I got shat on the other day for saying this. I'm not a casual gamer by any means, but holy frick RTS autists are in full force and there really isn't any fun to be had in MP. I dont care to become an APM master
I got shat on the other day for saying this. I'm not a casual gamer by any means, but holy frick RTS autists are in full force and there really isn't any fun to be had in MP. I dont care to become an APM master
You have to enjoy learning the game and getting better at it
If you don't raise your guard, you get knocked.
If you don't get knocked, the enemy is making a mistake you should take advantage on.
If you win easily without knowing some game, it is a bad game or a scam, and let you win
Thats the idea of sports and games. They're simulations of problems to be solved. There's nothing better than testing yourself against another human. It's never about him, it's always about you and your teammates.
But that's the point of "games", that's the point of these games
What is so offensive about that truth?
4 months ago
Anonymous
Video games in their inception and first decades were singleplayer. Sports are the home of over socialised partial people. I blame the creche industry and Hitlers Germany for this model of childcare which subsequently spread from Sweden to most major urban areas. The Children are placed in creches at 2 and never fully bond with their parents, only able to function as part of a group of others with a leader figure (the child carer/coach/captain etc).
4 months ago
Anonymous
Videogames can be a lot of things. You have Sony consoles that are mostly interactive movies even. But RTS are games to be tinkered with. To be competitive. To be singleplayer. To be puzzles. RTS are awesome because of that. But to make them work, they have to respect their own rules and their players, so the sandbox works. If people really dislike the idea of this sandbox being competitive by development outcome then they're not really into RTS.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>GOOCLICK IS MUH SOCIALS!!!! >*nobody plays the game*
4 months ago
Anonymous
>I CLICKY THAT MAKES ME SPROT REEE
You being mentally ill and devoid of any merit in your life is the truth, yes. Glad we agree.
Look buddy, i'm one of those people who create custom games with clear "chill noobie match" label, and often times i end up with homosexuals like you taking a massive hunk of shit on everyone inside. So clearly this is not the case of playing for the sake of competitiveness or improving yourself, these people are there to punch down so they can feel good about themselves. When this kind of shit keeps on happening casual players naturally just give up and let the shitlords enjoy the pigsty they've created.
>hese people are there to punch down so they can feel good about themselves. When this kind of shit keeps on happening casual players naturally just give up and let the shitlords enjoy the pigsty they've created.
I really get you're overblowing one or two instances when a bully attacked a kid. Nobody likes buillies.
But nobody likes victims either.
And it's not even about entering the Salty Spitoon or the Weenie Hut. Its about love for the game and for self improvement.
If you don't respect the game and its rules, you're not playing the game. You're dicking around. And ITS FINE to dick around. You should host DICK AROUND lobbies and enforce the dicking around. But to be mad against the people who respect it? don't be that kind of guy in life.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>asiaticclicktroony be like RESPEC & DA LIFE
Mentally
Ill
4 months ago
Anonymous
>being bad at the game is a crime and you should FRICK OFF
okay, cool
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Hyperbole
Did not said that at all, anon.
What is a crime is being buttblasted about people being better at it
4 months ago
Anonymous
read
Look buddy, i'm one of those people who create custom games with clear "chill noobie match" label, and often times i end up with homosexuals like you taking a massive hunk of shit on everyone inside. So clearly this is not the case of playing for the sake of competitiveness or improving yourself, these people are there to punch down so they can feel good about themselves. When this kind of shit keeps on happening casual players naturally just give up and let the shitlords enjoy the pigsty they've created.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Don't cater to bullies. But don't act like a victim either.
lol what does chill match in an RTS even mean. If I develop the means to destroy you I just... shouldn't? Get BTFO noob.
This behaviour can be observed in other games as well. Sweat lords who can't take a loss will always go for the easy win and will destroy matches for others. Casuals will leave the game entirely to the point where there is no other person left but sweat lords, who will then cannibalise each other until they either rage-quit or commit suicide in pure anger. They just can't relax. I've even seen this in fricking Half-Life 2 mods.
4 months ago
Anonymous
what you call sweat-lords we know simply as players that enjoy the game and play it as it's supposed to be and since you quit playing who cares what you think about games you don't play?
4 months ago
Anonymous
You may not have noticed the irony here, but you just confirmed the behaviour of sweat lords and lack of seeing other people's perspective. Don't cry that you are part of the moving force killing RTS.
4 months ago
Anonymous
This shit even happens in obscure Warcraft 3 maps. Like half of the maps available aren't actually playable because you need a minimum 200 hours experience + tutoring, which you will never EVER receive. Instead, you will be forced through the classic meatgrinder of newbieging, feeding, getting banned.
It's completely different with RTS. It's all about APM. Beleive me, RTS multiplayer is probably fulfilling as frick when you actually best your opponent, but there hasn't been an RTS game that made me want to master it. Hell, after all the years of playing singleplayer RTS, I still consider myself a shitter. I'm pretty good and can pick up fast when playing vidja, just I'm not interested in devoting anymore time into RTS, so I will not test my skill at multiplayer.
Recently got back into Company of heroes, there is absolutely no chance in hell I will git gud playing with someone who's been playing it for over a decade now, it's simply past my time.
I got shat on the other day for saying this. I'm not a casual gamer by any means, but holy frick RTS autists are in full force and there really isn't any fun to be had in MP. I dont care to become an APM master
>I want to compete but I don't want to play well
Just play ranked. Getting put in bronze or whatever your elo is will give you the experience you crave.
I am an old school C&C player and while I did play LAN games with a friend as a kid but we would impose a 5 mins no attacking rule so we could actually build our base, frick multiplayer man I would just prefer a skirmish against AI any time.
>we would impose a 5 mins no attacking rule so we could actually build our base,
lol the engineer rush early game to capture an enemy mcv and sell it was the most hilarious shit. you would miss it if you have a ceasefire for builing up like that.
That is why we imposed the rule, I think it is like what others are saying about APM, basically if we dont impost a rule like that it all comes down to who can click a mouse quick enough. which is moronic.
Personally I get fun out of C&C by building an absoluetly massive base and massive force and shitstorming the enemy after a long resource battle, exploring all the map and having the various skirmishes that occur doing so. Playing multiplayer well its basically teh popponent just wants to get rid of you fast, where I want a massive long skirmish.
Imagine it like I want to play chess take my time and think ahead and you want to play quick chess. 2 different ethos.
I am the same with TW, though of course in TW the battles are more fluid and separate from the strategy aspect.
I just dont like mutliplayer in RTS.
>I just dont like mutliplayer in RTS.
yoi could always play coop vs AI which is chill.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>coop vs AI
You know I have never tried that.
Could probably try that in RA2.
I just installed dune 2000 because of this thread.
4 months ago
Anonymous
It's great, just play a 2v6 game and have fun grinding ai
4 months ago
Anonymous
red alert 2 AI is pretty shit. you easily win the game by chronoing some prism tanks into their base or ICing your apocs. they can't obviously counter play by using force shields and other techniques to protect themselves like how human players do. I recommend you to play Dawn of War 1 for coop AI matches. Its AI keeps you on your toes.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Dawn of War 1
I am not into the warhammer shit at all and tbh I am quite pissed that the warhammer fans jumped on TW warhammer so much that it has kind of ruined CA even more. I know warhammer fans were begging CA to do a warhammer game for ages and I am glad for them they did one but as a history TW fan I am quite pissed about them doing 3 games and taking the team away from making a great history game.
Though tbh I dont think I will ever play a TW game after R2 shitty release, plus my PC is so old I doubt it could handle any game past atilla. It can only mediocre handle R2.
Still I am a rome fan so R2 is enough for me.
As for that warhammer game I also dont like the type of 3D RTS.
I like old school C&C and EA killing westwood killed C&C for me, generals was shit to me and any further game than that looks like trash as well generals is the reason I looked for a different RTS and got into TW.
Irony with TW is that I got into it because of the combat gameplay but now I actually prefer the overall campaign strategy map.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>I also dont like the type of 3D RTS.
oof I get that hate. I too dreaded the move from beautiful 2D isometric visuals to the low poly 3D in RTS games but it was inevitable. I think you'll have difficulty playing any RTS post 2000 if you keep holding onto the glory of the past. age of mythology really helped in overcoming the 3D hatred for me. It became one of my favorite RTS games.
As for TW, I get it. shogun 2 was peak TW for me. although the new games are technologically superior, I still miss old TW so much.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>shogun 2 was peak TW for me
I like it but I prefer the roman period.
I like R1 and M2 for a more chilled out strat game and R2 when I want a more complex strat game.
Yeah I grew up with the 2D RTS so jumping to the 3D has never been easy for me for these games, plus I have never seen a 3D RTS take my interest.
I dont really like isometric RTS either though I used to play syndicate a lot as a kid and that is isometric.
I play(ed) statlite reign isometric though a syndicate spiritual successor.
Still loads of the old RTS games are timeless classics, C&C TS, RA2 commandos 2 are games I could probably play forever.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>I dont really like isometric RTS either >TS, RA2, Commandos 2 are games I could probably play forever
but those are isometric as well.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>commandos 2
The Commandos games are stealth RTT, not RTS. Also, there's a new one being made.
4 months ago
Anonymous
ALARM ALARM
4 months ago
Anonymous
Shame that Mimimi is gone, though it might be for the best after Shadow Gambit, just how many times can you make the same game?
4 months ago
Anonymous
Can I add you to play RA2 with you? I would be down to players VS AI. I play similarly too.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I am not playing atm though you know there is the CnCnet website you can find players to do stuff like that.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Think the closest I've got to SC2 multiplayer was their coop
kek, this
RTS becoming some "competitive e-sport" killed the genre. People didn't play Starcraft for the online, they played it for the spectator sport and the custom maps. This is why they got away with selling $60 campaigns for 2.
No good single player = no RTS, just autistic asiaticclick simulator that will die with like 50 people playing.
When young me saw the e-sports scene pick up around starcraft I thought it was a great thing that would eventually legitimize video games and make bigger and better RTS games
little did I know that it would just streamline RTS games to be all about the clicking and the mashing instead of making bigger and better games.
same, though not just RTS but I thought games in general would get better and better due to wider reach and interest. instead RTS got killed and every other genre got fricked due to pandering to normies (matchmaking, behaviour scores, mobile, micro-transactions, gachashit).
Yup. None of them broke into Starcraft's niche apart from debatably AoE2, and no-one really discusses either of those games outside of their incredibly insular communities which are just like ant hives full of literal drones obsessed with e-celebs. Meanwhile, discussions of the campaigns in games like WC3, AoM, C&C, DoW (etc) are rich and varied because the content was really good. It's sad as frick that the genre as a whole bet on the first group and lose.
And AoE2 has one of the most impressive campaigns of any RTS out there. I think last count is literally 100 hours if you add all of the cultures campaigns together.
Cool. So, never. No lootboxes, no DLC milling, no E-sports homosexualry, no gacha and on organ selling. Meaning that any even remotely recognizable studio won't touch the genre with a 10ft pole. Indies won't dev something decent in two decades. Luv me hobby.
Based. I've been saying for literally years that multiplayer gays are a plague on the genre.
kek, this
RTS becoming some "competitive e-sport" killed the genre. People didn't play Starcraft for the online, they played it for the spectator sport and the custom maps. This is why they got away with selling $60 campaigns for 2.
No good single player = no RTS, just autistic asiaticclick simulator that will die with like 50 people playing.
Cool. So, never. No lootboxes, no DLC milling, no E-sports homosexualry, no gacha and on organ selling. Meaning that any even remotely recognizable studio won't touch the genre with a 10ft pole. Indies won't dev something decent in two decades. Luv me hobby.
Those are alive in MP and well
And if you like campaigns so much, then you don't really need more novelty. Go play the frickton there are with campa-oh wait, I forgot you're a secondary, you don't even play the campaigns either. A tourist. A coper. A shitter. A PvEr with no friends and social anxiety.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Games still being played online does not mean that the *genre* is alive, based mong. You've basically listed games from 15 years ago and some fan projects. I'm also a married man with a richer social life than yours lol
4 months ago
Anonymous
Married to a man more likely lmao
Cope harder gayet keep crying on a mongolian weaving basket board about your failures in toys
4 months ago
Anonymous
Thanks, I will. Enjoy flexing your epic skills at 15-year-old toys on the same forum. Hope you can sort yourself out soon.
4 months ago
Anonymous
You showed your tiny dick first, anon. I am enjoying the games on topic, and will keep accepting the future
Shame about your manwife having you at xir side.
gtfo of the discussion
4 months ago
Anonymous
>people playing the games doesn't count
wat
wtf do you mean then?
4 months ago
Anonymous
Games people care about being released. There are still people playing NES games, it does not mean the NES is alive as a platform.
4 months ago
Anonymous
ok but there are games being released
4 months ago
Anonymous
I assume it's a case of small but active communities "not counting". Kinda like how you can still find matches of CS 1.6 or Unreal Tournament but they're considered dead games because they're no longer relevant and have small & stagnant player counts. There are still people playing Dawn of War 2 online but it is kinda dead as a game, even if you can still find a match.
[...] >I want an RTS > But slow paced >In fact turn based >And wanna make my dudes and fight in epic big battles like im a general > Different units comp? That sounds tryhard >Techs? That sounds like build paths and i dont wanna learn that >Pincer attacks? Lmao what a tryhard babble >Disruption of economy? Lmao thats some tryhard words, im a general not an economist > I want the biggest tank, and i want it now >Building costs? Boring shit for tryhards >I dont wanna hear "scouting", means nothing to me >MP? Thats a solved building path and I... No I dont wanna play against a person who solved the game or me >I wanna play against an AI that plays always the same so i can solve the game >I wanna fight in my "own terms" and whenever i like, not when my enemy forces me to because i wanna be the one forcing, just dont know how >And if you beat me youre a tryhard korean in age of stratcraft i played that game all the time as a kid and was a god i know what im talking about but dem evil koreans made it bad
Ugh. Is it so hard to understand?
Anyways, what RTS game lets me roleplay as a good general? Without those -pesky- mechanics in the way
I main Protoss btw
>You like (CONTENT)? Well I don't like (CONTENT) I like (asiaticCLICK) therefore you're a secondary
Frick off, you already killed the genre with your stupidity. Playing with yourself and the other sub-80 IQ morons in the decade-old asiaticclick games that did it isn't an accomplishment.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Married to a man more likely lmao
Cope harder gayet keep crying on a mongolian weaving basket board about your failures in toys
Every RTS thread >Why are RTS not as popular? >I DON'T KNOW BUT I HATE RTS WITH PASSION CAUSE THEY MAKE ME ANXIOUS AND EXPOSE ME I WANT THEM TO BE ANYTHING BUT REAL TIME STRATEGY >I don't think you should be here bu- >FRICK THIS, THIS IS THE REASON WHY, THEY DON'T CATER TO ME SO I DON'T BUY WHAT I DON'T ALREADY BUY
What's with RTS and anxiety posters? chill, campaigns have never been good outside a handful in the first place.
Oh it's this moron again. The guy who argues that if you don't play sweaty ranked 1v1 games and maybe enjoy 3v3s or unranked then you're a secondary because games are only meant to be played one specific way and any other way isn't intended and/or is killing the genre
Games still being played online does not mean that the *genre* is alive, based mong. You've basically listed games from 15 years ago and some fan projects. I'm also a married man with a richer social life than yours lol
What's funny is he got everything he wanted ten years ago. Notice all the games in are ten to twenty year old games specifically designed around the sweatiest 1v1 lost temple only ladder play to the point that, minus AOE2 and SC2 which are games from nearly 20 years ago, some of them don't even have a campaign. PA Titans didn't come out with a story and was just ranked ladder matches. All of them minus the ones with campaigns crashed and burned financially because they got rid of the stuf people liked in RTS games, PA Titans nearly ruined the studio that was making it, for instance.
And he thinks he's not the cancer killing the genre.
4 months ago
Anonymous
But don't you understand, even though esportshomosexualry failed for 20 years straight,it will be successful eventually.
4 months ago
Anonymous
The genre is dead because there is no actual innovation, no new games that shake up the genre.
4 months ago
Anonymous
it's dead because there are no new games in the genre, Jim. there are tons of generic FPS games releasing every year and it didn't kill the genre.
4 months ago
Anonymous
The FPS genre is one of the most alive genres. There is constant innovation and shakeups. Even fricking Call of Duty had 3 reboots where they substantially changed the formula (MW, AW, WZ).
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Call of Duty had 3 reboots where they substantially changed the formula
press X to doubt.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Call of Duty
WW2 shooters, basically MoH clones >Modern Warfare
Modern setting, perks and killstreaks completely change the formula. >Advanced Warfare
A bunch of gay advanced movement, Titanfall was better tho. >Warzone
Free-to-play. Battle Royale, almost a different game.
Compare with Stormgate which is allegedly made by SC2 devs and it's the same game but gayer, and SC2 was already just a worse Brood Warm with a bunch of QoL shit. At some point RTS devs stopped trying and coming up with new ideas. That's why the genre died.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>he got filtered by the campaigns because he is a shitter and has to play against other shitters who can't beat the campaigns
4 months ago
Anonymous
>PA TItans >alive in MP and well
You're lucky to see a single lobby, with the eco jacked up to 5x
Didn't ask, don't care, never played ranked SC2 in my life and I never cared to.
You are a minority of maybe 5% of the playerbase killing the game for the other 95%
I remember the good old days of Sc2 playing on the KR server. Every match was 4 gate vs 4 gate or proxy cannons/dt rush. Terran always did 3 gate all ins or 1 base all ins and zerg either did roach all ins or just did pure macros to death. No game would last past 15mns due to 2 base all ins being so optimized. Game really went to shit once you start playing against good players.
SC2 is a flawed game to the core. The whole development time went into 1v1 and any other mode isn't balanced or even considered. Every other RTS is thought to be modular and better with more people, except SC2, because Korea time was all about the 1v1. Even there, the development is flawed, since instead of making a sequel with innovations, made more like a port of SC1 shortcomings to a new engine (ramps, stuck units, little basebuilding, TTK too low, deathballing by consequence, etc)
I liked my time in SC2 but not that much. And there's little player expression in that game, so you're always doing the same mechanical paths with the more or less same outcomes.
Campaign people are a loud minority that don't even finish those games. Everytime I see someone asking for a campaign, you realize they don't even understand the game. Might as well be a shooter on rails.
>Campaign people are a loud minority
Less than 25% of any given RTS playerbase so much as touches 1v1, let alone plays it primarily
YOU are the minority ruining it
If it has a good campaign, and a good skirmish then the average RTS player will be in heaven. You make a paper thin campaign and have it rely on multiplayer then it will fail. Companies failed to realize this
AoE2 campaigns work so well because its a MP designed game but translated the sandbox to narrated scenarios, like puzzles. And makes it kinda hard as well. Cool story, cool problems, and when you're done with them you're pretty much ready to play MP if you want.
This is why I don't really like the Total War Warhammer games much. They just drop you into a world with a few objectives, but there isn't much of a campaign. It feels totally hallow and pointless. Especially lategame when the entire game falls apart, because you have this massive boarder and are fighting 2 other super powers across the entire world with no easy way to get across it. Really after the first 30 turns there is a steep dropoff in quality, because the entire scenario the dev setup for you is basically over at that point.
Thats what I meant by "Drop you into the world with a few objectives", but its not really a campaign. Like it kinda is especially getting 8 peaks back, but there's a lot missing.
Based poll responders. Learning the uses and effective combos of units, finding and improving on new strategies, overall macro, and custom maps is where the fun is. E-Sports and high APM micro can frick off back to their containment starcraft.
This, I just wanted to play Civilization but in Age of Empires 2. >Continent with different resources scattered throughout for civ diversity >Taking your time advancing through the ages >Emphasis on diplomacy, remaining neutral and building trade/markets >Lots of walls >Focus on fighting over territory/border disputes rather than blitzing your enemies
kek, this
RTS becoming some "competitive e-sport" killed the genre. People didn't play Starcraft for the online, they played it for the spectator sport and the custom maps. This is why they got away with selling $60 campaigns for 2.
No good single player = no RTS, just autistic asiaticclick simulator that will die with like 50 people playing.
based Warcraft 3 enjoyers
give me a kino campaign and good custom maps, I don't care about sweaty multiplayer
competitive gays murdered rts and that's a fact
shove your apm up your ass homie
like 95% of rts games cater to casual shitters (all city builders, economy base building, all total war games, gsg, tower defense etc) theres grand total of 2 competitive rts yet you pathetic homosexuals still find a way to cry about it
lack of competitive drive and whining because you got outclassed in a mp match instead of trying to improve is purely a woman trait, go back to you sims 4 homosexual
4 months ago
Anonymous
I use my competitive drive in places that matter like my job. Try getting one nerd.
4 months ago
Anonymous
you sure do as a HR roastie lmao
4 months ago
Anonymous
>no argument >name calling >diverting
Thought so, games are winding down after a hard day of work. Get a job and maybe you'll stop ruining them for everyone else with your insecurities.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>still whining like a b***h and refuses to refute
there are like 3 rts with mp worth playing and even thats a stretch, games like aoe2de despite active mp community have great AI and tons of scenarios for everyone to enjoy if you do not want to play mp then dont you fricking homosexual.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>refuses to refute
Refutre what?
You got buttmad people don't like multiplayer and started talking about testosterone and shit, my argument is that you're a dumb nerd who takes videogames too seriously, frick off
4 months ago
Anonymous
here i will explain like to a braindead moron, anyone who actually plays same rts longer than a week will shitstomp braindead AI, especially if you had any experience in RTS games in the past theres literally no point in playing past that point, thats why people swap to multiplayer. Subhumans like you who cry about multiplayer dont play RTS, you just whine on the internet, not only 95% rts are made to cater to mouth drooling morons like you, the handful of multiplayer rts have great skill based matchmaking are also full of singleplayer and custom content for casuals. Its literally non issue only mentally ill troon would bring up and whine about multiplayer in every RTS thread.
4 months ago
Anonymous
didn't read lol
4 months ago
Anonymous
i accept you concession
4 months ago
Anonymous
Testosterone does increase competitiveness tho.
Its possible to even imagine a RTS that appealed to women, something like Animal Crossing or SimCity but with more murder.
I see this cause some consternation among the asiaticclickers >n-no, my autismfest is ultra high skill, you don't get it! >it has to mean something, i didn't just waste all my time!
loving every laugh
PLEASE BE GOOD. THAT IS LITERALLY THE ONLY THING THAT I'M EXCITED FOR. I'M A JADED 37 YEAR OLD DUDE. THE REMASTERED COLLECTION WAS ASS AND DESERTS OF wiener WAS SHIT. GIVE ME SOMETHING.
>THE REMASTERED COLLECTION WAS ASS AND DESERTS OF wiener WAS SHIT
What did they frick up? I thought that remaster was nothing but a visual touch-up and better support for modern OS?
Among other things, they only updated and polished the Homeworld 2 engine, then ported Homeworld 1 to it. It's not that HW2's engine was bad, but the two games didn't have the same mechanics and had a different "feel" to them, and the remastered edition got rid of that. HW1 ended up feeling quite a bit like a piece of HW2 DLC.
Also I think they made a few parts of HW1 easier, like the Gardens of Kanesh mission.
when they start having worthwhile campaigns and better customization tools. The reason they died was because every RTS dev neglected singleplayer experiences and custom game modes to chase esports/comp scene
I think rts require more production value than most realise. Maybe you don't want fancy cutscenes a'la C&C but you probably would want cool voiced lines for units.
Also I think your pic is why modern RTS' always fail.
No one would have the balls to make a Red Alert nowadays because they would be offended of making a game full of stereotypes, so they try some schlock copy+paste job of your image and thus none of them are interesting.
I think rts require more production value than most realise. Maybe you don't want fancy cutscenes a'la C&C but you probably would want cool voiced lines for units.
The former WC3 devs are making a new RTS right now that's supposed to release this year that was shown off at realms deep that had infantry units going through trees and other interesting ideas, but it's basically this image and had such a generic name literally no one remembers it, not even google.
>WC3 devs
Hard passage. Hardest of passings. WC3 was a blight on Warcraft and rts genre.
I saw a bit of it and it looked like some moba (they all the same) x starcraft 2
Horrible.
It was a good RTS game with a rich campaign and fun multiplayer
BUT
What ruined it was the constant chase of 'Balance'. Remember the era of Castercraft? That was created BECAUSE WC3 was a game made to chase balance considerations by 'Pros' who wanted to measure their self-worth through clicking.
It's no surprise their new game is kind of the same thing: An E-sports centric game that's inherently about 1v1 ladder play with very little creativity behind its lore, its story, or its setting. Because that's what they wanted to turn WC3 into.
4 months ago
Anonymous
vanilla WC3 was bloated to frick with micromanagement despite having appealing aspects
which is why MOBAs took off, it was literally just cutting out 90% of the gameplay loop to focus on managing 1 hero unit
I know this looks very impressive to you, but this looks exactly, just like
I think rts require more production value than most realise. Maybe you don't want fancy cutscenes a'la C&C but you probably would want cool voiced lines for units.
>hehe we will make a mega rts
oh nice >made by starcraft devs
really, the star- >starcraft 2 devs!
oh ok >balanced by sc2 players, the have the beta and alpha keys!
oh... >and the mechanics are based on sc2!
I get the gist, but the individual points are not very accurate
take Universe at War as an example >Hierarchy, evil guys invading earth, strong mobile fortresses >Novus, good guys invading earth, huge mobility >Masari, late to the party ancient defenders, defensive, can switch playstyle
Masari are the least gimmicky, not even actual bad but stirr shit up.
If anyone Novus has the only girl character.
some mod allows you to play humans as a faction and apparently someone recently figured how to make mods playable in online mulitplayer
Didn't try myself, only stumbled over this
It's actually a really nasty genre to code and requires a ton of assets to do right. The only low-budget modern RTS games I've really enjoyed were the 8-bit series.
this
specially the pathfinding, anything but perfect will kill the playerbase, janky unit movement will infuriate anyone
It's actually a really nasty genre to code and requires a ton of assets to do right. The only low-budget modern RTS games I've really enjoyed were the 8-bit series.
I'm working on one actually.
The amount of work is absurd 'cause game engines are absolutely not designed for RTS so you end up half engine-deving it. Like, I had to make my own physics engine to get vaguely acceptable performances, and make my own animation system 'cause otherwise there would be none at all.
I think rts require more production value than most realise. Maybe you don't want fancy cutscenes a'la C&C but you probably would want cool voiced lines for units.
Damn, this too.
It need shitton of models, voice, portraits, icons, VFX, SFX - way more than for most other game type.
I dread the moment were I will be out of the "just focus on making shit work" phase and will have to actually find/make all the assets needed.
>game engines are absolutely not designed for RTS
I wonder if it's possible with Source engine. I know Dota 2 is MOBA and all but the foundation is there with isometric views, pathfinding, and the Havok physics engine integration. I remember some modder developed Half-Life 2 RTS with the engine at one point.
playing dota and looking at the closeup view always blows my mind. the models and animations front on are really good. I wonder how well that game could run if everything was locked top down.
Then again it blew my mind when i played empire earth as a kid and seeing an artillery shell stopped mid air.
>why are there no indie RTS games? it seems like a great genre to innovate
Here you go
warzone 2100 and it is free, originally released on the PS1. Excellent game
https://wz2100.net/
I loved it on the PS1 as it is packed with sovl from the post apocalyptic feels and sountrack in that version and was kind of pleased to see it had been kept alive.
>why are there no indie RTS games? it seems like a great genre to innovate
Here you go
warzone 2100 and it is free, originally released on the PS1. Excellent game
https://wz2100.net/
I loved it on the PS1 as it is packed with sovl from the post apocalyptic feels and sountrack in that version and was kind of pleased to see it had been kept alive.
>>why are there no indie RTS games? it seems like a great genre to innovate >Here you go >warzone 2100 and it is free, originally released on the PS1. Excellent game >https://wz2100.net/ >I loved it on the PS1 as it is packed with sovl from the post apocalyptic feels and sountrack in that version and was kind of pleased to see it had been kept alive.
pic related is actually a pretty fun campaign RTS. I know it has active pause but really the genre is for casuals and it makes the experience far more enjoyable.
Give it a pirate if you want something new
>When are RTSs coming back in full glory?
Do you really want to monkeys paw this genre? It getting big now would be horrible for the genre. It's best if it stays "dead" and caters to the community it has. The second it breaks mainstream it's over.
Creeper World and Particle Fleet, if they are counted as RTS, are literally the best RTS games of the 2010s. Fricking insane to think about, despite them being amazing games.
Ok, so you want RTS to be great again. Understandable. Tell me, how the frick a release of an RTS game will ever beat RA2? It has to be at least THAT good, ideally even better. Think about how high of a ceiling that is for the devs to reach. How hard it is/would be.
>Creeper World and Particle Fleet
gameplay is a bit too simplistic. But they're still nice little games. I didn't like the Creeper World 2 tho. First one is great, third one is ok/very good. But they get boring quickly, I dunno, I got fed up with the Creeper World.
I really enjoyed 2, but I can absolutely see why someone wouldn't. I thought it was pretty brave of them, actually, to change the gameplay on such a fundamental level. The next one in the series looks like a sequel to 2, as well.
When they makes RTS games that are fun enough that people want to play them more than 20+ year old games, and when they stop giving a shit about multiplayer. Also, make sure you have a good art team.
nothing personnell against devs or backers, but I just straight up assume it'll be fricking garbage. Not because chances are it's a ripoff, whatsoever, but because 3D RTS games are just bad. The only reason WCIII has managed to somewhat pull it off is because of people being invested in the story, powerful editor, and blizzard not being total fricking shit just yet. Most attempts at 3D RTS fail, they just don't feel nearly as good to play, I dunno. member generals? yeah, whatever, average game. RA and Tiberian Sun are still better.
TL;DR: Hard to articulate right off the top of my head what is wrong with 3D and "good", or frick forbid "realistic" graphics in an RTS. But, they're just worse/average or bad.
They love being marketed as "ex blizzard devs" depite blizzard being shit for many years now so it doesn't mean jack.
The only ex blizzard devs that ever mattered were ArenaNet.
you know what, I did a little research on the website on that title. I take this
nothing personnell against devs or backers, but I just straight up assume it'll be fricking garbage. Not because chances are it's a ripoff, whatsoever, but because 3D RTS games are just bad. The only reason WCIII has managed to somewhat pull it off is because of people being invested in the story, powerful editor, and blizzard not being total fricking shit just yet. Most attempts at 3D RTS fail, they just don't feel nearly as good to play, I dunno. member generals? yeah, whatever, average game. RA and Tiberian Sun are still better.
TL;DR: Hard to articulate right off the top of my head what is wrong with 3D and "good", or frick forbid "realistic" graphics in an RTS. But, they're just worse/average or bad.
back. Because: That game is gonna suck so hard it is unreal. It will be one of the worst strategy game ever released. It'll flop so hard and die so fast, that I can't even. I quote the website: >The First Truly Social RTS >Additional chapters in Stormgate’s ongoing sci-fi and fantasy campaign will be released regularly alongside new units, maps, game modes, and more. >Compete on the traditional 1v1 ladder or as part of your 3P team. We aim to make it easier and more fun to compete whether your goal is to test yourself in grassroots events or qualify for world-class esports tournaments.
TL;DR: That game is rts cancer incarnate. I now regret entering this thread, because you made me learn about that bullshit game, that makes the world we live in worse by just existing.
[...]
The former WC3 devs are making a new RTS right now that's supposed to release this year that was shown off at realms deep that had infantry units going through trees and other interesting ideas, but it's basically this image and had such a generic name literally no one remembers it, not even google.
It's funny because 'Stormgate' was the fake game that people would make fun of as a fake MOBA because all of them have 'storm' or 'gate' in their name.
nothing personnell against devs or backers, but I just straight up assume it'll be fricking garbage. Not because chances are it's a ripoff, whatsoever, but because 3D RTS games are just bad. The only reason WCIII has managed to somewhat pull it off is because of people being invested in the story, powerful editor, and blizzard not being total fricking shit just yet. Most attempts at 3D RTS fail, they just don't feel nearly as good to play, I dunno. member generals? yeah, whatever, average game. RA and Tiberian Sun are still better.
TL;DR: Hard to articulate right off the top of my head what is wrong with 3D and "good", or frick forbid "realistic" graphics in an RTS. But, they're just worse/average or bad.
Pretty sure this is being made by the people that made starcraft
here is your failure >people that made starcraft
as I am meant to give a shit about that. the only reason they made it in the first place, is because they couldn't get their hands warhammer IP. Everybody knows that. Both Warcraft and Starcraft only exist, because Blizzard couldn't get rights.
Also, RA, RA2, Tiberian Sun, AOE2, even Cossacks Back To War, and other RTS games, are better than Starcraft in my book.
Starcraft at its core wasn't a bad game, the problem was Blizzard made it into an e-sport just like all there other games. >starcraft in the end a failed e-sport >overwatch a failed e-sport >hearthstone a failed e-sport >retail raiding a failed e-sport >retail arena a failed e-sport >M+ a failed e-sport
All of these things where fun until Blizzard twisted them into a e-sport then they all died.
here is your failure >people that made starcraft
as I am meant to give a shit about that. the only reason they made it in the first place, is because they couldn't get their hands warhammer IP. Everybody knows that. Both Warcraft and Starcraft only exist, because Blizzard couldn't get rights.
Also, RA, RA2, Tiberian Sun, AOE2, even Cossacks Back To War, and other RTS games, are better than Starcraft in my book.
>Everybody knows that. Both Warcraft and Starcraft only exist, because Blizzard couldn't get rights.
And they are both good games. The IP it's under doesn't change that. If anything I think Warcraft's early lore is better than Warhammer lore has ever been.
When you start playing them instead of not playing them and wondering why no one is playing them. You can find a match fast any time of day on any of the currently popular RTS games and even some of the less populated ones still have rooms going like DoW1.
>Nice, my dude. I fricking love RTS. I used to play AoE2 4v4 in LAN with friends all the time. Standard, quickstart, Deathmatch Post Imperial, whacky mods, you name them. >I love strategy. I love Starcraft's pacing even though I'm not that fast. I love SupCom design. I fricking love every AoE, every Relic game, even gave DoW3 a chance, too bad it wasn't what we expected. >Deserts of Kharak? i'm up to it >Come on bro, why you shy? >You like Campaign modes? I can point you into some awesome ones if you like, it's a great way to learn the MP >Nah, man, don't be shy, everyone starts slow. It doesn't matter if you lose your first matches, whats important is that you learn and have fun doing so >Ladder anxiety is real, no denying it. Can you imagine? I still got that feeling too sometimes! but it's part of growing up. It's a game, a training of mind and soul. The real enemy is within, not the other player, he's just testing himself too. So give it all you've got! >Cities Skylines is cool, but that's not an RTS, senpai. >Actually, yes, I have a copy of The Art of War right here. It's incredible how it actually can be applied to any vidya too. I can lend it to you if you like. >Yes, see, I'll teach you the pacing and why build orders are important, but mostly to think like your enemy and be 2 steps ahead. >Never give up! I won so many games with pincer attacks or guerrilla warfare behind the enemy production, outnumbered and outclassed. Scouting is vital! You see, you might have foresight, but it's better to actually have true sight >Pushes, defenses, turtling, rushes, eco, micro, macro, cheeky infiltrations, offensive maneuvers, defensive tactics, tech domination, they're all valid, as long as you try your best >Wanna hit me up at AoE4? I play RUS right now, eco boom is interesting >Let's smash some bots in BAR next! >Next we hit the gym and then some work. Healthy body and a healthy mind!
My pc's are cursed. I want to play all the Totala canpaign missions on hard since its fun and i see it as some completion. But ive been trying it 3 times already and ended up with my pc's somehow dieing every time losing all saved progess in the meantime. I have a new one now but im afraid to curse this one aswell.
Any ideas that could change up the structure of how RTS are made?
Maybe they could try adding a shit ton of buildings or units so the meta doesn't become stale and there's something new to try.
To be honest games that are pure skill can be boring. How many times does anyone want to 1v1 someone who's just better and get smashed every time?
I like quake 3 because of how mechanically sound it is and at the beginning the weapon pickups can seem RNG which can add to the fun factor.
>Any ideas that could change up the structure of how RTS are made?
Larger scale matches that continually evolve and are basically an entire campaign in one "game".
>I want an RTS > But slow paced >In fact turn based >And wanna make my dudes and fight in epic big battles like im a general > Different units comp? That sounds tryhard >Techs? That sounds like build paths and i dont wanna learn that >Pincer attacks? Lmao what a tryhard babble >Disruption of economy? Lmao thats some tryhard words, im a general not an economist > I want the biggest tank, and i want it now >Building costs? Boring shit for tryhards >I dont wanna hear "scouting", means nothing to me >MP? Thats a solved building path and I... No I dont wanna play against a person who solved the game or me >I wanna play against an AI that plays always the same so i can solve the game >I wanna fight in my "own terms" and whenever i like, not when my enemy forces me to because i wanna be the one forcing, just dont know how >And if you beat me youre a tryhard korean in age of stratcraft i played that game all the time as a kid and was a god i know what im talking about but dem evil koreans made it bad
Ugh. Is it so hard to understand?
Anyways, what RTS game lets me roleplay as a good general? Without those -pesky- mechanics in the way
I main Protoss btw
Ganker has too many narcissists with an ego that can't handle losing in a video game. everything comes down to "i wanna win all the time with minimal effort"
>Ganker has too many narcissists with an ego that can't handle losing in a video game. everything comes down to "i wanna win all the time with minimal effort"
True, and still if you want a discussion somebody gets hurt when outed
But Its reall a case to study. Imagine if people asked for Chess but claim they want a single player campaign with custom special rules for them and them only, and a story to accompany Chess with. Not only is already moronic, they already take it personal when people turn around in confusion.
There are a lot of adventure games and beat em ups and Tower Defense games. What is so offensive about not being into a genre you don't even like to begin with?
And when people actually understand the idea of the game and want to get in (i.e. git gud) people bombard those posts with demotivational speeches about the game. In reality, RTS communities are awesome most of the time and will teach whatever you ask them, either in forums, youtube or ingames.
>Imagine if people asked for Chess but claim they want a single player campaign with custom special rules for them and them only
Why would you bring up a game that was designed to be a 2 player head to head game and nothing else from the time of its inception as a point of comparison to RTS?
If you can't see the parallelism, is because you don't play video games competitively or at all.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>If you can't see the parallelism
I can't see the parallels because there aren't any. They're two fundamentally different games designed in completely different ways from the ground up.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I can't see the parallelism because it's obviously fricking wrong. Almost every game made for two player, even fricking cards, has a solitaire variant. Even checkers.
You just didn't know that until someone told you because you're a pseud trying to make simile in fields he knows nothing about when you barely understand anything about the RTS genre in the first place. I remember one thread you argued that custom maps killed RTS games.
4 months ago
Anonymous
If you like chess so much why would you play alone by yourself only?
4 months ago
Anonymous
Normal people can't comprehend schizoid gibberish, yes.
Such as gayging about >muh board game, therefore RTS esportshomosexualry is correct!!!
That is literally unhinged dumbfrick shit, and you call it a "parallel".
>Chess analogy
What's fricking hilarious about this screed of angry furor about people enjoying games in ways he doesn't approve of is that someone DID make a solo Chess campaign, literally 200 years ago.
C&C, Warcraft, StarCraft and Age of Empires are beloved because of their campaigns, and custom modes in the case of the classic Blizzard games. The multiplayer could be good, but it wasn't meant to be a super competitive thing. It just became that in the case of Brood War because of Korean autists.
>Imagine if people asked for Chess but claim they want a single player campaign >moronic
Black person, do you know how popular "chess puzzles" are among chess players?
Chess had single player scenarios since pretty much the beginning of the printed press.
>Noo i keep mashing shit sucks FGs are dead
It's the same as >Noo i keep getting rushed whyyy? build orders suck
Exactly as >Noooo i keep getting railed across the map frick he's aimbotting
And the >Noooo shit jungler why no gank tryhard shit
i don't like the nature of rushing so i was never a fan of rts multiplayer
anyway since C&C was raped and killed they weren't even worth playing for the campaign in the end
>Play the demo for Last Train Home >Don't have fun >Play the demo for Tempest Rising >Don't have fun >Company of Heroes 3 doesn't have a demo >Everyone says it sucks
D:
CoH2 and 3 have had tumultuous development and patching, and fans have had much to complain about.
That said, some of my most exhilirating multiplayer gaming experiences have been in coh2 pvp.
Frantic combat, victory points ticking down, then you finish off that tiger tank that threatened doom, the music swells, the voice actors scream, and your enemy surrenders.
That's the stuff.
I enjoyed CoH 1 and CoH 2 multiplayer, but I'm hesitant to buy CoH 3 because it doesn't seem to be an upgrade at all
Did they ever make more RTS where you can get on the field and fight among your men?
Every Men of War game has "Direct Control" which lets you command a unit in real time like it's a third person shooter. The newer Call to Arms even lets you do this in 1st person for infantry, although it has a much smaller unit roster. It's admittedly a bit janky but it is pretty fun to position all your troops and then jump into the perspective of some grunt to gun down some dudes who are flanking. I think Gates to Hell (the standalone WW2 game using the same engine) also lets you do this but I haven't played it yet.
You know what, I'm fine with the current state of RTS. I've bought enough of them since the 90s that I can simply rotate my playtime through my entire collection of RTS without feeling bored until the day I die. And don't forget custom maps and mods and freeware and forks, etc. etc.
I am perfectly fine with RTS staying the way it is and never returning to the glory days.
Every RTS thread >Why are RTS not as popular? >I DON'T KNOW BUT I HATE RTS WITH PASSION CAUSE THEY MAKE ME ANXIOUS AND EXPOSE ME I WANT THEM TO BE ANYTHING BUT REAL TIME STRATEGY >I don't think you should be here bu- >FRICK THIS, THIS IS THE REASON WHY, THEY DON'T CATER TO ME SO I DON'T BUY WHAT I DON'T ALREADY BUY
What's with RTS and anxiety posters? chill, campaigns have never been good outside a handful in the first place.
>our genre isn't popular enough >so we need to attract people who currently aren't playing RTS >but also we need to keep everything unchanged, because frick the people who don't like the currently existing games
I always feel like 99% of those discussion are just people not realizing you can't gatekeep and gateopen simultaneously.
Especially since new RTS get released every year and the old ones are still there. Your favorite decades-old game is safe, you are absolutely allowed to brainstorm about new design/concept/idea that would attract the people who are *currently* uninterested in what the genre has to offer.
I find it funny because the closest RTS came to being relevant again was Total Warhammer 2 through to TW3 Immortal Empires and barely anyone who bought those games cared about MP.
I'm working on one actually.
The amount of work is absurd 'cause game engines are absolutely not designed for RTS so you end up half engine-deving it. Like, I had to make my own physics engine to get vaguely acceptable performances, and make my own animation system 'cause otherwise there would be none at all.
[...]
Damn, this too.
It need shitton of models, voice, portraits, icons, VFX, SFX - way more than for most other game type.
I dread the moment were I will be out of the "just focus on making shit work" phase and will have to actually find/make all the assets needed.
What engine are you using? I'm tempted to just use whatever the latest version of GEM is and take the risk of getting sanctioned for using a mighty RVSSIAN game engine
>I find it funny because the closest RTS came to being relevant again was Total Warhammer 2 through to TW3 Immortal Empires and barely anyone who bought those games cared about MP.
Total War games are barely RTS, anon, that's why
They're exactly what PvE people want. Slow paced turn based games with meaningless cinematic battles that are better off pressing the skip button cause they suck to play.
The TBS elements are extremely shallow though. You basically just paint the map, build unit production structures and build economy structures. The only reason to play is for the RTS battles.
Total War are grand strategy games.
It's a hybrid, most of your campaign is going to be playing the RTS mode if only because Auto-resolve is all over the place.
>WTF using actual strategy to best your opponents in a stategy game?? NOOOOOOOOO you need to play games where i memorized the perfect build order to rush you in 5 minutes and pull off some wicked cheese micro bullshit with my spellcaster units
choke on dicks and die you autistic esport mobahomosexual
Unity. Mostly due to two features: BatchRendererGroup that allow for both batched rendering and fine control of per-instance shader data (custom animation system goes here) and Burst/Job that make parallel processing of big data pile faster and simpler (AI/physics/etc goes here).
>I'm working on one actually.
It might be worth just waiting for AI to get up to speed rather than one man army'ing it.
As much as I want to avoid AI generated stuff, it's probably what's going to happen.
Paying actual artists for custom stuff is way above my budget, and I have the artistic talent of a dead pigeon.
Sorian AI is really, really good on harder difficulties.
So much so Sorian had to nerf it for later games like PA Titans because it would outdo the player most of the time unless they were serious sweaty e-sports tryhards.
Never. Unless someone totally revolutionizes the genre in a way that it's barely RTS any more. RTS is the only genre where the game starts about 15 or 20 minutes after you click "start game" and then if you lose its back to "shit I guess I'll make 4 villagers and build 2 houses... for 10 minutes... again." For some reason anti-rush mechanics are to rts what "0 execution, instant, free comeback mechanics" are to fightan, it's something that casuals think they want until it's ruined the whole genre.
Is far better that today ones. Just not play argo ones and the recent roman one is kino. Overall it not may be so atmospheric as aoe2 but is a good one
Why isn't there a building rts builder? I want to have the main focus be on the building up the base, upgrading of the features, and building units with specific types of pre-built in commands. I don't care about the actual click/drag/move here/attack here aspects. I'd rather have an "attack" button that you just press where all of your units attack at once, attacking based on the type of attack/defence pattern you applied to them when creating them.
RTS certainly need an APM limit. They also need a bunch more controls. Using Ctrl+1 to select a group is great. Pressing T to select all onscreen of a type is great. Having to manually reselect with a mouse box every 3 seconds is terrible.
>noooooo rts should be campaign only, its the only way for rts to recover. mp shitters are killing the genre. >meanwhile the starship troopers rts, a campaign only rts from last year cant even break 300 players on a good day
its always funny see you morons complaing about X genre being dead and complain a game doesn't have players
starship troopers is that shit
its like you homosexuals when said no one played that shitty arena fps despite having shit artstyle shit design and shit characters
C&C and SC clones and remakes are fricking TRASH
DORF is only interesting because it is apparently branching out to logistics and production somehow in gameplay.
I don't care about campaign homosexualry, but I don't mind if they somehow come up with a good game mode that can be played against computer maybe even in co-op. Still, the main thing should be player against player, but without the muh e-sport homosexualry
Feel free to shit on my opinion
Most feefees hurt around MP are because they only played SC2 and got curbstomped and, well, SC2 was trash all along in their defense.
But yes, RTS are multiplayer games first and foremost. A robust MP makes good SP games.
I get angry when i think of SC2 larva injections and the ADHD clicking the game forces on you to do anything, only to either deathball the enemy or get deathballed in the end. It's not a good experience.
When I win or lose in the good ol' AoE2 I know it was because an outplay, or any other RTS. In SC2 it was because you looked away for a nano second
this looks nice but at the same time it has that cheap flat color cartoony look SupCom2, PA and BAR has.
It's like every unit is made up from toy blocks
Wrong.
You're one of those morons who's only ever beaten up the easy AI.
Red Alert, C&C, Wc2, Wc3, SupCom, TA, AoE - it'd be easier naming the RTS's that DON'T require APM than the ones that do.
By all means, enlighten us as to which RTS you're thinking of when you say stupid shit like that.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Define "how fast" is asiaticclicking to you because, my APM is around 40-50, pretty low, and never EVER felt stressed, tryhard or tired on any ANY game
Its regular gameplay. If you think that's the evil asiatic clicking then you have the reaction times of a dead dog and should just euthanize yourself
4 months ago
Anonymous
I'm not the one scared of "asiaticclicking".
Tell me which games it is that you think isn't about "being fast".
4 months ago
Anonymous
I'm not scared either and 50APM landed me in low plat in SC2 back then
Of course strategy is about being fast and being first to strike. But only Starcraft enforces rancid pointless clicking because units get stuck constantly
4 months ago
Anonymous
>But only Starcraft enforces rancid pointless clicking because units get stuck constantly
First it was Starcraft 2, now it's Starcraft? Bad pathing wasn't exclusive to Starcraft, so now all old RTS' are asiaticclick?
You also failed to mention what RTS' don't require le asiaticclick.
Because it doesn't need nearly as many MPgays as the MPgays think it does and SP gameplay (i.e. actual fun) inherently suffers when you try to balance for MPgay whinging literally every time.
No, esports autism killed RTS. You're moronic if you think multiplayer was never a draw when one of the key marketing points, along with single player, was playing with and/or against other people in online co-op or pvp matches.
>RTSs
I recently just learned about BAR. I fricking loved total annihilation and this looks like a new version of that. It's free on their website so I think i'm going to get it tonight finally and give it a shot
Brutal legend
Kingdom Under Fire 2
Men of War
You could kinda count some of the mousu games like Dysentery warriors but I don't.
Giants: Citizen Kabuto. maybe, it's been a long time since I played.
Sacrifice
Natural Selection but the units are other players and game is fuken dead
Dungeon Keeper/ War for the Overworld kinda but it's also not really an RTS, I just really like possession.
Battlezone
Executive Assault 1 and 2
There was a Supreme Commander-esque game, I think it was a fangame or maybe a mod, and it's name was something like K-1000 or KT-10000 or something along those lines. I swear it was real but I can't find it anywhere. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I don't want to have gaslighted myself into believing something I dreamed was real.
I don't understand the timeline of starcraft supposedly ruining rts.
>1998 starcraft comes out >1999 esports is just some weird thing people do in korea >2003 ea shuts down westwood >2009 microsoft shuts down ensemble >2010 starcraft 2 comes out
how could sc2 ruin rts when big corpos already killed blizzard's competitors before it even came out. how did sc2 over focus on esports when it has the most single player content of any rts ever made?
but that's my point how could starcraft kill rts when it was already dead before starcraft was relevant outside of worst korea and a few nerds on team liquid?
Basically the same mentality behind WoW killed MMOs or Halo/CoD killed FPS. Starcraft was a really big success and it had a decent influence on other developers. I don't personally think SC1 killed RTS, because the genre was doing great for a while and had some unique games come out after 1998 but that would be the thrust of the argument. If anything I think RTS died down because it was really, really hard to compete with >Supreme Commander >Age of Empires 2 >Tiberium Sun/Red Alert 2 >Starcraft 1/Warcraft 3
A lot of games tried and failed to tackle those titans, but developers lost interest especially as porting RTS to console is a pain in the ass. Why invest in one of the hardest genres to do well, against games that have staunch fanbases and similar gameplay to your potential game, for a single platform when you can bash out an easier to make multiplatform game? Relic and Eugen were able to make it work but most other devs were either too similar to one of the big 4 or just gave up. Then EA killed C&C, M$ killed AoE, while Relic and Gas Powered Games just kept making inferior sequels
This, and as AAA budgeting comes into play the genre itself didnt generate enough revenue to justify the dev costs that they forced themselves into for the WIDER AUDIENCE. This is how MS thought it was a brilliant idea to force Ensemble to make console exclusive RTS games, or EA killing Westwood without ever making an RTS. >Buy a studio known for their RTS games and some niche RPGs >Have them make an FPS and an MMO >both bomb unsurprisingly >kill the company and make C&C 3 without anyone that were originally involved with the franchise
Absolute corpo frickery.
Westwood made more than RTS despite C&C being their most popualar franchise.
Lands of Lore was sick and the Blade runner game is one of the best adventure games ever made.
I also liked renegade but acknowledge that it's not amazing.
Exactly because of that. Everyone else shit the bed and Blizzard was the last xompay holding the torch, and they fricked it all up with a bland asiaticcliquer. However, no one wanted to compete with fricking Blizzard, so they put all their money on MOBAs or competitive knitting instead.
I've been thinking about this and shouldn't it be the otherway around?
Since old games are better they should stay the same price but all the slop now should be cheaper?
I don't care how much it costs them to make it, I care about the end product.
Why would you want to pay $30 for a game that came out 20 years ago? It isn't even a remaster, and it doesn't even have any DLC, it's just the base game. The idea of attributing price to quality and not age seems stupid to me.
That's because you're moronic and would probably spend 100 dollars on a used Nintendo 64 game. Prices always fall with product age, regardless of the quality. Some just don't fall enough for idiotic reasons. This would be like asking why RDR 2 still isn't being sold for $60 despite being the same game as it was when it launched.
I've been playing aoe2 recently and it's impressive how much jank the original non-de game had. everyone shits on starcraft for having awful controls but in this game: >shift click does nothing >you can put multiple buildings in one control group but it will only make out of the first one >you have to use patrol all the time because there's no attack move >no option to hotkey screen locations
basically the only thing it does better is no control group limitations and walking up ramps. also it's funny that everyone talks about how shit things like larva inject are in sc2, but everyone is fine with shit like deer herding in aoe.
Is there a reason all game art looks like shit these days? Are there just no artists left that can do other artstyles besides plasticy/mobile aesthetic?
Same here, considering they already added a DLC for AoM outta fricking nowhere I can only assume AoM:DE is going to get post launch support for a while
Red Alert 2 was the climax of RTS. Everything after that looked stupid. Generals looked mad moronic. I'm glad to see a group has bought RA2 back into the spotlight. I had to stop playing that game due to how fricking horribly long it takes to play a good match.
My ideal RTS is just bigger supcom. There are a host of supcom inspired games but they all just do things a bit wrong. BAR is an example, the maps are way smaller and it doesn't have the same massive units. I just want a batshit crazy game where the developers don't give a damb about comp and just add walking aircraft carriers and shit.
I'd probably say I'd like a mix of supcom, men of war, and empire earth's digital/nano age. Closer to star wars where you have crazy machines piloted by humanoids rather than unmanned robots.
Red Alert 2 remaster
Yuri's Revenge remaster
Tiberian Sun remaster
Generals remaster
Zero Hour remaster
WH40k Dawn of War remaster
WH40k Winter Assault remaster
WH40k Dark Crusade remaster
WH40k Soulstorm remaster
LOTR Battle for Middle Earth remaster
LOTR Battle for Middle Earth 2 remaster
They could just copy the code from OpenRA. They've done most of the work. Most of the game works except bridges as far as I know and that was years ago. RA2 works almost just fine in OpenRA
Chris singlehandedly killed the RTS genre when he perfected it. >Compelling setting showing the complex political differences between fatalistic humanists, transhumanists, and fundamentalists. >Exquisite aesthetics that draw both from their core ideology, geometric uniqueness, and a splash of modern nations to make them more relatable >Perfectly balanced with all three human factions having equivalent units creating a large distinction using small differences instead of having each of the factions play different games or making them carbon copies of eachother >Expansion throws in an alien race which true to its nature, bends the rules in entirely unique ways like having a T2 unit that punches way above its weight and into T3 but sacrifices its T3 to do so (which fits into the theme that while the alien invaders may seem insurmountable, with perseverance the human spirit may win out in the end)
it was an accident. I pirated all games till I got a job and most of the games I loved pirating back in the day were RTS games, now god has punished me by giving money but depriving me of RTS games to buy.
RTS will never be back. They are like graphical adventures. People made them because they didnt know how to make better games work yet. People wanted to play a game like nights into dreams or star ocean or tomb raider but actually playing them made you vomit chunks so they played warcraft 2 and yu-no instead. Now its thirty years later the people who made the above games got better at it, except the people who made nights, so everyone plays star ocean and tomb raider, and no one plays nights or warcraft or yu-no, but they still want to play nights.
Between aoe 2 and 4 there's 40k players on steam alone. RTS is doing more than fine. If people want to play there's games available due to the 1v1 centred nature you only need a pop of a few hundred. And there's near a dozen decently sized titles in the horizon, RTS is doing better than It has for a long while
I want to like RTS. I tell myself I like RTS. But I like the IDEA of being able to play an RTS with any sort of competency, not really actually playing it.
I'm one of those moron babies who cannot be bothered to leave their base until I have "a full group of things" which means I'm going to get rushed to hell and back by people who know what they're doing. I know what a build order is, I can follow a build order, but the problem is that a build order doesn't actually help someone like me, who's a moron, to get any better at the game. It just SLIGHTLY extends the amount of time I can survive until I get destroyed. I don't understand why I'm not supposed to build more Econ yet, my monkey brain wants to see econ numbers go up so I can do more in the game, and the next thing I know everything is on fire because the real way to play an RTS is to make sure you are always seeing negative numbers in the econ readout.
I've come to accept I will never be able to handle an RTS, and will remain the kind of person who tries to play Men of War only to get cursed out by the other team by being so boring to play against I ruined their match.
I'm the same kind of moron. You can iteratively get better. You can boom and play defensively. It's a bit of work. I enjoy the chaos that deep into RTS game offers. So much shit is happening and if you can hold it together or create some space for yourself better than the other guy you can win.
I'll never be good but I can get victories against other shitters and that's good enough for me
I avoided online because of the shame of losingor getting stomped. But you just get over it, learn on the job. A loss is no big deal. Eventually I've gotten more enjoyment out of games vs humans. Even losses, Im constantly fricking up by not building infrastructure for military beyond 2-3 barracks. Soon I'll learn to just build the fricking things even tho it goes against my 1 of each building moronic city planner inclination
>I don't understand why I'm not supposed to build more Econ yet
ignore that shit.
1) don't stop making econ
2) spend your money
these two concepts alone will get you to king of shitters level in almost any rts.
For some games it works, but in others you have to make certain shit first. See: Heros in Warcraft 3. I personally hated that mechanic but if you don't play in a hero-focused manner you lose.
didn’t realize og starcraft is still running with custom maps and a decent player base. all these years i could have been playing and i thought it died. just place starcraft use map settings with me bros
also the soundtrack is kino
Sounds more like that the genre needs a coop campaign/ randomised missions/ or what ever in that category. The times where casual masses have the patience when getting stomped in every match are long gone. That's something comp gays need to understand, but probably never will due to mental illness.
How come every 2D rts from the 90's still looks better than any 3D modern rts? They're so much visually clearer, while modern rts games just have too many particle effects that often obscure whats happening.
Man, the only dude I knew from school back then, who went ultra competitive in RTS, was a midget. Always angry and mad at everyone, smoking and doing drugs to look tough. What is the matter with comp gays? Why are they always mentally ill?
I don't mind multiplayer but all the classic RTS had good campaign and that's how most people are introduced to the genre. Also most people played custom games with friends, not super competitive shit.
Because everyone knows people are talking about the most obvious shit like Age of Empires II, StarCraft and it's expansions. I never played C&C but from what I see people have quite a bit of nostalgia for those campaigns.
The campaigns itself are pretty easy, but they work as glorified tutorials for new players. They have cool stories and interesting challenges for people who have never played an RTS.
Necron campaign for Soulstorm. I still need to play Dark Crusade yet. I just like playing as these spooky scary space skeltals who only communicate in chitters, whirring and static.
Red alert 2 and its expansion has hands down the best campaign in any RTS game. it's because the setpieces and cutscenes were so much fun, it had varied, unique objectives and also superb feedback (enemy taunts you on your comms and smaller cutscenes display on your minimap in response to your actions). Age of mythology has the next best campaign I would say, because of its epic story and sufficient amount of missions.
Aside from the usual C&C answer, World in Conflict for me. The game is very simple with the offense and defense objectives with simple selections of units and its obvious rock-paper-scissors role, but the sandbox of the missions utilized the tactical options really well, from artillery to cruise missiles all the way to carpet bombing.
I really wish there were more wc3 style rts games where you got control of a few units but each of them came with 2-3 powerful abilities a piece but units weren't so squishy you could blink and have half your army vaporized by a deathball a la starcraft 2.
hopefully never if you're still wanking over aoe2 or coh or starcraft or warcraft 3 you need to wake up from your brainrot coma to see why the genre is irrelevant and why permutations like that should remain as legacy styled rts not to be used literally when developing anything new
Can Ganker even define what a sweat lord is? Is it anyone that can execute a build order with a modicum of success while you sit there placing buildings perfectly? Is it someone who doesn't just let his units die to whatever you have?
Campaigns can be enjoyable but once you understand RTS and can play 1v1 they're mostly dull. Most never reach that step though and RTS has no way to dumb down to shitters like FPS did.
So "When are RTs coming back in full glory", i dont think you are going to like the answer, but it goes something like this: > RTS are coming back to glory when Cloud Gaming works the way that is intended
So imagine this, you are visiting a VR pub or something and there is a retro gaming invent, you see that they are Playing Starcraft and AoE, yes...as incredible as it sounds that is the context were a whole NEW generation of players will discover these games, when they can run them on a cloud server without any noticeable input lag. Then there will be millons of players loving RTS again. If i would have to make an educated guess? this would be in no less than 50 years from now, when cloud gaming is practically like an online arcade.
not
never ever
Crate entertainment is making one and releasing in 5y time approx.
The grim dawn guys, will be set in the grim dawn world.
Based. I've been saying for literally years that multiplayer gays are a plague on the genre.
Sweatlords killed rts, nobody enjoys starting a chill unraked match only to be shat on by some autist in 5 minutes
I got shat on the other day for saying this. I'm not a casual gamer by any means, but holy frick RTS autists are in full force and there really isn't any fun to be had in MP. I dont care to become an APM master
You have to enjoy learning the game and getting better at it
If you don't raise your guard, you get knocked.
If you don't get knocked, the enemy is making a mistake you should take advantage on.
If you win easily without knowing some game, it is a bad game or a scam, and let you win
Thats the idea of sports and games. They're simulations of problems to be solved. There's nothing better than testing yourself against another human. It's never about him, it's always about you and your teammates.
>asiaticclicktroony: I AM SPROTS REEE
This is the mentall illness of a man with nothing in his life to be proud about.
But that's the point of "games", that's the point of these games
What is so offensive about that truth?
Video games in their inception and first decades were singleplayer. Sports are the home of over socialised partial people. I blame the creche industry and Hitlers Germany for this model of childcare which subsequently spread from Sweden to most major urban areas. The Children are placed in creches at 2 and never fully bond with their parents, only able to function as part of a group of others with a leader figure (the child carer/coach/captain etc).
Videogames can be a lot of things. You have Sony consoles that are mostly interactive movies even. But RTS are games to be tinkered with. To be competitive. To be singleplayer. To be puzzles. RTS are awesome because of that. But to make them work, they have to respect their own rules and their players, so the sandbox works. If people really dislike the idea of this sandbox being competitive by development outcome then they're not really into RTS.
>GOOCLICK IS MUH SOCIALS!!!!
>*nobody plays the game*
>I CLICKY THAT MAKES ME SPROT REEE
You being mentally ill and devoid of any merit in your life is the truth, yes. Glad we agree.
Look buddy, i'm one of those people who create custom games with clear "chill noobie match" label, and often times i end up with homosexuals like you taking a massive hunk of shit on everyone inside. So clearly this is not the case of playing for the sake of competitiveness or improving yourself, these people are there to punch down so they can feel good about themselves. When this kind of shit keeps on happening casual players naturally just give up and let the shitlords enjoy the pigsty they've created.
>hese people are there to punch down so they can feel good about themselves. When this kind of shit keeps on happening casual players naturally just give up and let the shitlords enjoy the pigsty they've created.
I really get you're overblowing one or two instances when a bully attacked a kid. Nobody likes buillies.
But nobody likes victims either.
And it's not even about entering the Salty Spitoon or the Weenie Hut. Its about love for the game and for self improvement.
If you don't respect the game and its rules, you're not playing the game. You're dicking around. And ITS FINE to dick around. You should host DICK AROUND lobbies and enforce the dicking around. But to be mad against the people who respect it? don't be that kind of guy in life.
>asiaticclicktroony be like RESPEC & DA LIFE
Mentally
Ill
>being bad at the game is a crime and you should FRICK OFF
okay, cool
>Hyperbole
Did not said that at all, anon.
What is a crime is being buttblasted about people being better at it
read
Don't cater to bullies. But don't act like a victim either.
lol what does chill match in an RTS even mean. If I develop the means to destroy you I just... shouldn't? Get BTFO noob.
This behaviour can be observed in other games as well. Sweat lords who can't take a loss will always go for the easy win and will destroy matches for others. Casuals will leave the game entirely to the point where there is no other person left but sweat lords, who will then cannibalise each other until they either rage-quit or commit suicide in pure anger. They just can't relax. I've even seen this in fricking Half-Life 2 mods.
what you call sweat-lords we know simply as players that enjoy the game and play it as it's supposed to be and since you quit playing who cares what you think about games you don't play?
You may not have noticed the irony here, but you just confirmed the behaviour of sweat lords and lack of seeing other people's perspective. Don't cry that you are part of the moving force killing RTS.
This shit even happens in obscure Warcraft 3 maps. Like half of the maps available aren't actually playable because you need a minimum 200 hours experience + tutoring, which you will never EVER receive. Instead, you will be forced through the classic meatgrinder of newbieging, feeding, getting banned.
It's completely different with RTS. It's all about APM. Beleive me, RTS multiplayer is probably fulfilling as frick when you actually best your opponent, but there hasn't been an RTS game that made me want to master it. Hell, after all the years of playing singleplayer RTS, I still consider myself a shitter. I'm pretty good and can pick up fast when playing vidja, just I'm not interested in devoting anymore time into RTS, so I will not test my skill at multiplayer.
Recently got back into Company of heroes, there is absolutely no chance in hell I will git gud playing with someone who's been playing it for over a decade now, it's simply past my time.
Fair enough my dude. But you can't deny the hard rock you got when you did beat someone back then.
Try Beyond All Reason, pretty good and free.
>I want to compete but I don't want to play well
Just play ranked. Getting put in bronze or whatever your elo is will give you the experience you crave.
I am an old school C&C player and while I did play LAN games with a friend as a kid but we would impose a 5 mins no attacking rule so we could actually build our base, frick multiplayer man I would just prefer a skirmish against AI any time.
>we would impose a 5 mins no attacking rule so we could actually build our base,
lol the engineer rush early game to capture an enemy mcv and sell it was the most hilarious shit. you would miss it if you have a ceasefire for builing up like that.
That is why we imposed the rule, I think it is like what others are saying about APM, basically if we dont impost a rule like that it all comes down to who can click a mouse quick enough. which is moronic.
Personally I get fun out of C&C by building an absoluetly massive base and massive force and shitstorming the enemy after a long resource battle, exploring all the map and having the various skirmishes that occur doing so. Playing multiplayer well its basically teh popponent just wants to get rid of you fast, where I want a massive long skirmish.
Imagine it like I want to play chess take my time and think ahead and you want to play quick chess. 2 different ethos.
I am the same with TW, though of course in TW the battles are more fluid and separate from the strategy aspect.
I just dont like mutliplayer in RTS.
>I just dont like mutliplayer in RTS.
yoi could always play coop vs AI which is chill.
>coop vs AI
You know I have never tried that.
Could probably try that in RA2.
I just installed dune 2000 because of this thread.
It's great, just play a 2v6 game and have fun grinding ai
red alert 2 AI is pretty shit. you easily win the game by chronoing some prism tanks into their base or ICing your apocs. they can't obviously counter play by using force shields and other techniques to protect themselves like how human players do. I recommend you to play Dawn of War 1 for coop AI matches. Its AI keeps you on your toes.
>Dawn of War 1
I am not into the warhammer shit at all and tbh I am quite pissed that the warhammer fans jumped on TW warhammer so much that it has kind of ruined CA even more. I know warhammer fans were begging CA to do a warhammer game for ages and I am glad for them they did one but as a history TW fan I am quite pissed about them doing 3 games and taking the team away from making a great history game.
Though tbh I dont think I will ever play a TW game after R2 shitty release, plus my PC is so old I doubt it could handle any game past atilla. It can only mediocre handle R2.
Still I am a rome fan so R2 is enough for me.
As for that warhammer game I also dont like the type of 3D RTS.
I like old school C&C and EA killing westwood killed C&C for me, generals was shit to me and any further game than that looks like trash as well generals is the reason I looked for a different RTS and got into TW.
Irony with TW is that I got into it because of the combat gameplay but now I actually prefer the overall campaign strategy map.
>I also dont like the type of 3D RTS.
oof I get that hate. I too dreaded the move from beautiful 2D isometric visuals to the low poly 3D in RTS games but it was inevitable. I think you'll have difficulty playing any RTS post 2000 if you keep holding onto the glory of the past. age of mythology really helped in overcoming the 3D hatred for me. It became one of my favorite RTS games.
As for TW, I get it. shogun 2 was peak TW for me. although the new games are technologically superior, I still miss old TW so much.
>shogun 2 was peak TW for me
I like it but I prefer the roman period.
I like R1 and M2 for a more chilled out strat game and R2 when I want a more complex strat game.
Yeah I grew up with the 2D RTS so jumping to the 3D has never been easy for me for these games, plus I have never seen a 3D RTS take my interest.
I dont really like isometric RTS either though I used to play syndicate a lot as a kid and that is isometric.
I play(ed) statlite reign isometric though a syndicate spiritual successor.
Still loads of the old RTS games are timeless classics, C&C TS, RA2 commandos 2 are games I could probably play forever.
>I dont really like isometric RTS either
>TS, RA2, Commandos 2 are games I could probably play forever
but those are isometric as well.
>commandos 2
The Commandos games are stealth RTT, not RTS. Also, there's a new one being made.
ALARM ALARM
Shame that Mimimi is gone, though it might be for the best after Shadow Gambit, just how many times can you make the same game?
Can I add you to play RA2 with you? I would be down to players VS AI. I play similarly too.
I am not playing atm though you know there is the CnCnet website you can find players to do stuff like that.
Think the closest I've got to SC2 multiplayer was their coop
All the commanders are OP in their own way too
kek, this
RTS becoming some "competitive e-sport" killed the genre. People didn't play Starcraft for the online, they played it for the spectator sport and the custom maps. This is why they got away with selling $60 campaigns for 2.
No good single player = no RTS, just autistic asiaticclick simulator that will die with like 50 people playing.
i liked comp at first because it was novel, but i didnt know they'd kill campaigns because of it
When young me saw the e-sports scene pick up around starcraft I thought it was a great thing that would eventually legitimize video games and make bigger and better RTS games
little did I know that it would just streamline RTS games to be all about the clicking and the mashing instead of making bigger and better games.
same, though not just RTS but I thought games in general would get better and better due to wider reach and interest. instead RTS got killed and every other genre got fricked due to pandering to normies (matchmaking, behaviour scores, mobile, micro-transactions, gachashit).
And then moronic publishers went "oh, you want to make an rts? Make it esports, make it like that spacecraft thing"
Yup. None of them broke into Starcraft's niche apart from debatably AoE2, and no-one really discusses either of those games outside of their incredibly insular communities which are just like ant hives full of literal drones obsessed with e-celebs. Meanwhile, discussions of the campaigns in games like WC3, AoM, C&C, DoW (etc) are rich and varied because the content was really good. It's sad as frick that the genre as a whole bet on the first group and lose.
And AoE2 has one of the most impressive campaigns of any RTS out there. I think last count is literally 100 hours if you add all of the cultures campaigns together.
MOBAs killed RTS.
MOBAs are the evolution of RTS
they're RTSs for people with extremely low APM
MOBAs made esports RTS viable.
Classic RTS is no good for competitive PvP because of how much shit you have to keep track of.
No
Cool. So, never. No lootboxes, no DLC milling, no E-sports homosexualry, no gacha and on organ selling. Meaning that any even remotely recognizable studio won't touch the genre with a 10ft pole. Indies won't dev something decent in two decades. Luv me hobby.
Yup. Your own fault for becoming an rts fan and not something like m*bas
anon, tons of recognizable studios don't do anything with the crap you just listed.
>Source needed
Coping shitters lmao
NGMI
The genre is dead because of you lmao
Not dead, I play everyday
You don't play at all
>the genre isn't dead because i play a game from 2010 every day
lol, lmao even
Age2, 3 and 4
FAF
BAR
SC1 and SC2
PA TItans
Those are alive in MP and well
And if you like campaigns so much, then you don't really need more novelty. Go play the frickton there are with campa-oh wait, I forgot you're a secondary, you don't even play the campaigns either. A tourist. A coper. A shitter. A PvEr with no friends and social anxiety.
Games still being played online does not mean that the *genre* is alive, based mong. You've basically listed games from 15 years ago and some fan projects. I'm also a married man with a richer social life than yours lol
Married to a man more likely lmao
Cope harder gayet keep crying on a mongolian weaving basket board about your failures in toys
Thanks, I will. Enjoy flexing your epic skills at 15-year-old toys on the same forum. Hope you can sort yourself out soon.
You showed your tiny dick first, anon. I am enjoying the games on topic, and will keep accepting the future
Shame about your manwife having you at xir side.
gtfo of the discussion
>people playing the games doesn't count
wat
wtf do you mean then?
Games people care about being released. There are still people playing NES games, it does not mean the NES is alive as a platform.
ok but there are games being released
I assume it's a case of small but active communities "not counting". Kinda like how you can still find matches of CS 1.6 or Unreal Tournament but they're considered dead games because they're no longer relevant and have small & stagnant player counts. There are still people playing Dawn of War 2 online but it is kinda dead as a game, even if you can still find a match.
Are you still posting this stale pasta
>You like (CONTENT)? Well I don't like (CONTENT) I like (asiaticCLICK) therefore you're a secondary
Frick off, you already killed the genre with your stupidity. Playing with yourself and the other sub-80 IQ morons in the decade-old asiaticclick games that did it isn't an accomplishment.
Oh it's this moron again. The guy who argues that if you don't play sweaty ranked 1v1 games and maybe enjoy 3v3s or unranked then you're a secondary because games are only meant to be played one specific way and any other way isn't intended and/or is killing the genre
What's funny is he got everything he wanted ten years ago. Notice all the games in are ten to twenty year old games specifically designed around the sweatiest 1v1 lost temple only ladder play to the point that, minus AOE2 and SC2 which are games from nearly 20 years ago, some of them don't even have a campaign. PA Titans didn't come out with a story and was just ranked ladder matches. All of them minus the ones with campaigns crashed and burned financially because they got rid of the stuf people liked in RTS games, PA Titans nearly ruined the studio that was making it, for instance.
And he thinks he's not the cancer killing the genre.
But don't you understand, even though esportshomosexualry failed for 20 years straight,it will be successful eventually.
The genre is dead because there is no actual innovation, no new games that shake up the genre.
it's dead because there are no new games in the genre, Jim. there are tons of generic FPS games releasing every year and it didn't kill the genre.
The FPS genre is one of the most alive genres. There is constant innovation and shakeups. Even fricking Call of Duty had 3 reboots where they substantially changed the formula (MW, AW, WZ).
>Call of Duty had 3 reboots where they substantially changed the formula
press X to doubt.
>Call of Duty
WW2 shooters, basically MoH clones
>Modern Warfare
Modern setting, perks and killstreaks completely change the formula.
>Advanced Warfare
A bunch of gay advanced movement, Titanfall was better tho.
>Warzone
Free-to-play. Battle Royale, almost a different game.
Compare with Stormgate which is allegedly made by SC2 devs and it's the same game but gayer, and SC2 was already just a worse Brood Warm with a bunch of QoL shit. At some point RTS devs stopped trying and coming up with new ideas. That's why the genre died.
>he got filtered by the campaigns because he is a shitter and has to play against other shitters who can't beat the campaigns
>PA TItans
>alive in MP and well
You're lucky to see a single lobby, with the eco jacked up to 5x
bionicle looking mf
Didn't ask, don't care, never played ranked SC2 in my life and I never cared to.
You are a minority of maybe 5% of the playerbase killing the game for the other 95%
I remember the good old days of Sc2 playing on the KR server. Every match was 4 gate vs 4 gate or proxy cannons/dt rush. Terran always did 3 gate all ins or 1 base all ins and zerg either did roach all ins or just did pure macros to death. No game would last past 15mns due to 2 base all ins being so optimized. Game really went to shit once you start playing against good players.
SC2 is a flawed game to the core. The whole development time went into 1v1 and any other mode isn't balanced or even considered. Every other RTS is thought to be modular and better with more people, except SC2, because Korea time was all about the 1v1. Even there, the development is flawed, since instead of making a sequel with innovations, made more like a port of SC1 shortcomings to a new engine (ramps, stuck units, little basebuilding, TTK too low, deathballing by consequence, etc)
I liked my time in SC2 but not that much. And there's little player expression in that game, so you're always doing the same mechanical paths with the more or less same outcomes.
SC2 also flopped in South Korea.
Campaign people are a loud minority that don't even finish those games. Everytime I see someone asking for a campaign, you realize they don't even understand the game. Might as well be a shooter on rails.
>no new ip
>it's the same sperg still melting down
Amazing
asiaticclickers are mentally ill
>campaign players
>loud minority
You're a fricking moron zoomer
>Campaign people are a loud minority
Less than 25% of any given RTS playerbase so much as touches 1v1, let alone plays it primarily
YOU are the minority ruining it
What the hell is "Arcade" RTS?
It's a term blizzard used for custom maps in SC2
based Warcraft 3 enjoyers
give me a kino campaign and good custom maps, I don't care about sweaty multiplayer
lol the reason I had so much fun with homeworld: deserts of kharak was because the campaign got so much focus
Yeah but that campaign shit all over the homeworld lore and cheapened everything
MP was so cool too. Too bad it was barebones. I wish for a sequel of that with an "extraction RTS" game mode but never gonna happen.
If it has a good campaign, and a good skirmish then the average RTS player will be in heaven. You make a paper thin campaign and have it rely on multiplayer then it will fail. Companies failed to realize this
AoE2 campaigns work so well because its a MP designed game but translated the sandbox to narrated scenarios, like puzzles. And makes it kinda hard as well. Cool story, cool problems, and when you're done with them you're pretty much ready to play MP if you want.
competitive gays murdered rts and that's a fact
shove your apm up your ass homie
Now i put a stadistic i shat 30 min ago in this forum, that will sure give me lots of yous!!!!
This is why I don't really like the Total War Warhammer games much. They just drop you into a world with a few objectives, but there isn't much of a campaign. It feels totally hallow and pointless. Especially lategame when the entire game falls apart, because you have this massive boarder and are fighting 2 other super powers across the entire world with no easy way to get across it. Really after the first 30 turns there is a steep dropoff in quality, because the entire scenario the dev setup for you is basically over at that point.
That's why the devs give the short campaign victory condition.
So you can "win" before it turns into a big blobby map painter.
Thats what I meant by "Drop you into the world with a few objectives", but its not really a campaign. Like it kinda is especially getting 8 peaks back, but there's a lot missing.
Looks like people are fricking tired of the competitive aspect and want more story/lore.
Based poll responders. Learning the uses and effective combos of units, finding and improving on new strategies, overall macro, and custom maps is where the fun is. E-Sports and high APM micro can frick off back to their containment starcraft.
nice source moron
This, I just wanted to play Civilization but in Age of Empires 2.
>Continent with different resources scattered throughout for civ diversity
>Taking your time advancing through the ages
>Emphasis on diplomacy, remaining neutral and building trade/markets
>Lots of walls
>Focus on fighting over territory/border disputes rather than blitzing your enemies
I wish the Spore civ stage had been more fleshed out.
That's how I like to play Seven Kingdoms. Playing it like Civilizations in real-time is pretty nice, AI could be smarter, tho.
like 95% of rts games cater to casual shitters (all city builders, economy base building, all total war games, gsg, tower defense etc) theres grand total of 2 competitive rts yet you pathetic homosexuals still find a way to cry about it
>le city builders are le rts
have a nice day troony
>troony
ironic its coming from a shitter who cries in every rts thread cause he lacks testosterone and competitive drive to play mp in rts
>testosterone needed to play an rts multiplayer
lmao shut the frick up nerd
lack of competitive drive and whining because you got outclassed in a mp match instead of trying to improve is purely a woman trait, go back to you sims 4 homosexual
I use my competitive drive in places that matter like my job. Try getting one nerd.
you sure do as a HR roastie lmao
>no argument
>name calling
>diverting
Thought so, games are winding down after a hard day of work. Get a job and maybe you'll stop ruining them for everyone else with your insecurities.
>still whining like a b***h and refuses to refute
there are like 3 rts with mp worth playing and even thats a stretch, games like aoe2de despite active mp community have great AI and tons of scenarios for everyone to enjoy if you do not want to play mp then dont you fricking homosexual.
>refuses to refute
Refutre what?
You got buttmad people don't like multiplayer and started talking about testosterone and shit, my argument is that you're a dumb nerd who takes videogames too seriously, frick off
here i will explain like to a braindead moron, anyone who actually plays same rts longer than a week will shitstomp braindead AI, especially if you had any experience in RTS games in the past theres literally no point in playing past that point, thats why people swap to multiplayer. Subhumans like you who cry about multiplayer dont play RTS, you just whine on the internet, not only 95% rts are made to cater to mouth drooling morons like you, the handful of multiplayer rts have great skill based matchmaking are also full of singleplayer and custom content for casuals. Its literally non issue only mentally ill troon would bring up and whine about multiplayer in every RTS thread.
didn't read lol
i accept you concession
Testosterone does increase competitiveness tho.
Its possible to even imagine a RTS that appealed to women, something like Animal Crossing or SimCity but with more murder.
best non korean sc2 player is literally a troony LMAO
time to chop off your wiener, troony
Sweatsissies, our response?
Co-op campaign and hot girls were the two things that saved otherwise mediocre RA3.
Thats why Warcraft 3 is the most beloved rts of all time
For me, it's skirmish mode.
I see this cause some consternation among the asiaticclickers
>n-no, my autismfest is ultra high skill, you don't get it!
>it has to mean something, i didn't just waste all my time!
loving every laugh
when you build a time machine.
AoE kind of did tbh
wait, there's a hd edition of 3 as well?
Yeah, they also have also released like 4 expansions wiht it
do they have campaigns or are they multiplayer only?
Homeworld 3 next month. That's something
PLEASE BE GOOD. THAT IS LITERALLY THE ONLY THING THAT I'M EXCITED FOR. I'M A JADED 37 YEAR OLD DUDE. THE REMASTERED COLLECTION WAS ASS AND DESERTS OF wiener WAS SHIT. GIVE ME SOMETHING.
dok was good
im sure hw3 will be good
>THE REMASTERED COLLECTION WAS ASS AND DESERTS OF wiener WAS SHIT
What did they frick up? I thought that remaster was nothing but a visual touch-up and better support for modern OS?
Among other things, they only updated and polished the Homeworld 2 engine, then ported Homeworld 1 to it. It's not that HW2's engine was bad, but the two games didn't have the same mechanics and had a different "feel" to them, and the remastered edition got rid of that. HW1 ended up feeling quite a bit like a piece of HW2 DLC.
Also I think they made a few parts of HW1 easier, like the Gardens of Kanesh mission.
>DESERTS OF wiener WAS SHIT.
I liked it
anon have you not seen the screenshot of the horrific UI? all the delays? the focus on characters. the flat mothership.
when they start having worthwhile campaigns and better customization tools. The reason they died was because every RTS dev neglected singleplayer experiences and custom game modes to chase esports/comp scene
why are there no indie RTS games? it seems like a great genre to innovate
because no indie dev has made a surprise hit RTS and the indie scene is driven by 1 hit wonders and their infinitely reproducing copy cats
They Are Billions was flavor of the month for a while.
Northgard and against the storm as well but they barely feel more than mobile games let alone like RTS games.
I think rts require more production value than most realise. Maybe you don't want fancy cutscenes a'la C&C but you probably would want cool voiced lines for units.
Also I think your pic is why modern RTS' always fail.
No one would have the balls to make a Red Alert nowadays because they would be offended of making a game full of stereotypes, so they try some schlock copy+paste job of your image and thus none of them are interesting.
The former WC3 devs are making a new RTS right now that's supposed to release this year that was shown off at realms deep that had infantry units going through trees and other interesting ideas, but it's basically this image and had such a generic name literally no one remembers it, not even google.
>WC3 devs
Hard passage. Hardest of passings. WC3 was a blight on Warcraft and rts genre.
I saw a bit of it and it looked like some moba (they all the same) x starcraft 2
Horrible.
>I saw a bit of it
so your opinion doesn't matter, frick off
I saw as much as I needed to make up my mind.
WC3 was a good game
I'll say it
It was a good RTS game with a rich campaign and fun multiplayer
BUT
What ruined it was the constant chase of 'Balance'. Remember the era of Castercraft? That was created BECAUSE WC3 was a game made to chase balance considerations by 'Pros' who wanted to measure their self-worth through clicking.
It's no surprise their new game is kind of the same thing: An E-sports centric game that's inherently about 1v1 ladder play with very little creativity behind its lore, its story, or its setting. Because that's what they wanted to turn WC3 into.
vanilla WC3 was bloated to frick with micromanagement despite having appealing aspects
which is why MOBAs took off, it was literally just cutting out 90% of the gameplay loop to focus on managing 1 hero unit
Imagine modern Generals
I could imagine the endless seethe about making Chinese generals and it g etting banned in China like the first game did
I know this looks very impressive to you, but this looks exactly, just like
in every way, shape, and form.
you know nothing about me, c**t
I miss Terro-, sorry, autonomous barrel bombs
>hehe we will make a mega rts
oh nice
>made by starcraft devs
really, the star-
>starcraft 2 devs!
oh ok
>balanced by sc2 players, the have the beta and alpha keys!
oh...
>and the mechanics are based on sc2!
A friend sent me a vid, take a webm
>webm
It's a basically a moba at this point.
Honestly, it really IS more fun if its set next door (but not real lol) and you blow stuff with red stars and blue eagles.
I get the gist, but the individual points are not very accurate
take Universe at War as an example
>Hierarchy, evil guys invading earth, strong mobile fortresses
>Novus, good guys invading earth, huge mobility
>Masari, late to the party ancient defenders, defensive, can switch playstyle
Masari are the least gimmicky, not even actual bad but stirr shit up.
If anyone Novus has the only girl character.
UaW had incredible OST by Klepacki.
Such a weird game. Thought it was gonna have more civs and more stuff later on.
some mod allows you to play humans as a faction and apparently someone recently figured how to make mods playable in online mulitplayer
Didn't try myself, only stumbled over this
this
specially the pathfinding, anything but perfect will kill the playerbase, janky unit movement will infuriate anyone
Total Annihilation tho.
It's actually a really nasty genre to code and requires a ton of assets to do right. The only low-budget modern RTS games I've really enjoyed were the 8-bit series.
Are you looking forward to 9-bit Army?
I'm working on one actually.
The amount of work is absurd 'cause game engines are absolutely not designed for RTS so you end up half engine-deving it. Like, I had to make my own physics engine to get vaguely acceptable performances, and make my own animation system 'cause otherwise there would be none at all.
Damn, this too.
It need shitton of models, voice, portraits, icons, VFX, SFX - way more than for most other game type.
I dread the moment were I will be out of the "just focus on making shit work" phase and will have to actually find/make all the assets needed.
>I'm working on one actually.
It might be worth just waiting for AI to get up to speed rather than one man army'ing it.
>game engines are absolutely not designed for RTS
I wonder if it's possible with Source engine. I know Dota 2 is MOBA and all but the foundation is there with isometric views, pathfinding, and the Havok physics engine integration. I remember some modder developed Half-Life 2 RTS with the engine at one point.
playing dota and looking at the closeup view always blows my mind. the models and animations front on are really good. I wonder how well that game could run if everything was locked top down.
Then again it blew my mind when i played empire earth as a kid and seeing an artillery shell stopped mid air.
there were a bunch, none of them even close to successful
>why are there no indie RTS games? it seems like a great genre to innovate
Here you go
warzone 2100 and it is free, originally released on the PS1. Excellent game
https://wz2100.net/
I loved it on the PS1 as it is packed with sovl from the post apocalyptic feels and sountrack in that version and was kind of pleased to see it had been kept alive.
>innovate
>indie
lmao
indie games are dead, buried in an ocean of talentless hacks
>>why are there no indie RTS games? it seems like a great genre to innovate
>Here you go
>warzone 2100 and it is free, originally released on the PS1. Excellent game
>https://wz2100.net/
>I loved it on the PS1 as it is packed with sovl from the post apocalyptic feels and sountrack in that version and was kind of pleased to see it had been kept alive.
RTS take talent and game design. Rules and fine tuning, only to have the forum filled with secondaries asking for anything but an RTS
Now, if you look at Tower Defense games with campaign, there's quite. I remember Anomaly 1 and 2, they were cool
It exist, its called beyond all reason
That looks really cool. Looking forward to a full Steam release.
I imagine coding good pathfnding alone is ass. Can't imagine making a playable RTS with an average indie team
pic related is actually a pretty fun campaign RTS. I know it has active pause but really the genre is for casuals and it makes the experience far more enjoyable.
Give it a pirate if you want something new
anon I'll rather play kingdom rush if I wanted to play a tower defense game.
FOR THE UNION!
never, normies don't like 1v1 games with high skill ceilings. fighting games only just get by.
>When are RTSs coming back in full glory?
Do you really want to monkeys paw this genre? It getting big now would be horrible for the genre. It's best if it stays "dead" and caters to the community it has. The second it breaks mainstream it's over.
>The second it breaks mainstream
yeah because starcraft and AoE weren't mainstream enough
Considering the genre is "dead" again, they really weren't.
Creeper World and Particle Fleet, if they are counted as RTS, are literally the best RTS games of the 2010s. Fricking insane to think about, despite them being amazing games.
Ok, so you want RTS to be great again. Understandable. Tell me, how the frick a release of an RTS game will ever beat RA2? It has to be at least THAT good, ideally even better. Think about how high of a ceiling that is for the devs to reach. How hard it is/would be.
>Creeper World and Particle Fleet
gameplay is a bit too simplistic. But they're still nice little games. I didn't like the Creeper World 2 tho. First one is great, third one is ok/very good. But they get boring quickly, I dunno, I got fed up with the Creeper World.
I really enjoyed 2, but I can absolutely see why someone wouldn't. I thought it was pretty brave of them, actually, to change the gameplay on such a fundamental level. The next one in the series looks like a sequel to 2, as well.
When they makes RTS games that are fun enough that people want to play them more than 20+ year old games, and when they stop giving a shit about multiplayer. Also, make sure you have a good art team.
>When are RTSs coming back in full glory?
when consoles die
I need to finish this game, I don't remember why I dropped it in the first place.
Isn't it already coming back ?
Oh boy, another starcraft clone with dogshit art.
looks like a mobile sweatshop game
nothing personnell against devs or backers, but I just straight up assume it'll be fricking garbage. Not because chances are it's a ripoff, whatsoever, but because 3D RTS games are just bad. The only reason WCIII has managed to somewhat pull it off is because of people being invested in the story, powerful editor, and blizzard not being total fricking shit just yet. Most attempts at 3D RTS fail, they just don't feel nearly as good to play, I dunno. member generals? yeah, whatever, average game. RA and Tiberian Sun are still better.
TL;DR: Hard to articulate right off the top of my head what is wrong with 3D and "good", or frick forbid "realistic" graphics in an RTS. But, they're just worse/average or bad.
>wc3
>sc2
holy shit no
WC3 was absolutely shit outside of custom maps
SC2 is even fricking worse being designed for 'e-sports' first
They love being marketed as "ex blizzard devs" depite blizzard being shit for many years now so it doesn't mean jack.
The only ex blizzard devs that ever mattered were ArenaNet.
It's going to be a game with a shit campaign, bland art, and all of the balance and effort put into multiplayer meta.
What a generic as frick name
you know what, I did a little research on the website on that title. I take this
back. Because: That game is gonna suck so hard it is unreal. It will be one of the worst strategy game ever released. It'll flop so hard and die so fast, that I can't even. I quote the website:
>The First Truly Social RTS
>Additional chapters in Stormgate’s ongoing sci-fi and fantasy campaign will be released regularly alongside new units, maps, game modes, and more.
>Compete on the traditional 1v1 ladder or as part of your 3P team. We aim to make it easier and more fun to compete whether your goal is to test yourself in grassroots events or qualify for world-class esports tournaments.
TL;DR: That game is rts cancer incarnate. I now regret entering this thread, because you made me learn about that bullshit game, that makes the world we live in worse by just existing.
sounds like some sort of live service garbage, too
Yeah thats' the game I'm thinking of here
It's funny because 'Stormgate' was the fake game that people would make fun of as a fake MOBA because all of them have 'storm' or 'gate' in their name.
Pretty sure this is being made by the people that made starcraft
And?
Starcraft at its core wasn't a bad game, the problem was Blizzard made it into an e-sport just like all there other games.
>starcraft in the end a failed e-sport
>overwatch a failed e-sport
>hearthstone a failed e-sport
>retail raiding a failed e-sport
>retail arena a failed e-sport
>M+ a failed e-sport
All of these things where fun until Blizzard twisted them into a e-sport then they all died.
here is your failure
>people that made starcraft
as I am meant to give a shit about that. the only reason they made it in the first place, is because they couldn't get their hands warhammer IP. Everybody knows that. Both Warcraft and Starcraft only exist, because Blizzard couldn't get rights.
Also, RA, RA2, Tiberian Sun, AOE2, even Cossacks Back To War, and other RTS games, are better than Starcraft in my book.
>Everybody knows that. Both Warcraft and Starcraft only exist, because Blizzard couldn't get rights.
And they are both good games. The IP it's under doesn't change that. If anything I think Warcraft's early lore is better than Warhammer lore has ever been.
and they both ended up having better lore than cringehammer ever did
>made by then people that killed Starcraft*
>see their presentation
>only talks about multiplayer and esports
>day9 asks about campaign
>oh yeah there will be one too some time
Hard pass.
>Hyper-responsive gameplay
So redbull/monster'd up tweens then?
Starcraft 2 and Warcraft 3 killed RTS games. I hate games them and the games inspired by them.
the games were great, it was the playerbase that killed it for me.
play original war
This year.
When EA remasters Red Alert 2
There is a resurgence right now, there's a lot of new ones coming
And BAR is free and one of the best this decade
dont like playing as robots. i want human infantry.
NOW
Looking forward to that. There's another C&C like called Global Conflagaration, its demo was pretty janky though.
inb4 "Not NOD"
Does men of war 2 count as a RTS?
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1128860/Men_of_War_II/
The King is still alive and well.
>noooooo rts are dead
>asiaticclick asiaticclick!
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1699050/Sanctuary_Shattered_Sun/
Looks soulless.
Was looking for a Sanctuary post. Most promising looking RTS in a while.
the terrain deformation mechanic could be a double edged sword, it could make or break the game. I can think of several ways of cheesing it already.
When you start playing them instead of not playing them and wondering why no one is playing them. You can find a match fast any time of day on any of the currently popular RTS games and even some of the less populated ones still have rooms going like DoW1.
Online multiplayer has literally never been good.
RTS threads are pretty much nostalgia ones.
>I WANT TO PLAY RTS, THEY WERE MY FAVORITE GENRE!
>Nice, my dude. I fricking love RTS. I used to play AoE2 4v4 in LAN with friends all the time. Standard, quickstart, Deathmatch Post Imperial, whacky mods, you name them.
>I love strategy. I love Starcraft's pacing even though I'm not that fast. I love SupCom design. I fricking love every AoE, every Relic game, even gave DoW3 a chance, too bad it wasn't what we expected.
>Deserts of Kharak? i'm up to it
>Come on bro, why you shy?
>You like Campaign modes? I can point you into some awesome ones if you like, it's a great way to learn the MP
>Nah, man, don't be shy, everyone starts slow. It doesn't matter if you lose your first matches, whats important is that you learn and have fun doing so
>Ladder anxiety is real, no denying it. Can you imagine? I still got that feeling too sometimes! but it's part of growing up. It's a game, a training of mind and soul. The real enemy is within, not the other player, he's just testing himself too. So give it all you've got!
>Cities Skylines is cool, but that's not an RTS, senpai.
>Actually, yes, I have a copy of The Art of War right here. It's incredible how it actually can be applied to any vidya too. I can lend it to you if you like.
>Yes, see, I'll teach you the pacing and why build orders are important, but mostly to think like your enemy and be 2 steps ahead.
>Never give up! I won so many games with pincer attacks or guerrilla warfare behind the enemy production, outnumbered and outclassed. Scouting is vital! You see, you might have foresight, but it's better to actually have true sight
>Pushes, defenses, turtling, rushes, eco, micro, macro, cheeky infiltrations, offensive maneuvers, defensive tactics, tech domination, they're all valid, as long as you try your best
>Wanna hit me up at AoE4? I play RUS right now, eco boom is interesting
>Let's smash some bots in BAR next!
>Next we hit the gym and then some work. Healthy body and a healthy mind!
Hey, it's the copypasta tourist.
Catch, moron
ok lets save this thread with GOOD campaigns for RTS games.
I'll start
supcom 1 + xpac
warzone 2100 (downloadable for free now via https://wz2100.net/)
RA2
Total ANNIHILATION+ xpac
Dawn of war chaos xpac
My pc's are cursed. I want to play all the Totala canpaign missions on hard since its fun and i see it as some completion. But ive been trying it 3 times already and ended up with my pc's somehow dieing every time losing all saved progess in the meantime. I have a new one now but im afraid to curse this one aswell.
>saves your genre
You're welcome kiddo
For me it's
You know you're in for good shit when even the menus have so much atmosphere.
Have an "extended" version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCzb1Fal12Q
Any ideas that could change up the structure of how RTS are made?
Maybe they could try adding a shit ton of buildings or units so the meta doesn't become stale and there's something new to try.
To be honest games that are pure skill can be boring. How many times does anyone want to 1v1 someone who's just better and get smashed every time?
I like quake 3 because of how mechanically sound it is and at the beginning the weapon pickups can seem RNG which can add to the fun factor.
>To be honest games that are pure skill can be boring. How many times does anyone want to 1v1 someone who's just better and get smashed every time?
>can seem rng
but they aren't.
>Any ideas that could change up the structure of how RTS are made?
Larger scale matches that continually evolve and are basically an entire campaign in one "game".
>I want an RTS
> But slow paced
>In fact turn based
>And wanna make my dudes and fight in epic big battles like im a general
> Different units comp? That sounds tryhard
>Techs? That sounds like build paths and i dont wanna learn that
>Pincer attacks? Lmao what a tryhard babble
>Disruption of economy? Lmao thats some tryhard words, im a general not an economist
> I want the biggest tank, and i want it now
>Building costs? Boring shit for tryhards
>I dont wanna hear "scouting", means nothing to me
>MP? Thats a solved building path and I... No I dont wanna play against a person who solved the game or me
>I wanna play against an AI that plays always the same so i can solve the game
>I wanna fight in my "own terms" and whenever i like, not when my enemy forces me to because i wanna be the one forcing, just dont know how
>And if you beat me youre a tryhard korean in age of stratcraft i played that game all the time as a kid and was a god i know what im talking about but dem evil koreans made it bad
Ugh. Is it so hard to understand?
Anyways, what RTS game lets me roleplay as a good general? Without those -pesky- mechanics in the way
I main Protoss btw
Yes.
Ganker has too many narcissists with an ego that can't handle losing in a video game. everything comes down to "i wanna win all the time with minimal effort"
>Ganker has too many narcissists with an ego that can't handle losing in a video game. everything comes down to "i wanna win all the time with minimal effort"
True, and still if you want a discussion somebody gets hurt when outed
But Its reall a case to study. Imagine if people asked for Chess but claim they want a single player campaign with custom special rules for them and them only, and a story to accompany Chess with. Not only is already moronic, they already take it personal when people turn around in confusion.
There are a lot of adventure games and beat em ups and Tower Defense games. What is so offensive about not being into a genre you don't even like to begin with?
And when people actually understand the idea of the game and want to get in (i.e. git gud) people bombard those posts with demotivational speeches about the game. In reality, RTS communities are awesome most of the time and will teach whatever you ask them, either in forums, youtube or ingames.
>Imagine if people asked for Chess but claim they want a single player campaign with custom special rules for them and them only
Why would you bring up a game that was designed to be a 2 player head to head game and nothing else from the time of its inception as a point of comparison to RTS?
If you can't see the parallelism, is because you don't play video games competitively or at all.
>If you can't see the parallelism
I can't see the parallels because there aren't any. They're two fundamentally different games designed in completely different ways from the ground up.
I can't see the parallelism because it's obviously fricking wrong. Almost every game made for two player, even fricking cards, has a solitaire variant. Even checkers.
You just didn't know that until someone told you because you're a pseud trying to make simile in fields he knows nothing about when you barely understand anything about the RTS genre in the first place. I remember one thread you argued that custom maps killed RTS games.
If you like chess so much why would you play alone by yourself only?
Normal people can't comprehend schizoid gibberish, yes.
Such as gayging about
>muh board game, therefore RTS esportshomosexualry is correct!!!
That is literally unhinged dumbfrick shit, and you call it a "parallel".
>carpetbagging esports homosexual ruins genre that used to be extremely popular
>REEE IT'S YOUR FAULT FOR NOT WANTING asiaticCLICK
every
time
>Chess analogy
What's fricking hilarious about this screed of angry furor about people enjoying games in ways he doesn't approve of is that someone DID make a solo Chess campaign, literally 200 years ago.
Yeah super popular it seems
>Campaign baddies didn't bought it anyways
History bound to repeat itself
so why is Chess popular, but esporstroony RTS asiaticclick isn't?
KEK
chess puzzles are arguably chess singleplayer and they're super popular
C&C, Warcraft, StarCraft and Age of Empires are beloved because of their campaigns, and custom modes in the case of the classic Blizzard games. The multiplayer could be good, but it wasn't meant to be a super competitive thing. It just became that in the case of Brood War because of Korean autists.
>Imagine if people asked for Chess but claim they want a single player campaign
>moronic
Black person, do you know how popular "chess puzzles" are among chess players?
Chess had single player scenarios since pretty much the beginning of the printed press.
>see: Ganker's relationship with fightan
>Noo i keep mashing shit sucks FGs are dead
It's the same as
>Noo i keep getting rushed whyyy? build orders suck
Exactly as
>Noooo i keep getting railed across the map frick he's aimbotting
And the
>Noooo shit jungler why no gank tryhard shit
Shitters gonna shit
How dumbfricked you have to be to agree with an esl copypasta?
Apparently (you) levels of dumbfricked.
>nooooooo it's pasta you can't agree with it then aaaaaaaaa
You absolutely can, just know it'll make you as much of a dumbfrick as the esl copypasta poster.
i don't like the nature of rushing so i was never a fan of rts multiplayer
anyway since C&C was raped and killed they weren't even worth playing for the campaign in the end
>Play the demo for Last Train Home
>Don't have fun
>Play the demo for Tempest Rising
>Don't have fun
>Company of Heroes 3 doesn't have a demo
>Everyone says it sucks
D:
CoH2 and 3 have had tumultuous development and patching, and fans have had much to complain about.
That said, some of my most exhilirating multiplayer gaming experiences have been in coh2 pvp.
Frantic combat, victory points ticking down, then you finish off that tiger tank that threatened doom, the music swells, the voice actors scream, and your enemy surrenders.
That's the stuff.
I enjoyed CoH 1 and CoH 2 multiplayer, but I'm hesitant to buy CoH 3 because it doesn't seem to be an upgrade at all
Every Men of War game has "Direct Control" which lets you command a unit in real time like it's a third person shooter. The newer Call to Arms even lets you do this in 1st person for infantry, although it has a much smaller unit roster. It's admittedly a bit janky but it is pretty fun to position all your troops and then jump into the perspective of some grunt to gun down some dudes who are flanking. I think Gates to Hell (the standalone WW2 game using the same engine) also lets you do this but I haven't played it yet.
You know what, I'm fine with the current state of RTS. I've bought enough of them since the 90s that I can simply rotate my playtime through my entire collection of RTS without feeling bored until the day I die. And don't forget custom maps and mods and freeware and forks, etc. etc.
I am perfectly fine with RTS staying the way it is and never returning to the glory days.
Every RTS thread
>Why are RTS not as popular?
>I DON'T KNOW BUT I HATE RTS WITH PASSION CAUSE THEY MAKE ME ANXIOUS AND EXPOSE ME I WANT THEM TO BE ANYTHING BUT REAL TIME STRATEGY
>I don't think you should be here bu-
>FRICK THIS, THIS IS THE REASON WHY, THEY DON'T CATER TO ME SO I DON'T BUY WHAT I DON'T ALREADY BUY
What's with RTS and anxiety posters? chill, campaigns have never been good outside a handful in the first place.
>i want real-time strategy but without the real time and without the strategy
i seriously don't understand what casuals on Ganker want.
>our genre isn't popular enough
>so we need to attract people who currently aren't playing RTS
>but also we need to keep everything unchanged, because frick the people who don't like the currently existing games
I always feel like 99% of those discussion are just people not realizing you can't gatekeep and gateopen simultaneously.
Especially since new RTS get released every year and the old ones are still there. Your favorite decades-old game is safe, you are absolutely allowed to brainstorm about new design/concept/idea that would attract the people who are *currently* uninterested in what the genre has to offer.
>Your favorite decades-old game is safe
COUGH COUGH Warcraft 3 COUGH COUGH
>the same sperg is now having all-caps meltdowns
You absolutely love to see it
I find it funny because the closest RTS came to being relevant again was Total Warhammer 2 through to TW3 Immortal Empires and barely anyone who bought those games cared about MP.
What engine are you using? I'm tempted to just use whatever the latest version of GEM is and take the risk of getting sanctioned for using a mighty RVSSIAN game engine
>I find it funny because the closest RTS came to being relevant again was Total Warhammer 2 through to TW3 Immortal Empires and barely anyone who bought those games cared about MP.
Total War games are barely RTS, anon, that's why
They're exactly what PvE people want. Slow paced turn based games with meaningless cinematic battles that are better off pressing the skip button cause they suck to play.
The TBS elements are extremely shallow though. You basically just paint the map, build unit production structures and build economy structures. The only reason to play is for the RTS battles.
It's a hybrid, most of your campaign is going to be playing the RTS mode if only because Auto-resolve is all over the place.
The battles are not RTS because there's no base building. Deployment of pre-existing troops in a singular battle falls under RTT.
>WTF using actual strategy to best your opponents in a stategy game?? NOOOOOOOOO you need to play games where i memorized the perfect build order to rush you in 5 minutes and pull off some wicked cheese micro bullshit with my spellcaster units
choke on dicks and die you autistic esport mobahomosexual
Total War are grand strategy games.
Unity. Mostly due to two features: BatchRendererGroup that allow for both batched rendering and fine control of per-instance shader data (custom animation system goes here) and Burst/Job that make parallel processing of big data pile faster and simpler (AI/physics/etc goes here).
As much as I want to avoid AI generated stuff, it's probably what's going to happen.
Paying actual artists for custom stuff is way above my budget, and I have the artistic talent of a dead pigeon.
I think Dust Front looks very promising on premise and visuals alone
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2610770/Dust_Front_RTS/
wow that looks like something I never want to look at again
niiice
When AI advances to the point where it's not braindead so you can actually play against something other than a 20 year veteran
Sorian AI is really, really good on harder difficulties.
So much so Sorian had to nerf it for later games like PA Titans because it would outdo the player most of the time unless they were serious sweaty e-sports tryhards.
Never. Unless someone totally revolutionizes the genre in a way that it's barely RTS any more. RTS is the only genre where the game starts about 15 or 20 minutes after you click "start game" and then if you lose its back to "shit I guess I'll make 4 villagers and build 2 houses... for 10 minutes... again." For some reason anti-rush mechanics are to rts what "0 execution, instant, free comeback mechanics" are to fightan, it's something that casuals think they want until it's ruined the whole genre.
The ONE modern RTS to cater entirely to campaigntrannies, and you guys don't even mention it. You are pathetic.
looks pretty cool actually, shame spess isn't my thing
is there a chance for zerospace?
I hope.
The plant based faction looks super comfy
I like the ideas for the mechanics, but the character art look like trash
In scarscar we trust
It looks even more soulless than Stormgate
Dead genre
Still take over any other tbh
>Aoe4
Trash game
Aoeo deseves the 4th more than aoe4
Is AoE online worth playing for its campaign ?
Is far better that today ones. Just not play argo ones and the recent roman one is kino. Overall it not may be so atmospheric as aoe2 but is a good one
I've just been playing FAF with a group of friends against the cheating AI
Why isn't there a building rts builder? I want to have the main focus be on the building up the base, upgrading of the features, and building units with specific types of pre-built in commands. I don't care about the actual click/drag/move here/attack here aspects. I'd rather have an "attack" button that you just press where all of your units attack at once, attacking based on the type of attack/defence pattern you applied to them when creating them.
There Are Billions
Tower Defense games
Total Annihilation games to an extent (gameplan style)
Dyson Sphere Program
There are quite a lot
Industrial Annihilation?
RTS certainly need an APM limit. They also need a bunch more controls. Using Ctrl+1 to select a group is great. Pressing T to select all onscreen of a type is great. Having to manually reselect with a mouse box every 3 seconds is terrible.
starcraft 2's coop has a mutation where it takes away minerals for every order you issued unironically called microtransactions
Soon, actually.
Some Blizzard refugees are making notStarcraft
RTS games should be balanced around 3v3
>noooooo rts should be campaign only, its the only way for rts to recover. mp shitters are killing the genre.
>meanwhile the starship troopers rts, a campaign only rts from last year cant even break 300 players on a good day
Good thing about single player RTS is that they don't need to break any daily quotas, tourist.
The good thing about single player only rts is that devs can easily see that nobody plays them so they dont waste time making more
Yeah, nobody played C&Cs, OW, WCs and so on
Dumb fricking tourist.
I didn't even know there was a Starship Troopers RTS until your post
its always funny see you morons complaing about X genre being dead and complain a game doesn't have players
starship troopers is that shit
its like you homosexuals when said no one played that shitty arena fps despite having shit artstyle shit design and shit characters
This
Because it's not about playing a game for whatever reason, these threads are about ego
>not a new IP
oops
as if it wasn't obvious by his posting style
kek
>BRO IT DOESN'T HAVE CONSTANT 100K CONCURRENT PLAYERS IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT IT SOLD WELL ENOUGH TO GET A DLC A GAME NEEDS TO BE PLAYED FOREVER
>starship troopers rts
tower defense games are no RTS
Battle for middle earth 3 when?
When Command & Conquer Generals gets a remastered release
hopefully never
I'll never forgive what they did to Generals
So how about that AoM remake?
Something tells me it's going to get turned into an AoE reskin, so then I just won't want to play it.
Nothing yet.
C&C and SC clones and remakes are fricking TRASH
DORF is only interesting because it is apparently branching out to logistics and production somehow in gameplay.
I don't care about campaign homosexualry, but I don't mind if they somehow come up with a good game mode that can be played against computer maybe even in co-op. Still, the main thing should be player against player, but without the muh e-sport homosexualry
Feel free to shit on my opinion
TA meets Dyson Sphere Program
Most feefees hurt around MP are because they only played SC2 and got curbstomped and, well, SC2 was trash all along in their defense.
But yes, RTS are multiplayer games first and foremost. A robust MP makes good SP games.
yet another scam from acclaimed "annihilation"-series scammers
SC2 is based because I can send 20 zerglings with 3 actions as opposed to 6 like in BW.
I fricking love ling all ins.
>t. 10 years a bronzie
I get angry when i think of SC2 larva injections and the ADHD clicking the game forces on you to do anything, only to either deathball the enemy or get deathballed in the end. It's not a good experience.
When I win or lose in the good ol' AoE2 I know it was because an outplay, or any other RTS. In SC2 it was because you looked away for a nano second
>But yes, RTS are multiplayer games first and foremost.
I'm glad that it's just one moron insisting this in RTS threads.
this looks nice but at the same time it has that cheap flat color cartoony look SupCom2, PA and BAR has.
It's like every unit is made up from toy blocks
rts is to pseudo intellectuals
see
>asiaticclicktroony so seething mad, xhe made a cope thread
KEKAROO
see
Strategy games shouldn't be about reaction times.
You still need fast reaction times on RTSs
No. RTS died because devs thought they did. It was doing very well before the click/e-sports rush
I don't mean asiatic levels of clicking, more like fast decision making, critical thinking and adaptability to enjoy RTSs.
Yes, real time gameplay requires real time thoughts and actions.
No RTS outside Starcrap has ever been about asiaticclicking
There's just regular micro managing in any other
Wrong.
You're one of those morons who's only ever beaten up the easy AI.
Red Alert, C&C, Wc2, Wc3, SupCom, TA, AoE - it'd be easier naming the RTS's that DON'T require APM than the ones that do.
By all means, enlighten us as to which RTS you're thinking of when you say stupid shit like that.
Define "how fast" is asiaticclicking to you because, my APM is around 40-50, pretty low, and never EVER felt stressed, tryhard or tired on any ANY game
Its regular gameplay. If you think that's the evil asiatic clicking then you have the reaction times of a dead dog and should just euthanize yourself
I'm not the one scared of "asiaticclicking".
Tell me which games it is that you think isn't about "being fast".
I'm not scared either and 50APM landed me in low plat in SC2 back then
Of course strategy is about being fast and being first to strike. But only Starcraft enforces rancid pointless clicking because units get stuck constantly
>But only Starcraft enforces rancid pointless clicking because units get stuck constantly
First it was Starcraft 2, now it's Starcraft? Bad pathing wasn't exclusive to Starcraft, so now all old RTS' are asiaticclick?
You also failed to mention what RTS' don't require le asiaticclick.
the transitioning into 3D is what killed the genre off
>on
Dumbfrick esloid
You mean turn based games?
>Speed is the essence of war
Does xcom count? Been addicted to long war of the chosen lately
>i shouldn't get punished for reacting too slowly to an attack on my front line
>that's fricking bullshit
RTS genre clearly need MPgays and SPgays to thrive, I don't get why there's always been so much hostility between these groups.
This is Ganker, nobody that actually plays these games think this stuff.
Because it doesn't need nearly as many MPgays as the MPgays think it does and SP gameplay (i.e. actual fun) inherently suffers when you try to balance for MPgay whinging literally every time.
was there even 3 not dogshit rts in the last 10 years?
Multiplayerhomosexualry killed RTS gaming.
No, esports autism killed RTS. You're moronic if you think multiplayer was never a draw when one of the key marketing points, along with single player, was playing with and/or against other people in online co-op or pvp matches.
>esports autism killed RTS.
that's multiplayer homosexualry, moron
>multiplayer = esports
moron
esports wouldnt exist without multiplayer, genuine moron
I didn't say that, moron.
you can play custom maps without multiplayer, but multiplayer is necessary for esports
suck a billion wieners moron
>esports autism killed RTS.
>in online pvp matches.
Correct.
>RTSs
I recently just learned about BAR. I fricking loved total annihilation and this looks like a new version of that. It's free on their website so I think i'm going to get it tonight finally and give it a shot
Did they ever make more RTS where you can get on the field and fight among your men?
Men of War kinda lets you do this
Also frick yeah Urban Assault
Not sure if mount and blade counts
Rise & Fall: Civilizations at War. Herzog Zwei.
Brutal legend
Kingdom Under Fire 2
Men of War
You could kinda count some of the mousu games like Dysentery warriors but I don't.
Giants: Citizen Kabuto. maybe, it's been a long time since I played.
Sacrifice
Natural Selection but the units are other players and game is fuken dead
Dungeon Keeper/ War for the Overworld kinda but it's also not really an RTS, I just really like possession.
Battlezone
Executive Assault 1 and 2
It peaked 25 years ago.
I played red alert 2 for 6 hours today, you can still enjoy them 🙂
Where is the lie?
>dude who has never made an RTS game and admits to never playing them
Why should anyone listen to his opinion?
He played them when they were big. Did you not listen to the video?
There was a Supreme Commander-esque game, I think it was a fangame or maybe a mod, and it's name was something like K-1000 or KT-10000 or something along those lines. I swear it was real but I can't find it anywhere. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I don't want to have gaslighted myself into believing something I dreamed was real.
zero-k
thank you anon. i guess i was misremembering the name, no wonder i couldn't find it.
The genre never died.
There's new RTS releases every year
am I just imagining it or are the people angriest about rts c&c fans lashing out at the genre when they should really just be mad at ea?
>When are RTSs coming back in full glory?
When they find out how to monetize it, or when the gaming community has gone full moron and think you need to buy you armies, like it's WH40K
>or when the gaming community has gone full moron and think you need to buy you armies, like it's WH40K
They already do that with TW:W.
I don't understand the timeline of starcraft supposedly ruining rts.
>1998 starcraft comes out
>1999 esports is just some weird thing people do in korea
>2003 ea shuts down westwood
>2009 microsoft shuts down ensemble
>2010 starcraft 2 comes out
how could sc2 ruin rts when big corpos already killed blizzard's competitors before it even came out. how did sc2 over focus on esports when it has the most single player content of any rts ever made?
RTS were long dead before SC2 came out. People thought it would revive the genre.
but that's my point how could starcraft kill rts when it was already dead before starcraft was relevant outside of worst korea and a few nerds on team liquid?
Nah RTS were still kicking with the surge in popularity with MOBAs. But NOW RTS is dead.
Basically the same mentality behind WoW killed MMOs or Halo/CoD killed FPS. Starcraft was a really big success and it had a decent influence on other developers. I don't personally think SC1 killed RTS, because the genre was doing great for a while and had some unique games come out after 1998 but that would be the thrust of the argument. If anything I think RTS died down because it was really, really hard to compete with
>Supreme Commander
>Age of Empires 2
>Tiberium Sun/Red Alert 2
>Starcraft 1/Warcraft 3
A lot of games tried and failed to tackle those titans, but developers lost interest especially as porting RTS to console is a pain in the ass. Why invest in one of the hardest genres to do well, against games that have staunch fanbases and similar gameplay to your potential game, for a single platform when you can bash out an easier to make multiplatform game? Relic and Eugen were able to make it work but most other devs were either too similar to one of the big 4 or just gave up. Then EA killed C&C, M$ killed AoE, while Relic and Gas Powered Games just kept making inferior sequels
This, and as AAA budgeting comes into play the genre itself didnt generate enough revenue to justify the dev costs that they forced themselves into for the WIDER AUDIENCE. This is how MS thought it was a brilliant idea to force Ensemble to make console exclusive RTS games, or EA killing Westwood without ever making an RTS.
>Buy a studio known for their RTS games and some niche RPGs
>Have them make an FPS and an MMO
>both bomb unsurprisingly
>kill the company and make C&C 3 without anyone that were originally involved with the franchise
Absolute corpo frickery.
Westwood made more than RTS despite C&C being their most popualar franchise.
Lands of Lore was sick and the Blade runner game is one of the best adventure games ever made.
I also liked renegade but acknowledge that it's not amazing.
I also forgot to mention that Westwood was in the making of Generals, which EA still axed them anyway before its release
Exactly because of that. Everyone else shit the bed and Blizzard was the last xompay holding the torch, and they fricked it all up with a bland asiaticcliquer. However, no one wanted to compete with fricking Blizzard, so they put all their money on MOBAs or competitive knitting instead.
It would probably help if older games got permanent price cuts to draw more people in. They're way too expensive.
I've been thinking about this and shouldn't it be the otherway around?
Since old games are better they should stay the same price but all the slop now should be cheaper?
I don't care how much it costs them to make it, I care about the end product.
Why would you want to pay $30 for a game that came out 20 years ago? It isn't even a remaster, and it doesn't even have any DLC, it's just the base game. The idea of attributing price to quality and not age seems stupid to me.
Why shouldn't cost equate quality?
The idea of spending more on garbage just because it's new is stupid to me.
That's because you're moronic and would probably spend 100 dollars on a used Nintendo 64 game. Prices always fall with product age, regardless of the quality. Some just don't fall enough for idiotic reasons. This would be like asking why RDR 2 still isn't being sold for $60 despite being the same game as it was when it launched.
I don't know why this even needs to be said.
Tomorrow
My uncle told me and he works for God
When someone creates a new original idea that isn't the same shit we've been force-fed for 30 years.
I still play bfme online
based
I'm an attack troll connoiseur myself.
>Homeworld 3
>Tempest Rising
>DORF
Yeah I'm thinking RTS are back
>Homeworld 3
ok
>Tempest Rising
no way lol. have you played the demo, it really sucks.
>DORF
It's a never ever.
TEMPEST LOST
Wish there were more gimmick factions like the Zerg or Undead that terraformed as they expanded.
I think it's cool
Watch
youtu.be/gz2QMUaIrSI
youtu.be/wD1RSZrvXcI
youtu.be/Ygrm7KMam1M
youtu.be/KiYkDXkoCjw
youtu.be/ksRCn1gRdX8
youtu.be/1VLDT-gbHFE
youtu.be/7djrrqBoG_c
youtu.be/kWRdcynXJ8Y
youtu.be/fQL_idkUxoA
youtu.be/xej5JeM2bME
youtu.be/aCBPQkwz714
youtu.be/fprCqgC-c14
youtu.be/V0thXFYIsSs
youtu.be/p3SPJLtnMXQ
youtu.be/wVJmMmq4FSc
youtu.be/nPmx9wpnLTo
youtu.be/S5HWucHmxek
GO BACK
where
https://c7-game.github.io/
I've been playing aoe2 recently and it's impressive how much jank the original non-de game had. everyone shits on starcraft for having awful controls but in this game:
>shift click does nothing
>you can put multiple buildings in one control group but it will only make out of the first one
>you have to use patrol all the time because there's no attack move
>no option to hotkey screen locations
basically the only thing it does better is no control group limitations and walking up ramps. also it's funny that everyone talks about how shit things like larva inject are in sc2, but everyone is fine with shit like deer herding in aoe.
Deer luring is a debated topic.
Is there a reason all game art looks like shit these days? Are there just no artists left that can do other artstyles besides plasticy/mobile aesthetic?
WHERE IS IT YOU FRICKS? I CANT TAKE IT ANYMORE.
Same here, considering they already added a DLC for AoM outta fricking nowhere I can only assume AoM:DE is going to get post launch support for a while
rrrrrrrrrRRRRRRRR-PEW
Red Alert 2 was the climax of RTS. Everything after that looked stupid. Generals looked mad moronic. I'm glad to see a group has bought RA2 back into the spotlight. I had to stop playing that game due to how fricking horribly long it takes to play a good match.
>Red Alert 2 was the climax of RTS
that's objectively incorrect of you to say when SC2 was the death of the genre.
What the frick are you talking about? Generals was great. RA3 was the one with the stupid clown cannon shit.
My ideal RTS is just bigger supcom. There are a host of supcom inspired games but they all just do things a bit wrong. BAR is an example, the maps are way smaller and it doesn't have the same massive units. I just want a batshit crazy game where the developers don't give a damb about comp and just add walking aircraft carriers and shit.
I'd probably say I'd like a mix of supcom, men of war, and empire earth's digital/nano age. Closer to star wars where you have crazy machines piloted by humanoids rather than unmanned robots.
Red Alert 2 remaster
Yuri's Revenge remaster
Tiberian Sun remaster
Generals remaster
Zero Hour remaster
WH40k Dawn of War remaster
WH40k Winter Assault remaster
WH40k Dark Crusade remaster
WH40k Soulstorm remaster
LOTR Battle for Middle Earth remaster
LOTR Battle for Middle Earth 2 remaster
>Tib Sun Remaster
Never happening. The source code is gone. They'd need to do a full blown remake.
They could just copy the code from OpenRA. They've done most of the work. Most of the game works except bridges as far as I know and that was years ago. RA2 works almost just fine in OpenRA
>RA2 works almost just fine in OpenRA
they still haven't fixed the lag issues.
age of empires 4 is good
Good morning sars.
pic related would be a miracle if a bunch of poles could make a good RTS game with their previous game assets.
>turning ero-gore game into actual RTS
Now that's quite a move.
Chris singlehandedly killed the RTS genre when he perfected it.
>Compelling setting showing the complex political differences between fatalistic humanists, transhumanists, and fundamentalists.
>Exquisite aesthetics that draw both from their core ideology, geometric uniqueness, and a splash of modern nations to make them more relatable
>Perfectly balanced with all three human factions having equivalent units creating a large distinction using small differences instead of having each of the factions play different games or making them carbon copies of eachother
>Expansion throws in an alien race which true to its nature, bends the rules in entirely unique ways like having a T2 unit that punches way above its weight and into T3 but sacrifices its T3 to do so (which fits into the theme that while the alien invaders may seem insurmountable, with perseverance the human spirit may win out in the end)
>TFW I killed RTS games.
why'd you do it
it was an accident. I pirated all games till I got a job and most of the games I loved pirating back in the day were RTS games, now god has punished me by giving money but depriving me of RTS games to buy.
Feeble cursed one!
>When are RTSs coming back in full glory?
When they stop trying to make them for E-Sports.
nobody is making rts cause they cant be played on controller and every company makes games primarily for console cattle nowadays
grand strategy games don't have controller support as well right? they are still successful
RTS will never be back. They are like graphical adventures. People made them because they didnt know how to make better games work yet. People wanted to play a game like nights into dreams or star ocean or tomb raider but actually playing them made you vomit chunks so they played warcraft 2 and yu-no instead. Now its thirty years later the people who made the above games got better at it, except the people who made nights, so everyone plays star ocean and tomb raider, and no one plays nights or warcraft or yu-no, but they still want to play nights.
Between aoe 2 and 4 there's 40k players on steam alone. RTS is doing more than fine. If people want to play there's games available due to the 1v1 centred nature you only need a pop of a few hundred. And there's near a dozen decently sized titles in the horizon, RTS is doing better than It has for a long while
i was hoping that the Dune movie would bring in life to that dead franchise. but no.
I want to like RTS. I tell myself I like RTS. But I like the IDEA of being able to play an RTS with any sort of competency, not really actually playing it.
I'm one of those moron babies who cannot be bothered to leave their base until I have "a full group of things" which means I'm going to get rushed to hell and back by people who know what they're doing. I know what a build order is, I can follow a build order, but the problem is that a build order doesn't actually help someone like me, who's a moron, to get any better at the game. It just SLIGHTLY extends the amount of time I can survive until I get destroyed. I don't understand why I'm not supposed to build more Econ yet, my monkey brain wants to see econ numbers go up so I can do more in the game, and the next thing I know everything is on fire because the real way to play an RTS is to make sure you are always seeing negative numbers in the econ readout.
I've come to accept I will never be able to handle an RTS, and will remain the kind of person who tries to play Men of War only to get cursed out by the other team by being so boring to play against I ruined their match.
I'm the same kind of moron. You can iteratively get better. You can boom and play defensively. It's a bit of work. I enjoy the chaos that deep into RTS game offers. So much shit is happening and if you can hold it together or create some space for yourself better than the other guy you can win.
I'll never be good but I can get victories against other shitters and that's good enough for me
Honestly the biggest problem is that playing against the AI just teaches bad habits.
Except maybe Warzone 2100 teaching me the joy of turret rushing.
I avoided online because of the shame of losingor getting stomped. But you just get over it, learn on the job. A loss is no big deal. Eventually I've gotten more enjoyment out of games vs humans. Even losses, Im constantly fricking up by not building infrastructure for military beyond 2-3 barracks. Soon I'll learn to just build the fricking things even tho it goes against my 1 of each building moronic city planner inclination
>I don't understand why I'm not supposed to build more Econ yet
ignore that shit.
1) don't stop making econ
2) spend your money
these two concepts alone will get you to king of shitters level in almost any rts.
For some games it works, but in others you have to make certain shit first. See: Heros in Warcraft 3. I personally hated that mechanic but if you don't play in a hero-focused manner you lose.
it still sort of works for warcraft 3 when you realize the econ revolves around hero exp and not gold or wood
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2607060/From_Glory_To_Goo/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2388620/DORF_RealTime_Strategic_Conflict/
Glory to goo looks like rimworld but rts.
I like that even the dev doesn't know why he called it DORF.
didn’t realize og starcraft is still running with custom maps and a decent player base. all these years i could have been playing and i thought it died. just place starcraft use map settings with me bros
also the soundtrack is kino
Sounds more like that the genre needs a coop campaign/ randomised missions/ or what ever in that category. The times where casual masses have the patience when getting stomped in every match are long gone. That's something comp gays need to understand, but probably never will due to mental illness.
Think people tend to prefer pve more as they get older. I know I did
How come every 2D rts from the 90's still looks better than any 3D modern rts? They're so much visually clearer, while modern rts games just have too many particle effects that often obscure whats happening.
making an RTS game is hard. 2D games had clear and precise artstyle. It is much harder to do that in 3D.
Man, the only dude I knew from school back then, who went ultra competitive in RTS, was a midget. Always angry and mad at everyone, smoking and doing drugs to look tough. What is the matter with comp gays? Why are they always mentally ill?
when you stop complaining and actually play them.
Are you a Arena FPS fan also, by chance?
I love Earth 2150 Trilogy
no other RTS even comes close to the amount of sheer soul it had
I went as far as making my own mod for it
>Earth 2150 Trilogy
for me it was warzone 2100, its vehicle design system felt really cool.
Earth 2150 filtered me quite well, and I also remember how Dark Reign filtered me. Frick, I was never good at RTS. Maybe except for KKND2.
To all the people claiming you like campaigns only
Which campaign and why?
I don't mind multiplayer but all the classic RTS had good campaign and that's how most people are introduced to the genre. Also most people played custom games with friends, not super competitive shit.
But nobody mentions what campaigns and what do they like about them
Because everyone knows people are talking about the most obvious shit like Age of Empires II, StarCraft and it's expansions. I never played C&C but from what I see people have quite a bit of nostalgia for those campaigns.
The campaigns itself are pretty easy, but they work as glorified tutorials for new players. They have cool stories and interesting challenges for people who have never played an RTS.
Necron campaign for Soulstorm. I still need to play Dark Crusade yet. I just like playing as these spooky scary space skeltals who only communicate in chitters, whirring and static.
Red alert 2 and its expansion has hands down the best campaign in any RTS game. it's because the setpieces and cutscenes were so much fun, it had varied, unique objectives and also superb feedback (enemy taunts you on your comms and smaller cutscenes display on your minimap in response to your actions). Age of mythology has the next best campaign I would say, because of its epic story and sufficient amount of missions.
Rise of Legends
There was never another one quite like it
Aside from the usual C&C answer, World in Conflict for me. The game is very simple with the offense and defense objectives with simple selections of units and its obvious rock-paper-scissors role, but the sandbox of the missions utilized the tactical options really well, from artillery to cruise missiles all the way to carpet bombing.
I really wish there were more wc3 style rts games where you got control of a few units but each of them came with 2-3 powerful abilities a piece but units weren't so squishy you could blink and have half your army vaporized by a deathball a la starcraft 2.
Never. It's a solved genre.
None answer that reeks of reddit and a homosexual who is desperate to fit in.
I'm thinking of buying warlords battlecry 3 on steam and roping my friends into play it with me
I only played Empire Earth 1 & 2 and I loved them. Wish they made more.
>Wish they made more.
they did. There's empire earth 3, it is better if you don't know about it.
Just looked it up, three factions and five epochs. "The game received widespread negative reviews."
Didn't miss anything then.
hopefully never if you're still wanking over aoe2 or coh or starcraft or warcraft 3 you need to wake up from your brainrot coma to see why the genre is irrelevant and why permutations like that should remain as legacy styled rts not to be used literally when developing anything new
>doesn't give an actual reason
Play Sins of the Solar Empire
Any RTS that mixes top down shooters well together?
Silica attempted something by mixing FPS with RTS. Its an interesting concept but it needs to get out of EA first.
>FPS with RTS
Man, this subgenre is cursed. From C&C Renegade to Natural Selection, shit never took off.
Natural Selection 2 was great until the sweats figured you could one-shot consistently with the shotgun.
they are still trying to perfect those, C&C firestorm is happening and Silica as well. Let's see how it goes.
it never left
www.darkreignws.com
>asiaticclick this
>sweatlords that
Why is it so hard for you "people" to just admit you were never good at RTS and citybuilders were more your speed?
Prostagma?
age is a boring MP game.
Broodwar was the only good MP game and Warcraft 3 for the casual MP play.
Everything else is subpar.
Age of Empires 2 DE adds new campaigns every year and you can get it for 5 bucks on sale.
What went wrong?
With game?
Line War
>tfw still no command and conquer base & army building warhammer rts
It will never make a come back unless RTS devs move away from the 3 races only style.
All I wanted was for WC3 to make a come back and the level editor community to flourish back again
Alas, blizzard
Can Ganker even define what a sweat lord is? Is it anyone that can execute a build order with a modicum of success while you sit there placing buildings perfectly? Is it someone who doesn't just let his units die to whatever you have?
People who beat me
gays who get offended by people having fun
Campaigns can be enjoyable but once you understand RTS and can play 1v1 they're mostly dull. Most never reach that step though and RTS has no way to dumb down to shitters like FPS did.
So "When are RTs coming back in full glory", i dont think you are going to like the answer, but it goes something like this:
> RTS are coming back to glory when Cloud Gaming works the way that is intended
So imagine this, you are visiting a VR pub or something and there is a retro gaming invent, you see that they are Playing Starcraft and AoE, yes...as incredible as it sounds that is the context were a whole NEW generation of players will discover these games, when they can run them on a cloud server without any noticeable input lag. Then there will be millons of players loving RTS again. If i would have to make an educated guess? this would be in no less than 50 years from now, when cloud gaming is practically like an online arcade.
When you play them instead of crying about people playing them better than you.