Too Ambitious: How Undisputed Lost Its Vision — and Why Most Fans Aren’t Buying the Pity Party

When Undisputed (originally ESBC) first hit the scene, it wasn’t just another sports title — it was a movement. The early trailers promised something revolutionary: authentic boxer movement, real-time stamina and damage, referees, and fluid footwork mechanics that finally looked real.

For years, boxing fans begged for a developer to treat the sport seriously again. Steel City Interactive (SCI) looked like that savior. But five years later, the game that once promised authenticity feels stripped down, cautious, and directionless — and the studio’s recent public “we know it’s broken” remarks sound more like a pity party than accountability.

From Passion Project to Product

When SCI first announced Undisputed, it marketed itself with conviction:

“By boxing fans, for boxing fans.”

That line connected deeply. Fans thought they’d found a studio with genuine respect for the sport — one that understood the subtlety of movement, the rhythm of timing, and the difference between boxing and brawling.

But as development dragged on, the realism gave way to convenience. Physics-based reactions became scripted animations, referee logic disappeared, and stamina management turned arcade-like. Instead of challenging the genre, Undisputed began copying the same patterns it once vowed to replace.

The result? A game that looks the part but plays like a compromise.

Built in Unity — and Boxed In by It

Adding to the puzzle is the engine choice. SCI chose to build Undisputed in Unity, a capable toolset for indie projects and mid-scale games, but one that struggles when pushed toward the kind of physics-heavy, high-fidelity simulation that Undisputed originally teased.

Unity can absolutely deliver beautiful visuals and smooth performance — but large-scale, physics-based systems like dynamic foot planting, punch impact deformation, and multi-layered stamina AI require advanced optimizations, something Unreal Engine handles more naturally out of the box.

By staying in Unity, SCI effectively limited its ceiling. That decision makes sense for a small startup — but not for a studio aiming to create “the most realistic boxing simulation ever made.”

So when the CEO admits the game “breaks” under certain conditions, it’s not just about bugs — it’s about architecture. You can’t chase AAA realism in an engine that’s not designed for that scale without a massive, experienced technical team to reinforce it.

That’s why this latest confession rings hollow. The issue wasn’t ambition; it was direction.

Five Years of Opportunity — and Silence

Fans were loyal. They waited patiently through early access updates, gave feedback, and even defended the studio when critics called Undisputed incomplete.
Five years later, those same fans are now being told: “We know some parts of the game are broken.”

That’s not transparency — that’s too late.

This isn’t an early development milestone. This is half a decade into production, after multiple paid updates, DLC packs, and a “Championship Edition.” When leadership admits flaws now, it feels less like honesty and more like damage control.

If these problems were known internally — and Unity’s limitations make that almost certain — then SCI either ignored them or chose not to tell the public until backlash forced the conversation.

And that’s not courage; that’s crisis management with a sad tone.

The Leadership Disconnect

Founder and CEO Ash Habib once said his team told him his original vision was “too ambitious.”
That statement alone says everything about what went wrong.

In most creative environments, leadership pushes teams to dream bigger. The CEO fights to make the impossible happen. Hearing that a team convinced its founder to scale back — and that he accepted it — is alarming.

You don’t hire developers to tell you what can’t be done. You hire developers who will find a way to make it happen.

Especially in 2025, when tools like Unreal Engine 5, AI-driven animation blending, and real-time physics simulation make things once thought “too ambitious” entirely possible.

So when the team building a supposed “boxing simulation” in Unity says realism is out of reach, the real issue isn’t ambition — it’s capability.

Creative Control: Lost Somewhere Between the Code and the Contract

In theory, Undisputed was an independent project. In practice, that independence evaporated the moment SCI brought in investors and publishers — including Plaion (Deep Silver) and a £15 million funding round.

Once outside capital enters, creative control becomes a negotiation, not a guarantee.
Founders who want to preserve their vision usually insist on creative control clauses — legal agreements that protect final say on design, scope, and quality.

If Ash Habib didn’t secure that protection, then decisions about gameplay tone, budget priorities, and feature cuts could’ve easily been overridden. Investors fund what’s safe, not what’s authentic.

And it shows. The Undisputed we have now feels engineered to meet milestones — not to make history.

The Pity Party Era

Now, with criticism mounting, SCI’s leadership has started admitting publicly that the game has fundamental flaws — that certain systems “break” under player pressure.

But saying that now isn’t brave. It’s a belated confession that feels like a plea for sympathy rather than accountability.

Fans aren’t looking for emotional statements; they’re looking for ownership.
You can’t spend years marketing a “true boxing simulation,” charge full price, and then shrug it off as “a work in progress.” That’s not transparency — that’s avoidance dressed as humility.

Real accountability means knowing when the vision is drifting and fixing it before the community loses faith. It means telling the truth when it’s uncomfortable, not when sales slow down.

What True Leadership Looks Like

A strong leader doesn’t wait until the crowd turns to explain what went wrong — they speak up before the collapse. They defend the vision even when it’s unpopular.

Ash doesn’t need to apologize for ambition; he needs to apologize for giving up on it.
If the team wasn’t skilled enough, he should’ve found people who could deliver.
If Unity wasn’t powerful enough, he should’ve migrated early or rebuilt the systems to handle the realism promised.
If investors pushed for shortcuts, he should’ve fought for authenticity — or walked away.

Because passion without protection leads exactly here: a broken game, a divided fanbase, and a founder who looks like a passenger on his own project.

The Path Forward

If SCI truly wants redemption, it starts with three things:

Transparency — not emotional statements, but technical breakdowns of what’s being fixed and why.
Recommitment to realism — rebuild the stamina, footwork, and physics foundations even if it means delaying content.
Ownership — no more sympathy talk. Admit where decisions went wrong, and show who’s responsible for changing them.

Fans don’t want pity; they want purpose.
They don’t want vague “we’ll do better” lines; they want to see the fight return — the fire that made Undisputed feel like the future of boxing.

Because right now, it doesn’t feel like the most realistic boxing game ever made.
It feels like the story of how realism was abandoned the moment it got hard.

Ambition wasn’t the problem.
Fear was.
And if SCI doesn’t start fighting again, the only thing left undisputed will be how far this game fell from what it promised to be.

The Blueprint for Redemption: How SCI Can Still Win Fans Back

Undisputed isn’t beyond saving — but saving it will require Steel City Interactive (SCI) to do something few studios are brave enough to attempt: admit failure, rebuild transparently, and fight for authenticity again.

The truth is, fans haven’t given up because they hate the game.
They’ve given up because they no longer believe the studio still cares about the same things they do.

If SCI wants to earn back that trust, it’s going to take more than emotional statements or patches. It needs a plan — a bold, strategic reset grounded in honesty, direction, and respect for boxing’s depth.

This is that plan.

1. Step One — Leadership Clarity and Creative Reset

Right now, Undisputed suffers from an identity crisis because no one seems to know who’s truly leading its creative direction.

If CEO Ash Habib still wants to be seen as the visionary he once was, he must reassert ownership of the game’s soul. That starts with:

Declaring a Creative Vision Statement.
One clear, public sentence defining what Undisputed is and is not.
Example:

“Undisputed will evolve into the most realistic boxing simulation ever made — one that honors the sport’s science, strategy, and spirit.”
Restructuring the Core Team.
Bring in experienced simulation engineers and AI designers — people with proven track records in sports realism, not just Unity generalists.
Consider forming a “Boxing Council” — a small advisory group of boxers, trainers, and industry veterans who help guide authenticity across gameplay, animations, and commentary.
Eliminate internal veto politics.
A team shouldn’t be telling the founder his vision is “too ambitious.”
Rebuild around developers who believe in that ambition.

2. Step Two — Technical Honesty: Unity Limitations and the Migration Path

It’s time for SCI to face the technical elephant in the room: Unity.

Unity helped Undisputed exist, but it’s also part of why it can’t evolve. Its physics limitations, performance ceiling, and instability under heavy AI and animation load make it ill-suited for a deep, reactive boxing simulation.

There are two possible solutions — both requiring honesty:

Option A: Stay in Unity, Rebuild from the Ground Up

Replace key systems (movement, punch impact, fatigue logic) with modular, optimized subsystems.
Integrate DOTS (Data-Oriented Tech Stack) for scalable simulation.
Focus on stability and responsiveness before visuals.

Option B: Migrate to Unreal Engine

Begin the process of porting assets and core gameplay logic to Unreal Engine 5, designed for high-fidelity simulation and dynamic environments.
This migration can be staged:
1. Prototype combat systems in UE5.
2. Gradually shift development tools and pipelines.
3. Release a “UE5 Beta Edition” as a relaunch milestone.

Fans will respect this honesty. A transparent explanation that “Unity can’t handle the realism we envisioned” would actually rebuild credibility — not damage it.

3. Step Three — Transparency Reboot

Fans no longer believe SCI’s words because they’ve been conditioned to expect silence or PR talk. That has to end.

Transparency should become part of SCI’s brand identity:

Monthly Developer Logs:
Break down what’s being fixed, what’s being redesigned, and why.
Not polished trailers — real footage, code commentary, and comparisons.
Community Testing Builds:
Let players stress-test new systems before they’re finalized. Treat fans as collaborators, not consumers.
Roadmap Calendar:
Show every upcoming milestone — even if timelines shift. Silence kills trust faster than delays.
Accountability Streams:
Host quarterly livestreams where the team answers questions — no marketing script, no censorship. Just real conversations with the boxing community.

4. Step Four — Reclaim Realism as the Brand

When Undisputed was first revealed, “realism” was the core of its identity. It needs to be again.
That means dropping the hybrid-arcade tone and building systems that represent real boxing intelligence, not button-mashing.

Key gameplay priorities should include:

System	Rebuild Focus	Why It Matters
Footwork & Positioning	True pivot mechanics, range control, weight transfer.	Boxing starts from the feet — every exchange depends on it.
Punch Logic	Directional precision, impact variance, timing-driven damage.	Brings individuality back to every boxer’s style.
Stamina & Fatigue	Energy systems tied to breathing, rhythm, and pacing.	Restores the chess-like flow of real matches.
AI Tendency Profiles	Adaptive behavior for offensive, defensive, and ring-generalship styles.	Makes single-player meaningful again.
Referee & Clinch Mechanics	Rule enforcement, break timing, and realistic referee presence.	The soul of boxing authenticity — missing entirely now.

This rebuild should focus on feel first, not visuals. Fans don’t care if sweat glistens; they care if punches land where they should.

5. Step Five — A Culture Shift: Stop Selling, Start Listening

Undisputed’s social channels have often felt defensive, selective, or overly scripted. The community doesn’t want marketing — they want engagement.

SCI must rebuild its communication philosophy from the ground up:

Admit mistakes early. Don’t wait until outrage forces it.
Involve boxers and creators again. Bring real fighters, analysts, and content creators into the testing process.
Reward loyalty. Give early supporters exclusive behind-the-scenes access, recognition, or discounted upgrade paths.

If fans feel heard again, they’ll forgive the past. If they feel ignored again, no update or DLC will save the brand.

6. Step Six — Rebrand and Relaunch: The Redemption Edition

Once the core rebuild begins paying off, SCI should relaunch the project under a new label — a symbolic fresh start.

Title Example:

Undisputed: The Redemption Edition

This isn’t just marketing; it’s a message — to fans, to critics, and to investors — that SCI is willing to fight for its vision again.

Include in that relaunch:

Full offline career overhaul.
Referee and clinch systems reinstated.
Boxer individuality sliders.
Realistic stamina pacing.
Open-source data modding tools.

Make it a love letter to the fans who stayed.

7. Final Bell — The Fight to Believe Again

It’s not too late for Undisputed. The bones of something special are still there — buried under compromises and misdirection.
But the first step to redemption is honesty: admitting that ambition wasn’t the enemy. Fear was.

If SCI rebuilds the team, the engine, and the trust, they can still make history — not as the studio that disappointed boxing fans, but as the one that listened, learned, and fought its way back.

Boxing is about adaptation, endurance, and will.
The same should be true for the studio that dared to bring it back.

Poe’s Game Intel

Thursday, October 9, 2025