The Critical Moves team explores Steam’s October 2025 NextFest, diving into dozens of strategy game demos ranging from highly anticipated AAA titles like Anno 117 and Heroes of Might and Magic: Olden Era to promising indie concepts and unfortunate quality issues, while examining Steam’s curation challenges and the rising influence of publisher Hooded Horse in the strategy gaming landscape.

LISTEN LINK: https://criticalmovespodcast.com/listen

This episode provides candid impressions of Steam NextFest October 2025’s strategy offerings, featuring detailed discussions of demos ranging from the massive Anno 117 to innovative indie concepts like Bite War. The hosts examine quality assurance problems plaguing many demos, celebrate hidden gems that demonstrate strong design principles, and analyse how Steam’s randomized discovery system makes finding worthwhile games unnecessarily difficult. The conversation covers city builders, apocalypse simulators, Majesty-inspired games, Bronze Age management, and the triumphant return of Heroes of Might and Magic, while praising Hooded Horse’s consistent track record in strategy game publishing.

Critical Moves Podcast Episode 51 Show Notes

Episode Title: Steam NextFest Special
Hosts: Jack, Adam, Tim
Episode Length: ~68 minutes

Episode Summary

The fifty-first episode of Critical Moves examines Steam’s October 2025 NextFest, with the hosts sharing unfiltered impressions across dozens of strategy game demos. From Jack’s frustration with Steam’s randomized discovery interface to Adam’s discovery of the compelling indie RTS Bite War, the discussion reveals both exciting possibilities and concerning quality issues in the current strategy demo landscape. The conversation explores how Hooded Horse has emerged as the dominant strategy publisher, examines why so many city builders feel identical, and celebrates Heroes of Might and Magic’s successful return while lamenting the unreadable UI of anticipated titles like Stellar Reach.

Steam NextFest Navigation Problems

Randomized Discovery Challenges

Jack opens the episode highlighting Steam’s problematic NextFest interface, where refreshing the page reveals entirely different game selections without notification. This randomization makes systematic discovery nearly impossible, forcing players to repeatedly refresh and hope relevant titles appear. The lack of clear categorization or persistent game lists transforms what should be an exciting demo showcase into a frustrating treasure hunt.

The hosts agree Steam’s approach prioritizes algorithmic randomness over user experience. While this theoretically gives unknown games visibility opportunities, it practically means even anticipated titles like Anno 117 and Stellar Reach can vanish from view unless players know to specifically search for them. Tim suggests the system improves after opening days as popular demos rise through player recommendations, but the initial experience leaves much to be desired.

Missing Curated Lists

Jack expresses disappointment that Steam didn’t publish curated lists of major anticipated demos before NextFest launched. While appreciating Steam’s free market approach where quality naturally surfaces, the complete absence of editorial guidance creates unnecessary friction for players genuinely interested in discovering worthwhile strategy titles.

The randomization problem extends beyond inconvenience to actively undermining smaller quality games. Adam notes how genuine hidden gems get lost among the overwhelming volume of low-effort submissions, making it harder for passionate indie developers to find their audience even when they’ve created something special.

The Quality Assurance Crisis

Unplayable Demos and Concept Art

Adam expresses frustration with the sheer number of unpolished demos that crash frequently or feel like pre-alpha builds rather than playable demonstrations. He emphasizes that NextFest represents developers’ opportunity to shine, as games typically appear only once, making the prevalence of broken or barely functional demos particularly disappointing.

The hosts distinguish between games with limited budgets versus those that simply weren’t ready for public testing. Adam mentions encountering demos that couldn’t run for five minutes without crashing, making meaningful evaluation impossible. This wastes players’ limited time while potentially damaging indie developers’ reputations when they needed to make strong first impressions.

AI-Generated Content Concerns

Tim discusses how AI has lowered barriers to game creation, enabling more people to develop games but also flooding NextFest with low-effort projects. Adam notes some demos appear to be concept validation exercises where developers check wishlist metrics for potential funding rather than showcasing genuine playable games.

The proliferation of AI-generated art assets creates additional concerns. Adam spots obvious AI-generated icons in Day of Extinction’s Steam page, raising questions about production values and developer commitment when even promotional materials rely heavily on automated generation rather than original artistic vision.

Steam Moderation Questions

The hosts debate whether Steam should implement pre-approval systems for NextFest demos. While acknowledging the massive resource requirements for manual review, they suggest basic functionality testing could filter out completely unplayable submissions. Adam argues that while he doesn’t expect Steam to judge game quality, basic playability standards would significantly improve the NextFest experience.

Tim suggests Steam could implement AI content tagging or other metadata to help players filter demos according to their preferences. The current system treats a fully polished Hooded Horse title and a crashing pre-alpha concept equally, making informed discovery extremely difficult.

Anno 117: Pax Romana

Massive Scale and System Requirements

The Anno 117 demo requires approximately 100 gigabytes of storage, immediately limiting who can participate in testing. None of the three hosts played the demo due to this barrier, though all three followed the game closely through gameplay footage and developer communications. Tim notes performance concerns based on previews, suggesting the massive file size reflects ambitious scope that might strain many systems.

Despite not playing personally, Tim remains excited about Anno 117 based on series familiarity and new features. The game promises significant evolution over Anno 1800 while maintaining the economic simulation and city-building elements that define the franchise.

Diagonal Roads Revolution

Tim jokes that diagonal roads represent a major selling point, but acknowledges this seemingly minor feature significantly impacts realistic city design. Previous Anno titles’ grid-locked roads limited architectural variety, making the addition of diagonal placement surprisingly meaningful for players who prioritize aesthetic city creation.

The historical setting appeals to strategy fans interested in Roman-era expansion and empire management. Combined with the franchise’s proven economic simulation depth, Anno 117 promises substantial strategic complexity for players willing to invest time learning its intricate systems.

UI and Voice Acting Concerns

Tim notes the current UI lacks immersion and polish based on footage he’s reviewed. He expects Ubisoft will iterate on interface design before launch, as UI refinement typically continues throughout development. The limited one-hour demo may prevent comprehensive UI evaluation, leaving questions about late-game management interface effectiveness.

Voice acting divides opinions, with some players appreciating narrative personality while others prefer more serious strategic presentation. Tim considers this personal preference rather than objective flaw, though he acknowledges the somewhat silly tone won’t appeal to all strategy gaming audiences.

Hidden Gem: Bite War

Minimalist Aesthetic Excellence

Adam enthusiastically champions Bite War as NextFest’s standout indie discovery. The game features extremely simple square-based graphics that initially seem primitive but actually demonstrate thoughtful design choices. Rather than attempting ambitious 3D models or complex textures beyond their capabilities, developers created a glitch-aesthetic RTS where visual simplicity enables focus on innovative mechanics.

The game’s presentation proves that developers who understand their limitations and work within them can create more compelling experiences than teams overreaching with inadequate resources. Bite War’s minimalist art direction appears intentional and cohesive rather than placeholder graphics awaiting replacement.

Drawing-Based Building Mechanics

Bite War’s unique hook involves drawing buildings directly on screen rather than selecting from menus and placing prefabricated structures. Adam describes this mechanic as initially obscure but surprisingly intuitive once understood. The drawing system creates emergent gameplay where building placement and design become creative expressions rather than optimization puzzles.

This innovative approach to RTS construction distinguishes Bite War from countless genre competitors using conventional base-building interfaces. The mechanic demonstrates how thoughtful design can differentiate indie projects in crowded genres without requiring massive budgets.

Intuitive Interface Design

Adam praises Bite War’s thoughtful UI layout and keybindings, noting that someone clearly playtested extensively. Controls fall naturally under players’ hands, suggesting developers solicited external feedback rather than assuming creator familiarity translated to player intuitiveness. This attention to usability contrasts sharply with many NextFest demos where interfaces felt unplayable.

The game’s brief tutorial efficiently communicates core concepts, allowing players to grasp mechanics within minutes and begin experimenting independently. This successful onboarding proves that even simple graphics can’t compensate for poor UI design, while thoughtful interfaces elevate modest presentations considerably.

The Only Wishlist Addition

Bite War was one of only two games Adam wishlisted during NextFest (alongside Heroes of Might and Magic), down from four or five in previous festivals. This selective endorsement emphasizes how strongly the demo impressed him despite or because of its minimalist approach. The game demonstrates that passionate developers with limited resources can still create compelling strategy experiences through clever design and appropriate scope management.

Day of Extinction: Apocalypse Simulator

Plague Inc. Inspired God Game

Jack describes Day of Extinction as a god game where players manipulate Earth events to exterminate humanity. The premise immediately invokes Plague Inc. comparisons, as both games task players with spreading catastrophe globally while humanity attempts defensive countermeasures.

The game differentiates itself through multiple apocalypse methods beyond disease—natural disasters, celestial events, and various catastrophes provide strategic variety. Players collect souls from deceased humans, places from geographical loot drops, and corruption tokens for gambling on event outcomes, creating multiple resource management layers.

Resource Systems and Progression

The soul currency funds upgrades for disaster types like hurricanes, viruses, and asteroid impacts. Places tokens enable territorial effect enhancements and global manipulation like filling emergency rooms to reduce healthcare capacity. Corruption tokens power gambling mechanics to disrupt humanity’s unification efforts, such as preventing continental lockdowns that would slow virus spread.

Jack appreciates the multi-layered economic systems creating meaningful strategic choices about resource allocation. However, he notes that all apocalypse types ultimately feel mechanically identical despite different visual presentations, limiting replayability once players understand core systems.

Strategic Limitations

The game’s critical flaw emerges from how easily asteroid impacts solve geographical challenges. When traditional plague spreading struggles reaching isolated regions like New Zealand or Hawaii, simply dropping asteroids eliminates populations instantly. This convenient solution removes the interesting logistical puzzles that make Plague Inc. compelling.

Jack successfully played four tutorial missions, unlocking hurricanes, tornadoes, asteroid impacts, and viruses. Despite different assets and visual effects, these apocalypse methods played identically, raising concerns about whether zombie mode or other locked scenarios would offer genuinely different strategic experiences or just cosmetic variations.

Fun Demo, Questionable Purchase Value

Jack calls Day of Extinction one of NextFest’s most enjoyable demos, providing several hours of entertainment. However, he questions whether the full game offers sufficient additional content beyond what’s already playable in the demo. The visible but locked content list appeared limited, suggesting the demo may already showcase the game’s complete mechanical depth.

This represents the concept demo problem—games fun enough to play freely but lacking compelling purchase reasons when the demo experience feels complete. Day of Extinction needs additional strategic depth or mechanical innovation beyond asset swaps to justify full-price purchase for players who’ve exhausted the demo.

Whiskerwood: Colony Sim Saturation

Cat and Mouse Theming

Whiskerwood combines Voxel and cel-shaded aesthetics in a colony builder where a cat monarch sends mice to an island for settlement. Players construct buildings, assign workers, manage incoming cargo shipments, and pay taxes to the monarch while surviving and expanding their mouse civilization.

Jack found the demo enjoyable but stopped playing to prioritize other NextFest titles, noting he’d likely return to explore further. The game’s cute aesthetic and anthropomorphic animal theming appeal to broader audiences than hardcore strategy fans, potentially helping it reach players outside traditional colony sim demographics.

Distinguishing Features

Whiskerwood differentiates itself through taxation mechanics and economic balancing that Jack found more interesting than typical colony builders. New events and kingdom management challenges provide strategic variety beyond simple resource gathering and building placement optimization that defines most genre entries.

However, Jack notes Whiskerwood belongs to an increasingly crowded category of similar-looking colony sims appearing in every NextFest. While this specific game attempts innovation, the genre’s visual and mechanical homogeneity makes individual titles difficult to differentiate and recommend.

Colony Builder Proliferation Problem

Jack observes that every recent NextFest features numerous Voxel-based colony builders with nearly identical mechanics—research technologies to unlock buildings, place structures, manage resources, expand territories. These games feel manufactured from the same template with minor thematic variations rather than genuine innovations.

For players passionate about colony building, this proliferation provides endless options. However, for general strategy audiences, the repetitive similarity creates recommendation fatigue. When every NextFest showcases ten nearly indistinguishable colony builders, highlighting what makes individual entries special becomes increasingly difficult.

Town to City Comparison

Jack contrasts current offerings with Town to City from a previous NextFest, a Voxel city builder that achieved mainstream YouTube coverage and attracted non-strategy gamers through its cosy aesthetic and distinctive music. That game transcended niche genre boundaries, demonstrating how exceptional colony builders can find broader audiences.

This comparison highlights the challenge facing games like Whiskerwood—they must not only compete within the crowded colony sim space but also distinguish themselves enough to attract attention from players experiencing demo fatigue after seeing dozens of superficially similar titles.

Crownbound and Lessaria: Majesty Spiritual Successors

Indirect Control RTS Mechanics

Both Crownbound and Lessaria attempt to revive the Majesty formula where players act as lords providing rewards rather than directly controlling units. AI-controlled heroes pursue objectives autonomously while players influence behaviour through bounty placement, building construction, and economic management rather than real-time unit commands.

Adam explains Majesty’s popularity in Eastern Europe while remaining relatively obscure elsewhere, making these spiritual successors particularly interesting for players unfamiliar with the original. The indirect control paradigm creates fundamentally different strategic thinking compared to conventional RTS games.

Crownbound’s Limited Scope

Jack initially felt catfished by Crownbound’s beautiful marketing art, which suggested high production values the actual game didn’t match. While he enjoyed the demo’s cute aesthetic and functional mechanics, the limited content raised concerns about full game depth—only five building types, five support structures, and several dozen spells across three playable scenarios.

The frame rate inconsistency where character animations appeared lower quality than environmental graphics created jarring visual disconnects. These technical rough edges combined with limited apparent content made Jack question whether the full game would justify purchase or remain a pleasant but shallow concept demonstration.

Lesaria’s Production Value Problems

Adam played Lessaria expecting the definitive modern Majesty experience after hearing buzz for one to two years. While recognizing developers captured Majesty’s mechanical magic, he found the execution severely lacking. UI clunkiness, unclear animations, and poor visual feedback made gameplay feel unsatisfying despite solid underlying systems.

The game features extensive production investment with numerous models, icons, animations, and graphics, yet something fundamental feels wrong. Adam couldn’t sense buildings being constructed, spells being cast, or units being clicked—the tactile feedback essential to engaging strategy games was completely absent despite obvious development resources.

Comparison with Original Majesty

Adam reinstalled the decades-old Majesty to confirm his concerns weren’t age-related gaming preference shifts. Playing the original immediately demonstrated what Lessaria lacked—responsive feedback, clear visual communication, and intuitive interface design that made player actions feel impactful and meaningful.

This comparison reveals that successfully reviving classic game formulas requires understanding not just mechanical systems but also intangible design elements that made originals compelling. Lessaria’s developers apparently studied Majesty’s systems without grasping the execution details that transformed those systems into engaging gameplay.

City Builder Genre Fatigue

Identical Engine Problem

The hosts observe that countless city builders appearing in each NextFest seem developed in identical engines with superficially different themes. Whether apocalyptic, island-based, medieval, or futuristic, these games share common building placement mechanics, identical research progression systems, and virtually interchangeable resource management.

This homogeneity benefits players specifically seeking more city builder content, as they enjoy reliable mechanical familiarity across different thematic settings. However, for general strategy audiences, the repetitive similarity creates discovery fatigue where evaluating individual titles becomes impossible without extensive playtime investment.

Cozy Genre Dominance

Adam identifies “cosy city builders” as the dominant subgenre—games prioritizing aesthetic city creation and relaxing resource management over challenging optimization or strategic decision-making. These titles appeal to broader audiences seeking stress-free creative expression rather than demanding strategic puzzles.

The cosy approach enables faster development cycles as designers avoid complex challenge balancing or intricate system interactions. However, Adam finds these games simply boring, missing the strategic depth and meaningful choices that make city builders engaging long-term rather than briefly pleasant experiences.

Dedicated Episode Proposal

Adam proposes dedicating an entire Critical Moves episode to city builders, examining subgenre distinctions and what separates compelling entries from forgettable ones. He suggests categorizing city builders into distinct buckets based on challenge philosophy, mechanical complexity, and design priorities.

This specialized discussion would help listeners understand what differentiates city builders beyond superficial themes, potentially revealing hidden gems while explaining why certain titles fail to engage despite professional presentation. The genre’s popularity and proliferation justify dedicated analytical attention.

Stellar Reach: Anticipated Disappointment

UI Readability Crisis

Jack expresses severe disappointment with Stellar Reach’s demo, particularly the impossibly small UI scaling. Text felt designed for microscopic viewing, making menus practically unreadable on standard monitors. The settings menu’s confusing implementation required entering text box numbers to adjust scaling, but UI wouldn’t scale beyond 0.71—its default setting.

This fundamental usability problem prevented Jack from meaningfully evaluating gameplay systems despite his anticipation for the title. A strategy game requiring extensive menu interaction becomes unplayable when players literally cannot read interface text regardless of display size or resolution settings.

Settings Menu Design Failure

Jack jokes the settings menu felt designed by programming communities that deliberately create inconvenient UI as technical challenges—YouTube search bars requiring mouse precision or audio sliders with inverse functionality. The text-based scaling input accepting values between 0.71 and 2.0 seemed almost intentionally obstructive.

This design failure particularly frustrates because it represents easily fixable problems. Simple dropdown menus or slider-based scaling would drastically improve usability without requiring fundamental mechanical changes. The fact such basic quality assurance issues made it into a major NextFest demo suggests deeper development problems.

Limited New Information

Jack reiterates previous episode frustrations about Stellar Reach’s minimal public communication. Despite NextFest participation and previous podcast discussions mentioning the game, developers haven’t released substantial information about mechanical depth, strategic resources, factional differences, or systems distinguishing it from Stellaris.

This information drought makes meaningful preview coverage nearly impossible. Without understanding what makes Stellar Reach unique or how its promised features function, critics can only discuss aesthetic impressions and speculate about mechanical implementations. Developers’ silence undermines anticipation rather than building excitement.

Comparison with Stellaris

The hosts acknowledge they may have created unrealistic Stellaris comparisons that Stellar Reach developers never intended. Perhaps Critical Moves elevated expectations by positioning the game as a Stellaris challenger when developers envisioned a smaller-scale 4X experience for niche audiences.

However, multiple podcast mentions and sustained interest suggest Stellar Reach occupies significant mindshare among strategy enthusiasts. Without developer communication clarifying scope and ambitions, players reasonably compare it to genre leaders. The quality assurance problems evident in the demo don’t inspire confidence regardless of intended scope.

Strategy RTS Innovations

Strategos and Master of Command

Tim discusses two nearly identical Total War-style tactical battle games focusing exclusively on battlefield engagements without strategic campaign layers. Strategos covers Greco-Roman warfare while Master of Command simulates Napoleonic battles, both offering improved tactical combat compared to Total War’s implementations.

These games appeal specifically to players who love Total War’s tactical battles but find campaign management tedious. By isolating the battlefield experience, they provide streamlined tactical challenges without economic or diplomatic distractions. Tim appreciates their focused design while questioning whether he’d actually play them given Total War already exists.

Incremental Improvements Over Total War

Both titles implement UI enhancements and tactical refinements that arguably improve upon Total War’s established formula. These polished, non-sloppy games demonstrate competent development and clear design vision focused on perfecting specific mechanical systems rather than ambitious feature creep.

However, Tim questions whether incremental improvements justify separate games when the core experience remains fundamentally similar to Total War. For diehard tactical combat enthusiasts seeking specialized battlefield simulators, these titles offer appealing alternatives. For general strategy players, they represent niche variations rather than essential experiences.

Niche Market Positioning

The critical moves assessment positions these games as “Total War exists”—they’re competently executed but don’t offer sufficiently different experiences to recommend over established genre leaders unless players specifically crave purely tactical engagements without strategic context.

This represents fair evaluation acknowledging quality while questioning market positioning. Not every strategy game must revolutionize genres, but titles competing directly with Total War face uphill battles convincing players to adopt alternatives offering similar core experiences with different historical settings.

Hooded Horse’s Dominance

Consistent Quality Track Record

Adam observes that recent Hooded Horse publications consistently achieve at least 5-6 out of 10 quality, establishing reliable minimum standards rare among strategy publishers. Their worst releases represent “mid games” rather than broken disasters, while their best titles achieve exceptional critical and commercial success.

This consistency suggests Hooded Horse implements effective quality control processes, provides meaningful development support, and curates their catalogue carefully rather than publishing anything strategy-adjacent hoping for occasional hits. Their track record builds consumer trust where the publisher logo itself signals basic quality assurance.

Strategic Game Discovery

Tim praises Hooded Horse’s apparent talent for identifying promising games during development and providing resources, guidance, and direction needed to transform potential into polished products. While he doesn’t know internal processes, results speak to effective collaboration between publishers and developers.

This curatorial eye distinguishes Hooded Horse from publishers simply licensing recognizable franchises or funding established studios. By identifying and nurturing promising indie projects, they’ve built a diverse catalogue spanning subgenres while maintaining consistent quality standards across different game types and team sizes.

Portfolio Breadth

Jack highlights Hooded Horse’s impressive catalogue spanning mainstream successes like Manor Lords and Against the Storm, critical darlings like Terra Invicta, YouTube phenomena like Menace and Every Day We Fight, Game Pass additions like Nine Souls and Cataclysm, and now Heroes of Might and Magic: Olden Era.

This diversity demonstrates strategic vision beyond niche focus. Hooded Horse publishes hardcore grand strategy alongside accessible colony sims, traditional RTS alongside innovative hybrids, demonstrating confidence in varied strategy audiences rather than limiting scope to proven commercial formulas.

Developer Relationships

Jack references his interview with Chris McElligott Park discussing Heart of the Machine’s development, where the veteran developer praised Hooded Horse’s collaborative approach and support throughout the project. Similar positive testimonials from multiple developers suggest publisher practices genuinely benefit creative teams rather than exploiting desperation.

These developer relationships matter because strategy game creation requires sustained commitment over years of development. Publishers supporting teams through inevitable challenges and setbacks enable project completion where others might abandon difficult titles. Hooded Horse’s willingness to invest in niche strategy games allows projects that otherwise wouldn’t achieve commercial release.

Heroes of Might and Magic: Olden Era

Best Demo of NextFest

Jack declares Heroes of Might and Magic: Olden Era the best demo he played during NextFest, praising production values, mechanical polish, and engaging tutorial missions. Despite entering with scepticism about franchise changes and developer capabilities, the demo exceeded expectations through competent execution of beloved series formulas.

Adam simply encourages listeners to play the demo if still available, promising dedicated episode coverage where they’ll explore the game comprehensively. His enthusiasm suggests the demo successfully captured Heroes franchise magic while introducing meaningful innovations rather than mere nostalgia exploitation.

Franchise Authenticity

Adam expresses surprise at how well the demo captured the Heroes franchise feel despite new developers and Hooded Horse publishing. This authenticity matters because passionate fanbases scrutinize beloved franchise revivals, punishing failures to honour series traditions while rewarding thoughtful evolution.

The development team apparently studied what made previous Heroes titles compelling and successfully translated those elements into modern context rather than superficially copying mechanics without understanding underlying appeal. This suggests genuine franchise appreciation rather than cynical license exploitation.

Mobile Game Aesthetic Concerns

Jack acknowledges merit in criticisms about mobile game aesthetics, particularly regarding resource presentation on maps and certain UI menu designs. Some visual elements suggest mobile monetization strategies adapted for PC rather than ground-up desktop design philosophy.

However, these aesthetic concerns don’t override the fundamental gameplay quality. The tutorial missions demonstrate solid strategic systems, engaging tactical combat, and proper Heroes progression mechanics. Visual presentation preferences shouldn’t obscure successful franchise revival execution.

Controversy and Licensing

Jack references previous controversy about the licensed development team’s history, suggesting community concerns about whether unfamiliar developers could handle the beloved franchise properly. The demo’s positive reception potentially addresses these worries through demonstrated competence.

Tim notes understanding general scepticism toward franchise revivals after years without new entries. However, Hooded Horse’s involvement provides credibility, as their consistent quality standards and developer support track record suggests they wouldn’t risk reputation on poorly managed franchise revival.

Bronze Age Management: Ascendant Dawn

Historical Setting Appeal

Tim expresses interest in Ascendant Dawn’s Bronze Age civilization management setting, noting few strategy games explore this historical period despite its fascinating complexity. The game attempts ambitious systemic depth with multiple interconnected mechanics simulating ancient society management.

This chronological focus differentiates Ascendant Dawn from medieval or modern strategy games dominating the market. For players interested in archaeological periods or early civilization development, the setting alone justifies exploration despite implementation problems.

Complex Interconnected Systems

The game features numerous interacting systems attempting to simulate Bronze Age society comprehensively rather than abstracting historical complexity into simplified mechanics. Tim appreciates the ambitious approach even while acknowledging execution issues prevent the demo from fully realizing its conceptual promise.

This complexity targets specific audiences seeking deep simulation over accessible gameplay. Players willing to invest time mastering intricate systems may find rewarding strategic depth, though the steep learning curve and current UI limitations create significant entry barriers.

Visual Presentation Problems

Tim candidly admits the game looks “pretty ugly” according to his aesthetic preferences, though he acknowledges visual presentation represents subjective preference. The graphical limitations may stem from limited development resources focusing on mechanical depth over visual polish.

However, poor presentation creates perception problems where potentially strong systems get overlooked because first impressions fail to communicate quality. Even mechanically sound games struggle finding audiences when visual presentation suggests amateur development or insufficient production investment.

Character System Skepticism

Tim expresses frustration with strategy games forcing character attachment through portraits, names, and personality traits when he’d prefer focusing on systems and mechanics. He notes rare exceptions where character systems genuinely enhance engagement, but most implementations distract from strategic decision-making without adding meaningful depth.

This design philosophy debate highlights player preference diversity—some strategy gamers want narrative personality and individual unit attachment while others prefer abstract system manipulation. Ascendant Dawn apparently targets the former audience, potentially alienating systems-focused players like Tim despite otherwise compelling Bronze Age simulation.

Corrupted Democracy: Statecraft

1970s-80s Political Management

Jack mentions Statecraft but didn’t prioritize playing the demo. The game simulates political management within Cold War era Eastern European contexts, focusing on corrupt governmental systems and democratic manipulation rather than large-scale grand strategy.

The smaller scale differs dramatically from Victoria 3’s global economic simulation, representing intimate political intrigue rather than sweeping historical forces. This focused scope might appeal to players seeking character-driven Machiavellian scheming over abstract resource optimization.

Aesthetic Success

Tim praises Statecraft’s committed aesthetic, noting the deliberate 70s-80s visual style works effectively precisely because developers didn’t attempt photo-realistic graphics beyond their capabilities. The game demonstrates how appropriate art direction matching technical capabilities creates cohesive presentation.

Simple but consistent aesthetics succeed where ambitious but poorly executed realism fails. Statecraft’s developers understood their limitations and designed within them, creating visually appealing experiences through thoughtful art direction rather than expensive production values.

Tim’s Potential Interest

Jack suggests Statecraft might interest Tim as a Victoria 3 enthusiast, though acknowledging the vastly different scales and focuses. The game’s political management systems potentially scratch similar strategic itches through different mechanical implementations and historical contexts.

However, Tim didn’t play the demo, leaving actual gameplay impressions unknown. The aesthetic appeal alone doesn’t guarantee engaging mechanics or deep strategic systems, though the committed presentation suggests genuine development thoughtfulness rather than rushed asset-flip production.

Other Notable Mentions

Hunting Pack: Wolf Strategy

Adam briefly mentions Hunting Pack, a roguelike RTS concept about wolf pack survival and hunting. The unique premise focusing on predator pack dynamics rather than human civilization offers fresh thematic perspective for strategy gaming.

However, Adam found the execution boring despite interesting conceptual foundations. The game apparently failed translating wolf pack behaviour into engaging strategic gameplay, demonstrating how strong concepts don’t automatically produce compelling experiences without thoughtful mechanical implementation.

Battlephone Reckoning: MMO Raid RTS

Adam describes Battlethorne Reckoning’s attempt to simulate MMO raiding through RTS mechanics, translating party-based boss encounters into strategic gameplay format. The ambitious concept blending genres could create unique experiences combining real-time tactics with MMO progression systems.

Unfortunately, the demo provided no instructions, control explanations, or tutorials, leaving Adam completely confused about basic gameplay. He questions why developers published demos without minimum documentation enabling players to engage with core systems. Even innovative concepts fail when players can’t understand how to play.

DSS2 War Industry: Scale Transitions

Adam expresses interest in DSS2 War Industry’s seamless scaling between Total War tactical battles and Europa Universalis strategic map perspectives. The game promises fluid transitions where zooming out reveals grand strategic context while zooming in enables tactical combat control.

The ambitious technical implementation simulates unit movement, base construction, and city development in real-time across multiple scale levels simultaneously. This represents genuinely innovative mechanical experimentation rather than iterating on established formulas.

However, constant crashing every five minutes prevented meaningful evaluation. Adam notes he hasn’t experienced PC crashes in years during normal gaming, making DSS2’s technical instability particularly frustrating. The promising concept remains inaccessible due to fundamental stability problems that should have been resolved before NextFest participation.

Quality Assurance Across the Industry

Strategy Game UI Problems

The hosts identify persistent UI/UX problems plaguing strategy games across budget levels, from AAA titles to indie projects. Poor interface design, unintuitive control schemes, and inadequate visual feedback affect even well-resourced development teams, suggesting systemic industry problems rather than individual studio failures.

Jack’s Stellar Reach experience exemplifies how UI failures can completely prevent gameplay evaluation regardless of underlying system quality. When players can’t read menus or adjust settings, even brilliant strategic mechanics remain inaccessible.

Testing and Playtesting Importance

Adam emphasizes that when UI feels intuitive and responsive, it’s clear someone actually playtested the game with fresh eyes. He humorously suggests developers should at minimum have spouses or friends test games before public release, as creator familiarity blinds them to usability problems obvious to newcomers.

External playtesting catches issues that internal teams miss through over-familiarity with systems and interfaces. The difference between games feeling immediately playable versus frustratingly opaque often comes down to whether developers solicited and incorporated feedback from people lacking built-in knowledge.

First Impressions Matter

The hosts repeatedly emphasize that NextFest demos represent crucial first impressions developers won’t get again. Publishing broken, unclear, or unpolished demos wastes opportunities to build audience excitement and wishlist conversions that fund continued development.

Adam recalls when demos showcased games’ best moments—God of War’s demo featured mid-game boss battles demonstrating peak action rather than tutorialising basic mechanics. Modern demos too often present worst possible first impressions through unclear tutorials, missing instructions, and technical problems that undermine excitement rather than building anticipation.

Episode Verdict

This episode successfully captures the frustration and excitement characterizing Steam NextFest experiences in October 2025. The hosts provide valuable service identifying hidden gems like Bite War while warning audiences away from technically broken or conceptually hollow demos that waste players’ limited time. Their candid discussion of quality problems pervading many NextFest submissions reflects broader concerns about lowered barriers to game development enabling premature public releases that damage indie reputation collectively even when individual projects show promise. The enthusiastic praise for Heroes of Might and Magic: Olden Era and consistent appreciation for Hooded Horse’s publishing standards offers hope that quality strategy gaming continues thriving despite market saturation. The variety of titles discussed suggests that rather than any single game defining NextFest, October 2025’s appeal comes from discovering personal favourites among diverse offerings serving different strategic gaming interests when players successfully navigate Steam’s challenging discovery interface.

Contact & Links

About | Contact | Meet the Team | Get Involved | Forum | Episodes
Patreon | Discord | Reddit | Twitter / X | Facebook
Instagram | Twitch | Steam Group | Steam Curator
YouTube | Spotify | Apple | Amazon
Email: [email protected]

Next Episode: Heroes of Might and Magic: OE or Endless Legend 2. Which Is Better?