Let's talk RTS

M

Matthew.

Deity
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
2,179
Having watched the Planetary Annihilation video again, there was one part that caught my attention: The team talks about how a traditional publisher isn't going to take interest in a game like Planetary Annihilation, that RTS's in general are in a decline except for a few exceptions.

I've heard these comments before over the last couple of years. I did a bit of research recently, and it appears the gaming community is divided: There are plenty of folk calling the RTS genre essentially dead; and the other half is claiming it is doing just as well as ever, there just isn't as much popular focus on it.

So which is it? Are there really no good ideas left for RTS and everything now is copy/paste? Is there not enough marketable interest? Development issues? It is all a myth and RTS isn't in a decline?

I'm still waiting for my dinosaur RTS or TBS game... (as the Planetary team says: Don't go for realistic, go for awesome!)
 
Chicken and egg scenario here.

RTS games haven't sold well for big publishers, so they don't put a lot of money into it.

Consumers don't play those titles because they were cheaply done and made.

I think RTS could easily be a big genre if a big company actually put money into it, but because it typically doesn't sell well, most publishers won't. It's sad to me, as it is one of my favorite genres, and the one I grew up on. Age of Empires 2, yeah? I think that RTS will survive for now, but won't achieve its former widespread success until someone breaks the mold. There will always be die-hard fans, as well as the indie devs that obstinately focus on it of course. I really, really hope that happens sooner rather than later.
 
Great classic RTS games weren't that common either. You had Ensemble, Blizzard, and Westwood. Go beyond those, and you either ran into junk or you ran into games that weren't really what springs to mind when you think "RTS game."

The thing about those sort of games is that they aren't particularly fun to learn to play (at least for me), but are tons of fun to play once I've learned how. Further, they're games that are more entertaining with a large community of players than with just a small core. Blizzard, by virtue of consistently making their RTS better than any of the competition, have pretty much locked down the market. I could see one or maybe two rivals being sustainable to Blizzard in the future, but you'll never be seeing an abundance of good RTS games (just look at what happened in the early 2000s when a bunch of rivals tried to cut in on Blizzard/Ensemble/Westwood: they all went bankrupt).
 
coanda said:
Blizzard, by virtue of consistently making their RTS better than any of the competition, have pretty much locked down the market.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. SC2 lacks in certain areas. Namely, there is little to no focus on map, controlling/defending key points, etc. Most games come down to executing meta-game build order, playing rock/paper/scissors with unit composition, and whoever gets their mineral line or army trashed first loses.

That is a simplistic view, yes, but it is rare to see those games where multiple economy points are locked down, multi-pronged raids, etc. They do happen, but not often enough that I'd consider it standard. Although I think the game is partially designed that way since shorter games are better for e-sports (people have short attention spans).

I just got into Company of Heroes (amusingly, I missed the initial release because I was in the military myself and didn't have time to game). So far I like how there is less focus on rote-memorized build orders, and more focus on reacting to and controlling key areas on the map.

I also recently got AoE3 (late for same reasons as above) and I like how while there is certainly a rock/paper/scissors set-up, they are more "soft counters" so there is still emphasis on where to place troops on the map, flanking, etc. I think in some ways, SC2 focuses too much on hard counters (again, probably best for the game since it works for shorter, e-sport focus). Micro still takes place, but it is on a tactical level: unique abilities, pulling out damaged units. With the exception of lings, most fights are giant death ball vs. giant death ball, and whoever has the better unit composition wins.

SC2 is an ok game, but I'd hesitate saying it has "locked down the market". What it does, it does well: Fast-paced, tactical focused game designed around an elaborate rock/paper/scissors system. However it is light on the strategy side and there is certainly room for games that place more focus on map control and what I would call "strategic micro" (more focus on how and where the army is placed on the field of battle)
 
Company of Heroes 2 comes out soon. I don't think my current comp will run it, but the first seems to be highly praised.

I'm sad to see AoE die out. The campaign in 3 sucked, but the skirmishes were a lot of fun.
 
I've been watching Planetary Annihilation as well. Just the way the RTS world is on an actual globe is enough to make me want to play. I do hope that if/when they get a chance to make the game that the combat units will be a bit more exciting than mech/human-shaped robots. For a game that goes for awesome, much more could be done like gigantic spider robots crushing buildings.
 
I recently bought Supreme Commander II and found it quite enjoyable. Brought back the joys of Total Annihilation. :)

Looking forward to Company of Heroes 2. Hope it will be good. CoH 1 was (and still is) excellent for sure. The best RTS game next to Warcraft III. :)

In addition, the problem with RTS is that the genre lost it's focus. For example, League of Legends is RTS, but in a different subgenre (MOBA). Anno 2070 was sort of RTS, but more focused on building than fighting.
 
Only casuals could find SupCom II enjoyable.
 
Kozmos said:
Only casuals could find SupCom II enjoyable.
Click to expand...
Meh, I am not a competetive player, but the AI skrimishes are fun with the AI improvement mod. :p

But I guess the game is playing right into my hands: turtle, super-defense, huge maps and battles. Sign me up.
Your argument is invalid. :D
 
Multiplayer SupCom2 seemed to be dead when I tried to get into it last year. SupCom1 solitaire was generally more fun than SupCom2, I found. BTW isn't SC2 reservered for StarCraft?

Company of Heroes has the most active online community for multiplayer RTS I've found. Problem is they're pretty elitist since the game has been around forever. And there's balancing issues. RELIC is one of the great RTS makers undoubtedly though.

Most fun solitaire is still Empire Earth I, for me. With an update in terrain, buildings, graphics, and economy, this would be a dream game. EE2 was innovative and interesting but too divorced from the EE1 feel. And obviously neither is that enduring in online multiplayer community.

Stronghold is an oddball. It feels more like a puzzle game with RTS units than a typical base-building RTS imho. And except for HD/Crusader versions, the franchise ain't done well.
 
Stronghold is a castle and village/town building and management game with siege warfare also possible. Crusader got awkward trying to cram in the RTS skimish mode. Firefly hasn't made a good game since.
 
Maniacal said:
Stronghold is a castle and village/town building and management game with siege warfare also possible. Crusader got awkward trying to cram in the RTS skimish mode. Firefly hasn't made a good game since.
Click to expand...

Problem I have with it is the base-building doesn't seem RTS, but more like "as soon as you can piece together a management solution".
 
GoodGame said:
Multiplayer SupCom2 seemed to be dead when I tried to get into it last year. SupCom1 solitaire was generally more fun than SupCom2, I found. BTW isn't SC2 reservered for StarCraft?
Click to expand...
Tbh, the best part of the series is still the good ol' Total Annihilation. Vulcan, anyone? :D

Company of Heroes has the most active online community for multiplayer RTS I've found. Problem is they're pretty elitist since the game has been around forever. And there's balancing issues. RELIC is one of the great RTS makers undoubtedly though.
Click to expand...
Yep. I may not be a fan ob their 40k series (setting wise), but they certainly are one of the top devs in that regard. :)

Most fun solitaire is still Empire Earth I, for me. With an update in terrain, buildings, graphics, and economy, this would be a dream game. EE2 was innovative and interesting but too divorced from the EE1 feel. And obviously neither is that enduring in online multiplayer community.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, that game was epic. I loved the race through the ages, the fact that you could customize your CIVs and unit stats. Only played a few MP games, but they were fun as hell. I'd just like a small graphic update, improved religion ("spellcasting" system) and maybe one or two more units for bigger tactical impact. Awww.... Yes...

Stronghold is an oddball. It feels more like a puzzle game with RTS units than a typical base-building RTS imho. And except for HD/Crusader versions, the franchise ain't done well.
Click to expand...
The sad thing is that this is a series that got WORSE with each new game made. Stronghold 1 was AWESOME (I still play it from time to time, even on LAN with friends), Part 2 was "meh" and 3? DEAR GOD WHY!?!
 
Stronghold 1 is awesome, it just sucks the missions are extremely imbalanced. Some are super easy, others literally impossible. I don't know anyone who has beaten the pig's castle mission since they patched it so you can out ranged their archers. The units are very deep or cool but the economy is well thought out and fun to build your castle and town.

If you enjoyed supreme commander 2 at all you MUST try supreme commander 1. 1 has the same resource system and tech tiers as total annihilation. 2 is extremely watered down. 1 is really TA with modern graphics and it is amazing. I know a lot of people didn't care for TA's style but I absolutely loved the resources and the engineer levels and tech levels.

I also loved mech commander 1 and 2. I wish they would come out with a new one of those. They were squad based rts, you didn't build anything. In between missions you would buy new mechs and equipment and the load out your pilots and mechs and deploy to various missions, so there was a lot of strategy with deployment and picking your loadouts. The first even had limited ammo so you had to be really strategic with those weapons. The second had awesome mech customization.
 
Yeah I'm hoping the HD release actually fixes the matchmaking for AOE2 so you don't have to spend an hour arguing with networking just to get some friends in a game. I may be hoping for too much, I don't know.
 
Its nice that they are updating it for modern computers and giving it new MP support. I'm not going to pay $20 for a game I already own and haven't played in years, especially when the Total War games with mods provide a far better battle experience.


Link to video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blake00
BAR: Beyond All Reason (Total Annihilation like RTS game)
Replies
0
Views
3K
Blake00
Blake00
Blake00
Dune: Spice Wars
Replies
1
Views
2K
Bonyduck Campersang
Bonyduck Campersang
lymond
Leigecraft - new 4X game
Replies
0
Views
437
lymond
lymond
Tehulotl
Ascendancy Delyxe
Replies
2
Views
4K
Tehulotl
Tehulotl
The_J
New studio Bitreactor by former Civ and XCOM devs announces turn-based Star Wars game!
Replies
0
Views
606
The_J
The_J
Back
Top Bottom