While I would say Amara is prettier in the new model, she just looks more... real and less "clay-mation-esc." I think it's a great change. Kudos to the devs.
She lost her rebel hair and her scars are barely visible, she's not risk-taker anymore, even if the improved texture and proportions make her less goofy
Amara's visual update has nothing to do with her looking ''prettier.'' She actually looks like a human now with correct proportions and a human face shape.
@@vouneo if they made her personality like tanya maybe the gamers will love her. And drop out his husband intro to the trash since there is no significance in that story. If I would make a stormgate intro is where the demons came like doom no warning no mistake just pure chaos. And the human just like hell yeah we gonna get some guns fire these demon out of thei ass. For me the only complict she should face is her wounds and the demons only fear is human technology that has been research to counter them no artifact. This artifact does'nt work in sci-fi maybe they should put and left it behind in Aom since that is their main base line.
Yeah that's the funny thing though, almost every other game I've covered has had their first iteration as ''0.1'', heck we even talk about the main release as 1.0 right?
Looking forward to it! I've got 40ish hours into Stormgate so far, mostly 3vE but I might try 1v1 again. I only ever used my first doggo in my builds, but I got wrecked a bunch by mass doggo. They're like zerglings and the surround is too good. It would be cool to see them do something like having other units be able to path through them or displace them so at least you could always be moving rather than getting pinned and picked off.
As a curious bystander I just wish they had more money, 2 years more is what they need for a decently succesful game imo. The recent work looks great, but it withers in the shadows of that one looming problem.
This is still Early Access, if they get support now the official release may be the game everyone wants. If people see potential in this as a rough start, they should support the game and it will develop into what they truly want.
the scars were not a problem, the problem is the rest of the face and the eyes especially, they just looked dead and uncanny. I hope they don't err too much into yassifying the character into a League of Legend supermodel
Thanks for the update as usual ! it's really interesting the way this game dev is shared with so many people. All of that would usually be done behind cloed doors. Now people can get a glmpse of what it looks to improve through game dev cycles. Great work and if they keep it like this, it should make for a great game when 1.0 hits.
Really like the new changes. I have been cheering the team on all along and listening to the interviews i can hear their passion to make a great game. If any of them read this keep grinding I am cheering you on!
Awesome! My feedback a few weeks ago was that the Box art and style looks great, and the closer they can match that to the in-game style the better. The box art is the promise, and the game is the fulfillment of that. And it's great to see them take feedback on Amara, she's the poster child after all. I think they struck the balance correctly in the redesign, obviously you still want it to look great from a gameplay standpoint, models have to be a little chunky to create readable silhouettes in-game, but also you have to make the models good enough with good proportions and fidelity for ground-level view, close up in cutscenes and whatnot. I think they nailed that redesign, and it gives me more confidence in the game's development.
YES! Now we are talking... those ugly models weren't making me play the game TBH. I like the art direction but not how ugly the models were before. I hope they later fix everything and make it more decent. Amara looks now like a normal person, not sexy, not shitty, just normal, and seems quite good so far.
People have to be patient. May that be a lesson for some people. Just wait for the more polished version, 1.0 for exemple. Othewiste, prepare to be disapointed.
@@HighLanderPonyYT Go eat some rainbows yo. Where is the beauty standard? Before it looked just awful, like a son between cousins bro. I hope Concord taught some people a lesson
@@Frodonsake24 I am not 100% agreeing with that. A lot of cases where people said "We should be patient" we got a shitty game because there wasn't a fuss before and they get away with it. This game is founded by many people who already paid for it even if it is gonna be F2P, so of course they should be vocal ASAP. You can't assure me they were gonna upgrade the models if people didn't complain THAT badly.
@@Lanzetsu "a lot of cases where people said 'we should be patient' and we got shitty game", sure, ofc it happens both ways and, at the end of the day, we'll have to wait and see. There's nothing wrong with that. Money doesn't translate necessarily to "good video games". That's the way it goes, it's not easy to make a video. Not at all. And you don't know about the updated models. You just don't know what they intended to do internally. Obviously they were planning to improve graphics because that's how any video game dev works. That was obvious. Did they specifically wanted to improve the models ? We don't know. Were they going to if nobody said anything? Maybe, we don't know either. Anyway, the whole point of this open way to develop the game, having the early access and all, IS to get feedbacks. So they got feedbacks, and adjusted, as it was very much intended.
I appreciate the changes to proportions, but I wish they kept the messy hair, and the more visible scars. I'm surprised they intend to change the gameplay model as well, I hope it still reads well from isometric perspective. The addition of details to map tilesets is also fine, but optimization is still rough, so I hope there's an option to keep that from impacting performance. I've had a rough time onboarding friends with weaker PCs into coop so far.
About the balance of the SCOUT, if we look at SC2 there was a period wheen Blizzard was too prone to nerf something when a counter could be found, so no surpise FG was waiting
I fall mostly into the keeping an eye on it camp. I would like to do some co-op, but I've put it off a bit to see how the game develops while cracking through Space Marine II and a couple other games. I appreciate the coverage!
Calling it beautifying is horribly disingenuous. The original models were bad. They were sloppy work that weren’t worthy of being included in a professional product. We haven’t seen art that bad since late 90s.
Personally, I've never been fussy over the art-style or graphics, but as long as it doesn't harm performance, it is a positive. The map does remind me of SC2 maps. There is a clear natural & you can potentially wall off there too. I'll probably enjoy the familiarity of that. I'm most interested in what the balance changes will be.
I'm a campaign player and i think that they should have done a first closed test of it to identify the biggest expectations of the players. While i'm hopeful seeing their reactions, my main problem with the campaign was not design but pacing. In terms of gameplay all mission lasted less than 20 min on normal difficulty, which is understandable for the first 3 as they act as tutorial, but is too short for the next missions. Also the story telling is skipping some pretty important parts. If i were to do an analogy, it would be like skipping lordaeron in WC3 human campaign and starting directly in northrend. We don't have time to discover the setting and protagonists, that we already found all 5 parts of the mcguffin and killed the first big enemy
Looking forward to updates for balances, also I hope they improve performance, the game feels sluggish when you have a massive army, so I just don't like playing long macro games. I think they need more consistent updates. They should follow overwatch style patch updates, I think they might get too caught up on stuff. The update to that girl is great she looks so uncanny atm
I love the game. I'm just really wanting them to add FFA. My friends and I love to play. But we can't all play coop or 2v2 together. There's 5 of us atm. Maybe more will come. A FFA would suit my group so well
In my opinion they make too less drastic changes. Like adding an automated map generator like in the Age of Empires games. That would increase the diversity and will open up new options for game modes like nomad from age of empires. To say we want to build a blizzard rts and therefore we don't want this is like saying we want to stay bad and want to living in the past with no real improvements to our game. So open your eyes guys and see the benefits of auto generated maps! There is absolutely no disadvantage about this, because you can still play on hand crafted maps. And it is possible to generate maps symetrical for competitive reasons. So there is no argument to not implement an automated map generator. To not implement it is just like saying we don't want to add improvements to our game. We know that game is not age and will never be, but nevertheless they steal good things from other games like Age of Empires like the Scout unit you start from the beginning. I just suggest to steal more good things from other rts. They have also stolen general abilities like in C&C Generals or god powers like in Age of Mythology. That was a good idea to steal it. So steal more good stuff like auto generated maps! You should also steal things like a more complex eco system. For example buildings you can build anywhere on the map that produce a resource like landing zones or marketplaces in C&C Generals or like farms in Age of Empires. That would increase the diversity because of that every position on the map can be an interesting position for attack targets. You are not limited to the static resources and towers on the map. You can keep that static stuff, but only static stuff is really boring. And one more thing to steal are walls. Because walls make it possible to change the situation on the map like no other thing can do. You can close ways your opponent want to go or make it at least much more difficult to go the same way again and again. You can buy time. You can also protect your team mates through building walls for them. So walls have a really interesting effect in a match. It makes it also possible to build more save bases everywhere you want. You don't need so much cliffs on maps anymore that can't be destroyed and are just like an undestructable wall from the beginning and will reduce the diversity on the map and the possible situations on the map. The map should be less static and walls are a perfect tool to reach that. The place where save positions or ways to the opponent are changing during one match and make it much more interesting to play and to watch. Alternatively, to add some new ideas, you can make every cliff destroyable so a ramp will replace the cliff. You can also play more with weather effects and or day and night change. So sometimes you prefer to attack during daylight and sometimes during night. You could also increase the importance of fire. So some units will burn structures and you need workers to remove the fire and not only to repair. That is on a standard rts player wish list for more than 20 years. So if Stormgate want to be the real next big rts so they have to implement it. Otherwise they can just build a new version of Starcraft 2 and how good that game has performed and performs today we know. If no of these things are added to the game I can say Stormgate will be pretty sure not the right rts for me. And in my opinion many players think in the same way. So if you want more players you should keep sure to respect the different needs of the different rts players. And the players who like Age like Age mostly because of there is a more complex eco system, an auto generated map generator and walls. They don't like Age because out of nowhere or because Age is Age. There are reasons for that. Copy these reasons! What like SC players about SC? I can say too. They like the 3 completely different factions, the possibilities to express your skills through micro and the universe itself. They don't like SC primarly for their hand crafted static maps. Many people believe its needed for competitive play, but there is absolutely no evidence for that. Almost every Age game is played competetive. People also don't like Starcraft for its really simple eco system. They don't like Starcraft for not having walls. So it will not hurt Stormgate in any way if Frost Giant will implement these things. To just repeat again and again we want to build a blizzard like rts is no argument at all. Today SC is not the best rts and is mostly played because of Coop Commander mode, WC3 is played because of the fun maps. So how good the basic game really is is really overrated. The lore is good and the universe is good and the possibility to express your skill through micro is good and the diversity between the factions are good. But there is much more that could be good!
I'm one of the ones who tried the early access and then put the game down hard. These changes look good, but I'm still not touching the game until it hits full release, and probably not until a couple months after it releases so I can play with some post-launch patches. I'm mostly looking forward to the improvements to the ground textures and foliage. When I tried the game, the biggest thing that looked unappealing to me was how bland and unfinished the maps looked. StarCraft 1 had better looking maps, and it did that with super low-resolution pixel-based tiles.
what is "in time ?" in time for what ? for 1.0 ? They don't have any strict schedule. In time before Battle Aces launch ? It's completely different style of RTS i'm not sure they're gonna be in the same lane anyway. So i'm not sure what or who they are racing really.
I like the look of the game, I love the feel of infernals and vanguard. However Celestials kind of killed my appetite for the game, they feel out of place. Coming from someone who did commit the 200 for special edition. They feel counter intuitive to me. I have been playing RTS for 25 years though, not resistant to change, but also just a bit baffled by that race.
It's probably gonna be later that they adress these. It takes a lot of time, and it's generally the sort of things you do pretty late in the developpement process. But we can hope they can make some improvements along the way, they are probably gonna need some UE5 specialists to do so, maybe even some update in the engine itself.
Thx for the Infos Guys! Yeah i can only imagine fixing sthing like that takes time, thats when i became a bit concerned Hearing that they are rushing a 3v3 mode before that gets adressed, anyways lets see what theyre cooking up!
This game was just released to early. No ones playing it. A few guys are making a little content. It’s a deathknell for this kind of game. No one cares, and by the time they would ever get this to a competent product it will be buried and forgotten. Occasionally mentioned as an aside here and there.
Overhyped copy of SC2 and WC3 that didn't bring nothing new to the RTS. Almost nothing is original, even voice lines of some units were stolen from SC2, and this map in the video is Fighting Spirit from Brood War. So much for the next gen RTS. Shame.
To my understanding (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) but points can only increase. Your MMR can drop with losses, but points are an only up mechanic. I believe points gained is a function of your current MMR and current points, so if your MMR has dropped well below your points, gaining points will be slow until your MMR catches up.
@@mental4508 points will be reset per season - mmr wont rn point climb is very strange - for every lose you have you need to get 1 win to equalize it, only if you win more then you lose you get full points. which is fine if you are very close to your mmr - but this starts like 200-300 points away from your mmr so it takes ages to actually reach it.
While I would say Amara is prettier in the new model, she just looks more... real and less "clay-mation-esc." I think it's a great change. Kudos to the devs.
Well she's certainly a lot less bug eyed that's for sure
@@L3monsta That comparison is spot on. I haven't really followed the game that closely, but the old model in the video was atrocious.
Meh, lost most of the quirky proportions and went "muh doll protagonist".
Making her stare less intense might've been enough.
She lost her rebel hair and her scars are barely visible, she's not risk-taker anymore, even if the improved texture and proportions make her less goofy
@@lxdnd yeah idk why the scars got changed so much. Bit weird.
I hope it's going to drastically improve as it's been advertised.
hahaha
I like that the general vibe on the social has improved a lot after these graphical updates! Great video as always :)
Yes it's extremely refreshing isn't it? Thanks for posting that reply from Gerald man.
Wow the visual changes are looking great. Hopefully the updates to Amara's look are a preview of what's to come.
Amara actually looks like a human being now
For better or worse.
Amara's visual update has nothing to do with her looking ''prettier.'' She actually looks like a human now with correct proportions and a human face shape.
I agree, don't get me wrong I think it's a great improvement overall, but she's a little generic-looking.
Amara went from 🤢🤮😬 to 🤌🥵🫡
😂
@@vouneo if they made her personality like tanya maybe the gamers will love her. And drop out his husband intro to the trash since there is no significance in that story. If I would make a stormgate intro is where the demons came like doom no warning no mistake just pure chaos. And the human just like hell yeah we gonna get some guns fire these demon out of thei ass. For me the only complict she should face is her wounds and the demons only fear is human technology that has been research to counter them no artifact. This artifact does'nt work in sci-fi maybe they should put and left it behind in Aom since that is their main base line.
I would say the game is received with mixed feedback. most ppl are critical but they see a potential if changes are made.
1:17 Normal people: "1st iteration starts at 1." Programmers: "1st iteration starts at 0." Mathematicians: "Define '1st' and provide a proof."
Yeah that's the funny thing though, almost every other game I've covered has had their first iteration as ''0.1'', heck we even talk about the main release as 1.0 right?
Looking forward to it! I've got 40ish hours into Stormgate so far, mostly 3vE but I might try 1v1 again. I only ever used my first doggo in my builds, but I got wrecked a bunch by mass doggo. They're like zerglings and the surround is too good. It would be cool to see them do something like having other units be able to path through them or displace them so at least you could always be moving rather than getting pinned and picked off.
As a curious bystander I just wish they had more money, 2 years more is what they need for a decently succesful game imo. The recent work looks great, but it withers in the shadows of that one looming problem.
This is still Early Access, if they get support now the official release may be the game everyone wants. If people see potential in this as a rough start, they should support the game and it will develop into what they truly want.
They released the game in early alpha. Never a good idea imo
This is beyond reasonable interpretation of “early access”. They want us to pay them for basic game testing of their game while it is in poor state.
yeah forgot that 40 millions are not enoug money to develop a good game
the scars were not a problem, the problem is the rest of the face and the eyes especially, they just looked dead and uncanny. I hope they don't err too much into yassifying the character into a League of Legend supermodel
Same. Many just can't stomach if chars don't look like Barbies and Kens and that's a shame.
there goes patrarchy for you it's shitty but it's very real, especially in the gaming community where sexism is a big big issue.
Thanks for the update as usual ! it's really interesting the way this game dev is shared with so many people. All of that would usually be done behind cloed doors. Now people can get a glmpse of what it looks to improve through game dev cycles. Great work and if they keep it like this, it should make for a great game when 1.0 hits.
Really like the new changes. I have been cheering the team on all along and listening to the interviews i can hear their passion to make a great game. If any of them read this keep grinding I am cheering you on!
Awesome! My feedback a few weeks ago was that the Box art and style looks great, and the closer they can match that to the in-game style the better. The box art is the promise, and the game is the fulfillment of that. And it's great to see them take feedback on Amara, she's the poster child after all.
I think they struck the balance correctly in the redesign, obviously you still want it to look great from a gameplay standpoint, models have to be a little chunky to create readable silhouettes in-game, but also you have to make the models good enough with good proportions and fidelity for ground-level view, close up in cutscenes and whatnot. I think they nailed that redesign, and it gives me more confidence in the game's development.
Can't wait for 3v3 but I am glad they are not tunnel vision just on that
I'm so glad 3v3 got pushed up. I was down with testing more of the campaign but pseudo warcraft 4 is where my heart lies.
I hope StormGate could have built on some existing lore, like gods or mystic creatures, so their game would have some asthetic basis, and fan base
YES! Now we are talking... those ugly models weren't making me play the game TBH. I like the art direction but not how ugly the models were before. I hope they later fix everything and make it more decent. Amara looks now like a normal person, not sexy, not shitty, just normal, and seems quite good so far.
Looks way more generic and "muh beauty standard".
People have to be patient. May that be a lesson for some people. Just wait for the more polished version, 1.0 for exemple. Othewiste, prepare to be disapointed.
@@HighLanderPonyYT Go eat some rainbows yo. Where is the beauty standard? Before it looked just awful, like a son between cousins bro. I hope Concord taught some people a lesson
@@Frodonsake24 I am not 100% agreeing with that. A lot of cases where people said "We should be patient" we got a shitty game because there wasn't a fuss before and they get away with it. This game is founded by many people who already paid for it even if it is gonna be F2P, so of course they should be vocal ASAP. You can't assure me they were gonna upgrade the models if people didn't complain THAT badly.
@@Lanzetsu "a lot of cases where people said 'we should be patient' and we got shitty game", sure, ofc it happens both ways and, at the end of the day, we'll have to wait and see. There's nothing wrong with that. Money doesn't translate necessarily to "good video games". That's the way it goes, it's not easy to make a video. Not at all.
And you don't know about the updated models. You just don't know what they intended to do internally. Obviously they were planning to improve graphics because that's how any video game dev works. That was obvious. Did they specifically wanted to improve the models ? We don't know. Were they going to if nobody said anything? Maybe, we don't know either.
Anyway, the whole point of this open way to develop the game, having the early access and all, IS to get feedbacks. So they got feedbacks, and adjusted, as it was very much intended.
I appreciate the changes to proportions, but I wish they kept the messy hair, and the more visible scars. I'm surprised they intend to change the gameplay model as well, I hope it still reads well from isometric perspective.
The addition of details to map tilesets is also fine, but optimization is still rough, so I hope there's an option to keep that from impacting performance. I've had a rough time onboarding friends with weaker PCs into coop so far.
About the balance of the SCOUT, if we look at SC2 there was a period wheen Blizzard was too prone to nerf something when a counter could be found, so no surpise FG was waiting
I fall mostly into the keeping an eye on it camp. I would like to do some co-op, but I've put it off a bit to see how the game develops while cracking through Space Marine II and a couple other games. I appreciate the coverage!
Calling it beautifying is horribly disingenuous. The original models were bad. They were sloppy work that weren’t worthy of being included in a professional product. We haven’t seen art that bad since late 90s.
Personally, I've never been fussy over the art-style or graphics, but as long as it doesn't harm performance, it is a positive.
The map does remind me of SC2 maps. There is a clear natural & you can potentially wall off there too. I'll probably enjoy the familiarity of that.
I'm most interested in what the balance changes will be.
Good game, I play 2 - 3 times a week. But waiting for the full version of the game to come out and enjoy the story line quests 😊
I'm a campaign player and i think that they should have done a first closed test of it to identify the biggest expectations of the players. While i'm hopeful seeing their reactions, my main problem with the campaign was not design but pacing. In terms of gameplay all mission lasted less than 20 min on normal difficulty, which is understandable for the first 3 as they act as tutorial, but is too short for the next missions. Also the story telling is skipping some pretty important parts. If i were to do an analogy, it would be like skipping lordaeron in WC3 human campaign and starting directly in northrend. We don't have time to discover the setting and protagonists, that we already found all 5 parts of the mcguffin and killed the first big enemy
Looking forward to updates for balances, also I hope they improve performance, the game feels sluggish when you have a massive army, so I just don't like playing long macro games. I think they need more consistent updates. They should follow overwatch style patch updates, I think they might get too caught up on stuff. The update to that girl is great she looks so uncanny atm
I love the game. I'm just really wanting them to add FFA. My friends and I love to play. But we can't all play coop or 2v2 together. There's 5 of us atm. Maybe more will come. A FFA would suit my group so well
In my opinion they make too less drastic changes. Like adding an automated map generator like in the Age of Empires games.
That would increase the diversity and will open up new options for game modes like nomad from age of empires.
To say we want to build a blizzard rts and therefore we don't want this is like saying we want to stay bad and want to living in the past with no real improvements to our game. So open your eyes guys and see the benefits of auto generated maps! There is absolutely no disadvantage about this, because you can still play on hand crafted maps. And it is possible to generate maps symetrical for competitive reasons. So there is no argument to not implement an automated map generator. To not implement it is just like saying we don't want to add improvements to our game.
We know that game is not age and will never be, but nevertheless they steal good things from other games like Age of Empires like the Scout unit you start from the beginning. I just suggest to steal more good things from other rts.
They have also stolen general abilities like in C&C Generals or god powers like in Age of Mythology. That was a good idea to steal it. So steal more good stuff like auto generated maps!
You should also steal things like a more complex eco system. For example buildings you can build anywhere on the map that produce a resource like landing zones or marketplaces in C&C Generals or like farms in Age of Empires. That would increase the diversity because of that every position on the map can be an interesting position for attack targets. You are not limited to the static resources and towers on the map. You can keep that static stuff, but only static stuff is really boring.
And one more thing to steal are walls. Because walls make it possible to change the situation on the map like no other thing can do. You can close ways your opponent want to go or make it at least much more difficult to go the same way again and again. You can buy time. You can also protect your team mates through building walls for them. So walls have a really interesting effect in a match. It makes it also possible to build more save bases everywhere you want. You don't need so much cliffs on maps anymore that can't be destroyed and are just like an undestructable wall from the beginning and will reduce the diversity on the map and the possible situations on the map. The map should be less static and walls are a perfect tool to reach that. The place where save positions or ways to the opponent are changing during one match and make it much more interesting to play and to watch.
Alternatively, to add some new ideas, you can make every cliff destroyable so a ramp will replace the cliff.
You can also play more with weather effects and or day and night change. So sometimes you prefer to attack during daylight and sometimes during night.
You could also increase the importance of fire. So some units will burn structures and you need workers to remove the fire and not only to repair. That is on a standard rts player wish list for more than 20 years. So if Stormgate want to be the real next big rts so they have to implement it. Otherwise they can just build a new version of Starcraft 2 and how good that game has performed and performs today we know.
If no of these things are added to the game I can say Stormgate will be pretty sure not the right rts for me. And in my opinion many players think in the same way. So if you want more players you should keep sure to respect the different needs of the different rts players. And the players who like Age like Age mostly because of there is a more complex eco system, an auto generated map generator and walls. They don't like Age because out of nowhere or because Age is Age. There are reasons for that. Copy these reasons!
What like SC players about SC? I can say too. They like the 3 completely different factions, the possibilities to express your skills through micro and the universe itself. They don't like SC primarly for their hand crafted static maps. Many people believe its needed for competitive play, but there is absolutely no evidence for that. Almost every Age game is played competetive.
People also don't like Starcraft for its really simple eco system. They don't like Starcraft for not having walls.
So it will not hurt Stormgate in any way if Frost Giant will implement these things. To just repeat again and again we want to build a blizzard like rts is no argument at all. Today SC is not the best rts and is mostly played because of Coop Commander mode, WC3 is played because of the fun maps. So how good the basic game really is is really overrated.
The lore is good and the universe is good and the possibility to express your skill through micro is good and the diversity between the factions are good. But there is much more that could be good!
Nice to hear
I'm one of the ones who tried the early access and then put the game down hard. These changes look good, but I'm still not touching the game until it hits full release, and probably not until a couple months after it releases so I can play with some post-launch patches. I'm mostly looking forward to the improvements to the ground textures and foliage. When I tried the game, the biggest thing that looked unappealing to me was how bland and unfinished the maps looked. StarCraft 1 had better looking maps, and it did that with super low-resolution pixel-based tiles.
Ok.
@@HighLanderPonyYTsalty stormgate dev
they need to remove anti-cheat malware.
The changes seem to coming quick, but I have doubts if they will be able to fix everything in time, especially with strong competition.
what is "in time ?" in time for what ? for 1.0 ? They don't have any strict schedule. In time before Battle Aces launch ? It's completely different style of RTS i'm not sure they're gonna be in the same lane anyway. So i'm not sure what or who they are racing really.
Wow the new map is based on a sc1 map called fighting spirit… lol
I like the look of the game, I love the feel of infernals and vanguard. However Celestials kind of killed my appetite for the game, they feel out of place. Coming from someone who did commit the 200 for special edition. They feel counter intuitive to me. I have been playing RTS for 25 years though, not resistant to change, but also just a bit baffled by that race.
2v2 ranked asap pls.
Was anything said to adress the terrible performance issues? Otherwise sounds decent, I guess?
It's probably gonna be later that they adress these. It takes a lot of time, and it's generally the sort of things you do pretty late in the developpement process. But we can hope they can make some improvements along the way, they are probably gonna need some UE5 specialists to do so, maybe even some update in the engine itself.
they also said there will be performance improvements with hunter , gerald confirmed this in discord
Thx for the Infos Guys! Yeah i can only imagine fixing sthing like that takes time, thats when i became a bit concerned Hearing that they are rushing a 3v3 mode before that gets adressed, anyways lets see what theyre cooking up!
is fighting spirit xD from broowar
My problem with Amara was never in her looks, but her unlikeable character and monotone voiceacting.
i think its WAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY to late, the game its DOA already
This game was just released to early. No ones playing it. A few guys are making a little content. It’s a deathknell for this kind of game. No one cares, and by the time they would ever get this to a competent product it will be buried and forgotten. Occasionally mentioned as an aside here and there.
They didn't had choise
I am playing it
Overhyped copy of SC2 and WC3 that didn't bring nothing new to the RTS. Almost nothing is original, even voice lines of some units were stolen from SC2, and this map in the video is Fighting Spirit from Brood War. So much for the next gen RTS. Shame.
why am i only getting +1 point per win and nothing for losses?
To my understanding (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) but points can only increase. Your MMR can drop with losses, but points are an only up mechanic. I believe points gained is a function of your current MMR and current points, so if your MMR has dropped well below your points, gaining points will be slow until your MMR catches up.
@@mental4508 points will be reset per season - mmr wont
rn point climb is very strange - for every lose you have you need to get 1 win to equalize it, only if you win more then you lose you get full points. which is fine if you are very close to your mmr - but this starts like 200-300 points away from your mmr so it takes ages to actually reach it.
There should be a major update, it's been about a month since the last patch. Waiting!
Dog the game isn't even out yet. There's tons of work to be done and I'm pretty sure the development team is relatively small.
Normal for EA brah.
They said it'd be around the 17th AGES ago.
Don't throw shade just because you're out of the loop.
It takes a lot of time to make a game !
game is dead anyways, 200-300 player count and dropping
Doggo is too strong The new model is great