Stormgate is a fresh RTS game set in an all-new science fantasy universe, it's hit Early Access today free to play but you may need a little tweak on Linux to run it. Developed by a whole bunch of Ex-Blizzard staffers including people who worked on StarCraft II, Warcraft III as well as C&C: Generals 2 and Wasteland 3, the team certainly knows their stuff.
Quite exciting to see another big RTS enter the market, as someone who absolutely adores these types of games and what I've played of it has been quite promising. Still plenty of rough edges, but that's expected for an unfinished game.
YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Direct Link
Direct Link
The good news is that with Proton 9.0-2, it does work pretty well on Linux (testing done on Kubuntu 24.04). However, there's an issue where you may get stuck on the loading screen when it's checking for Ping. You can overcome this issue with one single terminal command, which as always with suggestions — use at your own risk:
sudo sysctl -w net.ipv4.ping_group_range="0 1000"
This allows your user to send and receive ICMP echo packets.
After that, no issues getting into the game. Performance is pretty reasonable too, again making allowances since it's not finished. Running it on my AMD Ryzen 5800x and Radeon 6800 XT at 2560x1440 the "Ultra" preset has been giving me a mostly smooth 60FPS+ and largely well over that.
I played a lot of StarCraft and StarCraft II years ago, and playing Stormgate was quite peculiar because it really does feel like StarCraft, although StarCraft with a lower budget. Even some of the unit voice lines sound like an alternate version of some units in StarCraft. This Ex-Blizzard team are certainly doing their best to be StarCraftButNot.
The free to play release does still need you to end up paying eventually though, since it only includes 1v1 ranked matched, 3 player co-op missions (and all heroes in co-op up to level 5) and custom games. If you want all the heroes and the actual campaign, you do need to pay up. For everything it's £50.99 according to Steam in the "Ultimate Early Access Pack".
Find Stormgate on Steam.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
allow me to edit once : curious as we are , just checked both the browser and steam client and the game is not even trending in one of the 5 sections. Its nowhere to be seen. Someone might have a hangover by next week. I still wanna try the 3level demo tho if they patch it up. Overpromise, underdeliver, i cant speak for the gameplay but if its in the trending sections nowhere i doubt the opinion of one crazy person will make much difference. Should have tried the €20 all -in approach like ARK started perhaps ... too late now ? i bet ... business at hi level is such an unforgiving place
it looks more like a playable demo than f2p and moreover the way they use skeevy sales from the start 60euro pre-early access packs to an unfinished game that already got kickstarted in the (lemme look that up) , short of 2.5 million ? and then the F2P game is a playable demo after 2 weeks. They might as well have stayed under miCrotter, then at least the game wouldnt look like disney and they could use skeevy tactics all the same.
I can stream it from the stream deck without poking but the mousepoint wont go below half the screen so i'll wait for a patch. I was just curious. This is so totally un-blizzard (like the blizzard we got to love from orcs-vs-humans and up) that it might as well be microsoft xbox studios.
Actually,
If they get popular enough maybe they can be "not blizzard" under the xbox studios label later (wouldnt that be lol) and that would make them Kotick++ (wouldnt that be even loller).
Anyway, it looks like nothing i expected but i should know better than to expect anything by now. But maybe there's a crowd for it. I doubt they'll have torn their pants starting at 2.5 million before coding one line.
Last edited by Syntax Error on 14 August 2024 at 3:17 am UTC
it looks more like a playable demo than f2p and moreover the way they use skeevy sales from the start 60euro pre-early access packs to an unfinished game that already got kickstarted in the (lemme look that up) , short of 2.5 million ? and then the F2P game is a playable demo after 2 weeks. They might as well have stayed under miCrotter, then at least the game wouldnt look like disney and they could use skeevy tactics all the same.
I can stream it from the stream deck without poking but the mousepoint wont go below half the screen so i'll wait for a patch. I was just curious. This is so totally un-blizzard (like the blizzard we got to love from orcs-vs-humans and up) that it might as well be microsoft xbox studios.
Actually,
If they get popular enough maybe they can be "not blizzard" under the xbox studios label later (wouldnt that be lol) and that would make them Kotick++ (wouldnt that be even loller).
Anyway, it looks like nothing i expected but i should know better than to expect anything by now. But maybe there's a crowd for it. I doubt they'll have torn their pants starting at 2.5 million before coding one line.
Last edited by Syntax Error on 14 August 2024 at 3:17 am UTC
0 Likes
I went to the Steam page and there's three tiers of paid. There's like "Early Access Pack", "Deluxe Early Access Pack" and "Ultimate Early Access Pack". The basic one gives you one hero and one chapter of the campaign. The middle one gives you two more heroes and no extra content. The top one gives you two more chapters and another hero as yet unspecified. They all also have little bits of bling.
So basically, if you want any content you really have to pay through the nose for the top tier.
So basically, if you want any content you really have to pay through the nose for the top tier.
2 Likes, Who?
soulsource Aug 14
I was aware that some distributions disable ICMP for regular users, but this is the first time I am wondering why they actually do that.
Does anyone know?
Does anyone know?
0 Likes
Quoting: soulsourceI was aware that some distributions disable ICMP for regular users, but this is the first time I am wondering why they actually do that.
Does anyone know?
Quoting: soulsourceI was aware that some distributions disable ICMP for regular users, but this is the first time I am wondering why they actually do that.I think it does something else compared to what you think it does.
Does anyone know?
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Sysctl#Allow_unprivileged_users_to_create_IPPROTO_ICMP_sockets
I am not a native english speaker, but way I understand it works(suspect) is this:
Their server or whatever sends a ping/packet/whatever from itself to client machine on some port 1-1000(which in linux is a restrictive set of ports, that is ONLY allowed to be opened by default by a root user, by default on most Linuxes anyway).
And by receiving this packet on some port, client machine OS send back a ICMP reply. Which later on that reply is being judged for some glitch/network delay exploit detection.
If set permission is not set an default policy of OS is not to respond - ICMP reply will not be generated/send. Hence it breaks their anticheat.
Its all speculation of course.
0 Likes
Quoting: Syntax Errorallow me to edit once : curious as we are , just checked both the browser and steam client and the game is not even trending in one of the 5 sections. Its nowhere to be seen.
This game is mostly for RTS fanatics, and most of us already pledged in the crowdsourcing campaign. That means that most of the people playing now on steam, didn't buy a copy on Steam and this is why the game selling stats are low (for Steam is not a trend if people don't buy on Steam).
And then there is the microtransaction drama which also didn't help this game "launch".
With mixed reviews ofc casuals stay away. Money aside, it's not necessarly bad. This is a startup not Blizzard and early access game is truly early access. It's better to expand to less "committed" audience when the game is more polished just to not affect reviews even worse.
0 Likes
ElectricPrism Aug 14
The textures really need more filth and grit. Reviews are currently @ 60%. Easy Anti-Cheat DRM grosses me out.
The formatting and basic construction have enough charm, the battle particle and laser effects are a bit muddy making it harder to focus on the strategy of well... a RTS.
I'll have to play the game to judge the sound design too -- they could win a lot of points back if they had a kind of analog grit and otherworldly sound from the 90s -- but I don't really anticipate they did more than off the shelf current gen mobile slop.
The reviews and community discussion area are vicious, looks like they really made their kick-starters and community mad for charging them for the extra content.
Also, I know with the rise of WarCraft 3 and DOTA 1 and DOTA 2 the focus on "Heroes" is now a thing, I just wish it wasn't. RTS was just fine when heroes we're 300% the size of units with obnoxious roles and mega powers. It's fine when done with taste but I haven't really seen it cooked right. SC2 was okayish.
The formatting and basic construction have enough charm, the battle particle and laser effects are a bit muddy making it harder to focus on the strategy of well... a RTS.
I'll have to play the game to judge the sound design too -- they could win a lot of points back if they had a kind of analog grit and otherworldly sound from the 90s -- but I don't really anticipate they did more than off the shelf current gen mobile slop.
The reviews and community discussion area are vicious, looks like they really made their kick-starters and community mad for charging them for the extra content.
Also, I know with the rise of WarCraft 3 and DOTA 1 and DOTA 2 the focus on "Heroes" is now a thing, I just wish it wasn't. RTS was just fine when heroes we're 300% the size of units with obnoxious roles and mega powers. It's fine when done with taste but I haven't really seen it cooked right. SC2 was okayish.
3 Likes, Who?
soulsource Aug 14
Quoting: dimkoThe docs you linked sound more like how I understood it though. The setting seems to be about user group numbers, not port numbers:Quoting: soulsourceI was aware that some distributions disable ICMP for regular users, but this is the first time I am wondering why they actually do that.
Does anyone know?Quoting: soulsourceI was aware that some distributions disable ICMP for regular users, but this is the first time I am wondering why they actually do that.I think it does something else compared to what you think it does.
Does anyone know?
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Sysctl#Allow_unprivileged_users_to_create_IPPROTO_ICMP_sockets
I am not a native english speaker, but way I understand it works(suspect) is this:
Their server or whatever sends a ping/packet/whatever from itself to client machine on some port 1-1000(which in linux is a restrictive set of ports, that is ONLY allowed to be opened by default by a root user, by default on most Linuxes anyway).
And by receiving this packet on some port, client machine OS send back a ICMP reply. Which later on that reply is being judged for some glitch/network delay exploit detection.
If set permission is not set an default policy of OS is not to respond - ICMP reply will not be generated/send. Hence it breaks their anticheat.
Its all speculation of course.
Quoting: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Sysctl#Allow_unprivileged_users_to_create_IPPROTO_ICMP_socketsping_group_range determines the GID range of groups which their users are allowed to create IPPROTO_ICMP sockets.Also, the docs directly talk about being able to ping other machines and receive their replies
Quoting: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Sysctl#Allow_unprivileged_users_to_create_IPPROTO_ICMP_socketsThe IPPROTO_ICMP (icmp(7)) socket type adds the possibility to send ICMP_ECHO messages and receive corresponding ICMP_ECHOREPLY messages without the need to open a raw(7) socketFurthermore, the server cannot assume that it will be able to ping the user's computer (via ICMP), as many users' computers are behind firewalls and/or NAT, so imho it only makes sense for the user's computer to ping the server, and not the other way.
0 Likes
Quoting: ElectricPrismAlso, I know with the rise of WarCraft 3 and DOTA 1 and DOTA 2 the focus on "Heroes" is now a thing, I just wish it wasn't. RTS was just fine when heroes we're 300% the size of units with obnoxious roles and mega powers. It's fine when done with taste but I haven't really seen it cooked right. SC2 was okayish.
Yeah "heroes" in strategy games really rub me the wrong way. It is an RPG-ization of the genre, moving away from "you control an army" to "you control this main character, plus some minions". It is particularly common in fantasy-themed games, precisely because they get thematic inspiration by the D&D-style fantasy where "party of heroes goes adventuring" is a powerful trope. If I'm to have leaders to the army, I'd rather have a general that isn't a powerful warrior but gives command bonuses.
There are some benefits to hero units in game design, dipping into the strengths of other genres: it is convenient for making narratives more personal, leveling up is a good progression mechanic, it creates a lot more unit distinction (with a built-in diegetic explanation), powerful unique units give a sense of power and accomplishment, it helps keep the scale in check to make the game easier to control, and the mechanics are part of basic game literacy. But the thematic connection makes it clear that a large part is "make it more like an RPG, RPGs are good!". With Warcraft 3, it was very obviously meant to mix the genres, with the Rexxar campaign standing out. Blizzard always felt like they just didn't want to make RTS games, it was more like an obligation, and they constantly tried to turn their RTS franchises into something else (Lord of the Clans, SC Ghost, and finally succeeded with WoW and never looked back).
Anyway, tangential rant finished, but yeah I'm tired of hero units.
2 Likes, Who?
I've nothing against heros in campaign or coop. But for competitive I also think they detract rather than increase strategic depth.
1 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me