No More Excuses: Why SCI’s Resources Mean Accountability, Not Deflection

1. The Old Narrative vs. Today’s Reality

For years, Steel City Interactive (SCI) leaned on the “we’re just a small indie studio” defense. That line had some weight in 2020 when the project was first revealed as ESBC. But that time has passed. Today, SCI is not the same fledgling outfit. They now have:

• Two studios in the UK

• A facility in Las Vegas

• Veterans on their team with past experience at EA, 2K, and other major sports studios

• Over a million copies sold of Undisputed

This is not the profile of a scrappy, under-resourced indie anymore. This is a company with staff, infrastructure, and revenue.

---

2. The Excuse About Animations

One of SCI’s recurring statements is that adding or adjusting animations is “hard” because it could break something else in the game. On paper, that sounds like a reasonable technical hurdle—but in practice, it’s a pipeline and design issue, not a limitation of the engine or resources.

Compare this to NBA 2K, Madden, MLB The Show, or WWE 2K:

• Those studios constantly add individualized animations without destroying core gameplay.

• They do this through modular pipelines: upper body, lower body, situational layers, blendspaces, and data-driven tendencies.

• If a jab is added for one player, it doesn’t break 100 others. The system is built to handle it.

SCI’s claim reflects design shortcuts taken early—not impossibility. If animations are tightly coupled to each boxer’s profile instead of modularized, yes, changes will cascade and break things. But that’s a leadership and planning decision.

---

3. Why Fans Don’t Accept the Excuse Anymore

Hardcore boxing and sports gaming fans know better. Once you’re operating across two UK studios and a Las Vegas facility, excuses about lacking infrastructure don’t hold weight. With over a million sales in revenue, SCI has:

• The funds to hire animation engineers who can modularize systems.

• The manpower to build QA teams that stress-test new content.

• The obligation to deliver a product that respects boxing and its fanbase.

Simply put, the money and manpower are there. What’s missing is a clear priority to invest in fixing the foundation instead of patching the symptoms.

---

4. The Bigger Problem: Priorities

This isn’t about Unity being “too limited.” Countless fighting games in Unity handle layered animation logic just fine. It’s about what SCI chooses to prioritize:

• Marketing and content creator showcases over foundational fixes.

• Balance patches and stamina tweaks instead of modular animation systems.

• Deflection instead of transparency about design debt.

When leadership chooses speed-to-market over building for scalability, the result is a fragile system. That’s why every animation tweak feels like pulling a Jenga block.

---

5. Where Accountability Must Land

Fans don’t want to hear “it’s hard.” They want to hear a plan. At this stage, SCI needs to:

1. Rebuild animation systems into modular layers (footwork, punches, defensive moves).

2. Separate boxer data from animation logic, so tweaks to one don’t break others.

3. Hire specialists in animation engineering, QA, and sports AI.

4. Be transparent with fans about what’s being rebuilt and why.

This is no longer about excuses. With multiple studios, veterans on staff, and over a million copies sold, SCI has the resources—it’s simply a matter of leadership and accountability.

---

Closing Line

Hardcore fans won’t accept excuses anymore. SCI doesn’t get to play the “small indie” card when they’re operating across two UK studios, a Las Vegas facility, and are sitting on million-plus sales. The problem isn’t capacity—it’s priorities. Until that shifts, every claim of “it’s hard” will sound less like truth and more like deflection.