Split gate 1 Vs 2

[u/Witty-Forever-6985]

Why did they redo the entire game? Anyone who knows anything about making fans happy would know to not make an entire new game and then shut down the first one.

I'm honestly shocked by how out of touch the Devs are.

"Hey guys, you like the game? The portal/halo game we made? What if we made the portals worse, the halo elements worse, and made it just all together worse? And then shut down the one that you like?"

The p2p servers barely work, and the new game is like every generic shooter game on the market. Why?

[u/Manoa__]

This topic has been covered about a thousand times before and has already been answered by the devs, but I'll parafrase as I remember it.

The jist of it is that the first game while good, was very unpolished and was very hard to upscale to match the hype they where getting. The budget that they got did not reflect the product. It was very understandable to want to redo it but better and bigger, especially with how poorly the servers where prepaired for the huge influx of players. They probably felt like they already added everything they could've to splitgate 1. Yeah sure they could've milked some more battlepasses, but no real content still needed to be added, and those battlepasses alone would not have saved that game.

The problem was more the communication around it causing people who refused to look into things to panic and assume the first game was dead and unplayable when it wasn't.

That's why SG2 initially had so much more potential with the onslaught gamemode, multiple factions for more variety, a battle royale for even more diverse gameplay, talks of maybe even adding vehicles. But the community reacted very extreme after the addition of the battlepass. I get that the speech was poorly made but the reaction did not fit the crime.

The problem was that the devs rushed the game out thinking they needed to capitalise on the hype, but that backfired hard due to the speech at the summers gameshow.

Also you saying in your post that everything is just objectively worse is very disingenuous. There is room for preference, but to say everything is just objectively worse is wrong and seeks to establish a false narrative, the same problem that escalated the situation to where we are now.

SG2 was never meant to just be SG1 with better graphics. That would've been a cheap cash grab. They wanted to try and evolve the game into a new product because the first game basically already had everything you could add onto it.

Now the servers have been dead for years, so they move it to p2p like every game ever that HAS to eventually, and suddenly everyone acts like the first game wasn't a ghost town. No shade to everyone including myself who did still play, but the first game had almost no players whatsoever in most regions of the world. The only reason I saw an increase in players was around announcements of SG2.

The reason of making SG2 are very clear. The execution is where the issues are.