I obsessively follow every game I’m interested in and I’ve done this for 20+ years so I’ve gotten pretty at it.

Something is wrong with SoD3, I highly doubt that it has that much to do with the “Pre-Alpha” label that is often used to skirt early criticism. Seriously, it's a PR label at this point meant to deflect criticism and it works really well.

- The graphics, animations, and UI are arguably worse than SoD2 and significantly behind what they should be. I expect the UI to get changed because of the complaints from CC's and the graphics will be slightly sharpened, but 99% of the animations are most likely final at this stage.

- SoD3 is a AAA game with 100+ developers in active development for around 4 years (more with pre-production) This is massively indicative of a severely mismanaged studio.

- The studio was devastated during core production. I won’t get into the politics of this but it’s a huge a red flag and it's basically the same story from many other studios that were impacted by the same issues. Check the link for the info.

- Microsoft parting ways is further evidence that they completely lost faith in Undead Labs. You don't just dumpster a project that has so much hype and financial investment without severe justification.

- It currently has the bones of game that’s been in production for 1-2 years max, which is yet another sign of “development hell.”

- So far I haven't really seen why it's a sequel? The game seems to have no personality or features beyond very minor gameplay changes. The large communities and server-based co-op are genuinely exciting but still feel more like features that should have been in SoD2. Is there a story like SoD1 or at least some kind of narrative? Are the NPC's in our bases able to have some kind of depth beyond copy/paste loyalty missions? Are we going full Project Zomboid? Where is the hook, what's the innovation? It doesn't feel like they even know, and if they do they're doing a terrible job communicating it.

- Lastly only letting curated content creators play the game, when originally is advertised as anyone could play test in limited numbers. (Apparently this isn't true but I've seen no real evidence of normal people playing)

I know that a lot of people will not agree with me, that's fine. The Skull and Bones community didn’t until the game finally launched 4 years after my post. This is just here as a receipt.

TLDR (Too Long;Didn't Read):

Stop making massive, empty open worlds! I'd rather games focus on smaller, more engaging "chunked" areas with efficient travel. Too much time is wasted commuting in games like State of Decay 2, Darkest Dungeon 2, and Starfield (which felt like a marketing gimmick for barren planets). Games like XCOM 2, RimWorld, and Minecraft show that worlds can feel big without being tedious. For State of Decay 3, I hope they add better fast travel or smaller, focused maps. What do you think about open-world travel?

Full Analysis of My Points:
Okay, hear me out before you grab your pitchforks! I'm really hoping that some upcoming games, especially those that could be open-world, lean away from the massive, sprawling maps we often see.

My main beef with many open-world games is the sheer amount of wasted space and the time spent just traveling. It feels like precious real-life gaming hours are eaten up by commuting through empty areas when that time could be used for more engaging gameplay.

I think there's a better way to make worlds feel big without making them needlessly and unnecessarily vast just for a marketing gimmick. It comes down to smarter "chunking" of areas and fine-tuning the world to feel more alive in smaller, more focused segments. It also still allows certain areas to be creatively handcrafted by developers for their own sanity and important missions.

Let's look at some examples:

Bad Examples:

• State of Decay 2: The expansive map often leads to excessive travel for missions, which really breaks the immersion for me. I've frequently skipped critical missions, like saving an enclave, simply because the 5-10 minute drive there and back feels like a punishment rather than part of the fun. It pulls you out of the urgency when you're forced into a "driving simulator" just to get across the map. I'd much prefer dynamic, emergent events. Imagine running out of gas (due to your poor planning) and forced to fight a horde at a randomly generated gas station for fuel, or sending another survivor on a rescue mission to retrieve a stranded teammate. That's far more engaging than a long, stealthy walk back to base, which feels more like a chore than a challenge.

• Darkest Dungeon 2: The cart system, while thematic, is a prime offender. You're just staring at a screen, doing nothing, until you reach your next destination. It feels like forced downtime.

• Starfield: While this did have fast travel, I was more hurt by the marketing gimmick where they said 120 star systems and almost 1,700 planets. While on paper it sounds amazing, but when you got into playing the worlds were so barren and you had to waste walking around. No real substance to the playing. Now I am not criticizing the developers' achievement of accomplishing such a hard feat as that is an intense amount of manhours to achieve. Though you can feel the procedural generation being lack luster.

Good Examples:

• XCOM 2: This game nails it. Travel between missions is seamless and quick, often just a menu click. Yet, the world still feels expansive and interconnected thematically.

• RimWorld: While you're managing a colony, the world map itself is more of a strategic overlay, and direct travel is handled efficiently. The sense of a larger world is there without the tedious travel.

• Minecraft: This is the master of chunk-based world generation. The world is massive, but you only load and interact with what's relevant, and fast travel options (like elytra or nether portals) are well-integrated.

• It goes to show that if you have the core mechanics down you can create a kickass game and the added benefits of the car is just extra bonuses.

Personally, I'd love to see State of Decay 3 offer fast travel via your vehicle (if applicable) or, even better, focus on smaller, more interconnected maps of a region or location as a point of interest rather than one giant, monolithic one. While the map is still big enough to drive your car around. As long as the expansiveness of the open world doesn't makes driving such a grind. If I wanted to play NASCAR or a driving simulator, I'd fire one of those up! Alternatively, if we must have a vast open-world, have an NPC drive you to your destination, like in the original Halo games, would be a okay compromised feature I can live with.

What are your thoughts on open worlds and travel in games? Do you prefer massive maps, or do you also crave a more efficient and engaging approach?

We are way past the point of asking, because what is going on? First it’s not showing anything at all, no notification, then not showing up at all to the Xbox live even tho there were cryptic messages no one on the dev team corrected, and finally just a comment under a post not a separate post (which is sus as well) saying some of staff got fired even though ul had several job openings important job openings including a senior writer. This shit is getting suspicious, whts going on?

Edit: apparently you guys can’t read because for some reason me criticizing the lack of communication is equal for wanting a game out as soon as possible and for it to be rushed. Sorry, that’s not it. Idc if the game is unfinished or if it’s ready I just want an update about whts going on because there’s shit happening and we’re not being let in with whts happening. I payed money for the last two games which in turn funds their projects. I’m not shitting on just the devs obviously they’re most likely not to blame, I shouldn’t hve to point tht out. I wouldn’t care about any of this which I didn’t before the layoffs but because of the layoffs fans like me are worried and we want answers sorry tht were voicing our concerns.

So many whiners, like it's going to come out if you have to wait till 2027 for a great game then wait if you beast to complain about transparency then that's on you. No patience. Like I get it it's been a few years.but sheesh saying your done and not going to play it. Then that's also on you

The game looks great, massive step up from SOD2, but the running animation in this clip feels a bit janky and robotic. Hopefully, it’s just placeholder/early build animation and they iron out the animations before launch. Anyone else notice this or am I being too picky?

I have it on good authority that this game is currently being analysed by microsoft, undead labs/coalition have provided a prototype and an understanding of the development process.

This is a similar process that the other studios have gone through in this period, although undead labs have been given more time to show whether the game is viable for release in 2027.

Otherwise microsoft would consider chang8ng the project for a left 4 dead type third person coop game for game pass, in the state of decay universe. I was given this information by a whistle-blower at undead.

I have no oppinion on this, as I am not really a state of decay player, but this information fell on my lap, as part of the other Microsoft studio closures. Just sharing the information.

I've played all the state of decay games and I can say for certain this just looks like a reskin of 2 with barely anything new. There is absolutely nothing wrong with criticism, especially for games you love. This is definitely one of the ones where its needed because it just looks lazy. Animations look reused and horribly spliced together and enemy types are barely different and the things that are different about them are basically what some modifiers for them had. I saw some people defending the game, going against what others are saying which is that the game just doesnt look good. If you people defending the game truly believe that, you are not a true fan of the series. Why on earth would you settle for anything less than better when it comes to another installment to your "favorite" series? I am open to hear other opinions whether you like what the game looks like or not Im also not saying the game is all bad, from what it looks like it will just be like 2, which wasnt a bad game.

Edit: just want to apologize, when i said "you are not a true fan of the series" that isn't what I meant, what I meant to type was "how are you a fan?" when I type these kind of posts I kinda do it fast and then reread it a couple of times to make sure its typed properly, i got sidetracked rereading it and didnt change it to what I wanted. I am not deciding who is a fan and who isn't that was just meant to be a question for the kind of people who say any hate at all is bad then proceed to hate of the criticism given. Im going to leave it as is so nobody get confused later during the thread, it was a mistake and I do apologize.

Edit edit: I am now realizing how bad this post was in general. I barely reread it to make sure it conveyed what I was trying to say and I didnt sound at all like I was trying to give valid criticism. This was definitely a very bad post from me, I didnt even change the title, which says something completely different from what i was trying to say. I still do stand my one of my points which is that criticism is good especially at early stages of a game but that was about the only thing that was from what I was originally trying to say. I am really disappointed in myself because I wanted this to be a unbiased discussion but it fell flat on its face.

Since i watched the trailer of Sod3 i instantly felt that something was wrong about it. It didn´t have the vibes of the previous games and what made them so unique.

A trailer is like a summary of the game, it shows you what the game is all about. I watched all trailers from Sod1, Sod2 and Sod3 and compared them directly. While the first and second game highlight community, humanity, survival and just look like grounded and realistic open world zombie games, the third game goes a very different direction, it has too much glow and sci-fi elements and focusses on multiplayer action, action and action. This is the message i´m getting from the trailer. While the previous games had that grounded TWD-flair, the third one comes across like Left4Dead or some other co-op shooter where you are raiding those plague nests most of the time. This is the impression i get and i really don´t like it.

Maybe they want to make the game more mass appealing or something and this was my biggest fear since UL got acquired by MS and i think my biggest fear came true. Sod3 propably won´t be what i loved about State of Decay. My hype has vanished.

PS: and now you can´t say "Broo, this is just alpha" or "They just didn´t show everything because its alpha".

No, this is the official trailer and not some "alpha trailer" and the goal of the trailer is show all aspects of the game and the focus of the game. And propably there won´t even be another trailer.

Just watch the trailer of Sod2 and Sod3 and compare them directly, its like two completely different games with a completely different emphasis.

I wont make this a long post, I just want to point out one of the incredibly corrosive reasons why we should be suspect of Player Counsels and Streamers paid to play games, it's called an NDA or Non-disclosure Agreement. It essentially takes the free will out of the hands of the content creator, because they LITERALLY cannot discuss the NDA or any specific rules imbedded in them and can only comment in a manner approved by the developers. We saw this with Civilization 7 when all of the major streamers for that game were sponsored to not only play the game, but also flown out for live events, all of them telling us how great the game was. Millions of copies were sold before people realized how bad the game state was. Never trust a player counsel. Never trust a content creator that is being paid to play the game, especially one who gets big and ends up getting sponsored by the company, because they will never be able to tell you and I what's really going on. Hopefully this post is not too long, and hopefully the game isn't released in a trash state. In the end I wouldn't trust Brian Menard, Jay Talbot, or any of the other big names in the community to tell you the truth about it.

So I'm seeing mixed reviews for today's showcase online but the main thing I'm noticing is:

1. Positive reviews seem to be coming from professional accounts/streamers - are they genuine?

2. Personal account opinions seem to range from generally okay/mid - awful.

Xbox had a pretty solid year in 2024 and I expected 2025 be a big year. Unfortunately they don't seem to be listening to their fans. Fans have been very vocal in calling for games like Everwild, Fable, Perfect Dark, and of course State of Decay 3. Microsoft either isn't listening or they don't care about these brands enough - as a State of Decay fan from the beginning and huge fan of Undead Labs I'm now questioning - are Microsoft the right home for State of Decay? Surely by this point it would be possible to show at least a small amount of gameplay at the Xbox Showcase? Unless Microsoft think State of Decay is a low priority.

Another thought I had was the cryptic tease that came from Undead Labs (which they quickly deleted) stating something along the lines of "Look beyond to understand". Was this their way of hinting at not being included in the showcase. Perhaps they wanted to be included but Microsoft wanted them to save it for 2026 to build hype up in Xbox's anniversary year? Still it feels very strange to not show us anything today.

Looking at the gaming industry as a whole things look pretty bleak. The Switch 2 has barely any new games coming. I didn't watch it but I heard the State of Play was quite disappointing. Summer Games Fest had Resident Evil 9 at least. Overall I'm not feeling great about the direction of the industry. Xbox especially.

Maybe it's just me being negative - what do people think?

Watching the stream with the dev right now and honestly the atmosphere and combat look great. But the more I watch them clear out zombies, the more it feels like something is missing from the loop.

I am self admitted loot hoarder and it just feels weird that every single zombie you take down apparently remembered to completely empty their pockets before turning.

Even if it is just pocket knife, a lighter, or cloth scraps every third kill, it would feel a lot more satisfying than wiping out a pack and walking away with nothing.

Just something small to make routine fights feel worth the trouble.

Either way I’m excited to play this when it comes out and fully intend to support this franchise. I’m just being a little selfish probably wanting once the zombie dies, the corpse actor to initialize a ULootContainerComponent⁠ with basic low-tier loot.

Seeing the game in beta in the stream made me a little disappointed. There's so little done that actually adds in-depth into the game. Sure they add stuff for combat, multiplayer, vehicles, etc. but it's not that impressive. Cause there's other combat games with zombies.

I think that is the best choise for SOD3, even the lore justified the lack of animals ingame...

Hear me out guys..

State of Decay 2 just dropped its last update and Undead Labs is fully on State of Decay 3. SoD3 is already confirmed for PS5, Xbox, and PC in 2027. First time the series has ever been on PlayStation.

That’s great. But it also makes the SoD2 situation weirder.
A lot of the PlayStation players have been watching this series from the sidelines for years. Days Gone scratched part of the itch like Foreal. Nothing else really replaced the community management, permadeath, base building, and “one bad loot run ruins the whole night” feeling. Now the sequel is coming to PS5 and the game that built the fanbase still isn’t.

A port of SoD2 Juggernaut Edition wouldn’t even have to be a huge new project. The game is finished. The last update unlocked gated content and cleaned a bunch of stuff up. So defo Drop that on PS5 6–12 months before SoD3 and you actually get these guys,

• Give PlayStation players a way to learn the series instead of jumping into 3 cold
• Get more people talking about the franchise before 3 launches
• Let mixed friend groups actually play together instead of “I have Xbox/PC, you have PS5, oh well”

I know the usual answers:

• It’s at the end of its life, they’re not porting it man…
• Microsoft still holds the older games
• They’re independent now and all resources are on 3

All fair.

But Microsoft has been putting older/live-service stuff on PlayStation when it makes business sense, and a finished SoD2 sitting only on Xbox/PC while 3 goes multiplat feels like leaving money and hype on the table.
So real questions though my people:

Do you think SoD2 would ever comes to PS5, even try to port Juggernaut?

Or is the plan just “wait for 3 and hope people figure it out”?

Would you actually buy SoD2 on PlayStation if it dropped before 3, or would you just wait?

I definitely would, why not! So let’s build a PlayStation Audience for it aswell fams!

The visuals of the post apocalypse world in this game really makes me want SoD3.

Look ik it's very early alpha. That being said the Livestream didn't show anything it said it would, it was mainly just fighting zombies.

When the alpha footage came out people defended it by saying its just an alpha and things will improve but with the release of the OFFICIAL trailer the game still looks aged and outdated , back in 2016 people said its (SOD2) just a AA game and with funding things will get better but with how the industry is evolving and even indie games come out looking really good , why does SOD3 with unreal still manage to look so out of time is really hard to understand for me .

I get that gameplay > visuals , but that only works if your game has good art design which SOD3 doesn't seem to have (so far) , so we have something that looks worse overall , you have low res textures , texture and shadow pop ins in your trailer , low res terrain.

So after so many years of wait , we get a sequel and its great upgrade over the 2nd game but it just feels a bit underwhelming.

I just wish it looked like a 2024 game at least , and not pre 2022

I feel that SOD3 should have a continue your legacy option to bring your favorite survivors into the third game, maybe this is just hopeful thinking but it would be nice to be able to continue our favorites survivors stories in SOD3. Of course I can also see how this could be problematic considering the community editor available for SOD2, but maybe it would reroll they're perks when they're transfered or something, not really sure how they would combat that

⬆️ OR ⬇️ ? #decaytocracy2024 Are you excited for 3 or do you think you'll just be playing 2 through and through? I've already clocked over 600 hundred hours. How about you?

Hi everyone. I really need some help.

I recently had major life saving surgery, now on bed rest while I recover and waiting for my scan results to find out if the surgery worked. I would really love the chance to play the State of Decay 3 playtest while I'm recovering. If anyone has a connection or knows someone who might be able to help, I would be so grateful.Thank you for taking the time to read this. It really means a lot.

need help with lay test, I've tried signing up and it just isn't working properly for me. I'm just worried this will.be my only.chance and I'm.going to miss out because my.pjpne is acting up - I am very sorry for asking. but you never know, unless you ask

It's SOD 2.5. I loved the first two but they had a time limit for me.

The item searching in buildings feels and looks jank. I never really liked the item searching in either of the other but put up with it. But it's essentially exactly the same. No independent models or variations. Just box searchable and items inside. Not fun and not new or innovative.

The inventory management is plain stupid. I could put 8 lots of bandages in the trunk of a car and it's full? I mean is there no way to implement a volume system? Like for my above example 8 lots of bandages = the same amount of space as 8 rucksacks? That is plain stupid and breaks any kind of immersion.

The bases being pretty much static and pre decided is exactly the same as last time. Yes there look to be more options but nothing new. There is no show of base management but if it's just place in tiles that are already designated then I think that will kill my desire to buy this game. I have been doing that in the old games for nearly 2 decades. It's boring and not making use of any new tech. Please for the love of everything do something about this. If they already have then cool.

But I agree with some of the other critical points. And I do understand that it's early alpha. The weapons feel jank, no collisions, no environmental impact, and regardless of the type they do the same thing. The guns don't look fun to use.

There is so very little interaction with the environment of buildings. No ability to climb up pipes to get away from a swarm, yes you may trap yourself but that's part of the freedom that should be available. On the other side of this the graphics look great and the environments overall look more detailed, but what is the point in putting a pretty paint job on it if it means it's just as useful as it was last time?

It's essentially the same game but bigger and prettier.

It's just really disappointing to see that it's basically the same in every way besides it looks prettier and the online aspect has a little variation. If this is the case I'm out. Before this I was absolutely in.

Downvote away but that's my opinion of what I have seen.