have been great to see the game appear more realistic rather than cartoony. It closely looks like planetary annihilation, which did fail for many reasons mind you, appearance being one of them--could not attract an audience. In addition, the terrain of each map should have been more stylized rather than cliche. Every RTS game has similar terrain. It would have been more appealing to see something different and innovative. Such as maybe a rocky world that looks like the spiky asteroid from the movie Armageddon--just a thought. All that said, I'll still watch from the sidelines to see if the game continues to evolve to my appeal. If not, hey, I just won't play it as its not for me which is np.
Worse thing about this game is the art style, huge downgrade from both Starcraft & Warcraft character designs and models.. I bought the ultimate pack because I love RTS games, but I honestly cannot get into these characters at all.. and I wonder if it will be enough to pull me from SC2 which I still have installed.. I like the mechanics of all 3 races and how they work, but just the unit designs themselves hurt to look at.
I see what they are saying, its very possible they have set up so much that inherently just can't shine until the final polish and pulling together of the seams. But until then the visuals and style doesn't look distinct in general, just pass over generic 3-d, and it does make people think of StarCraft at first and second glance.
So I will turn up for release and hope it works out, I really do want RTS to come out of cult classic status and at least be between that and mainstream numbers (I don't think that is possible for anyone to do) but getting over invested does nothing to help or hinder it.
Partially it gives me ''I have a bad feeling about this'' that there is so much promo before the release. FGS has secured founds to get this going so... give us the game already and let us decide ourselves if we like it. Diablo 4 got good only after players told them whats wrong with it.
I mean, not really .
From what i see, there realy isn't much promo before the game releases. Whats going on is just small things like these QnAs and small showmatches and a bit of casting from the closed beta, which only matter to people closely following the game. It's not constant bombardment with adds on 7 platforms or a million sponsorships. It's bassically just a devlog.
Additionally, they have given the game to a lot of people for closed beta tests, and are working on the feedback that those people gave to them. They will be doing an open beta when they feel like it, but theres no point in just releasing an unfinished game to get a ton of free bugtesting from players when they know they can keep working on it before they release it to improve and expand the game, without the gigantic amount of negative press every game which releases in an unfinished state gets, which 100% absolutely does negatively affect a games long term performance. Stuff like noans sky and cyberpunk 2077 could have twice there current playercounts if they didn't have as shit a release as they did.
@@Santisima_Trinidad I keep my fingers crossed for SG, after beta I was giving them 2:1 chances for creating something worth calling SC2 successor. Right now I just can't wait to lay my hands on it, more hoping it will not be a year or two till they get it right. Fingers crossed even harder ;)
cheers
What I really dislike is how all the units look the same. SC2 had the same problem to a lesser extent. All the units from BW were unique and fun to look at while they matched around.
Almost time to flex my chicken while getting bodied by SC2 vets!
The game will die quicker than the Grey Goo.
The art style will keep the game fresh for many years to come. Many of the old games that tried to have "realistic" graphics now look really outdated while games with their own artstyle (like WoW) still look ok.
It is funny how after 15 years SC2 graphics looks better than this.
This Q&A Feedback seems hollow and in bad faith and I feel they will not address anything on a serious way.
My biggest problem its not art style but gameplay and balance as the faction are looking incredible same-y and boring with mistake other RTS already did before but applied on this fresh game ( ex: medivec + siege tank drop issue ).
I honestly fear this game will be another Petroglyph rts style game: Promising the world and a bit more but delivering a boring, dull and DOA game that will be forgotten at the shade of another future RTS release.
They need change and add ALOT of gameplay refinements and changes to the current and delay as much as necessary or this will be another dead game on production that will be beat by 15 old SC2 "unsupported" current ruler or other stable old games ( AOE2 , kane wrath, company of heroes 2, etc).
For me the ground texture is by far the worst part. There's something so bland, blurry and flat about it. Theres also very evident tiling in a lot of areas at the moment. The factions also all look extremely similar, like theyre all using the same technology even though theyre supposed to be distinctive.
@@allanshpeley4284ngl that's funny as hell😂
How tf did GiantGrantGames make a better game than this
looks horrible. game is doa with this art style
The problem is not that the graphics are stylized. A lot of gorgeous games have varying degrees of stylization. The problem is that the unit and building designs are just very poor and don't match the themes of the game. The animations are lackluster. The terrain doesn't have any details or doodads. These are all problems the stylized Blizzard RTS games of old didn't have, going back as far as Warcraft II. I'm sorry to say, but I think Frost Giant just seems to lack artistic vision and talent.
@@allanshpeley4284 Spot on
You got it!
I'm neutral on the art style, but imo legibility is not good atm. With bigger armies I just have no idea what I'm looking at. Maybe it will get better as we get used to units more.
Why is this graphic engine visually inferior to SC2 engine???(circa 2012)
It's really not. It is Unreal Engine 5 running the graphics. However, a better engine does not equate to a better looking game.
StarCraft 2 had basically years more of development time than Stormgate when both were shown off to the public. Also, unlike SC2 which is a AAA game SG is an indie game. There will be budget cuts to make production feasible.
@@Frozen_Death_Knight Indeed, SC2 went through many iterations, and SG should do the same, while gameplay is what matters the most, these MOBA/mobile graphics are simply unacceptable for a game claiming to be a successor to SC/WC. Also consider that its 2024, small studio and all that are not acceptable excuses. They need to do better.
Just watch this video and t hen immediately go watch an Artosis cast of a Brood War game and be blown away just how much better stuff looks. Clearer and more interesting.
I played SC2 since it's release with gaps. TBH this Diablo injected WC-SC setting is still not sold to me. Also I'm sure that there will be improvements in gameplay and controls, but the readibility in the current state is quite terrible at the moment. I hope that this will be evolve over time as the design will be finalized.
I honestly think the game would go much far i its would be either totally sci fi or totally fantasy. I would say after 14 years of SC2 probably total fantasy would be the way to go. I love infernals, and I would reather see dwarwesm frost giants (lol), mages on horses and thing like these than a mix of everything.
I really don't like most of the graphics except for a couple of units. The mining part also looks pretty cheaply made. But the only thing i really don't like are the camps, it's something extra for strategy that i don't have the IQ for it or the patience to learn to deal with.
"this is the resource building. Your resource dudes go here" we are back to Warcraft economy 25 years ago
The game releases only with 1v1 but didn't they say that 3v3 and social playing was the main selling point of the game? If this is not the case, there will be the same goddamn players playing those god tier 1v1 games with the same goddamn commentators and that game died already. Something new and different please...
They so much underestimate the value of polished graphics of the game Before early-access. So many people will be terrified with how junky it looks (especially cliffs) and just go away. And just few % of the pro-gamers left cause of gameplay.
And the reason to play SG because SC2 is not supported is inadequate, you can't promote it like this
Its approachable artstyle for cheaper production. Frost Giant Studio is indie studio after all.
The problem for me isn’t “realistic looking” it’s that these designs are bland. I have seen indie games with way more interesting and unique designs and aesthetics.
@@commanderwookiecopc806 me too, I like some of vanguard and infernal designs (but not all). And I reaaaally dont like how Celestials turned out to be. They look mostly bulky and we already have two bulky-looking factions.
@@allanshpeley4284 its still Indie. Also for game of that scope is Not that much money
Tim made the Naga faction for WC3? Ah, so it's *his* fault that Grant suffered so much against them in WC3:FT Sentinel Deathless. lol
My only graphical issue is that i cant tell teams and unit apart. I dont care about the style if i can tell whats happening in battle
I have no problem with the Comic-Art Style. I'm sure it can be improved to look less "Smurfs" (la la lalala la) like.
I HAVE a problem with Stormgate and SC1 and SC2 in regard of it's units and building being not made with the same scale.
I realy hate people that are bigger than tanks and buildings! It's just weird! I wished they would have taken some lessons from C&C Generals when it comes to scale of units and buildings.
Then I wished that "Air" Units would get weather terrain.... "wind" and "view"
The game looks ugly to me, but i tend to play rts on the lowest graphics settings anyways. As long as the game is fun and expressive I'll get over it. Someone will release a mod with better visuals if that's what we need.
The art style is clearly a lot closer to wc3 than starcraft. I do like starcraft a lot more but it doesnt really bother me
Dammm that footage of the game from 2022 development then cutting to the 2023 footage... makes me excited to see what they will be bringing for EA in 2024!
This game is gonna fucking fail....
"Were very much putting our heart into all of the time. and it make us SAD TO SEE CRITICISM"
And they cant fucking handle it.....And this engine.......The saving grace will be the engine.....BUT IT WILL BE LOSS. IF PEOPLE DONT BUY IT
From a design, graphic perspective : having not an intial appeal for most players is already killing any hopes of being a world hit. if they are fine having a niche success : good. If they plan on being a world wide hit : sorry to break it to you guys, but your design is NOT appealing as SC1, Warcraft, SC2, C&C, DOW, as they were back in the days.
This cartoonish art style breaks the game for me . Terrible art design choice. Yes there are solid core mechanics but most of us dont do pro level game play with all details on low to squeeze extra fps.