RTS chads, help me disprove him
There's got to be another RTS with base building that has as good of story and gameplay as Warcraft 3, if not better, right? At least something semi close?
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
He is correct, no other RTS ever came even close to WC3. Everything is very well done, polished and given atention to.
Halo Wars
Dawn of War? Supreme Commander?
>cringehammer
>cringehammer, RA2 & YR
He's asking for a good story, dimwits.
Original War
>CringeX CringeY
Frick off you meme-damaged zoomer homosexual.
seething
No, angry and disgusted.
Angry that someone called it for what it is, disgusted because you know it's true.
Angry because you are such a shit poster, and disguster because I know that people unironicly post exactly as you.
You are seething so hard that you forgot your spelling.
I am so disgusii that i don care bout me spelling anymaur.
>Story
Warcraft is for homosexuals. Playing an RTS for the “story” is basically admitting you are dogshit at RTS games
You morons never played actual melee/ladder matches, did you? Somehow I get the feeling you don't even play the RTS genre in general, but just fart around in single player until you get bored.
I did and in ladder it's still your hero and couple other units because of low the pop cap is. It plays more like party based RPG with all the caster units, status effects and shit.
You have it backward. The majority of people who ever played RTS don't play competitive multiplayer. You are the invading minority trying to alter the genre. To the extent that was successful, the genre was also killed as a viable product.
But the vast majority of people you are talking about are casuals. And I don't mean that as a pejorative, I mean that in the most neutral sense possible. They are not particularly invested in the genre, let alone any individual game. They played X game for a few dozen hours, never discussed it on the internet or consumed content related to it, and moved on with their lives. They certainly didn't come to a niche board on Ganker to proclaim their superiority.
The RTS games with the most longevity have all been kept alive because of their robust multiplayer scene, AoE2, SupCom, RA2, and BW are all examples. WC3 is the only exception I can think of, and even then it was sustained by (multiplayer) custom maps, not its campaign.
>WC3 is the only exception I can think of, and even then it was sustained by (multiplayer) custom maps, not its campaign.
Empire at War, everyone either plays vanilla singleplayer, or modded singleplayer.
Stronghold is largely a SP deal too, where MP matches is mostly just compstomps with mates.
Paradox, 4X, and TW games make pretty much all of their money due to SP players, not RTS, but still strategy games far bigger than most RTSs are now. The problem is that most RTSs don't have an "ever green" campaign and skirmish, despite SP being what made RTS an thing before broadband internet was even a thing.
>Playing an RTS for the “story” is basically admitting you are dogshit at RTS games
Good thing nobody ever did that in the entire history of games, moron. A good story is just a bonus in RTS games.
I'm dogshit at RTS games and I played Warcraft 3 for the story with whosyourdaddy the whole time.
I'd also make custom maps with custom units and pre-built bases to stomp the AI with.
Just another multiBlack person killing the genre he claims to love
I have no interest in fighting randomly picked oponents on symmetrical maps.
When the story campaign is over, i uninstall the game.
When the story campaign gets lazy and throws generic skirmishes at the player to "prepare them for multiplayer" i uninstall the game.
When the story is boring and feels like an excuse, i uninstall the game.
>I am bad at the game, so I uninstall the game
I heard you the first time.
Look, I love WC3 and it's my favorite competitive RTS, but the same features that made it great also crippled it.
For example, heroes snowball from xp gain really hard. Losing the first battle too early often results in rage quits in 90% of matches. I'm not even sure how to fix this.
I don't like the artstyle and the armies are too small. I like historical RTSs with big battalions.
RA1, RA2+YR, and Generals with ZH.
AOE2 El Cid Campaign (AOE gameplay is tast-based, but so is every single Blizzard game.).
Dawn of War 1 and Winter Assault.
Also
>Niggit
WC3 honestly barely counts as an RTS game. In retrospect the base game of WC3 itself was a moba prototype.
>In retrospect the base game of WC3 itself was a moba prototype.
Dumbest fricking post on this entire site
>In retrospect
>moba prototype
You can't retroactively make something a prototype you fricking idiot
Why do you think like this? Is it because of the hero units?
Yes, also prevalence of caster units and status effects, neutral creeps, item shops, low pop cap. On top o that I've seen it said that it was intended to be even more hero focused game initially.
Now to be fair calling it a "prototype" fudges cause and effect a bit. Obviously most moba feature WC3-like elements because they are directly inspired by the WC3 custom scenario and the scenario had to work with what was available but the vanilla game was already halfway there and I believe the combination of features made moba the inevitable next step.
be me play game
have fun
then see someone on internet say game is bad
suddenly i don't have fun anymore
>Be me
>Have fun
>Then see someone on internet say game is bad
>Comment on how he is full of shit
>Proceed to have even more fun
warhammer kids seething
>story
starcraft 1 had a better story
Starcraft, Dawn of War, Command and Conquer.
BFME aswell, but i feel like that is cheating.
>BFME aswell
Too bad the game is shit, nostalgiagay
>RTS with base building
As opposed to RTS without base building?
Plenty of them out there you dimwit
You're confusing them for RTT.
RTT is stuff like Commandos, Desperados and Shadow Tactics. What do you call games like Dark Omen and Mark of Chaos? RTS without basebuilding
>Commandos, Desperados and Shadow Tactics
Those are stealth RTT, itself a subgenre. The poster boy for RTT is Total War.
World in Conflict?
Also RTT
>DoW2
No, not a RTT. You have a base, you build units, tech up, gather resources and research things.
You just do not clutter your base zone with anti-lore shit.
>Perimiter
Your base can become a unit. You generally just construct power lines and tech unlockers. General construction happens in starting base-unit.
Your goal is not even that much destroying the base as making the base zone unlivable.
>Homeworld
Literally the only non-moving non-combatant is a lab unit. And that is only in first game.
People that can't distinguish those from RTT do not play both enough.
Is Rise of Legends' building Base Building?
Yes.
Any AoE game.
Command and Conquer has a neat story
>with the blizzard's first success starcraft
anon, this is a troll post, you're not supposed to disprove it.
Warcraft 3 has everything going for it EXCEPT the story. It's basic and the dialog is cringe. Characters act like teenagers and it's chock full of melodrama.
And while Starcraft 1 is better written, none of the Blizzard games are actually well written. That's why their novel tie-ins and film adaptations fail so hard; there's not really anything to work with.
As for op, just read a proper novel and forgot about it. Don't look for Dostoevsky in an industry run by manchildren.
>That's why their novel tie-ins and film adaptations fail so hard;
I thought the one with thrall's backstory was neat as a teenager tbh
Age of mythology
Spellforce 3 is basically Warcraft 4
Play as humans, elves, orcs, dwarves, dark elves or trolls.
Not to mention there is more you can do with heroes.
mental omega
Red Alert 2, Yuri's Revenge and Mental Omega
>the yuri trilogy
Explains why it's also the least fun RTS ever made.
WC3 would be a lot better if
>reduce hp of units to like 1/3
>remove tp
>increase size of armies
>remove upkeep
AoE 2
>B-b-but that story is literally just history
Exactly
Those new campaings they added in Lords of the West are kino. Finding out that the Edward Longshanks campaing was tied directly with the William Wallace campaing was pure ludo
You are arguing on Reddit, you have already lost.
It's not even the best RTS from that fricking company, brood war is infinitely better in every way. Warcraft opened the door to moba bullshit with their homosexual hero mechanic.
rbt gays are literal children, Myth shits all over War3
>nooo it doesn't have muh comfy wompfy sim town building waaa
grow the frick up
>story
Kane is way more memorable than character from the World of Warcraft
Wc3 story is what made the game. Following Arthas through his change. Even if simple it was still infinitely better than any other rts story telling.
Especially the beginning of seeing Arthas change and turn undead. Still you kept playing as him even after he was a bad guy. The world felt alive and changing. Heroes getting more powerful each scenario.
Aoe2 then for example every scenario starts again from 0. There's no build up. Not much finale. Nor drama.
I never liked Aoe2 despite being a very popular game. I can see why it's liked but it's not for me. Troops die instantly and I feel like you need 50 peasants to run the economy. I'd rather play city builder at that point.
Yeah been really liking the newer campaigns. Best moment for me was hiring jan zizka in the final Lithuanian/Polish battle then seeing that he has a whole campaign of his own.
Spellforce
Age of Mythology. There. Thread over.
Attack move is broken in that game in a way that hampers my enjoyment significantly.
You trying to convince a redditor? That not going to happen.
bump