Gigantic! Gigantic! Gigantic! Open beta hits Windows 10

You keep your Pokélads; I want a bigger monsterpal. I’ve had my eye on Gigantic [official site] for a while, fancying 5v5 third-person action where each team is supported by a honking great monster, and I’ll be having a go this weekend thanks to the open beta that’s now live. Our monsterdad can beat up your monsterdad.

As you’d expect in These Here Modern Times They’ve Got Now, Gigantic has a load of different characters with different abilities. Get five of them together, tell ’em another five said something about their dad, and off they go! They duff each other up, try to control key points in the map, and ultimately want to beat up the other team’s big AI-controller monster. Something like that? I get distracted by the huge monsters.

The open beta will be a long one, with developers Motiga adding new characters and monsters and whatnot over time. Because reasons, the beta is only on the Windows 10 Store though the full game will launch elesewhere and on Old Windows once it’s done. Gigantic be free-to-play, selling the usual MOBA-ish things.

Here, this trailer is flash and thunder about the beta:

Or, more useful is this old gameplay video from back in January. Obviously a fair bit could have changed but hey, ‘s better than that.

From this site

12 Comments

  1. clownst0pper says:

    I’ve been in the Gigantic Beta and its Core testing group for almost 18 months and despite all its potential, the game has lurched from one disaster to the next. Primarily through the miss-management of Motiga who constantly iterated on everything, while achieving very little in the process. There’s a good game here, but one that’s also been heavily neutered in recent months that have simplified most things that made it great.

    I’d recommend you try it when it arrives, but hold off on spending your money.

    • fabronaut says:

      were any of things in the open beta I tried about a month or so ago?

      I thought it was still quite good. pretty streamlined, sure, but it had the makings of a very good game nonetheless.

      awesome art style, and everything felt pretty clean and made sense, although maybe that’s due to some of the odder bits being sanded off along the way.

      what exactly got iterated out?

      • Loam says:

        I’m not actually sure whether it’s permissible for core testers to talk about details that aren’t in the public patch notes, tbh? There was just a lot of back-and-forth, a lot of experimental adjustments to everything from movement mechanics to the entire pacing/timing structure of a match.

        • hungrycookpot says:

          I mean, one could argue that that is the entire point of beta testing.

          • ButteringSundays says:

            My thoughts exactly.

            How dare a developer iterate their game during the development cycle!

          • clownst0pper says:

            There’s iteration and then there’s Motiga. For the past two years they’ve been tweaking fundamental systems and still haven’t solidified any of them, despite the core testers all agreeing what they started with was better than what’s left.

            The list is simply too long of things they’ve changed just to go back and erase six months of work.

    • Loam says:

      I had been in the CBT and the core tests as well (at least until the core group started getting big and attracting Rude People and I just did not want to start making waves). It’s true that they seemed to iterate on things a lot. That’s something I can personally really identify with — that anxious perfectionistic streak, never certain what to settle on — but I agree that this kind of process doesn’t necessarily produce the best final result. Iteration doesn’t always make things better, as you imply; it may not-make-a-difference or it may be actually a step back.

      Overall, though, I think that even if it doesn’t end up being Game Of The Year A++ or whatever, the things that DID stay the same over my 4-6 months’ experience I think are fairly solid. That is to say, I haven’t seen them make the kind of massive misstep that would be required in order to ruin the basic premise. And the art direction doesn’t seem to have swerved, which was what had caught my eye originally :P

      (The main thing that would keep me away from Gigantic wouldn’t be Gigantic itself, it’s how the entire category of online team PvP games *is* in the here and now. To me — I don’t speak for anyone else — the attractive promise of such games is the prospect of casually coordinating with a group of random strangers to achieve a shared goal. However, a lot of things that are considered Normal and Acceptable Behavior in such games [cf. “it’s the internet, what do you expect”] are…. actively unpleasant… to me. And I just find myself with less and less patience for that kind of thing. I’ve run out of buffer. That’s even BEFORE you get the less upsetting problem of casual/hardcore divides that fail to describe what I want to get out of a competitive team game…)

      edit: Jesucri, sorry, I GUESS I’M NOT OVER IT

  2. Ghostwise says:

    And to think that mere days ago Ms. Warr was going out of her way not to quote the lyrics to Gigantic in an article given the subject, hmmm, matter of said song.

  3. oyog says:

    Oh great, now look what you made me do, I’m listening to Surfer Rosa.

    When will this madness end!?

    • gummybearsliveonthemoon says:

      I’m so glad I wasn’t the only one who went there immediately. I was starting to wonder “where is my mind”?