this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2026
18 points (100.0% liked)

Games

21195 readers
160 users here now

Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.

Rules

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
jack@hexbear.net
RiotDoll@hexbear.net
18
I wake up… its another half assed starcraft clone looking for an esports playerbase (stormgate) (youtu.be)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by Snort_Owl@hexbear.net to c/games@hexbear.net
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Why does nobody know how to make an rts? Why is it always starcraft over and over and over. Why not make a total annihilation clone? A company of heroes clone? An age of empires or empire earth clone? Command and conquer? No. The rts gamers yearn for ranked ladder. We must espurt again it’ll definitely work this time.

SHUT UP ABOUT BLIZZARD SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT THE FUCK UP THEIR GAMES ARE SHIT SHUTUP SHUTTUUUPPPP matt-jokerfied

RTS is by far my most favourite genre and dawn of war was absolute crack for me how is nobody able to make 1 good release?

Halo wars 2 is an unsung diamond its campaign is better than mainline halo

all 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Formerlyfarman@hexbear.net 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

There was a company of heroes clone a while ago called iron harvest. It was ok, I liked it better than company of heroes,

Unfortunately it surfers from the same issues of poor camera angles and unit controls.

As for rts I have recently been playing empires of the undergrowth, it plays like a sort of dungeon keeper game. Highly recommend that one.

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Oh boy, I can't wait to see what fun and wacky stuff each of the factions in this game can do, and what sort of silly fun games I can play with my friends, or even against the AI! catgirl-happy

Oh...it's got three factions who are all "perfectly balanced" and focused solely on top level competitive play so none of them have any fun or wacky mechanics or silly nonsense, the game is fully streamlined to be an e-sport and any personality in the game would just get in the way of that. catgirl-flop

[–] TRI_STATE_GLADIO@hexbear.net 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Whats frustrating is that, in an ideal world and with no offense towards you, this game would have been able to sustain itself without having to cater to you.

I'm as far away from you as they come. I either prefer a very casual game that's accessible (as in, if you have a disability, you can engage with the game's mechanics enough to hang with the homies) or I want the fucking deep end, and if you drown and complain, then you get what you deserve. Anything in the middle is just tedious and how you wind up with gameplay systems that reinforce antisocial behavior (see: DBD).

The issue is that Stormgate didn't really appeal to anyone. In terms of fluff, it's blatantly just Starcraft. Like I can't imagine the themeing of this game appealing to anyone. How do I get anyone into this game? What fun modes are there? Why the fuck would anyone waste their time with this uninspired campaign? There's so many ways to waste time in SC2 with the custom games or the co-op mode that you never have to learn what a build order is. For better and worse, it's where a majority of the playerbase still is.

If I wanted to play SC competitively, I'd just play 2 or Brood War, both of which still have a very active community that you could engage with at a very high level without having to beg for games in a discord or something. The process of learning these games, regular build orders for each faction, timings, maps, etc is a rewarding experience and people that automatically dismiss those elements don't understand that dance is art. There's beauty to motion.

All that being said, I don't wanna learn another RTS, especially if it's like 20 percent different, and what they added sucks. I don't wanna play a MOBA. Why are you asking me to creep? Why are the maps so garbage? They try to have these creep camps be a point where both players skirmish to try and get a resource advantage, kinda like WC3, but they're so spread out that most games resulted in both players jacking off on their side of the map until it was time to deathball.

The individual units themselves also just don't spark joy. There's a lot of "X gets a 20 percent boost" or whatever flaccid garbage because they're afraid of making gameplay mechanics that might be unbalanced, because that might push players away. Good job, dickheads, now you don't have them in the first place. Make a cool game, have it break, balance it with a map pool that makes sense and adjust numbers.

Stormgate feels like it was for fucking nobody. "Hey, they should do another starcraft" is where the planning of this game began and ended. They stuck with safe gameplay design that still managed to fall into the design pitfalls of other RTS games, and anyone who's felt the touch of a lover in the past five years is going to look at the end product, think it's fucking lame, and play Fortnite with Homer and Cartman and all your favorite American heroes. Please stop cutting 50+ honkies paychecks to make this garbage.

[–] robot_dog_with_gun@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day ago

isn't it a warcraft more than a starcraft? i think i played it and there wasn't any macro in the demo

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I don't think we actually disagree at all. I was basically complaining about how Stormgate is "modern" SC2, a game built solely around "balance" for competitive level play and not at all interested in making a game that is actually fun to play at all. And like you said, that appeals to no one, because people who like to play SC2 will just continue to play that, and people who don't like SC2 won't want to play an SC2 clone.

I was more pining for the days of very early SC2(and other RTS from around that time), where there was a lot of jank, a lot of units were quite "unbalanced" and quite a lot of maps were "unbalanced" and it made for a fun and memorable experience, nowadays it feels like every game just feels the same, every map feels the same, it isn't a fun or engaging experience for me anymore, and I feel this is largely because of an obsession with "balance" that the game has (ironically, the win rate for the 3 factions is now far less balanced than it was back in WoL days, so they haven't even succeeded in their goal).

Some of my fondest memories playing an RTS are when you do something silly and ridiculous, like rushing militia in AoE2, something that only works because it is so "suboptimal" that your opponent doesn't even consider preparing for it. Far too many games these days feel like they aren't built to have fun with, but are built to optimise, that your APM and Macro and Micro are the only things that matter, that in order to win you need to just be a more efficient cog in the game's machine than your opponent, you can't do anything to blindside them or surprise them to win, you can only ever win through being more optimal than your opponent, following the "correct" strategy better than they do. It's kind of like chess in a way, how a grandmaster is just someone who has memorised tens of thousands of potential moves, and just uses the optimal ones, but chess isn't fun at that level, it's more fun when you're playing with people who barely know the rules and can actually strategise against each other instead of just winning through being better at memorisation of the optimal strategies.

Basically, I think that video games, especially multiplayer ones, should focus on being fun to play rather than being some kind of big money making e-sport. In other words:

[–] KhanCipher@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don't think we actually disagree at all. I was basically complaining about how Stormgate is "modern" SC2, a game built solely around "balance" for competitive level play and not at all interested in making a game that is actually fun to play at all. And like you said, that appeals to no one, because people who like to play SC2 will just continue to play that, and people who don't like SC2 won't want to play an SC2 clone.

Me every time I see someone contort the reason why Gundam Evo failed having absolutely nothing to do with just borrowing Overwatch's homework and barely changing much if anything at all. Like I literally got a "But it's a better balanced Overwatch" from people defending it.

[–] TRI_STATE_GLADIO@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day ago (3 children)

This is pedantic, but we do disagree and I don't actually agree with your end thesis.

Far too many games these days feel like they aren't built to have fun with, but are built to optimise, that your APM and Macro and Micro are the only things that matter, that in order to win you need to just be a more efficient cog in the game's machine than your opponent, you can't do anything to blindside them or surprise them to win, you can only ever win through being more optimal than your opponent, following the "correct" strategy better than they do

Again, there's beauty to that and I really don't agree that it's even a problem. It's a problem specifically for RTS games because it's audience wants modding tools and tower defense. You are still dismissing the training of these elements as something negative, and not something requires effort and condition, which is fun in its own right

And like, this would be an understandable statement even if I wouldn't agree with it pre-08 crash, but like, genuinely what games require like, training. SC2 doesn't. CS:GO/TF2 don't. Fortnite doesn't. How many friendslop games (I mean that with no derision as someone who likes friendslop) have sold millions of copies out of nowhere? If you wanna complain that you can't just roll people in a ranked queue or formal setting, there's an alternative. The problem for Stormgate is that casual players don't have a casual alternative, when that's the only business model that seems to work right now with this genre.

Some of my fondest memories playing an RTS are when you do something silly and ridiculous, like rushing militia in AoE2, something that only works because it is so "suboptimal" that your opponent doesn't even consider preparing for it.

Go on a pick up tennis court, and just exclusively bunt. Don't try to volley, don't try think about where your opponent is going to send the ball. Just lightly tap it every time. Ask them for another game after you do that.

Sincerely engaging with these games mechanics, as art unto themsleves, is fun. It is a form of art that challenges you to be better than you were the day before. It domesticates you like grain. There is artistry to what these games require of you and the decisions (I legit cannot think of any competitive game that is straight up just how many Monsters have you drank in a 24 hour period). It is a form of expression that is important to the medium. The act of going nutty in IIDX is as important to the art form as every Mother 3 and Disco Elysium.

Against buddies, who gives a shit, but against other people, "I'm going sit down, and take 15 minutes of someone else's time trying to pull down their pants with something that exclusively works against new players", is antisocial behavior. It's not your fault, a lot of games encourage this by having matchmaking systems where your behavior doesn't have meaningful social consequences. It's why I despise most games where the primary bulk of the playerbase hangs out on a ranked ladder.

And before people jump down my neck, the problem isn't "oh I got cheesed". What you did exists in AoE2 in different forms. It's more effective, it leads to more interesting decisions to be made from both players, and there's more of a narrative to it for you, that you are personally involved with, than "oh they scouted me, guess the last 8 min don't matter".

Basically, I think that video games, especially multiplayer ones, should focus on being fun

But your problem isn't "these units in the game are just Legacy of the Void units on ambien", your problem stems from trying to design to design a competitive game in general. Stormgate requires less APM. Units do fewer things than SC2. You have to old off early aggression and other possibly frustrating elements in other RTS games much less. And it's worse because of it. Games do not have any obligation to be something to be fun. They can be upsetting, and ugly, and annoying.

You might feel bad after playing a game and losing, and like, sit with it. See where it goes. This is not a viewpoint I had all of my life, it actually took me until my early 20s, but it's wonderful. I lived in the middle of nowhere for years, the only queer community I had were through the communities that formed around these games. Do you have any idea how many top players of fighting games are trans women?

rather than being some kind of big money making e-sport.

This piece of shit game entered development proper after 2019/the esports bubble popped. Dont worry, that issue has been taken care of.

The lesson to be learned is "don't chase investor money trying to sell franchise spots with a game that does nothing right and has no real identity".

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I really don't understand your position, and I'm not fully sure you understood mine, I'm not trying to pick a fight or be abrasive here, I'm honestly interested in what you have to say, even if we do ultimately disagree, I'm just not fully sure I do understand what you're saying.

I understand you have a lot of positive memories with these games, I do to, I'm not some "tourist" or whatever, like I said, I've played SC2 since it came out, I know about the grind, I know about losing and using it to improve my skills, the problem is, at some point it stops feeling like I'm actively improving and learning, and more like I'm memorising, it makes the game feel like work. The satisfaction at improving a skill is gone and it just becomes drudgery.

And I only put up with it for so long because of the more accessible stuff that made the game fun in the first place. A game without that, that is only focused on the competitive side has no appeal, which I thought we agreed on, but we apparently don't seem to? I thought we both agree that the focus on the competitive e-sport aspect is what made Stormgate dull and not fun to play.

I'm not saying I want every game to be super easy and everyone wins all the time, I'm saying I want strategy to be the core part of a strategy game, the main thing that lets people win, not memorising and practicing build orders or improving APM, not focusing on optimisation, but focusing on creative thinking and self-expression, which personally, is what makes a hobby appealing to me. You mention fighting games, isn't it more fun to win a match when you can predict and counter what your opponent is doing, rather than just winning because you had faster reflexes?

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth or accuse you of anything, sorry if it comes across that way, I'm honestly trying to understand your position here, I'm not upset or mad or anything, I'm more confused. So sorry if I seem to be attacking a point you aren't actually trying to make, you obviously have a lot to say on the topic and it seems quite close to you, so I'd rather understand you, even if we just end up disagreeing, there's nothing wrong with that, but I can still learn some interesting insights from you.

To reiterate my own position to avoid confusion about it: I don't like when strategy games focus more on the "hardcore" or "professional" side of things and demand hundreds of hours of work from potential players before they can even win a match, I think it is bad for the games and actively hurts any potential community that can form around them, any new strategy game that comes out is going to need to focus on the players actually wanting to play the game and enjoy their time, not focus on pushing players to "invest" hundreds of hours into the game.

When I mention fun matches with friends, many of those friends were friends I made after we had a particularly intense SC2 match together, usually though one of us winning due to a risky and unusual but clever strategy, but if a strategy game just involves being "better" rather than out-thinking an opponent, I don't think you can have that same sort of respect for your opponent develop. When a game's skill is entirely built around how many hours a person has put into the game, all I can think when someone beats me is "I guess they spent more time in the SC2 mines than I did." It isn't fun and it doesn't feel worthwhile to me.

I think that strategy should be more important than just winning through practiced skills alone, not that I think every game should be "casual" or "fortnight" or whatever, just that the skills people practice in a strategy game should be ones focused around being more strategic and tactical in their thinking, rather than the skills they need to focus on being about improving twitch reflexes and memorisation of the "optimal" strategies. I'm not saying those things are bad, I think they work great in a fighting game context, I just don't think they should be the main focus of a strategy game. I hope I've made my position a bit more clear.

[–] Snort_Owl@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Dont even bother arguing with people like this they exist in a world where they moralise ranked queue and think the only purpose to gaming is to be better than someone else. Rts has always been a casual genre the esport scene killed it entirely its why sc2 doesn’t have any players left.

Balanced apm dependant ranked rts gameplay is shit and always will be shit. The best features of sc2 were the campaign, coop, archon mode, custom content. Apm ladder hogs are niche and i dont want them in my genre

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I do want to give them the benefit of the doubt, though that could be why I was failing to understand them.

I hope that isn't their position, it's such a hollow way to look at things, to need to "win" rather than have fun and enjoy yourself. I used examples from some of my fondest moments in RTS games, because I can clearly remember an AoE2 match I played with a friend 20 years ago, but I can't remember the hundreds of hours I spent grinding to get diamond league in SC2. And I would wager that if you asked people on the street which experience they'd rather have, 99% would prefer the "fun game with a friend" rather than the "hundreds of hours of slog that blur together so you can get a meaningless title in a video game instead of doing something worthwhile with your time." But I guess thinking like that would make me a filthy casual or something.

[–] Snort_Owl@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago

Oh and some of the most fun i had in sc2 seared into my memory was actually archon mode ladder. Because i didnt care for apm since im disabled it was actually super fun me being the base builder and my friend doing army management micro it was some of the best rts gaming ive had in my life.

[–] Snort_Owl@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have a rather sordid history arguing with fighting game player types who try to apply their single digit player number logic to every single game so personally I dont bother. The second fighting games was mentioned i knew exactly where the conversation was heading.

Aoe2 but its arcade mode and ranked ladder

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, me too. The conversation always goes the same way, they complain about their single digit player base for their game and wish there were more players, but are outraged at the idea of fighting games that are more enjoyable or accessible, insisting that new players should just play hundreds of losing matches over and over until they finally git gud enough to be accepted by the community, and they refuse to consider that this elitist attitude is why so few people are interested in picking up their favourite fighting game. Reminds me a lot of the boomer mentality of "We can't improve things, because I suffered in my youth, so the kids these days also need to suffer like I did" except applied to a game.

[–] Snort_Owl@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That and I find them to be massively ableist. Its why halo wars 2 is my favourite recent rts because first and foremost it has controller support. Secondly the developers made some of the best skirmish ai to exist where isnt of the usual cheating bots depending on difficulty they would adopt better strategies and even simulate micro so I could learn without being intimidated and tweak to the level im comfortable.

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There really is an undercurrent (and sometimes just a current) of ableism in that kind of attitude, isn't there? I never really thought about it beyond it being "elitist" but it is also ableist as fuck, it isn't just people without endless free time that they dismiss out of hand.

And I never played Halo Wars 2, I played the first one on the 360 though, a shame more RTS games don't try for controller support, most RTS don't have that many hotkeys (or at least ones that can't be remapped) that a keyboard is completely necessary. I might check out HW2 if it has good skirmish AI, always frustrating when they don't bother to program interesting AI and just have it cheat. It doesn't even help the ladder climbers practice that way, since playing the AI is so different to a non-cheating human.

[–] Snort_Owl@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago

Microsoft never released it on steam so its a windows store exclusive. Its such a shame i feel like a steam release would revive that game, creative assembly just has so much talent

[–] HexReplyBot@hexbear.net 1 points 1 day ago

I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:

[–] robot_dog_with_gun@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago

broodwar is good why should someone make a worse game?

[–] tombruzzo@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago

I love Total Annihilation and it ruined other RTS games as a kid for me. I didn't realise it was the outlier for resource management in those types of games. I'd play something else and it would be like "you can't build that because you don't have enough X resource."

Total Annihilation doesn't say no to you. You can start building as much as you want. You might run out of resources part way through the building process, but you can start it

[–] LeeeroooyJeeenkiiins@hexbear.net 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the people who made this literally worked on starcraft and warcraft

[–] Snort_Owl@hexbear.net 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ok?

[–] LeeeroooyJeeenkiiins@hexbear.net 8 points 2 days ago

you said "why is it starcraft over and over" and it's because it was made by the starcraft guys i'm just answering the peoples' questions here chief

[–] CaliforniaSpectre@hexbear.net 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Halo Wars 2?? I think it was fun, didn't play it much though. My problem with the campaign was it basically ended at the end of act 2 of the narrative, and then they never continued any of it because Halo 5 was such a dumpster fire and the entire story got scrapped.

I actually played tons of Halo Wars 1 as a kid, I grew up on Age of Mythology and also loved everything Halo. Even as a kid I knew it was a "bad" rts but still loved it. Veterancy and spartan hijacking was just so much fun.

[–] Snort_Owl@hexbear.net 3 points 2 days ago

I unironically believe halo wars 2 could have saved that storyline better than what infinite did. I mean the main issue most people had with 5 was not being able to play as chief for most of it