Everything We Know About Frost Giant's New RTS: Stormgate (And My Thoughts About It)

I think Frost Giant announced their game too soon. I also don't think that means Frost Giant is going to make a bad game.
An aside, it is REALLY hard to make a video like this showcasing what you're talking about when we are working with so few pieces of information. Hopefully we will get more stuff to show off soon.
0:00 - The Story of Frost Giant
1:34 - Stormgate
2:06 - The Cinematic and Visuals
4:43 - The Five Pillars
5:10 - The Campaign and Story
6:48 - Cooperative Play
8:55 - Ranked Play
11:54 - eSports
13:50 - User Generated Content and the Editor
14:36 - Rapid Fire Other Things
16:50 - Monetization
17:29 - Resources
18:00 - Can They Make This Game?
18:16 - What is GGG's Opinion?

[@lukeskarda1780]

When I first heard of frost giant studios, and that it was made from a bunch of X blizzard devs, I thought it was a spite group. Once the scandals in blizzard we're revealed it was a lot more reasonable for them to have left. Now that I see how loaded the companies talent is I am actually excited.

[@Slaanash]

Depends on what end of the scandals they were on... I'll hope for the best but I'm measuring my expectations.

[@Sensko]

Those dudes were at Blizzard while all the gross stuff was in full swing and jumped ship when the company first started getting investigated. Not gonna tell anyone to not play the game, but maybe not go in with the mindset of supporting the Good Guys.

[@wilhua3083]

valid points, consider my expectation tempered

[@AAAAAA-jj4mr]

@@Sensko uhhh, why they left waa overall completely unrelated to this, it was full confirmation from Acti-Blizz that they are not interested into making no RTS anymore. Ans generally it's pretty shitty to make any suggestions loke that withoit any knowledge how they were involved into anything or not. We are speaking about massive corpo here and not some small family run company.

[@DesignerDave]

@@Sensko That's not true though... Tim Campbell left years before things went gross, and I can personally vouch that he's not a POS. I can say the same for Micky Neilson but can't speak to anyone else.

[@danielskrivan6921]

8:40 One of the things I really hate about SC2 is that the vs.-AI modes are all about attack waves. Look at your own Starcraft 1 videos, where you are strategizing things like which base to attack, so you can relieve the pressure on yourself. 99% of the time in SC1, the assets exist on the map or are created through normal production, which allows you to strategize what happens. In SC2, units are generated on timed intervals. It doesn't matter if you clear the map or if you turtle up, you're going to get hit the same regardless.

[@Qladstone]

This is true for SC2 Coop, AI attacks are all attack waves that just spawn at intervals. Only difference is occasionally they come from a different direction (and even so they are still too predictable especially with the minimap marker), and the unit composition can be different each game. I agree, being able to alter the enemy's attacks through your own actions is definitely a important part, rather than just attacks waves that happen no matter what and you have this boring spawn camping strategy shown in the video. I noticed in Campaign (Wings of Liberty right now) which I currently am playing again to get the achievements, it's a mix. For some maps, if you destroy their production structures, they don't produce from them anymore, e.g. (The Dig where you control the laser drill). But I think they have infinite resources, and can produce nonstop so long as the production buildings are there. Sometimes attacks are triggered at set intervals and will happen no matter if there are production buildings. It depends on the mission.

[@Norrieification]

This is a really great insight.

[@Sunnysideanyway]

I wish the AIs actually used their base in co-op and stuff...

[@ScarletKobold]

Yup! That's the main thing about StarCraft 2 that made it difficult for me to replay its campaigns compared to SC1 or other RTS games. I often felt like the strategic flexibility was so much lower than I would've wanted. If nothing else, a varying mix could also be interesting. The expansion for Command & Conquer Tiberian Sun specifically had a level where off-map reinforcements came in to attack you as an "optional objective," but were stopped if you destroyed the bridges they used to enter the map. Its implementation felt gimmicky in the context of that specific game, but maybe mixing together intervals of attacks, units produced from buildings, attacks that can be stopped/intercepted, and other ideas might make for a much more diverse campaign to play with and make plans for how you'd approach it.

[@ScarletKobold]

@@Sunnysideanyway That's the one thing that always gives me pause to consider playing co-op on occasion. It's not quite the same feeling when you play an RTS with base building, but you have no reason to destroy the enemy's base unless it's on an expansion or just happens to be in the way of an objective. Having an incentive to still destroy them without it just being an instant win (like money or a buff or keeping the AI off your back for just a little while with slightly smaller attack waves or something) would really round out the experience, at least to me.

[@zaksmith1035]

"I just read the storyline on the wiki like everybody else." Everybody except the Wiki Writer Guy. Thanks Wiki Writer Guy.

[@calebadam2576]

I get the impression you were given early access to this stuff because you've become at least reasonably well known for a professional and polite presentation of in-depth information and analysis about rts games, while also having a finger on the pulse of some pretty active community stuff for Starcraft 2. Don't downplay or question why you're being noticed Grant!

[@vahidmoosavian6313]

Hear hear!!!

[@runtergerutscht4401]

Isn't he also working as an advisor on game design for Frost Giant?

[@artemis_fowl44hd92]

@@runtergerutscht4401 He said he was working as advisor for companies making rts, it is unclear where he is working (as far as I know).

[@runtergerutscht4401]

@@artemis_fowl44hd92 ok, maybe I'm wrong about it being Frost Giant. I may also just have figured that without checking

[@Scortch-lo3xy]

THIS ^^^^

[@MrGreg242]

Grant you under-sell yourself. You provided excellent, constructive, but most importantly honest feedback. You are genuine with your words and it is refreshing. Honestly this is one of the main reasons I watch you as a creator. So, Grant people appreciate your input and it makes sense that Frost Giant reached out to you.

[@NostraDavid2]

*looks at subscriber numbers* *looks at theme of the channel* Nope. Not a clue why he got invited! /s

[@ahoy1014]

I trust Morten made the free-to-play choice from a well-intentioned angle, but I can't help but be skeptical of any game's development when their plan is free-to-play from the get-go. It means that invariably, monetisation becomes an active part of the game's design. Any game element could become subject to the whim of a dev thinking 'what if we did something profitable with this?' Of course, depending on the devs this isn't a large problem: setting up code to be able to asset swap in case of skins, updating pathing AI to be able to port over smoothly to DLC maps, etc. But those are parts of development that usually are there already for the sake of future-proofing. I personally feel that just slapping an upfront 20-40 bucks price onto the game lessens the monetisation aspect of development, allowing the devs to focus on the game for the sake of the game before the sake of the company coffers. I'd much rather see the game be priced to begin with, and then going free-to-play over time like StarCraft and Team Fortress did.

[@nikitosha1000]

They are going to release it on Steam, so I hope it will go the path of Dota. Battle passes, Stormagate+ (? xD), skins for units (maybe even for different body parts). No Pay2Win things, just purely cosmetical, analytics and SP campaigns. But yeah, I think they need to release some kind of SP Demo and then release priced first SP campaign

[@alarak5474]

From what I understood from Winter's interview, they'll keep the first "chapter" or part of any game-mode free. Like the first campaign is free, but expansion campaigns will cost money. Same with the co-op mode, the first heroes will be free, and additional heroes will cost money, etc. I assume skins and cosmetics will roughly follow the same idea for competitive.

[@rudelwolf1591]

i absolutely get being careful about f2p, but i do have hope there. i find league one of the best examples that good f2p can be very profitable without alienating players.

[@crazymanmot]

I think it could work, Dota 2 has been F2P from its inception and it is doing fine. Besides a F2P model is ideal for building up a community around the game, specially since free means you can get the most casual of casual players to at least try out your game if its popular enough. So I do not think F2P from the start is necessarily a bad thing as long as the team designs the monetization intelligently. And, as much as I hate to say it, it does seem like the most profitable games to make are F2P, so making money there is not that difficult. I'd even go as far as to argue that most F2P games designed on this day and age are bad precisely because they were designed as a cash sink and nothing else. But those games routinely fail while games with more reasonable F2P monetization dominate the market in terms of player base and revenue.

[@Shinteo5]

@@crazymanmot Path of Exile for a Diablo like game example.

[@alexandersmerage4931]

Unfortunately my reaction is “don’t do that, don’t give me hope.” If they manage to pull off everything, or even half of what they said that they’re planning to implement then I will be overjoyed, but the only AAA studio that I don’t feel overwhelmingly disappointed in right now is FromSoftware. I suppose you could also see it as that we’re overdue for a new heavy hitter. Damnit grant, you’re making me drop my wall of cynicism and angst again

[@lodhi6666]

If elden ring, the reused asset-fest and 100+ copy pasted bosses in copy pasted dungeons was your best offering, video games are long gone.

[@planescaped]

@@lodhi6666 Seriously, Eldin Ring was a decent game that people act like it was a freaking masterpiece. I guess when you're drunk on hype hype a solid 7/10 appears as a 10/10. :P

[@pallingtontheshrike6374]

@@planescaped when you compare a 7 maybe 8/10 to a bucket of 4/10s i mean yes it does start looking like a 10/10 i don't know enough about elden ring to put a number on it tho

[@emlen5847]

@@lodhi6666 i kinda disagree on the asset-fest. Fromsoft is well known for its variety of enemies in their games. The game had plenty too. Sure they reused assets but then again, the game has plenty of different mobs anyway so it doednt really matter

[@amateurishauthor2202]

I'd say a solid 8/10 is a good number, I've beaten the game and it feels like a good spot. the world is rich and beautiful, the combat is something you can actually improve at, and just look at the community content out there already, not a 10/10, but it's on the upperside of the spectrum

[@DrakonLameth]

I believe the best term to use for looking forward to Stormgate is "Cautiously Optimistic" -- if it meets the expectations, you'll be there with everyone else hyping it, but you'll try to avoid your own hype until then because you're uncertain if it will fly... or flop.

[@arsenbabaev1022]

Overhyping will dissapoint a lot of people for sure. Its really hard to achieve what sc2 did in terms of game feel, and other solved "RTS problems" doensnt matter if the game feels bland or laggy.

[@gabrielpineirogarcia2078]

I think its a good idea. People are looking for "the Starcraft 2" 2. Which as a fan of the Starcraft RTS, I share. But, we need to remember that this is NOT Starcraft 2.2. This is its own independent Game, so we must see It for that. People going in expecting It to be "just like Starcraft" will get dissapointed. We must see It for the Game It is once It drops. And have our expectations measured to enjoy It.

[@gowzahr]

"Things are more interesting when each faction has a little bit of good and a little bit of bad." I think this is a big source of the problems with SC2's story. Someone must have thought that people wouldn't enjoy playing as the bad guys for and entire game, so the writing department had to come up with a story that would see the player in charge of the good guys in each game.

[@zimboiii9025]

Yep, so sad. Reality just isn't so black and white, moral ambiguity is really lacking in the stories of most modern games which can really absorb players into a universe (e.g. Culling of Stratholme)

[@SchemingGoldberg]

Meanwhile, everybody loved SC1. You played as the "bad guys" through a huge chunk of SC1, but everybody loved it. We're adults, I wish companies would stop treating us like children.

[@CivilChev]

@@SchemingGoldberg The first time I played through the Terran campaign in SC1 I screamed at my computer screen when Mengsk gave the order to abandon Kerrigan. I did it again when Arthas claimed Frostmorne by claiming he'll pay any price to get his revenge. Playing as or under morally gray factions has always created highlights in game stories.

[@nevermore7285]

I say it was more a need to introduce a ‘badder’ guy. You were still fairly evil in the Heart campaign, especially the beginning, it’s just after a point you were always fighting worse people.

[@Pigraider268]

@@nevermore7285 That is really good point. I don't think good person would wilingly infest and mind control fellow, mostly innocent, humans like Kerrigan did

[@Lv05Ditto]

Co-op is a huge point for me as it's the sole reason I keep coming back to sc2 every couple of months, and it's the reason why i tried out different things in the first place. I don't mean that as in multiplayer, but as in just the other races, like zerg. I never had any interest in playing any zerg commanders until they released dehaka, who has zerg units, but has the production of terran or protoss. It made me want to branch out and learn how to play other zerg commanders, which I realized was just make 4-10 hatcheries each map. If I ever end up playing stormgate, it will be really interesting to see how they try to tie all the different modes together, and to see if I would ever become interested in multiplayer.

[@YRhandlesathing]

That ending....🤣 I thought I was imagining the cut-off, so replayed the last 10 seconds. Just for it to happen again.

[@arsenbabaev1022]

6:55 UE5 Doesnt reduce "lag" in any way. Its just a toolset with good graphical potential. All Lag issues are solved by writing good "rts-engine" for simulating the game + networking code. Thats why they said in the interviews about their deterministic engine they created for this game.

[@laurelkeeper]

Technically, yes (and by the way, I recognize your profile picture as the card art for Summoning Stone from Hearthstone) but I will say that UE5 improves overall performance, failure in which can cause lower-end machines to have lag-like problems.

[@colinmartin9797]

When my friend first told me "Ex blizzard developers. Making a new game. It's tech vs demons." Hellgate London alarms started screaming in my head.

[@ThanhLe-ti8nx]

This sound like Warhammer 40k to me when I heard it.

[@rightwingofthenuthouse3232]

Yeah, feels bad. But I guess retreading failed waters might prove a decent path.

[@nevermore7285]

I mean, Doom is also Tech vs Demons

[@colinmartin9797]

@@nevermore7285 but it wasn't made by ex blizzard devs. Hellgate London was ex d2 devs and supposed to be the "true" successor to Diablo 2.

[@droideka1890]

Their focus on competitive from day 1 raises a MASSIVE red flag for me, that’s what happened to Overwatch and Heroes of The Storm, they got hyper focused on making a brand new idea competitively viable, without remembering competitive scenes are made naturally, and then it turns into a one dimensional [blank]fest. What’s so bad about staying casual? Must everything be *perfectly* balanced? Sure I get nerfing the OP thing everybody and their mother is abusing, but at least make it more interesting for the rest. I’m cautious for now, wouldn’t be the first time ex-developers made their own company and failed to make a good first impression because either them or their followers had their expectations too high.

[@royaldarkness8453]

this remind me of this video for similar case here 'Hey, remember Phoenix Point?'

[@nlb137]

What Grant described seems like a much lower level than what Overwatch and HotS had; for those it was more like "this Will Be An ESport" and throwing a huge budget behind it before the game was even out. FG being open to other people hosting a major part of the 'scene' and not leading off with "XX million in prizes" shit sounds a lot more reasonable.

[@FrostGiantStudios]

We agree -- there's nothing wrong with staying casual! It's why we're so excited about our plans for ongoing story content and cooperative play modes. Competitive isn't for everyone, but for players who do enjoy it, we want to have a really satisfying ranked ladder experience from the get-go.

[@XSoulDivideX]

I'm of pretty much an exact opposite opinion, but from the sounds of things, its seems like they'll cater to both sides equally, which is actually quite refreshing!

[@Contentrist]

I personally prefer 10v10 strategy games where I, an introvert, can hide inside my team so to speak. 1v1s and even 3v3s can get really personal but a big player count such as a 10v10 with smaller unit numbers to control is perfect for me. This is a camfort I learned from Wargame: Red Dragon's 10v10 tactical games.

[@Maji777111]

can hide in 4v4 but not 3v3v true, also 8 player ffa is alot fun like in wc3.

[@planescaped]

I personally find watching team games a lot more interesting than 1 v 1's in Age of Empires 2. Never liked them much in Starcraft though... the graphical style/game just always made them hard to follow.

[@gorkemaykut5230]

StarCraft 2 is easy to distinguish between units but when you increase the number of players to 6 it became chaotic and hard to follow

[@pallingtontheshrike6374]

@@gorkemaykut5230 aoe2 has brighter light and more of the units covered in the color [and less flashy attacks n stuff] which makes units way easier to differentiate

[@DoABarrelRol1l]

Just remembering who's on who's team in the middle of a fight can be a struggle. I wish sc2had team colors like 'reds' vs 'blues' where members had different shades of a similar color so you can still see which player is controlling which units but at a distance the team breakup

[@a1zen2k34]

Deathballs on Starcraft are very common too , armies disappear way too fast to really enjoy anything

[@DoABarrelRol1l]

@@a1zen2k34 I kind of love how quick combat is! Other rts have a very guelling 1v1 where units plink attacks on a massive health bar but Starcraft was enjoyable because of how fast things get shredded. I guess RTS have all kinds choices to be made for developers- they got their work cut out for them.

[@HeavyMetalGamingHD]

This game needs a good and well thought out campaign. Imo many RTS games fail because they are only esports focused and ignore the casual mass of players. but the casual players keep you afloat. Blizzard's games were so succesful, because they had great campaigns (some of the best in the genre history) and great competitive multiplayer

[@mumblecake251]

I wouldn't see the "intended duration" of a competitive game to be 20min as a firm target but more as an indication of how fast the game flow is planned to be. E.g. The average StarCraft game (as a guess) will be between 10-15min (averaged over all skill levels) but it can be over in as little as 4-5min with an un-scouted cheese. AoE4 on the other hand you are more looking at 25min+ average game time and generally even with a successful cheese, players wouldn't normally tap out at the 5 min mark but more at the 10 min mark. The game flow between the two games is significantly different. When they say that they aim for 20min I think it says more about how quickly cheeses will kill rather than how long someone can stretch out the inevitable on the other end but that's just a personal opinion/guess.

[@laurelkeeper]

I definitely like the hour-long Bronze League Heroes games.

[@mumblecake251]

@@laurelkeeper hell yeah, I'm up for those :D

[@notinvispineapples5346]

This is actually really exciting! Normally im kind of bored and apprehensive whenever i hear about this kind of stuff, but this adresses and helps many ussues i have with rts. I hope it turns out how you describe.

[@DB-yj3ii]

This video is why you were invited. Youre an amazing asset to our scene! Loved the end.

[@bcrtrx]

i also found the cinematic sound design to be quite bland. hopefully the final product will be better. look forward to seeing gameplay

[@1r0zz]

My biggest problem with the cinematic is the design... It feels somewhat uninspired and too much "blizzard lite"

[@Eri4Jp]

@@1r0zz characters design is more riot games like which are investors

[@laurelkeeper]

Yeah, the guy doing audio found out at the last minute that they weren't able to license the music they wanted to use, and he had to score it on the fly and ran out of time.

[@1r0zz]

@@laurelkeeper That's slightly worrying...

[@laurelkeeper]

@@1r0zz Eh, it's early enough that they can hire another audio person now that they know that's a problem. There's a saying in programming - fail early and fail often - and I think it applies here.

[@riccardochecchinato4883]

One of the main fears that I have is the possible lack of diversity in the playable "races". One thing that, in my opinion, allways made Blizzard RTSs stand out was the possibility of playing many different races, with wildly different mechanics and feels to them, while still being balanced. I hope that along this Human Vs Demon we can also get some other interesting factions, ora at least significantly different subfactions (like the coop commaders) to have variety.

[@ObsonBowuzel]

AoM music that takes me right back to my childhood, love it! AoM and Starcraft 1 were basically my entry to gaming :')

[@KadeDev]

yea ok this game is cool and all, but I think the game is bad until I see gameplay of it. so many games this year have just shown promise and then as soon as gameplay is shown or whenever people get to play it, it falls apart. I really want to be excited for this game, but I just gotta get gameplay first.

[@friedegg646]

I must say i agree here

[@AAAAAA-jj4mr]

I am overall surprised how everyone is immediately expressing their opinions about a project we know close to nothing from the start. Gameplay reveal is supposed to be done at sunday so it would be wiser to wait till then before stating anything. Overall I am kinda surprised that they aplit it as cinematic obviously had to be rather mediocre, I don't get why they tried to hype up the way they did. I subscribed for beta and I am interested but there is nothing to really talk about so far.

[@planescaped]

_cough Babylons Fall Battlefield 2042 New World cough_

[@KadeDev]

@@AAAAAA-jj4mr idk why you would show a game to someone without showing them gameplay with it, it just feels like they're hiding something. ig we will see sunday then

[@nevermore7285]

@@KadeDev It’s a teaser.

[@DrawPG]

I like the concept of having rank games having 3v3. Solo play is still good but imagine 2 players going on the offence and one watches the flanks forming this trifecta of strategy filled with cheesing, skirmishes, and head on fights

[@MrFullCrumb01]

THAT is something I have been waiting for.

[@volodymyrboitchouk]

that is how 3v3 in aoe 2 works out. Its arguably the most popular multiplayer game mode

[@Willdroyd]

Im happy it will let you have massive scaled fights instead of 3 1v1 games

[@VernulaUtUmbra]

That was exactly how my brothers and I played it DoW 1; I (Chaos Space Marines) would poke and prod the opponent, and when we found a hole in their defenses my brother would drop Terminators in and I'd start summoning demons. All while the third brother was playing Imperial Guardsman with so many Earthshakers that the other people couldn't get close

[@cooltv2776]

im personally hoping this game doesnt focus heavily on intense micro. I love fast paced strategy games, but people generally take that to mean "200 apm micro" and not "something happened, you have half a second to make a decision about how to handle it" I like making long term plans on my eco, and positioning and movement of my military, and having to adjust those plans in the ever chaotic heat of battle, and the person who wins is the one who can make decisions faster and make better decisions, not the one who can micro their units better in the middle of a fight tho I also recognize im in the minority here. I think there are a lot of people like me who just believe the RTS genre isnt for them, and I dont know how to reach those people if they exist. I would hope theres some way to design a game for both pro and anti micro people, but I honestly dont believe its possible

[@Dj0enderman3000]

Well Starcraft is very middle way, if you try to focus hard on macro the average game could take hours or become easily too complicated with different informations. Like civ VI has so many mechanics to wrap your head around. Up to Diamond League it is almost pure macro and a tat of micro from there it starts to get more intense. Having good management and beeing great at high apm is rewarding in nearly every RTS, otherwise it would only be an S for strategy game

[@Laezar1]

Yes I agree with that, micro is just something I'm not interested in. I want my games to focus on the strategic and tactical aspects, the major deciding factors should be those decision points and not how fast and precisely I can click buttons. Having unit effectiveness vary drastically based on micro feels really bad to me cause I ended up feeling like my strategy doesn't matter.

[@Laezar1]

@MangoTaro well real time add some interesting tactical challenges that turn based doesn't. But I prefer slower paced games where small mistakes don't end up costing so much and where individual units control are less important than unit composition and placement. An exemple would be something like stellaris that is real time but micro isn't exactly a thing. Though the combat of stellaris is a bit boring and I'm not asking to make something as slow and long as stellaris obviously, just to give an exemple of real time not necessariily meaning high micro. but yes I also enjoy turn based games a lot. and I understand that people might want their micro focused game, I just feel like there kinda lacks things that are a bit in between.

[@DoABarrelRol1l]

I'll be honest I love holding down the 'Q' button on my 6 hotkeyed baracks and seeing that queue fill up. SC2 button-spamming production and eco management are so fun I usually just A-move in the direction of the enemy on the minimap and then eat popcorn as I watch them pewpew and yell 'For Aiur!'- micro and decision making is more of a hindrance to me. Either way; it's a free game so I'll definitely give it a shot especially since it just so happens 3v3 and co-op are my favorite ways to play Starcraft. Pretty excieted

[@gergobanfalvi2263]

I love RTS games, but the intense micro will keep me away from multiplayer games. And turned based games are just too slow for multiplayer. One example for low micro RTS is Northgard. I really like that game in that regard, you don't need to remember tons of hotkeys, or 200 apm micro in a battle. Sadly even in Northgard I can't play multiplayer, because while it has multiple win conditions, the winner is always the one who rushes the enemy as soon as it can.. But that is another story.

[@sotmMrPants]

I wrote this comment without watching this particular video all the way through but I remember watching your previous RTS analysis videos and you bring me great comfort that you're helping us to stay connected with my childhood company and developers at Blizzard. I've been with them since the 90s, not as much right now but this video is great news for me to see their former developers continue.

[@korakys]

I'm happy to hear about lowering the skill floor. I played a few hundred 1v1 SC2 matches but eventually gave up because it was too frustrating to keep track of both macro and micro. It feels like the game just isn't made for those that can't muster at least 100APM (I top out at about half that).

[@JJJBunney001]

I definitely think you've missed a bit of RTS history here, there's heaps of games that have a lot of focus on team games. Aoe 2 and 4 have tournaments all the time with massive prize pools that cater to team and solo games. These guys aren't doing anything revolutionary I think you've just been stuck in the Starcraft scene for a while haha. And the multiple media projects could be good, there's been plenty of games that have had companion media like movies, books, comics etc. Some are lacking but a lot, like the mass effect stuff, are pretty good

[@commanderwookiecopc806]

Giant Grant is really in the Blizzard scene and kinda in the AOE scene. Rarely seen him talk about CnC or any Relic RTS games

[@kabob0077]

@@commanderwookiecopc806 He also doesn't talk about Homeworld... Wait, that and Dawn of War both count as Relic, nevermind.

[@silentdmg6281]

No I think Grant was pretty accurate here as he was talking about RTS's in general and most new games do focus solely on 1v1 though there is exceptions here like AoE 4, you can't really count AoE 2 as it is a very old game with a tournaments already been made popular by the community and not by the developers. All I'm saying is while there is exceptions his point that most newer RTS put way to much priority on 1v1 including AoE 4 still stands perfectly valid.

[@GiantGrantGames]

I agree that the focus on team games has existed in other RTS, but its very new for a group who is going in very explicitly saying they're interested in designing a "Blizzard-Like" rts. I am a huge fan of games like Age of Empires and Company of Heroes which I basically only play in a team setting, and I am super excited to see that be adopted here!

[@commanderwookiecopc806]

@@GiantGrantGames True, but you should try to get into command and conquer. The CnC games actually avoids the death airball for the most part by making aircraft have less health, faster, and sometimes even have to go back for ammunition. I much prefer it too blizzard RTS games where air units just feel like ground units that float over terrain.

[@RancorSnp]

THE thing I care about the most about the user generated content is that the editor is ACCESSIBLE. I do not understand how is it possible that 30 years ago, when I was a child growing up all map editors were so easy to use that a literal child could spend more time creating than Actually playing the game. And then StarCraft 2 came out, they were like "This is the most powerful user generated content tool ever made" - and all those years down the line I STILL DO NOT KNOW HOW TO MAKE A CUSTOM UNIT WITH AN ATTACK. And I'm a game developer. So yeah let's go back to having editors that let you actually do simple things easily. And reserve the rocket science to when you want it to send a rocket to the orbit shall we? Another thing I really, really, really want - is achievements in the campaign and a return to player profiles being a summary of how awesome you are

[@momom6197]

Haha, I remember with my brothers creating a custom map in SC1 where we each started with hero versions of our favorite units. 😁 It was as balanced as an elephant on a bicycle, but we were so bad it didn't matter, and we just had a lot of fun! Never did that kind of things with SC2. On the other hands, the depth of the games that are released on the SC2 arcade blows my mind!

[@TourFaint]

i think that's more of a You problem than a problem with the editor, tbh.

[@nevermore7285]

Hate the StarCraft 2 editor. Definitely could have benefited from having a simpler version

[@Dakilaaa.]

This type of content is gold, in my opinion. Great work Grant!

[@RoyalFusilier]

I'm seeing a lot of incredibly encouraging things coming out of this, and very much looking forward to how it goes. The idea of turning RTS back into a social experience, well it's one of the cores of your channel. You do, at least for uploads here, basically exclusively 'single player content' in a social way. Interacting with the people who make the content, your partners and their channels and audiences, and of course your own audience. The alienation and isolation of 1v1 ladder is probably the most repellent thing to me in RTS, the fact that the sum total of your interaction with other players during a session is, if you're nice, typing glhf and then GG, and if you're not nice, going on Artosis rants in general chat about how the opponent is not following the rules. Then again, I prefer PVE to PVP generally, and from that perspective there is a lot to like from what we're seeing so far. Here's hoping.

[@prw56]

From what you've said, here and in another video, I get the impression that they know enough to understand the problems that need to be tackled, but I'm not going to be hopeful about this until I see an alpha. There's so many ways to fail, even in great conditions, and between that art style and them touting free to play, I'm concerned about their potential monetization strategies...

[@moth7579]

Well, he said what only first campaign would be free. So assume to get some halo infinity type of monetization. Campaign for money and battle pass for niche nice things.

[@thorveim1174]

The fact their focus is NOT on PvP tells me they are going at it the right way at least.

[@GoldenArbiter01]

On the 5 seconds of cutscene we got, I'm gonna say it gives me big 'Hellgate: London' vibes. And I'm okay with that. That being said, Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment. I will not hope for this, but I *will* forget about it for now. If all goes well, I'll be pleasantly surprised next year with a good product. Otherwise, well... Didn't put too much stock into it in the first place.

[@stephencraig3176]

This is a great video and im very happy it was made as i hadn't heard about the new information from frost giant. Many of the thoughts are well put together and interesting to listen to. I also find it amusing at 16:45 he is taking about zone control and losing a whole army to artillery units.... but shows a toss army a-move stomping straight through a lurker position

[@icelandicfartpolice1206]

Haha alright, nice cut at the end there. This and your AOM retrospective video earned yourself a new sub today good sir.

[@tbird81]

Really good and honest analysis. Thanks.

[@JWQweqOPDH]

I really like the general game plan. Fix what's wrong with RTS and add new content later.

[@acolyte63]

Thanks for the update, keep me posted. Cheers.

[@Jaesnek]

I am deeply excited for Stormgate, and it looks like Frost Giant did take into account your survey you did. Which is really really neat.

[@f4lvso4kg]

Hey Grant, how much do you know about the Age of Empires 2 scene? I think it provides some really interesting insights into how team games can be a part of a ranked play ecosystem. Basically all of the top AoE2 players participate in team game tournaments ranging from 2v2 to 4v4, and they're often some of the most interesting tournaments. AoE2 also has some really interesting dynamics where there are lots of goofy or experimental tournaments that use unconventional maps which sometimes end up changing the game meta for more standard maps or more often influence the future ranked map pool. After years of SC1 and SC2, I've gone back to AoE2 as my main RTS because the team games are so much fun and provide a more social and less stressful ranked environment than 1v1. Admittedly AoE2 is different from either Starcraft, and seemly different from Stormgate, in that the civilizations (factions) are more similar than different and there's a much larger pool of them, but I think examining the AoE2 scene could provide a lot of supporting evidence for the way you view team games and user generated content in RTS. Thanks for your work keeping the genre alive!

[@Karaksonen]

I believe one of the biggest issues with modern RTS is the fact that they are competitive/esports first, fun later

[@ducparker662]

congratulations on 100k sub man

[@Martin-mo1xv]

I felt the same about the cinematic's sound design. Nice video, nice ending.

[@Cryten0]

Im only really interested in story and crafted AI opponent experiences. Competitive taught me I get super stressed trying to keep up. I dont want that. As for the game, I think its foolish to assume this will be a starcraft level game even with the talent. Most things that get that big including starcraft 1, league and among us where designed for just a few hundred thousand (or in among us only thousands). And that focus on a core audience experience and core gameplay being polished is what elevated them.

[@thorveim1174]

note how PvP isnt the fous of that one.. which makes me hopeful that they are looking at the RTS genre the right way; think about it, all the biggest RTS games of the past (I put MOBAS in another category) werent made with competitive PVP in mind, but had very strong campaigns. The PVP community formed after from people that wanted more after having completely mastered single player. The failing of RTS games these day is that they chase the competitive scene first, not the casual/solo player.

[@Cryten0]

@@thorveim1174 I would note that pvp was a focus of their original pitch and a pillar on their presentation. But I certainly hope so if they can focus in on good gameplay.

[@thorveim1174]

@@Cryten0 weird... The first source I had about this game existing didnt mention the PvP much if at all compared to the solo and coop

[@Cryten0]

@@thorveim1174 well perhaps it was just the news site and not their stuff that put it first.

[@firockfinion3326]

Water doesn't have terrain? Only if you're not thinking creatively. There could be whirlpools, shallows, reefs, and areas with a current.

[@myriad9597]

Is there any rts that implements anything like this?

[@firockfinion3326]

@@myriad9597 I don't know, but there should be.

[@ZX-Gear]

Yeah. There is so much you can do with water.

[@rickhagaman7916]

hey grant, just recently found you thanks to the hype around StormGate and the Developers actually doing everything right to create something that I hope takes the World by Storom, pun intended. anyways I know big things are in store for you as well ^.^ thanks for Loving RTS and the Community as much as you do! Keep up the great work sir.

[@bobsizzlack008]

Hadn't heard of this title before, because I don't follow gaming news, so big thanks for highlighting this. I think you're right though, too early for hype train, but has loads of potential. Definitely glad to hear 3v3 is a focus, gonna try and wrestle 2 of my other SC2 friends into considering this!

[@thorveim1174]

I like that their approach is campaign/coop first, which is a good thing, because when you think of it, starcraft one and warcraft became pvp games, but they werent built as pvp games; give me hope this may be a good game as a result and not something that ends up rather bland. And i agree with the high tech humans vs demon angles being interesting: makes for an interesting faction matchup (an we have yet to see the third playable race), and reminds me a bit of rise of Legends as far as being an unusual mix (that one was steampunk industry with a touch of Da Vinci's inventions vs 1001 nights arabian magic users vs alien tech in stone constructs with an mayincatec design) as a sidenote.. man that mech design is just Dva's mech with a starcraft marine texture on the canopy. Its TOO blizzardy for peeops that should distinguish themselves from blizzard

[@emilchan5379]

Funnily enough, the post-apocalypse demons vs hi-tech humans setting has been done before in Hellgate: London, which was also made by ex-Blizzard employees. Let's hope this is way more successful than that. But yes the races in Rise of Legends was a such a refreshing twist in the fantasy setting. Instead of the usual humans vs elves vs orcs, we got clockwork spider tanks vs genies vs stone jaguar robots.

[@FenixFireborn]

1. Good that you recognized that there is problem with plot of "good guy and friends" vs "bad guy and his henchmen". I still remember SC1 days where all factions had their own agenda and nobody was obviously good. 2. If you think water terrain is bland then check Supreme Commander 1 and Heroes of Might and Magic series. 3. On the topic of Supreme Commander - it would be nice if there was building synergy, like in that game. In Supreme Commander, building energy generators next to factories would lower energy cost of units in said factory.

[@Sorain1]

3 also caused a fun tactical choice: Will you risk a crippling strike by your enemy by clustering it, or will you give up that efficiency? (Honestly I think it's a matter of how well do you keep your enemy from scouting that weak point, but that's me.)

[@ChaosXeronix]

Your Point about sound is absolutly important! And please do awesome Unit reactions. I know most non RTS Gamers do not understand that but it is so important to give a Unit a personality and to have good voice Actors creating unique Units. I play RTS since 20 years now starting witht he age of 7! And I really did not understand the written words. I just played and had fun with voice Actors. Now about 20 Years later I still hear their voices and have my favorit Units from all over the different strategy games like: WC3, SC, SC2, Age of Mythology, Command and Conquer, Empire Earth... Also I do like the 3-4 Race System SC2 or WC3 had. But do not forget the Hybrid factions. Terra + Zerg combinations are awesome. Bloodelves are (underpowerd) awesome. If you implement co-op as core feature there can be great combinations of the unqie faction units and maybe also something that fits so well togeather that it could be a combined use of both Art- & Playstyles. this can also combine a offensive and supportive faction with a fitting hole of a massiv tank for example. thanks for your insight.

[@trykan3190]

Congrats on 100k subs! Thought you were always there though tbh

[@sk00b72]

When you said Stormgate and with demons and Sci Fi another game jumped into my mind and that is Hellgate. It was a very cool game, but I did not managed to grasp all the lore. I hope the game turns out good, but for now we must wait and see because, to be honest, a lot of new games turn out bad or even awful (Diablo Immoral) so I really hope this works, but as I said. We must wait and see what happens.

[@mykin3945]

I'll be honest, when I first saw the trailer I thought this game was an Overwatch/Firefall clone and tuned out before it finished. Even after remembering who Frost Giant was and rewatching the trailer, I don't see anything that screams "This is an RTS game" to me. This video is the only reason I'm putting this game on my radar and that's not a good sign for their marketing team. Here's hoping future trailers do a better job than their first trailer did. That said, I am excited for 3 player coop. Looking forward to seeing what they do on that front. Still a bit worried about the free to play model (past RTS games that started out as free to play never seemed to get off the ground), but if they do it like Starcraft 2, then I can see it working. Just hope they don't fall prey to the "Here's your overpowered faction/unit for $99.99" down the line.

[@Robertata1]

The cinematic scene reminds me a lot Diablo and Starcraft, and I don't know if that's something good or not. I mean, a part of me want it to be the next step for a game that I love so much like Starcraft, and at the same time I don't want to play a copy of Starcraft, because I like not only the gameplay, but the lore and experience (ambience, music, etc). In a way, it's like the situation with Warcraft, when people say that Warcraft is medieval Starcraft, or that this one is space Warcraft. And also, as a creator, is difficult to detach yourself from your previous creations. However, I hope the best for this game and for the RTS. Great vid! (sorry if my english is not the best)

[@CivilChev]

That cut off was amazing!

[@spacebumpkin1565]

It’s sounding too good to be true. I’m really excited to see more

[@nemtudom5074]

Based on this video, i've deduced that fros giant's goal is to change the world. Very promising goal, but realistically speaking, the amount of things you listed would be too much even for blizzard during its peak years, let alone now, or an indie studio with way less resources still. I'd love for all this to come true but something has to give, this is just too high of a bar

[@muhammadhashirrehman6207]

I'm really excited about the game, but am more excited for the 100k SUBS!!! Congrats a LOT GRANT 🎊🎊🎊

[@user-rb9xg7zl7c]

Congrats on 100k subs!

[@leadpaintchips9461]

I'm going to be a bit leery about this, since the last studio that I've heard of that had a bunch of former Blizzard peeps and a famous author that tried to make it big was Red 5 Studios, and we all should know how Firefall went. Was burned on that, and will keep it like how I do most games nowadays. Wait for it to release, see how well it does, and if it's decent buy it on sale.

[@Jay-js4gb]

I really liked the ending of th-

[@KaiserMattTygore927]

The Protis sniper has returne-

[@KonfluxGames]

Nice ending heh. And a good summary, thanks Grant

[@Benjackalope]

This is definitely the best review I’ve seen so far. The others always felt like an hour long video hyping on storm gate without actually talking about storm gate.

[@steffennilsen2132]

I hadnt followed this game so it was a surprise to me when I saw the trailer yesterday, and honestly as all I had to judge it by was the trailer it immediately struck me as a run of the mill action game, and a poor one at that once the action started. Still given the pedigree of the people behind it I can only wish they succeed.

[@dahkla9602]

All of it just sounds too good to be true, so many AAA companies that have rotted and become greedy husks of themselves has made me so jaded. But this could be the Starcraft 3 I always prayed would come someday, especially if so much of its talent have gone on to Frost Giant. I have high hopes, but Im waiting to see more of the actual game before I start telling anyone and everyone about it.

[@ShadowMk3]

Thanks for your thoughts! I am so looking forward to this, although... Coop stuff I don't have people to play with much

[@elliejohnson2786]

It's rare to see a game mention all the good points, and when they do, they rarely hit them on launch. I'm cautiously excited for the release and hope it's everything both they desire and we want. Also, congrats on 100k subs!

[@bobbyferg9173]

I definitely am excited to see what this game will be like and what we hear sounds solid. BUT as someone who also is a Fallout fan the story of Obsidian with Outerworlds sounds similar: Outerworlds was supposed to be a shooter RPG that would have been the “right way” to make a new Fallout game made by devs who worked on the beloved New Vegas and 2D Fallout games. Bethesda, on the other hand, dropped the ball with the disastrous Fallout 76 release. Outerworlds seemed like it would have been a proper return to form with a new but great experience. Unfortunately though this wasn’t the case and for all that seemed to be going for Obsidian and Outerworlds, many consider it disappointing. So while I hope that this game can be a new RTS that captures that original Blizzard game feel in the face of actual Blizzard ignoring RTS, I also acknowledge that this can fail and we shouldn’t get our hopes up too much, because for all that’s going for it, it isn’t fail proof.

[@ofgreyhairwaifu4089]

While I somewhat agree, the problem OW had was false hype, mostly. It had barely any1 of importance from F:NV working on it. This, on the other hand, looks like something that cherrypicked important people. At least I hope it did. Those alpha designs and the "trailer" look incredibly bland...

[@jimofthenorth8090]

As good as it all sounds, I see free-to-play and red flags fly. Especially when you see "blizzard" and FtP in the same sentence right now :s they need to be very clear what their FtP model is going to be otherwise I think that many people will already be writing this game off.

[@reddragon4482]

I agree, seeing them going to be free to play and it's not even out the door yet has put me right off it already. It's not like it was years old like SC2 and they wanted to bring njw players. The monetization on this game will likely be cancer. We will all see though, i'll let it come out before I judge though. I just have a severe disgust reaction anytime I hear "Free to play". Nothing is free in this world... there is always a price to be paid somewhere.

[@Suprasec]

Really hope this vid reaches the devs and they can get a look into all you say to tick off some boxes, the community is there to be listened to, and this guys have shown that they can do great stuff, going on their own and not being part of Blizz hopefully makes some magic happen, been a real while since I've played any RTS and something like old-era Blizz would get my interest for sure.

[@ChaosXeronix]

"I am exited" "Need a Medic" "Rolling out" Nice cut in the end!

[@kabob0077]

2:42 Yeah, that's not good... Not terrible but it definitely isn't good. There should be something more akin to a walking car hitting bone or something, metal bending and shaking as the mech takes a hit, the machinegun should be louder and have more beef to it (it sounds more like something you'd hear in a Unity Asset Flip or old Bargain Bin game, I swear I've even heard it before). The fact that it's almost silent makes this feel... Unfinished. Say what you will about some of the more popular RTS games out there right now but most at least get sound design right. Like CoH2's Sturmtiger, CoH3's Nebelwerfers (Which sound Realistic in the BEST way), Command and Conquer 3's Railguns, the Obelisk of Light in general, the sounds of pretty much everything in Halo Wars from the Marines all the way to the Vultures and Scarab, Dawn of War and stuff like the Space Marine weapons and Imperial Guard gear (I mean just listen to the Basilisk firing). Sound Design is important to a good gameplay experience in my book. Edit: Okay, upon reflection I was far too easy on this. The sound design is AWFUL in this. Either the sounds DON'T fit or are FAR too quiet for the actions happening. I'm keeping the rest of my original comment up but my opinion has changed on this trailer in the span between first posting and now. I hope they get good people onto their sound design team, because otherwise I fear for the gameplay experience.

[@KaiserMattTygore927]

I already don't care for the sound design in SC2, this trailer worries me that they'll have even worse more bland sound design

[@zerglinglover2303]

I disagree, it's horrendous. The demon crashed into the mech, and there was literally no sound, and the gunshots sound like those popping things you find on Firework Day. Edit: yes, I forgot the name of independence day.

[@kabob0077]

@@zerglinglover2303 The Demon and Mech should have sounded more like some of the sounds from this kzbin.info/www/bejne/ioanfaCBmpiYbq8 , this kzbin.info/www/bejne/eqqaq5eebrGFY7c , or this kzbin.info/www/bejne/aauuemaGh56KY80 I'm gonna have to amend my commet after some thought because yeah, I was being a bit too optimistic on this.

[@zerglinglover2303]

@@kabob0077 yeah, I was shocked when I read "it's not bad" like Jesus Christ I would've been more satisfied if it just stopped at the pause before the fight.

[@kabob0077]

@@zerglinglover2303 I honestly paused at that exact time stamp and started writing that comment. I'll get to amending it tomorrow though,

[@ozthebeeman]

6:13 actually I think both wc3 and sc2 had multiple gray area characters. In sc2 Jim is a criminal, he steals and he doesn't hesitate to kill. Same with kerrgian she isn't pure good, all of HOTS is her revenge plan that leaves thousands of good soldiers to die. And do I even need to talk about wc3 it has multiple characters with great character like illidan who believes the end always justifies the means. grommash is fueled by bloodlust and tyrande is a racist etc....

[@Spys_Scion]

Man I think these videos are great. Hopefully the game will release soon and modders will easily be able to make their own campaigns. That would provide a ton of content for you.

[@danhk96]

The natural barrier system you're talking about was in Starcraft 2 as well, at least at the start of WoL when everybody was playing it. 4v4 was very popular, it's after a lot of 4v4 that I finally got into 1v1.

[@Salted_Fysh]

Okay, I have to admit after seeing this, I'm worried. Those screen shots don't look like an RTS. The zoom is too close, the units are too big, the terrain too... Full. If your base units are already intended to come in low number, that can create a huge problem in game progression and resource balancing. It's also bad for pathing. And then it also doesn't bode well for user jeneraided content because modders that go multiplayer tend to focus on higher player numbers and high unit count maps are also very popular - which could potentially cause problems in a system not designed to handle many units. I feel I have to add that that gameplay screenshot looks kind of ugly. It definitely feels more mobile game with too many colours and less serious RTS with a story I'm supposed to care about. Lastly, this may seem very petty, but the same guess for the title. What's with the stupid stylized O? The things I immediately think of are heroes of the storm and hearthstone because guess what: it's the exact same visual design. Just... Don't. More Diablo II, Warcraft 3 or StarCraft 2 design, less trading card 'hey look at me, I'm desperate' please. Then again, it's probably already too late to change it. Regarding the pricing: I'm also worried here. Trying to finish a major RTS game on 35m $, and then not recouping any cost on release... Let's just say there's a high likelihood of a rushed release and months of patching to catch up - all of which won't encourage players to spend on the micro-transactions that are necessary to keep the studio afloat until new story content is released. But perhaps I'm too pessimistic.

[@TourFaint]

Warcraft 3 had a small amount of units that took a lot of punishment (when comparing to other games in the genre) instead of a huge amount of small units and that wasn't a problem.

[@Salted_Fysh]

@@TourFaint that worked due to the hero system where units are meant to supplement one central unit that grows over the course of the game. A lower unit amount meant the freedom to focus more on managing your hero and their skills. This also allowed for a basic unit imbalance. They didn't have to stand on equal footing because they were not meant to fight face to face by themselves. That means that resource investment is mainly focused on the hero - from buying consumables to unit choice and composition. That usually meant that a 1v1 game had a steady progression of: Early Game: Rushing out your hero and a few units to help creeping. Building up your tech tree while working your hero towards levels 3-4 and gathering necessary items while securing an expansion. Mid Game: Getting the second hero to make up for weaknesses of the first. Small probing skirmishes with the enemy player. Late game: Putting together your final army. If you clash with the enemy and your hero dies the game is basically over. Whole game cycle usually takes between 20-30 minutes. Unless they intend to implement a similar system in this game (can be hard in an inherently imbalanced environment of fantasy vs sci-fi) this translates far more poorly. Each unit lost is a huge investment in resources suddenly gone. It's harder to recover from that without something like a hero to act as a stalling factor while you rebuild.

[@nevermore7285]

It’s sounds like it will have a commander/hero system, so it might draw a bit from Warcraft 3. Or they just zoomed in for the screen shots, which is also very common.

[@Salted_Fysh]

@@nevermore7285 well, like I said, maybe I'm being too pessimistic. It's how I do. And I was probably immediately wary due to that title. It just looks very... mobile game and then the art style didn't make it much better.

[@reddragon4482]

It looks like a glorified "free to play" phone game lol.

[@cinema_roll6296]

This is the first i've heard of this game and now i'm pretty excited for it. I disagree with you a bit on the art style. The simple and colorful art style is easy on the eyes in my opinion. I don't like how similar the character designs seem to Blizzard

[@thorveim1174]

think it comes from the fact that, well.. this is ex blizzard creators here, of course similarities will pop up. Also a simple and colorful artstyle could be grating for an FPS, but for an RTS? Its perfect. ensure batles are easily readable at a glance and that even in large battles the game runs smoothly.

[@sokorelcoz3418]

Congrats on 100K Grant

[@kiyan2622]

Congrats dude you are almost at 100k subs!

[@kiyan2622]

99.9k right now.

[@Piromysl359]

StarCraft 1 deathless run for 100k subs?

[@dirge7459]

Seeing their Steam page for their new RTS game doesn't fill me with hope when I saw the tags: F2P, Esports, PVP" Honestly just feels like they've wasted a few yrs setting up yet another studio that's going to go completely ham on F2P micro transactions and PVP/Esports. Even when you made your "why the enxt RTS will fail", it's like devs decided to ignore what you stated and go against it instead out of spite or something. RTS really doesn't need a new game putting big focus on F2P/PVP/Esports. We need a brand new memorable game that isn't always online, has a price point and a campaign that's going to be remembered fondly for yrs like C&C/Starcraft/Warcraft's are remembered for. They can be "legit" all they want, but going F2P and making yet another esports focused RTS just screams failure and refusal to learn, imo. We know they have 4 pillars for this game, but in all honesty, PVP takes more resources over time from the other pillars due to balance changes, the esports focus, the promos to show off, focus on getting pro players in the big league seats/shows, all of which could instead be funnelled into more co-op and PVE content like a campaign expansion or sequel. I just don't ever want us to go back to the days where PVP takes priority in RTS games, because as someone that grew up with the genre as my core favourite 9still is to this day), I do not play PVP within the genre anymore, nor do I want to see it encompass new RTS games, because that then pushes me out of my favourite and already dwindling genre. As a side note, battle passes, skins and tid bit content being sold at a pop really puts me off wanting to play just about any game these days. I want to buy the game once and own the content that comes with it, not play a game and buy thousands of pounds worth of content, because they wanted to nickel/dime me. F2P really isn't the end all to be all model for everyone.

[@user-lt4ih7ip4x]

Well SC2 was pretty heavily focused on Esports and it didn't make it a terrible game in any way. And these are THE GUYS who made SC2, so it's not totaly ureasonable to think that they might know what they are doing. As said in the video they are going to focus story, coop and give a lot of tools to the mod makers, so I don't understand why you think they have ignored everything in the GGG's video about rts games. They told it was their focus from the start, even before GGG made his video. Free to play part bothers me a little, if you remember GGG's video, he told about a pretty good increase in playerbase of sc2 by making it f2p. Developers have seen those stats, so they know how much more players they can bring in to the game by making it f2p The tough part will be for them to keep on their promises tho...

[@dirge7459]

@@user-lt4ih7ip4x Everyone thought CDPR could do no wrong either, but then we got Cyberpunk... I love me some well known devs myself, but I know they are human, they are fully capable of releasing a bad game or making the wrong decisions. I've gone through years of let downs with RTS, so I'm not exactly as heavily optimistic as you and GGG appear to be. I also don't want to be that guy that gets told I'm being unreasonable, then what was said prior comes true and me calling it and everyone who said I was unreasonable just shrugging their should and trying to walk off blame free (because I see that ever so often in the games industry). if I'm wrong, cool, we all win and get a good game, but if I'm right, I'm expecting no walk aways from the overly optimistic folk.

[@user-lt4ih7ip4x]

@@dirge7459 Lol, we are sure gonna have to stand trial for our sins against your opinion XD It won't surprise me if game is going to fail cause of many many reasons. It's just that it's not fair to compare this team to every other rts developers that failed cause everything they've said so far is the right approach to the game if you want it to be not just good, but great For now we are going to wait for the gameplay to see if they are not going in gameplay direction of Dawn of War 3 or something like that

[@dirge7459]

@@user-lt4ih7ip4x lol I'm not asking for trials, I'm basically wanting folks who are overly optimistic to be a bit more realistic and if what was called comes to pass, that they admit they were wrong, but since it's the net, most ppl don't like admitting fault. I don't recall bringing up failed RTS dev studios tbh, but I don't see why you cannot recall history to others, so that they do not doom themselves to repeat the same mistakes. Did you love DoW 3?, because from a good chunk of the RTS/ DoW fans, 3 wasn't that great compared to 1 and 2 tried to switch to tactics, which again split the community.

[@user-lt4ih7ip4x]

​@@dirge7459 I have brought DoW 3 cause it was a failure and not an as example of a good game, in case that wasn't clear I tend to agree with you about not being overly optimistic, but that's a very safe position if you want to be mostly always right. That's just the state of the game industry these days. But I don't see anything wrong about being sometimes optimistic about games that sound like something very good in theory. Not hype, just optimistic

[@abyssalzei552]

The Age of Mythology sound track playing in the background made me feel nostalgic for RTS games

[@sheen4813]

this sounds like it has some real potential. I'm hooked.

[@checkandmate4703]

Something is not right over here… I don’t want to be the one who judges the book by its cover, but I find the cinematic more important than promises they made. I cannot see a game take itself seriously when a human that being tossed with such speed and crushes with its spine into stones, standing up like it was nothing. One of the more important aspects of a game's story in my opinion is its atmosphere and specifically established bounds of the character’s abilities. If the main characters in the game can take hits like superheroes, you can’t be worried about them. Suddenly, a story about war and people dying becomes into a cool adventure of quirky characters. Older games presented such subjects way more serious and grim, thus making us respect the setting and believe in the story they prepared for us. This cinematic on the other hand, makes it seem like they want to make the game appeal to a wider spread of people, make the game family friendly. Combine this to the fact how little they talked about the races, lore and story makes me feel like they are not making a game because of a story they want to tell and the world to create, but instead just make a good rts with some campaign that teaches how to play. And without a good campaign, the identity of the game might be blurred and uninteresting. I hope I am wrong and they actually came up with very good lore and story.

[@michaelbecker621]

Let's hope this game's release doesn't turn into a crowbcat video

[@starbreeze2057]

1:49 "And for some reason me" Holy s*** Grant you're making it big time. You're very good at what you do, that's why you were included. Very happy for you, keep it up!

[@starbreeze2057]

Wow @GiantGrantGames you've made it so big there are now spam/scam channels mimicking you 🤣

[@chrispowell2480]

I saw an interview with Winter yesterday, and my immediate thought was that they had STUDIED your "The Next Great RTS Will Fail" video. Every point you made seemed to be addressed.

[@HoltzWorks]

Yeah, can't say I'm too hopeful about this one. Particularly the setting. The art style looks like Diablo 3 vs. Overwatch and I'm just not there for it. Bring the saturation on the environment down like 20% and load up on the colorful trim on the units, and then we're talking. Or at the very least give us a graphical option that puts bright outlines around units. Because I'm getting the feeling this game is going to be very visually busy, possibly to the point of being hard to read. If you've seen Generals: Evolution, you'll see what I'm talking about. They've improved it a bit, but when there's a big fight in the middle of the map you can see jack through all the explosions and contrails.

[@planescaped]

I'm just a cynic towards the games industry in general these days...

[@laurelkeeper]

This is over a year before the BETA. They’re very clear that they want to make the game enjoyable and clear to read for everyone, and address community concerns. It is far to early to make judgement on that.

[@reddragon4482]

Most of the pictures shown said "pre-alpha" so I assume they will fix them up but I agree with you. The art and animation makes it look like a phone game. I'd prefer dark and gritty over that bright crap any day. Hopefully enough people agree with us so that they will change the art style before launch. Every game looks the same these days. They tried to do it with that newest halo game too and made it cartoony and garbage looking. I honestly think it''s just artists being lazy, same with the sound design on this. It all looks phoned in no pun intended xD

[@AlephTTM]

I'm seriously underwhelmed by this. From both the trailer and all the screenshots the game feels like MOBA, not an RTS. And let's not forget that having a roadmap with "years of story content planned" is a BAD thing. It means they plan to start selling the game first, and then MAYBE finish it later, if the sales are good enough. And if they aren't, we'll end up either with an un-finished game or non-cosmetic cash shop.

[@gorkemaykut5230]

Planned story content was a thing regardless of the genre Movies, books, tv series, games etc they don't release everything at once. Every story should be able to stand on it's own but planning a sequel for it is nothing new

[@MegaDrunkViking]

Except they aren't selling it, the initial release is free? As Grant said.

[@RancorSnp]

StarCraft 2 was also a years of story "planned" type of scenario if I may remind you. Unlike SC1 and Warcraft 3 which I think we can agree feel like they were supposed to be standalone and then got an expansion. Starcraft 2 has released with one campaign and two more campaigns coming as paid content, then they added Nova's campaign which it is a crime they didn't do any more paid campaigns after it. Probably because Activision doesn't know how to find their own ass. Look how many years we had skins in the game before they FINALLY decided to "grace us" by letting us actually buy new skins. I think it was 7

[@gorkemaykut5230]

@@RancorSnp even if you quadruple the sales of skins in SC2 it would be a drop off water compared to their other titles and why spent so much time ona project when you can do much more with others

[@Maurodax]

"I'm going to..." Well played Grant, well played! All in all, it sounds pretty good, and as you said, visual and audio sounds is a huge deal. That counts for good, memorable one-liners as well, atleast for me. "For the last time, I'm a dreadlord, not a druglord!"

[@tracer8943]

for the user generated content is enough to grasp my attention i used to make alot of story maps in the world editor as a kid till now but i couldnt get into SC2's map editor of how complex it is im very excited to try this game out but your right thou judging from what you say we might wanna not set the expectations to high about this game but i have good faith in frost giants new RTS.

[@Kingofredeyes]

Good pathfinding isn't the issue with deathballs, hell look at CoH and CoH2, their pathfinding in those games is garbage and yet deathblobs are still a thing. If they want to limit deathblobs than they need to limit the amount of units people can select. I've often felt what RTS need to do is make unit selection it's own tech tree. Imagine starting out a game only able to select say 12 units and then as you upgrade your communications tech you are able to control more units, increasing the coordination of your army, but always keep a hard cap, say around 24-30ish units, with higher teir units requiring more slots, so you don't get like 8 carriers 12 void 6 temps and a warp prism. Forcing players to actually build up the amount of units they control at a time by turning it into an actual game mechanic to further represent the fog of war would be a much better way of limiting deathblobs IMO than trying to find the AoE balance.

[@marley7868]

or just have aoe's

[@cooltv2776]

this is actually a very interesting idea, and I really want to see it tried somewhere now. I can only hope its a *good* idea, but its definitely *interesting*

[@Kingofredeyes]

@@marley7868 SC2 has tons of AoE, siege tanks, psistorm, lurkers, fungle growth, disruptors, etc etc...it also has tons of deathblobbing issues. AoE's on their own have proven time and again that they don't solve the deathblob issue. When you can easily control your big blob it makes it easy to manuver the big blob around and away from the AoEs. When your control is limited, however, that is a lot harder to do and even weaker AoE's become far more punishing because they have time to do their damage due to limiting how quickly you can react.

[@Creabsley]

That’s all negated by control groups. Are you going to restrict those too?

[@Kingofredeyes]

@@Creabsley Except it isn't. in OG Starcraft, and Brood War, you had control groups, but the hard 12 limit still prevented blobbing and required more individual control. When you have to select through multiple groups, make sure you have the correct one being attacked, in order to move it control groups won't function near as well. It would actually be quickly to perform a drag select to pull the group out most of the time, especially if the AoE hits a mix of more than just one group. When you limit a players ability to control massive blobs, and there by make it easier to punish them, suddenly players are forced to spread out their forces and attack from multiple angles just to avoid AoEs.

[@aveomnissiah2896]

I seen the trailer in summer fest... I mean it confusing as hell. I fear this game not going to be good as it should be. But I still pray that I'm death wrong.

[@dirge7459]

It's being created in UE5, yet the screenshots on Steam show it looking cartoony/colourful as hell, and it's going to be F2P from the start, as well as PVP/Esports focused (going by the Steam tags) =/ Can't say I'm hyped tbh, because I thought these guys would have learned this lesson by now, that the RTS genre doesn't need another F2P micro transaction laden game, let alone one with an esports/PVP focus, those days are done and dusted for the genre.

[@planescaped]

@@dirge7459 Took the words right out of my mouth

[@laurelkeeper]

@@dirge7459 You do understand, though, that the competitive PVP games that exist in the modern day DO NOT HAVE a decently sized community unless there is no monetary barrier to entry? And that there is literally no way to make it pay-to-win and still make it properly a RTS?

[@dirge7459]

@@laurelkeeper Run that by me again, because that sounded confusing near the end. SCII originally cost money and that didn't go P2W?. I can't think of a single RTS where you've bought your way to victory.

[@laurelkeeper]

@@dirge7459 You're exactly correct. The game's microtransactions can't impact gameplay, because that's antithetical to the RTS spirit. Free-to-play means more players, which means a (hopeful) resurrection of the dwindling RTS presence in the public mind. While I do personally prefer single-purchase games, I played Warframe for over 100 hours and I play League today, and neither of those extremely enjoyable games would ever have been something I'd checked out if they weren't free. League and Fortnite are both big, notable examples of F2P PVP games, and they are by all accounts, pretty good games overall. I think the F2P model is the right one for the long-term health of the game, especially considering their focus on onboarding new players in an enjoyable way.

[@Antare5]

I am trying very, very hard not to be excited yet and maintain my skepticism. Your video definitely is making me more interested, but until we see execution on some of these promises I'm going to try and calm my excitement. But when we see gameplay, and it looks good, it looks fun. Then I will find myself a seat on the hype train.

[@MentalVideographer]

Hmm... Bearing in mind this is filtered through your take on the situation: It definitely feels like they have a strong impression of what they want, and what they're looking for, and all of it seems like reasonable goals. Additionally, from your general review of the people working on it, it seems as if they have the technical skill to make it happen. I definitely got the impression that there was a lot that wasn't actually done yet, which makes sense considering they only plan to have something user-ready as of the middle of next year. On net, a very promising start.

[@arthurmarkiv8773]

Sounds interesting. Loved the ending of the video. No words like gender, equality or diversity which is good. Agree with most key points they have made which is great. Have experienced making awesome games before. I can only cross fingers and wish them good luck though won't get my hope up due to what west game studios tend to make this last dozen or so years. Will check on them from time to time though

[@dweebie]

Why is talking about gender, equality, and diversity bad?

[@arthurmarkiv8773]

@@dweebie cause if you look at companies that like to speak about such topics you will see that their games leave much to be desired about besides marketing. They spend to much time and money on anything but the gameplay. Take current blizzard for example. At best such companies can hire other studios to make games for them cause the lost the ability to do it successfully themselves.

[@dweebie]

@@falsnamae3511 wow, you really don't understand social politics.

[@dweebie]

@@arthurmarkiv8773 This seems like a gross generalization. Blizzards core issues have nothing to do with diversity, and their core issue with equality was that they weren't treating their female employees well, but yeah, if it means a good game, fuck treating people like humans right?

[@MarcelN1980]

@@dweebie absolutely. If they release Starcraft 3 and it's a good game, I will absolutely, definitely, 100% and without hesitation buy it. I couldn't care less about the "misogyny" or whatever. Look at Diablo Immortal. People downloaded millions of copies. They don't care. You know what I need? A good game minus the discussions over inclusivity, gender, sjw or whether woke mobs are happy. Unlike the Twitter crowd, I *do* pay for games and can afford to not pay for any social justice crap. This is why a ton of films failed miserably, this is why a sane male will not pay for a game which states "men bad", this is why Netflix, Disney and Amazon Prime are failing: it seems that it's more important to have lgbt/PoC/gender quotas (or replace males in the production) than have a great story arc. Of course, this madness is the exact same reason I'm pro choice when it comes to abortion but I fully defend the right to bear arms (Eastern European, so I know how it is to have no guns against Russian commies). Woke movement is a cancer and, mark my words, it will create a counter culture in which "old, male and stale" people like me will vote conservative, far right parties which will make things worse than now for the Twitter activists. The Republicans will win the next elections, and I laugh in the bed thinking of the pathetic screams of the far left back in 2016. Only this time, the anti woke brigade backlash will be far worse. Economy is crashing. Prices are huge. The crazies with gender studies and no practical skills will go for onlyfans or starve. When fuel and electricity prices are skyrocketing, you will not only be mocked for trying to bring the ridiculous arguments of representation into discussion, you will be chased away.

[@47StormShadow]

Is anyone else disappointed with the seemingly very bright and very colorful visuals? This isn't Blizzard anymore, can we please move from this formula to something more...um...adult?

[@maniacalcoast2742]

grant why would you be surprised that they wouldnt show you about it. personally youre the only starcraft 1 and 2 content creator ive found myself to consistently come back to watch. and your analyses have been fantastic to the point i listen to you while i play myself. u r the goat

[@nataliyakozakova8317]

great job grant 100k subs loved the videobtw sounds intresting