From Alpha Dream to Hybrid Reality: Fact-Checking Raczilla’s “Apples and Oranges” Defense, And Why Undisputed Still Isn’t Finished

When a studio shifts direction mid-development, you can track it in their language long before you see it in their patch notes.
Raczilla’s Discord post about the ESBC Official Alpha Gameplay Features (First Look) is one of those moments; a moment where spin tries to rewrite history, soften expectations, and distance the current team from the original, simulation-driven identity that built all the hype in the first place.

He says the alpha video was:

Just a “slice of work in progress.”
Released “a little before” he joined.
Not comparable to the 2025 version because we’re “comparing a video and a game.”
Not something to “fall in love with,” since videos can’t be picked apart like a full game.

On the surface, it sounds humble and reasonable.
When you check the history, timelines, reception, and today’s reality, it collapses.

1. Timeline: When the Alpha Dropped, and When He Joined

1.1 The alpha video date is not up for debate

The ESBC Official Alpha Gameplay Features (First Look) video went public in the final week of March 2021. It was aggressively promoted:

GamesRadar covered it on March 29, 2021, embedding the footage.
Sports Gamers Online ran “ESBC releases alpha gameplay footage” on March 28, 2021.

This isn’t fan speculation, it’s documented.

1.2 When was Raczilla hired?

On August 26, 2021, Prolific North reported that Will “Raczilla” Kinsler had been hired as Global Communications Director for Steel City Interactive.

So yes, the alpha video came out roughly five months before he joined.
That part of his post is technically correct.

What’s missing is everything that comes after.

2. The Alpha Was Not Some Random WIP Clip — It Was The Vision That Sold the Game

Raczilla frames the footage as something fans shouldn’t take seriously, a small slice, a rough cut, nothing you can compare to a “real game.”

But the 2021 coverage contradicts that:

It was described as a meaningful gameplay look, not a placeholder.
It showcased the slower, more methodical, authentic pacing the community wanted.
It represented the game’s original simulation-first identity, the exact identity SCI marketed.

And the community response shows how important it was:

Steam discussions explicitly reference that video as the reason they bought in.
Petitions and threads repeatedly point to that exact alpha as the moment ESBC became “the boxing game we’ve been waiting for.”

This was not a tiny slice the team casually threw out.

It was the pitch.

It was the promise.

It was the identity.

Trying to frame it now as a meaningless video is convenient — especially for someone who later helped guide the game into a very different direction.

3. After He Joined: His Role Grew From Communications to Direct Product Influence

This is the part that gets glossed over in his Discord message.

2021

Hired as Global Communications Director.
(So already in a role that shapes expectations and messaging.)

2022

Appeared as the face of gameplay update videos.

2023–2024

Internally and externally involved in shaping the overall direction.

2024: Pre-launch

Publicly referred to as SCI’s Director of Product and Authenticity, and directly tied to design intentions.

By the time Undisputed released in late 2024, he wasn’t just a PR guy.
He had a voice in product direction and authenticity — two areas the community feels slumped.

So when he says “what we have today is leaps and bounds better,” he is now judging:

The pre-Kinsler sim vision
vs.
The post-Kinsler product he helped form.

Of course he says the newer version is better.

He has every incentive to.

4. Is Undisputed (2024–2025) “Leaps and Bounds Better”? The Evidence Says No

Let’s compare the claim to reality.

4.1 Critical reception

Metacritic shows mixed or average reviews, not a groundbreaking leap.
Critics say the game isn't polished and lacks depth, often calling it “not ready” compared to Fight Night Champion.

Hardly “leaps and bounds.”

4.2 Fan reception

Steam discussions and community forums repeatedly say:

The game does not resemble the simulation shown in 2021.
Core gameplay became formulaic and exploit-heavy.
Many ESBC features were watered down or removed entirely.

4.3 Even sales numbers don’t match quality

Undisputed sold over one million copies by the 1.0 release, but reviews sit around the mid-2s from players.

Games that are “leaps and bounds better” than their early builds don’t usually release to mixed, divisive, or underwhelmed reactions.

This is not a slam dunk.

This is a product that barely cleared the runway while promising a moon landing.

5. The Most Important Part: The Game Still Isn’t Finished

This is what completely collapses the “apples and oranges” argument.

Undisputed launched on:

October 11, 2024 – marketed as a 1.0 release
But in reality, according to critics, players, and ongoing dev updates…

The game is still unfinished in 2025.

Not unfinished in a poetic sense.
Not unfinished in a “games-as-a-service” sense.

Unfinished in an “entire systems are missing” sense:

No real in-depth career mode compared to early promises
AI issues still unresolved
No meaningful cutman/corner authenticity
Online exploits and balance breakdowns
Missing promised gameplay layers from 2021–2022 footage
Still receiving developmental patches for basic functionality

Even reviews at launch criticized the game for feeling like an Early Access title disguised as a full product.
Multiple reviewers said:

“It doesn’t feel complete.”
“This is not ready yet.”
“Feels like a beta.”

So how can you claim:

“What we have today is leaps and bounds better”

When is today’s game still not fully built?

When will core features from the alpha vision still don’t exist?

When the most common review phrase is:

“A good start, but not finished.”

That undercuts his entire narrative.

You can’t use “finished product vs video” as an argument
When the product isn’t finished.

6. The Real Issue: He’s Comparing a Vision He Didn’t Own to a Game He Helped Shape

This is where the conflict of interest comes in, even if unintentionally:

The 2021 alpha represented the ESBC simulation-first identity
The 2024–2025 Undisputed represents the hybrid-arcade identity that became dominant once new leadership (including Raczilla) influenced product direction

So when he says:

“There really isn’t a comparison.”

he is essentially saying:

“The game we helped create is better than the game we didn’t.”

It’s not objective.

It’s not data-driven.

It’s self-validation wrapped in PR tone.

7. Final Verdict: Was He Downplaying the Alpha to Protect the Current Game?

Based on all evidence:

Yes.

He is downplaying the alpha because:

That alpha represented the simulation vision fans were promised.
Undisputed 1.0 is not finished and not simulation-based.
Community reception and reviews do not support “leaps and bounds better.”
His role evolved into one with direct product influence, so he’s defending his era of development.
The “apples and oranges” argument fails once you acknowledge the final game is unfinished, rushed, and missing entire systems.

This isn’t malicious lying; it’s PR spin trying to rewrite the timeline of expectations.

The problem is that fans have the receipts.

They remember the promises.
They remember the alpha.
They remember what boxing games are supposed to feel like.

And they can see, clear as day, that in 2025 the game still isn’t the one ESBC showed the world.

Poe’s Game Intel

Wednesday, November 26, 2025