>play SS >SoB >build holy icon on listening post >50 req and 20 power or whatever it was >cancel >get 50 req and 20 power refunded >build holy icon >50 req and 20 power >cancel >get 100 req and 40 power refunded >build holy icon >50 req and 20 power >cancel >get 200 req and 80 power refunded >repeat until everybody stops playing multiplayer >or it gets patched >whichever is first lol
12 year old me used to rage at getting wiped by sisters 5 minutes into the game AGAIN
>Blacks are more OG in video games and geek shit than the average white homie
nerd shit has been around since at least the 70s, meanwhile you had no idea any of that stuff even existed until you were issued an obamaphone in like 2014
>mfw the only good melding of RTS and RPG is a shitty Turk game
I love Mount & Blade but I wish a more competent studio would put together a game like it.
because you need big IQ to play it and theres no sexy opposite sex you can fap to and make fanfics about
also AoE isnt a great example of RTS games, it was like entry level in ~2004 of RTS games
It used to be good but then it got into the hands of minmaxing autists (particularly from worst korea) and became great.
However greatness comes at the cost of accessibility. For example, box art armies get mogged by single unit compositions which in turn have no chance against actually balanced armies who again get fricked by properly microd single unit comps which in turn gets mogged half of the time by macro beasts and so on. NormalBlack folk barely have the brain capacity to play fortnite and you actually expect them to both memorize shit and innovate? Frick.
RTS is too hard for the average braindead gaymer
You are basically playing a fast paced 1 v 1 match of chess on steroids. You make ONE 1 second mistake and you can lose the match
There is no social aspect and no team to blame for your shitty performance
>RTS >big IQ required
you people are talking about hardcore pvp or something right? You can't have actually have felt smart completing the campaigns or beating bots in just about every RTS ever, right?
Because nobody bought all the creative strategy games and everybody bought starcraft. So now RTSs are synonymous with optimal meta gameplay.
Likely this. Observing the RTS genre from the outside became synonymous with optimal gameplay, which isn't a great appeal. It also was hard to innovate the core well gameplay.
>you people are talking about hardcore pvp or something right?
2/3 comments you replied to mentioned things that only happen when fighting another player
so yes
>AoE isnt a great example of RTS games, it was like entry level in ~2004 of RTS games
this. every aoe game is just the most basic of basic rts games. sure you can 'master' them by being an autist and do the same building route every game, min maxing your peasants and build route.
I consider aoe games extremely boring and bad. When I tried the 3rd I beat a guy on my first try, he was playing it for like 10 years... he got so irrationally angry he hates me ever since. lol.
that being said I played a lot aoe2 multi and it wasnt much fun.
aoe 3 had ridicilously low cap and there was a peace time at the start...
I would beat your mediocre ass too in any of your favourite rts games, first try.
I exclusively play rts
the problem isn't IQ, it's macro
macro (while pleasing to autists like me) is basically just looking up build order and repeating until you become speedy gonzalez
micro (you know, combat, aka the "fun" part of the game to most people) isn't even relevant until you are good enough at macro to do it basically on autopilot. multiplayer for nearly every RTS is just "who is better at macro" until you reach the highest tiers of play.
RTS is too hard for the average braindead gaymer
You are basically playing a fast paced 1 v 1 match of chess on steroids. You make ONE 1 second mistake and you can lose the match
There is no social aspect and no team to blame for your shitty performance
>chess on steroids
again, not until the highest levels
I really doubt there are many people on this board (let alone this thread) who are good enough at their chosen rts for this meme to be true
>AoE isnt a great example of RTS games, it was like entry level in ~2004 of RTS games
this. every aoe game is just the most basic of basic rts games. sure you can 'master' them by being an autist and do the same building route every game, min maxing your peasants and build route.
I consider aoe games extremely boring and bad. When I tried the 3rd I beat a guy on my first try, he was playing it for like 10 years... he got so irrationally angry he hates me ever since. lol.
that being said I played a lot aoe2 multi and it wasnt much fun.
It used to be good but then it got into the hands of minmaxing autists (particularly from worst korea) and became great.
However greatness comes at the cost of accessibility. For example, box art armies get mogged by single unit compositions which in turn have no chance against actually balanced armies who again get fricked by properly microd single unit comps which in turn gets mogged half of the time by macro beasts and so on. NormalBlack folk barely have the brain capacity to play fortnite and you actually expect them to both memorize shit and innovate? Frick.
>le asiatic meta argument
Even setting aside you don't need to be an autistic minmaxer to enjoy 1v1s (matchmaking exists for a reason: it matches you with other shitters) things like campaigns, custom games, coop, team games, etc were made precisely for people like (you) who complain about the supposed "overly competitive" nature of RTS, and yet you still don't play them. The truth is RTS is a niche genre that filters morons like yourself, who never actually liked it.
Why the frick are you assuming that I dislike the competitive nature? It's the direct reason that it is good but also the direct reason for it being a niche genre forever. SC2 was a blip on the radar but as you can see we are back to status quo.
>campaigns, custom games, coop, team games
this is so wrong, every RTS post 2004 had budget, second-rate copy paste afterthought campaigns and content suites exactly because they wanted to pander to MP obsessed homosexuals after Starcraft made it big, including changing core gameplay so much to pander to them even the meager offerings were no longer fun to play
C&C3+Expansion
RA3+Expansion
C&C4
Grey Goo
Dawn of War 2
Dawn of War 3
Supreme Commander
Supcom 2
8-bit insert name here games (there's like 41 of them)
Dawn of War 2 has a full singleplayer campaign with tons of voice acting, side missions, and a loot and upgrade system that is completely absent from the multiplayer mode. It's basically an rpg. Also the devs removed macro and resource gathering from the game entirely.
This is evidence that they were chasing after the Starcraft multiplayer scene?
2 years ago
Anonymous
> full singleplayer campaign
it was full of repetitive dog shit missions
and DoW2 was MPgay central, asscancer victim TotalBiscuit used to like it, c'mon
generally I agree but starcraft 2 is supposed to have a decent campaign. They also tried adding some coop and other shit but people still just kept playing mp
>starcraft 2 is supposed to have a decent campaign.
Yeah, it was supposed to have one. Except it ended up being pretty shit in comparison to BW.
WoL >Eh campaign design, eh storyline.
HotS >Slightly better campaign design, the story tanks quite a bit though.
LotV >Get to do the last mission with a full brood war protoss army as your layout. Pure kino. Fricking bash my head against a rock storyline.
depends on what game you play, i remember playing sc2 10 years ago with gold/platinum players all i had to do was mass producing units and A + LMB on enemy base to win the game, completely 0 macro involved
RTS is too hard for the average braindead gaymer
You are basically playing a fast paced 1 v 1 match of chess on steroids. You make ONE 1 second mistake and you can lose the match
There is no social aspect and no team to blame for your shitty performance
>There is no social aspect and no team to blame for your shitty performance
aka competitive gameplay kek
>theres no sexy opposite sex you can fap to
never stopped me
meh, twitter "artist" inserting his own characters instead of taking ingame characters and anime'ating them
[...]
[...] >RTS >big IQ required
you people are talking about hardcore pvp or something right? You can't have actually have felt smart completing the campaigns or beating bots in just about every RTS ever, right?
[...]
Likely this. Observing the RTS genre from the outside became synonymous with optimal gameplay, which isn't a great appeal. It also was hard to innovate the core well gameplay.
you havent even touched RTS if you think all AI is easy especially when they have huge advantage
it did work at the time idk about now, i regularly was taking advantage of people playing passively or cheese meta (like protoss backdooring with stalkers) and focus on economy
the biggest classic was me playing zerg vs terran id usually had 3/4 bases while enemy was sitting tight gathering tanks around his only base. my brood lords would tear everything while tanks are fighting endless streams of hydralisks
literally right click hatchery on enemy base FTW
RTS is too hard for the average braindead gaymer
You are basically playing a fast paced 1 v 1 match of chess on steroids. You make ONE 1 second mistake and you can lose the match
There is no social aspect and no team to blame for your shitty performance
>games about building civilizations fade out as more blacks and women pick up gaming as a hobby
I'm sure this is just a coincidence
because you need big IQ to play it and theres no sexy opposite sex you can fap to and make fanfics about
also AoE isnt a great example of RTS games, it was like entry level in ~2004 of RTS games
what nerds can't understand is that normal people aren't dumb, they just don't want to be bothered spending hundreds of hours learning how to minmax a game
if you're a shut in with no friends then any time consuming activity will good because you'll be getting something to dedicate your life to for months, but for the average person there's more going on in life so games are just a way to have fun and take breaks from other aspects of life, besides, intelligent people challenge themselves developing real skills for high paying jobs, not learning how to efficiently do things in a game for nothing more than a victory screen
>hundreds of hours learning how to minmax a game
holy shit you are on Ganker, we already spend hundreds of hours shitposting
why are you so mad? did your gf(male) beat you in age of empires?
They hated him because he spoke the truth.
On average normies are moronic. But the difference between someone good at a game and someone great at a game is hyper autistic levels of dedication that no self respecting person should consider.
You are fricking WRONG my friend. You could only believe what you're saying if you are a normalgay yourself or if you rarely have to interact with them. I swear to you, the most simple things need to be explained to them, I regularly have to talk to these fricks like they are children, I can't give them the respect I would give to someone I know is intelligent because they literally wouldn't know what to do with it, they could not engage with me on topics I'm interested in and so it's pointless treating them as though they are intelligent people with interesting insights to share with me, because they simply aren't.
>they just don't want to be bothered spending hundreds of hours learning how to minmax a game
because that was really necessary for AOE2 where you could just spam units you thought look cool
>now RTSs are synonymous with optimal meta gameplay
I loved RTS for fricking around and beating AI, as soon as other people, PvP and competition gets involved, it's all just "if you don't have your barracks by 87 seconds, might as well give up"
Besides some battle micro, RTS games are so cut and dry with its timings and calculations, it's like you're just following and executing someone else's blueprint and if you don't do that, you lose.
The same to an extent happens in MMORPGs and similar, get X equipment and Y talent or you suck.
You have to either introduce ever-changing, shit-tons of variables like Path of Exile does to keep things fresh or you're just calculating and executing someone else's work over and over. RTS are the pinnacle of this problem and it's why it died out.
I always liked playing against bots. It’s not hard or anything, but it was fun building a little civilization and watching it grow. Multiplayer never appealed to me in RTS’s.
Like this guy said the RTS genre was THE game's game genre. People were treating RTS's like city builders but the way you're supposed to play them was too arcadey, metagaming heavy, dumping buildings in a nonsensical blob-like way like a homosexual, harvest spamming, and ideas that were cool like technology being entirely focused on how fast you progress, which triggered a lot of autism.
Eventually the RTS genre made way for like Dungeon Keeper, Evil Genius, Startopia, Anno, and DF-like games like Rimworld and Banished. THOSE games survived, but RTS died like piss on the weeds.
yeah this is honestly it. I love turtling and building a huge fortress. my friend and I would play without siege units and make huge meatgrinder battles. too bad thats not how you are supposed to play the game
This. Tryhards ruin the game and make it impossible for noobs to learn how to play. Not to mention that when you aren't a try hard chink who plays the game 12 hours a day the other players are extremely toxic to you for being a noob.
The "solution" was for people to make host games saying "noobs only" in shit like warcraft 3 but ofc they would be swarmed by tryhards and ruined.
That said I still had a blast playing WC3 it's sad that it's not very fun to play online anymore because the only people who still play it are tryhards. Was great when there was a large casual player base.
You're just saying you hate the game because you suck at it.
That comes back to the point made that the reason RTS is not that popular is because you have to not be moronic to get good at them and almost everyone on Earth is moronic.
The RTS genre was already perfected in the late 90's/early 00's.
And as perfect as they were (some of the greatest games of all time), there was no where else to go.
There's a reason AoEII still has a community 23 years on.
The only thing left for the genre was to dumb it down and sell micro transactions to zoomer morons (MOBAs).
The real answer is they are just boring. no one wants to watch tiny guys fight from an aerial view, people want to be up close to the action and have more individual control over their own character
cool deathball
the real killer of RTS games btw: giant deathballs where nobody can tell one unit from another and it takes hours upon hours of training to tell two-units apart in the gray, low-contrast 'next gen' graphics.
Honestly it's this. Modern graphics were a huge mistake because it made everything into a muddy mess that's hard to tell the difference between everything on the field. It's no surprise its' heyday was the era of high-contrast sprites and obvious differences between even the tiniest unit.
everyone wants to play them differently and still want to win
>Play RTS >Tired of just cheesing bots >Play online lobbies >Get shitstomped every game
Gee I wonder why people despise RTS games.
Best answers. RTS games on standard difficulty tends to be too easy while moderate or higher difficulties has the most inconsistent and annoying difficulty spikes that just waste your time.
Also watching again, that was Viper. So maybe he did win it. Though idk why the frick he let that happen in the first place. Those things wipe the floor with two-handed swordsman
The best time to play RTS games was when the internet was still new so you played with friends or locals at LAN parties. Playing AOE2 or Dawn of War with people you know in person is comfier than getting matched with a stranger who build orders you to deletion.
Also the focus shift to competitive online. Everyone remembers warcraft 3 for the custom games. Everyone remembers command and conquer for the atmosphere and story.
RTS games died out because of their incompatibility with consoles and the asiaticclick memes scare away all the zoomers that jumped onto the PC bandwagon to be like their favorite streamers
>EE was objectively better than AoE2 in every way except this gigantic overarching flaw that touches every facet of the game
I love EE anon but c'mon dont downplay this.
Absolutely not. EE is only good if you are a little kid who just wants to do botmatches and frick around for a couple hours. AoE2 actually functions as a game with decent rock/paper/scissors, an expanding arsenal, and actually good graphics and sound.
People hate RTS because they're very stressful to play. I for one would love to see an RTS that did away with fog of war. If you're the better player you shouldn't need it anyway. Do chess players whine about their opponent being able to see their pieces? Is chess not a strategy game?
Chess is turn based, meaning once you make a move you're locked in an interlocking assembly which forces you to eat knives often to achieve a better position.
RTS was doing great until asiatics figured out you can attack, retreat, attack, ad infinitum. And the faster you click, the more you can do that, and other things.
Then very quickly RTS went from armies fighting each other and sieging bases, to autistic clickfests no one but asiatics wants to participate in.
No he seemed to be describing some sort of specific tactic that somehow ruined every single RTS, which has never been a thing ever. If a Korean 4pools you, that's not doing what he said.
Chess is turn based, meaning once you make a move you're locked in an interlocking assembly which forces you to eat knives often to achieve a better position.
Doesn't matter. Try to imagine what would happen if Starcraft didn't have fog of war for a second. Cheese automatically no longer works and the game becomes about making better decisions than your opponent.
It matters but sure let's move on.
Cheesing would still exist for asiaticclickers because just making the damn units faster than the opponent can react is often the path to victory.
What you describe can also happen and is the design thinking behind AOE1: you can focus on controlling your army or controlling your econ but not both. "Decisions" in your scenario would simply become a game of watching your opponent's moves and countering them continuously.
Naturally, the UI elements of the enemy players are still hidden as are transport details, hidden units or targetting reticles for things like Nydus canals.
>Cheesing would still exist for asiaticclickers because just making the damn units faster than the opponent can react is often the path to victory
You're a complete fricking moron because the only reason cheese works if that you don't see it coming due to fog of war. Cheese is VERY EASY TO STOP by definition. >What you describe can also happen and is the design thinking behind AOE1: you can focus on controlling your army or controlling your econ but not both
What if I just play fast enough that I CAN do both? >"Decisions" in your scenario would simply become a game of watching your opponent's moves and countering them continuously.
So why don't chess players just counter their opponent continuously? Oh wait it's because their counters risk putting pieces out of position and weakening them elsewhere.
>Cheesing would still exist for asiaticclickers because just making the damn units faster than the opponent can react is often the path to victory.
That's not cheese, that's called economic victory and is also how you win wars in the real world.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Cheesing would still exist for asiaticclickers because just making the damn units faster than the opponent can react is often the path to victory
You're a complete fricking moron because the only reason cheese works if that you don't see it coming due to fog of war. Cheese is VERY EASY TO STOP by definition. >What you describe can also happen and is the design thinking behind AOE1: you can focus on controlling your army or controlling your econ but not both
What if I just play fast enough that I CAN do both? >"Decisions" in your scenario would simply become a game of watching your opponent's moves and countering them continuously.
So why don't chess players just counter their opponent continuously? Oh wait it's because their counters risk putting pieces out of position and weakening them elsewhere.
You're a fricking teenager, it's so obvious.
I've seen plenty of games where pros do pick up on what their opponent is doing but still cannot stop them, usually because of a hole being made regardless resulting in unrecoverable worker loss.
Most cheese is just converting micro into enough early econ deficit so result in eventual victory. >fast enough that i can do both
Well then the devs would want to crush your attention span even further to preserve their design philosophy or scrap the game and rebuild the architecture & design entirely because you're breaking it. Many such cases. >just counter their opponent continuously
That's one of the things which does tend to happen. Do you play chess only holding your asscheeks tight and never sacrificing your queen? Chess games vary a lot, even more than pro RTS games imo, though the comparison is obviously unfair because of the centuries. This does highlight one of my beliefs: that if Blizz had let SC1 & 2 stay as they were at launch players would have eventually dug for new strats and adapt to those continuously. Boxer always did this to much fame.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>I've seen plenty of games where pros do pick up on what their opponent is doing but still cannot stop them
Yes, because they found out too late BECAUSE OF FOG OF WAR.
DeWalt, a Russian, ended 2 - 3 against Barracks a minor "asiatic" pro without people helping him.
A chinese broodwar player was close to defeat the best amateur
We might send the best outside of korea to see if he can level enough to beat amateurs
You are bad at games
2 years ago
Anonymous
>this arbitrary evidence of whatever the hell I'm talking about happened
Gold star for you, schlomo. Back to the cabin.
People being better at a game than you ruins it for you? I fail to see how this isn't just you whining about losing to a better player. You're looking back with rose tinted goggles at a time when you were an ignorant child.
comp/metagayging being a thing means rts are no longer comfy, and are designed with those types of games in mind.
"being mad about losing to better players" is rich.
i dont give a frick about that shit. that's the problem. my interests are not being supplied by the market at all.
moving
You claimed it ruined games so feel free to post games that got ruined by catering to MP gays. Surely you aren't just a shitposting homosexual, right?
2 years ago
Anonymous
the fact that there's no games that focus on single player base building, fighting, and it's all been replaced by few units, micro intensive moba style garbage or micro/macro shitfests like starcraft ?
see the progression of dawn of war series for a real time degeneration of the genre as an example.
the entire genre was molded to suit homosexuals like you instead of upstanding citizens like me.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>the entire genre was molded to suit homosexuals like you
Black person I haven't bought a new RTS since SC2 (which was sorely disappointing). Also, the Stronghold guys kept trying with what you described, maybe if Black folk like you actually bought games instead of endlessly whining online you'd see more of it. And the degeneration of RTS into MOBAs is only proof that the brainlets are winning, not that the asiatic crowd is being catered to.
2 years ago
Anonymous
This entire thread is just one moron seething. He has a Hollywood vision of strategy in his head where he spends ages coming up with 200 IQ plans and "out thinks" his opponent, and his opponent isn't allowed to do anything to prevent himself from losing to his masterful plan.
"Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics."
- US Gen. Omar Bradley
Even decorated real world generals think the seether is a moron. He either needs to stop playing games that involve unit production, or shut up.
I'll admit I don't know anything about cnc but >warcraft >the poster child of custom games in rts >ruined by mpgays and not the braindead company that executed it just so they could sell it again >aoe >anyone caring about any aoe but 2 >implying that aoe 2 doesn't have more sp content than ever before
2 years ago
Anonymous
>the poster child of custom games in rts
you mean the poster child for 40 different lobbies of DOTA Allstars, where you had to fricking dig just to find a game of Uther Party
MPgays even managed to destroy customs by giving way to the blight that is MOBA, and thus MPgays are directly responsible for the focus on trash like HOTS and the death of WC3 >anyone caring about any aoe but 2
people had to stick to 2 because devs shifted hard into pandering to MPgays after it >implying that aoe 2 doesn't have more sp content than ever before
implying that AOE4, the one new game in the series, wasn't a forced MPgay tailored failure and dumpsterfire
clinging to aoe2 remake adding another cheapo set of mission is cope, devs clearly showed they do not give a frick nor are willing to learn, and will always prioritise mphomosexual game design and pandering over making a good sequel to 2
>C&C
all the C&C games starting with Generals were MPgay designed shitfests trying to bandwagon SC's asiaticclick gameplay
people blame 4 for killing the series, but it was flopping by RA3 because C&C3 showed that they're just going to resking Generals' shitty gameplay and fail yet again to get MPgays on board a franchise famous for live action cutscenes and building lots of tanks
2 years ago
Anonymous
>>the poster child of custom games in rts
Uhh no, Brood War had way better maps.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Broodwar had like 12% of the customs WC3 had
2 years ago
Anonymous
Quantity doesn't mean quality bro. Name a single UMS game on WC3, that was better than Diplo Infi. Today's world would be much better if Infi got the standalone game ports and not dota.
2 years ago
Anonymous
wc3 had the best customs? >footmen wars >tower defense >DOTA
srsly. It spawned the DOTA and TD genres.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You new to Ganker? Everyone knows dota originated from Starcraft, it's called ASShomosexualS for a reason. And like I said, the world would be a better place if dota didn't grow anyways.
Also, pretty sure tower defense also started on BW.
2 years ago
Anonymous
AoS was shittier than dota that's why everyone played dota and not AoS
2 years ago
Anonymous
>dota originated from Starcraft,
thats Aeon of Strife, distant ancestor of Dota allstars
2 years ago
Anonymous
There were 100000 wc3 custom rts maps that were better than that, I'm sure. Personally I liked Warlock, Island Troll Tribes, Dota, escape maps etc though. Starcraft is mostly just good for standard, the customs are shit compared to wc3. Sorry senpai.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Brood war custom maps were extremely limited in comparison
People being better at a game than you ruins it for you? I fail to see how this isn't just you whining about losing to a better player. You're looking back with rose tinted goggles at a time when you were an ignorant child.
competitive, "meta" homosexualry and epeen obsessed weirdos need to die
it led to the creation of mobas, and sweaty starcrafts compgayging and "ladder" homosexualry, which is supremely gay
dude, my favorite game is AoM, AoE 2 and Warcraft 3, but i don't play them online because people killed them with competitive meta and shit.
The best thing to do is gather friends to play, throw Black Florest in AoE2, progress to the last Age, build a huge army and start a diplomacy play with your friends.
I remember one time when i was the strongest in the game and one of my friends made an treat with me to attack another friend, but the moron tried to back stab me! Thank God i knew to never belive my friends in this game and managed to destroy them both lololololol.
It's soo very cash money playing with friends only trolling.
Fricking this. If you hate PvP so much go play PvE. If an RTS dev would make a game with a fun PvE mode maybe it'd catch on.
>Randomly generated maps >Random objectives >Random enemies >Team based
Ever play Deep Rock Galactic? Imagine being sent on random missions like that, except the gameplay is RTS. Then obviously there can be PvP mode for the sweaties.
Battleforge has essentially all of this
Starcraft, RA3, Ao2:DE has coop campaign
RTS was doing great until asiatics figured out you can attack, retreat, attack, ad infinitum. And the faster you click, the more you can do that, and other things.
Then very quickly RTS went from armies fighting each other and sieging bases, to autistic clickfests no one but asiatics wants to participate in.
Battleforge actually fixed this as well. You make units sluggish and hit and run doesn't work anymore
The genre peaked hard and early, there's nothing to add when AoEII, Warcraft and Starcraft already cover everything and have fans that are hard to woo with anything else.
lack of vision. There is a lot of cool stuff some games tried and a lot of stuff completely untouched. Spellforce mixed RTS and RPG
Universe at War had interesting factions and turned every asset on the map into a resource.
Warzone, Earth 21X0, Impossible Creatures allowed you to design your own units
city builders are not fantastical or fun, and there aren't outside threats to fight to spur your progress.
you can remain an irrelevant shithole forever in city builders.
also engaging in a fake economy that is obtuse and worthless is less satisfying than personally mining resources to expand.
I mean a lot who played for building pretty cities and maps did.
Those who liked big battles left for Total War.
The ones who liked the ruling aspect turned to GSG.
The only people left are nostalgiagays trying to replicate their childhood - who won't play newer games in the genre anyway - and autistic asiaticclickers.
Like I said above, the genre was popular because there weren't many alternatives and/or people didn't know better.
>The only people left are nostalgiagays trying to replicate their childhood - who won't play newer games in the genre anyway - and autistic asiaticclickers
This, harsh truth that tards will never accept
That's basically what happened but rts had way more character and an actual goal
Also as an aside multiplayer has always been the mode of choice for the minority of players. Catering to muh e-sports bullshit is what killed the genre.
Same reason fighting games died: too multiplayer focused. Once companies figure out only autists care about multiplayer and focus should always be on single player mode, they'll come back.
Multiplayer is the only thing keeping RTS games alive, dummy.
You think AoE2 would be having global tournaments sponsored by Red Bull if it was just a stream of somebody playing the campaign by themselves?
These games require some work. You have to build a base, balance an economy, upgrade your equipment, etc. Most zoomers can't handle that shit. Games like Total Annihilation would have had them running to their troony discords to complain.
because they're hard and people complain when anything is hard
just look at all these people who want an SP rts where they beat on brainless ai without any strategy because they don't want to lose to other players online
>just look at all these people who want an SP rts where they beat on brainless ai without any strategy because they don't want to lose to other players online
you are incapable of understanding why single player rts is fun while i am perfectly capable of understanding why multiplayer rts is fun.
>just look at all these people who want an SP rts where they beat on brainless ai without any strategy because they don't want to lose to other players online
>look at all these people who want an SP rts where they beat on brainless ai without any strategy because they don't want to lose to other players online
Actually the reason I don't play most RTS games multiplayer is because of build order meta homosexualry, I just think that's a really tedious thing to have to get good at so I won't waste my time, instead I'll play Wargame: Red Dragon or something else without basebuilding if I want to fight against humans in a strategy game.
you know I never understood this hate against build orders
it's a game, so of course there's gonna be some level of optimization for what you should do right at the start, it's like complaining about chess openings
Chess is turn based. RTS build orders crunch your nervous system.
>I've seen plenty of games where pros do pick up on what their opponent is doing but still cannot stop them
Yes, because they found out too late BECAUSE OF FOG OF WAR.
I'm talking to a bot.
Most games your scout will reach their base early enough to spot exactly what the opponent is doing.
On some level you will always have the fog of war regardless: your screen shows only one small part of the map, cloaked units remain stealthed in any scenario for consistency, you can't view boarded units, you can't see the enemy queue.
At the same time, you're just being a whiny c**t because Fog of War could always be disabled in Starcraft and AOE.
>I never understood this hate against build orders
Building things quickly/in a particular order just doesn't feel like a rewarding skill, but it is, in fact in mp strategy games with basebuilding the result of the game is often decided within the first few minutes before any combat takes place at all.
That is quite simply boring. Watching builder units construct buildings or gather resources is not entertaining at all, but this is actually where most of the decisive shit is happening in these games - that's boring to me.
Well I guess for one thing in chess it's only a few turns carrying out the "meta" opening moves and even then some variation becomes immediate based on what your opponent does. Not to mention both players in the early game would be making their moves immediately so little time is wasted.
In your typical RTS it's a little while doing the same shit at the start every time and it's always a fixed time.
Supposedly there's no reason for it to be a couple of seconds. Think about how quickly a game of chess gets going because both players already know the opening moves off by heart and will waste no time moving pieces.
>Well I guess for one thing in chess it's only a few turns carrying out the "meta" opening moves and even then some variation becomes immediate based on what your opponent does.
Same applies to RTS. You're supposed to scout and react to what your opponent does. Good luck blindly completing your "meta build order" if the other guy decides to go for the rush.
But that's not immediate, it's a reaction that first requires you to get a scout over to their base.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>it's a reaction that first requires you to get a scout over to their base.
How is reacting to what you see your opponent do or having to do something to actually revealing his actions a bad thing?
>Well I guess for one thing in chess it's only a few turns carrying out the "meta" opening moves and even then some variation becomes immediate based on what your opponent does.
Same applies to RTS. You're supposed to scout and react to what your opponent does. Good luck blindly completing your "meta build order" if the other guy decides to go for the rush.
Because I actually just want to build pretty bases and not actually strategize, much less play against other humans.
So I stopped building pretty bases in skirmish AoE2 and started just playing colony sims/city builders/tower defense instead
From the way Ganker acts I'm pretty sure I did the right thing since you guys seem to hate "casualgays" that only play single player.
1. the skill ceiling is extremely high so it's inaccessible to casuals unless the ladder is very, VERY segmented
2. strategy games require thinking moreso than reflex and a lot of people don't want to have to think in their games
3. the people who DO enjoy thinking often want time to think about their moves, that's why turn-based strategy games like civ and real time with pause strategy games like most of pdx's library are a lot more popular
4. nobody who really enjoys RTS wants to spend a bunch of time relearning everything from the ground up, which is why only a few big names tend to have success
You need to kill your hands to play rts, and to get to that point you'll have grind a lot to memorize shortcuts and get good reflexes with the mouse but at that point most sane people would have given up because they have better things to get good at
probably larger. rts carried PC gaming back in the day and even then it was dwarfed by console/handheld. starcraft in its heyday never held a candle to mario, final fantasy, halo, and the other big names of console gaming. even doom's popularity was vastly overshadowed by later comers like goldeneye and halo. it was consoles that brought laypeople and casuals were the biggest market by a large margin. a lot of people in the 90s didn't even have a computer and in the 2000s i recall countless magazines fortelling the death of pc gaming.
it wasn't until a little while after orange box came out and steam started popularizing pc gaming that it started to take off, and even that wasn't an immediate thing. pc gaming now has grown a lot since then, although it was overshadowed by mobile gaming which captured a large number of people who do not consider themselves gamers.
there's also the fact that consoles used to have fairly unique architecture that enabled some interesting titles. ps3's architecture in particular was much hated by devs but also was different enough that some really cool stuff came out. these days, most console games are identical on every platform and (outside of nintendo's library) usually get ported to pc, and nintendo's stuff just gets emulated.
Remember consoles couldn't really do shooters as well as pc too so stuff like quake doom and others were popular on it. It took until Halo to really take off console shooters
they were, but at that point in time a lot of people didn't have PCs. i had one because my dad worked for IBM, but i knew a LOT of friends who didn't have a PC until like the early to mid 2000s. on the other hand, the reason goldeneye was so big despite the controls being complete dogshit was because it was accessible to a lot more people -- lots of people had N64 and ps1, so games on those systems were accessible to a majority of people. quake and unreal were extremely popular relative to the number of gamers who played on PC, but the total number of people who played on PC at that point was overall fairly small.
I dunno, it just seems that PC used to be more relevant to the gaming scene, whereas now it's more for indie games whilst AAA devs develop for consoles first and maybe port to PC later. And that obviously means you can't have a game that doesn't work with a controller. The opposite isn't a problem, especially when they started making controllers that you can use with PCs.
the delayed release to PC is more (a) to avoid piracy and (b) for exclusivity deals with sony/microsoft than for any technical limitation. these days engines like unity and unreal have options to build on whatever platform you want pretty much, so porting is very little effort - it's mostly QA work to make sure it runs properly on a bunch of different hardware profiles since with consoles you usually only have a couple.
there's no real platform-specific innovation driving it like there used to be and for most games these days the expectation is they'll eventually make it to pc if they don't launch there at release. people also have enough stuff to play where new titles aren't as exciting as they used to be -- look at the hype difference between old E3 and the last E3 we had. sure there's still SOME hype for new titles, but it's NOTHING like what it used to be. that's why people are willing to wait 6 months for something to come out on pc, or 12 months to get it for half price on pc.
if anything, it's not so much any one platform dominating these days as it is a blurring of the lines between the platforms altogether. i think we're already at the point where there's no substantial difference between pc and console gaming and they're largely treated as the same thing.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>the delayed release to PC is more (a) to avoid piracy and (b) for exclusivity deals with sony/microsoft than for any technical limitation.
Except the obvious techical limitation of having to work on a controller. People have tried to make a console RTS. None of them really succeeded.
>most players are just casuals who just love playing and turtling with frens >nowadays every new RTS is designed with asiaticclick in mind while there's a separate genre out there that caters to number autists and city builders >Blizzard fully embracing MMOs in the early-mid 00s spelled doom for the genre, even SC2's campaign is soulless outside of Wings of Liberty - the last game where the OG Blizzard crew of WC/SC worked on >Blizzard also JUSTed WC3's remaster and has permanently killed the IP in favor of WoW >there's only so much Warhammer 40k RTS you can churn out until series fatigue kicks in
Stunned and surprised that EA hasn't shat out RA2/YR remaster alongside with Relic doing a Dawn of War remaster
I think the bigger issue with asiatic click is that people completely forgot why asiatic click was even a thing in the first place. It was because the AI was so stupid that clicking really fast made them smart. Instead of it being a thing of the past they made a shitty mechanic that servered no reason in to the main mechanic of the game. To make it worse is that the only reason why asiatic click was so rewarding in the past was because of how much effort you needed to do in order to make your units not be moronic, now we have perfected unit AI, so to justify asiatic click they added in a bunch of mechanics that end up just feeling like meaningless work rather than actual skill.
I wonder why janny wants to delete >the only reason why the government would want to disarm you after 243 years is because they intend to do something that you would shoot them for
from an RTS thread while leaving thousands of disgusting offtopic garbage on the frontpage.
Also leaving "what's a PVE lobby?" unanswered as if it isn't on-topic, the for-free operating frick.
What's the point of attaching random, unrelated images to your post in a thread that is mostly on-topic discussion? Especially boomer-tier milquetoast shit like that.
>make complete non-post >attach attention grabbing image because you know your post is worthless and will be overlooked by itself >hurr durr y no one answer me?!
2 years ago
Anonymous
>read post >say it's non-post
Hurr durr. As I said, go clean up the rest of the filth-ridden board.
>10-20 years ago >you play against friends with moronic, but fun strategies >win or lose, you get some fun memories and banter
I still remember spamming dogs in RA2 and using them to cleanup paratroopers my friend spammed
>now >you play against online sweatlords where they try to execute the cookie-cutter strategy
If you lose, you can only seethe, if you win, they say "gg" and leave. Both victory and defeat feel empty.
>10-20 years ago >have friends willing to play games with you >now >have no friends, have to play against people you hate online
this is the reason rts "died"
AOE4 had no colors dude. It's showing even in your image. It feels like they desperately wanted units to stick out so they just bleached everything.
The white fog everywhere also doesn't help
Whoever's doing UI work for a lot of companies are complete imbeciles. Somehow that carried over to UX as well: gross scaling of ammo and units, washed out colors, weak-ass illustrator drawn cultural symbols instead of nicely painted artworks aoe1 had, buildings not looking as aesthetic as aoe1 either.
Somehow the elefants still look kino at least.
The genre peaked hard and early, there's nothing to add when AoEII, Warcraft and Starcraft already cover everything and have fans that are hard to woo with anything else.
Pretty much this. Add Total Annihilation/Supreme Commander and CnC and there really isn't much left to do.
There's plenty but nobody willing to innovate and the sale counts aren't sexy either. Nobody wanted to make a modern Harvest Moon so one guy just reaped all the profits.
it's a mobile game that they fashioned into a pc game, somehow. that's what makes it so shitty looking. shit graphics style, shit zoom, shit everything. like, no joke, why didn't they create a patch where you could zoom out more, it can't be so fricking hard for them to do? they did it with the aoe2 remaster, and i think they did it with the aoe3 remaster too, so why not with aoe4?? it boggles the mind, literally. this is relic we're talking about, we're not talking about a noob company here, we are talking about experienced devs. why did they frick up the zoom? and why the cartoon graphics???? this is literally the goddamn age of empires series we're talking about, a legendary fricking series, why the fricking disrespect????? truly, it boggles the mind...
aoe2 and 3. age of mythology. company of heroes series. starcraft series. empire earth series. red alert series. dune series. warcraft series. homeworld series. i can't remember any others.
dawn of war 1: base game(GOTY edition) is my favorite campaign so far. winter assault's is a let-down, dark crusade is a risk-style map where you fight other factions and need to take land. soulstorm is only for mods because it's fricked otherwise.
starcraft
warcraft 2
warcraft 3
aoe 2
supreme commander
rise of nations
company of heroes
never played them but the dawn of war games maybe
Warlords Battlecry, Warlords Battlecry 2
the third one isn't as good but has a longer campaign.. They changed summoning mechanics for the undead race among other things in order to sustained siege tactics, which was the only real trump card versus a pure merchant build, shifting the meta from resource management, upgrade order, tiered armies and planned sacrifice to merchant&command build to the extreme, then rush with cheap units asap. Still quite fun in single player, but unless you are in a house-rules community that bans the merchant build, pvp was ruined in it.
GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE
Memorizing dozens of hotkeys and build orders is as meaningless and visually unsatisfying as memorizing fighting game combos; not a lot of people want to do it. RTS was my favorite genre growing up, by the way!
Well yeah it did hurt esport and in doing so killed most of the interest the games already had. You think MOBAs are popular with kiddos because they're just hella fun? Nah, it was the thriving esport scenes that popularized them because people will jump at the chance of winning gorillions.
Dota was a fun party game we played in internet café as a child
2 years ago
Anonymous
Sure but it was still SMALL as an audience. hundreds of MILLIONS have played it since then.
Anyway, personally I'd rather have few games with a steady audience than many shitty ones or with flakey audiences.
cool deathball
the real killer of RTS games btw: giant deathballs where nobody can tell one unit from another and it takes hours upon hours of training to tell two-units apart in the gray, low-contrast 'next gen' graphics.
There's a reason AOE1 had 50 units maximum. HP was supposed to abstract for each unit per point otherwise it made little sense. It could've had phallanx soft in the back but they couldn't get it balanced in time for release and just didn't bother.
the only reason most people bought rts games in the first place was because they knew nothing about them in an age where the internet didn't exist in it's current state
2 years ago
Anonymous
Nah dude I'm pretty sure I could fire up RA2 or AoE2 right now and have some fun, those are beloved classics for good reason
2 years ago
Anonymous
that's not what I meant, I'm saying most people bought them knowing nothing about the genre as a whole even if they turned out to be good games
2 years ago
Anonymous
Oh shit man good point my bad bro keep it up you're killing it homie
the simple answer is RTS is an extremely niche genre, and its popularity is just a consequence of it having a lot of individual things people like
People didn't like RTS, they liked building cool cities -> move to city builders or civilization
People didn't like RTS, they liked groups of ancient armies fighting -> moved to total war or similar games
People who liked microing their troops around moved onto mobas, people who liked the strategy elements moved to turn based tactics games
only people who like the very specific combo of building up AND micro AND strategy WHILE under real time pressure actually enjoyed the genre for its own sake, there's a reason why in aoe2 or warcraft/starcraft you had literally half the playerbase just doing the campaign or custom scenarios, even at the genres peak the people who were actually playing an RTS in the RTS game were a minority
>the simple answer is RTS is an extremely niche genre
Except it's not and people want RTS games. The issue is that new RTS games are ass in every aspect.
why do you keep posting this fricking meme? my homies and i loved playing rts's for the stpry and the awesome LAN, god damn, dude, stop posting this stupid fricking meme, it's just not true.
wow you and like 5 people play RTS'S? i guess they aren't niche and sell millions with playecounts in the high hundered thousands and they also come out like one every 3 months
You have to babysit literally every single unit and greenlight EVERYTHING that happens in your civilisation. The units have zero autonomy, so there is zero unpredictabled or hilarious stuff than can happen aside from surprise attacks by the enemy.
It's basically like playing with little action figures, moving them from point A to point B.
That is a little unsatisfying. There is just not a lot of interesting shit that can happen except different variations of enemy troops which you have to defeat in a paper, stone, scissors kind of way. But you can't even enjoy the combat because you have to babysit like 40 villagers at the same time all the fricking time.
I think that a big problem with rts is that they are either too fast or too slow, i don't know why people don't learn that warcraft 3 speed was perfect
Low IQ casuals took over gaming and culture in general, plus a good RTS is hard to make and corporations don't want to make something difficult, only things they can churn out on a production line.
esports shit has made all games try to appeal to it
i want devs to know, not everyone wants to play starcraft with 500 billion fricking APM
1.remove shit like animation cancelling, eg like archers in age of empires being able to fire faster if you micro them intensly, introduce turning speed similar to dota to stop that
2.fricking stop min maxing balance to be as "flashy" and "exciting" as possible for esports, noone gives a rats ass about that
3.actually fricking make singleplayer content so people have fun offline and theyre not forced into MP from the start, on that note making singleplayer only RTS games would be nice because those fricking died
>Why did this genre die?
Because it became less about strategy and more about memorizing meta builds and clicking as fast as possible, and quitting if you missclick once
RTS isn't dead. The real issue is the massive divide between those who just want to play single player and those that want to play online. CoH2 was a massive hit, yet despite this only 1% of players ever hit the achievment "play 3 online matches". SC2 almost died way soon till they finally added in coop mode with the ability to choose commanders to alter your army. IN fact the coop mode is played more than vs. Even with AoE now being a literal behemoth still less than 1% of the player base ever touches online, but almost 100% of players do go through the story and challenge modes. The devs of Age of Empires online reported that the entire reason why the game failed was because it did not launch with PvE or skrimish options, which they found out the vast majority of people play. So the real big issue isn't that RTS is dead, but that devs constantly try to make RTS games that heavily focus on multiplayer rather than trying to make an interesting single player. To add insult to injury nu devs lack creativity. They do not create interesting worlds or game play. Name another RTS that has mechanics like zerg creep, or protoss reavers needing to build their ammo. At most a modern RTS will offer a unit like a seige tank, but that's about it. They do not try to think of new ways units can work or even just copy mechanics. They just make them as simple as they can be as they are neither creative nor compitent enough to do anything else, which says a lot since the devs that pioniered RTS had less time, money and tech.
It sounds really cool on paper and then I remember my reaction time is subpar and I’m too lazy to learn real life skills, let alone micro and macro. Like MOBAs, it’s more fun to spectate than to play
I played a couple games of AoE2 last night. I'm going to play another in a few minutes. I only play 1v1 ranked because if it's not ranked the other player will get salty if I don't follow some unspoken rule.
It's a fun genre. I hope more games come out. It's deep and complex like MOBAs but you don't have to rely on other people.
>Genre only works on pc so AAA won't touch it since they could just make any other game with crossplay and reap more money >To outsiders every game look the same but in a different flavors of "Build and research stuff to crush the other people doing the same" while with something like CSGO vs TF2 there are vastly different first person shooters at a glance >A split between people wanting good solo content and people who only care about multiplayer
fricken christ, haven't we been over this a thousand times, already? it's because the fricking money men made two or three crap rts games in a row and then collectively decided that the whole fricking genre had died, damn....
so what are some of these games that asiaticclick changed that people talk about?
people keep saying that all the devs catered to esports gays in their design decisions, but what games did those devs make?
i have an old CD of SC2 WoL that's completely broken, installs but won't do anything but show script errors on the launcher and not update
despite just werking on my shitty laptop 10 years ago
anyone know what hoops i have to jump through? compatibility mode? i just wanna play bot matches frick online
might as well ask here, all results on forums are just "update ur drivers lol"
npcs and most birdbrain idiots are too stupid to participate.
not even kidding many people simply cant learn how to play even the most simple strategy games.
It take sforever and everybody turtle up behind a billions defence.If there is a super aggro race like zerg in starcraft or china in command and conquer they ether get team up by everyone else or they steamroll everyone.
>Waaaa! too hard! I do not know what my opponent is doing! I can't react to it! Fog of war is stupid!
Learn to scout >Waaaa! my opponents cheated and followed a guide!
Learn a build order >Waaaa! It is LITERALLY impossible to learn how to play these games!
It has never been easier to learn RTS with the amount of information and tutorials out there.
It use to be fun as shit online in the old days and call me stupid but the koreans and people that play 12 hours a day made the fun machine take a shit and die
>Why did this genre die?
Because even when they were selling really well most people didn't actually enjoy playing them, they enjoyed the single player or custom scenarios.
It's like fighting games, you unironically need to be built different to have your cute little settlement with perfectly space buildings get completely fricking trashed by some dickhead tower rushing you and instead of ragequitting the game go "ok, how do I beat this"
They didn't die out.
RTS is just a odd genre out where instead of a constant slew of new titles every year the old pillars of the genre managed to stay popular.
It's too big of an endeavor for indies to pick up and AAA studios only make 2 games and small studios are sort of few and far between.
Also if any new ones do actually come out they often fall into the esports trap where they focus more on the games being competitive instead of focusing on them being fun.
Its complicated, but i think one of the MAIN reasons is that the devs that make them died out or abandoned the genre. Think of how westwood, ensemble, etc. have died and you realize the people that want to do RTS just end up being bankrupt or going to other genres.
>Yet another 'RTS is dead' thread by moron homosexual OP that doesn't even play RTS games
Abloo blo bloooo there isn't a starcraft 27 or C&C 2713890, RTS is DEAD!
God I wish you homosexuals would stop talking like you know any god damn thing about the genre. It's more alive than it's ever been before currently and we're spoiled for choice on great looking games coming out in 2023 and we've had some bangers this year too. Frick off back to your gay ass hero shooters and half assed FROM hack and slashers.
We're actually getting a full set of new moderately big budget RTS in 2023, so calling the genre dead is a bit of a stretch.
Stormgate - Blizzard Stacraft/Warcraft-like
Tempest Rising - Command and Conquer-like
Sanctuary Shatter Sun - Total Annihilation-like
Homeworld 3
This in addition to tons of smaller indie games like crossfire, dorf game, muriet, etc. Pick a game and play it homie.
You're wasting your time, any homosexual calling the genre dead is just some nostalgia queer crying about not getting a new C&C, who hasn't actually played an RTS game in 10+ years.
>Tempest Rising >checks store page >"2 epic single player campaigns with between-mission cutscenes." >can immediately tell it's gonna be glorified skirmish maps
>Iron Harvest comes out >really cool unique setting and lore >fun campaign >UGGHHH IT'S JUST A SHITTIER COMPANY OF HEROES
fans just can't be happy themselves
>long gameplay session per game >require high apm and high focus/brainpower so you can't "just chill and play a comfy game" >pve ranges from too easy to way too hard for all the wrong reasons >pvp is incredibly sweaty and there is no "I just play for fun" option, you're tryhard or you're getting fricked
AoE4's problem is that you can't deliver it with less content than AoE2 if you want to replace AoE2. It's a tall order where they need to have all the civs from all the expansions and map types and then more. As soon as they released it with less than a 20 year old game, it was doomed. People played the new campaign, thought it's cool civs are much more unique, saw the multiplayer was worse and just went back to what had more.
It had several causes that led to its demise.
First was the death of LAN and the Birth of Online Multiplayer
Second was the death of the Campaign in favor of the E-sport.
And third was the rise of the Moba.
Why do people think RTS are harder than any other competitive genre online?
I have seen friends get into league of legends and lose their lane every time for months straight and thats babies first moba.
People b***h and complain about fightan and I got to red ranks in 4 months in tekken of never playing a fightan.
If you put the work in, its no different than literally any game
People just want wins handed to them
Been playing a ton of Dark Omen lately, it's still hard as nails
I used to almost break my mouse frantically clicking to power up units in hand-to-hand >TO THE DEATH!
frick me, theres an old game with similar graphics ive been trying to find for many years, except the units looked more 3d
it had gore and i think the demo had a mission with undead coming out of a river and some pumpkins you could smash
annoying thing is i saw a compilation of easter eggs few years ago on yt and it had mentioned the game, but it didnt mention the name and few days later was taken down for copyrights
The intersection between cool army battles and playing a game to win doesn't line up as I envision it in my head. And because I don't want to go through the hassle of learning and optimizing a build order Im less likely to enjoy it.
The cool visuals of large armies fighting it out cant be enjoyed too much in an rts because you've got to constantly be looking around the map and managing economy too. That's a certain kind of fun but for me it's more often stressful and work and not laid back vidya like i'd like.
AI typically are too moronic or even if competent not particularly satisfying to beat.
Total war used to be the game for people like me but since warhammer and the faster pace of the game I cant even enjoy watching battles because they're over in 5 mins. Medieval 2 and prior units would duke it out for a couple of minutes before crumbling or routing.
Someone needs to make a game with delayed unit orders and a maximum number of orders allowed. Let the superior tactics and strategy play it out instead of autistic unit behaviour manipulation and intense micro dictating every single game in the genre.
That said Im glad AoE is in a second golden age and i'm hype for AoM.
AoE3 is a fricking great game and absolutely worth a playthrough, its greatest crime is simply not surpassing what could very reasonably be called literally the best RTS ever made, and who can blame it for that?
Dawn of War 1 is the best RTS game ever made >Only requires an APM of about 4 for multiplayer, anyone can enjoy it >Every faction is fun and unique >God tier soundtrack >Amazing 40k autism army paint customization >No Black folk, no women (except sexy elves and space nuns)
All that is required of the player for a perfect experience is to use the grid keys mod and camera zoom mod.
I wouldn't mind learning a new rts. What are some rts games with an active multiplayer scene of enough players that you don't recognize names and a newbie can find other newbies? Other than the obvious blizzard rts and age of empires.
Don't care about multiplayer
People who play pvp only are the most miserable homosexuals on this planet with their head permanently stuck in between their cheecks
Just give me a good singleplayer one with fun mission design
Anyone else hate when you have to actually engage with a games mechanics? How am I supposed to watch xqc on my second screen and film tiktoks if I have to actually play the game fr fr on god
Cope all you want but i played it
Everyone tries to cheese the other one to win under 15 minutes to get imaginary internet points to get a badge
Unironically reddit teir
Yeah when you're moronic, when you start actually thinking it gets amazing and dynamic
2 years ago
Anonymous
Uh huh
homie i played it
Dont try to fool me
2 years ago
Anonymous
>do the same thing over and over like a moron without thinking >blame the genre
2 years ago
Anonymous
Yes thats what it became
Either copy others or lose
2 years ago
Anonymous
ahahhaha holy shit does Ganker REALLY
You are braindead genuinely
2 years ago
Anonymous
You homosexuals cant be honest if it saved your life
Holy shit
2 years ago
Anonymous
If you're playing MP and only doing the same strats without thinking then no shit it'll stop working
2 years ago
Anonymous
It didn't stoped working
I just got bored
Sure if i come back in sc2 now after a decade it will be different but once you figure out what's working or look up the meta its back to the grind
2 years ago
Anonymous
LMFAO
Here's your last (You) homosexual, this is terrible shitposting even for Ganker
2 years ago
Anonymous
Sure, run
2 years ago
Anonymous
everything that anon said is correct, I'm confused as to why you find this controversial
you can literally just look up vibes b2gm series and copy them exactly and it will carry you straight to platinum with 0 brain power
it's not super stimulating, dude. the only circumstances in which you are correct are
1) gentlemen's agreement among friends
2) everyone playing is at the same level of macro prowess
2 years ago
Anonymous
Dude he is clearly just coping and arguing in bad faith
For him rts is a holy genre that only literal geniuses can play because otherwise game just wouldn't load unless you pass mandatory IQ check
Lets hope he doesn't choke on his own farts
2 years ago
Anonymous
It sounds like you dislike how difficult it is to come up with new and effective strategies by yourself. I get that. If your goal is to win and get good, it's much less effective to experiment on your own than it is to simply look up a guide written by an expert.
But, you do not have to focus everything on winning and following the meta. That is not required, no one is forcing you. You are free to play as you like and if the game has a functional matchmaking system you will find evenly-matched games regardless. You can experiment, you can mess around, only it won't be optimal. That doesn't matter if you're still having fun.
Also, it does take brainpower to implement and follow a plan and keep everything working properly in the heat of a match against a competent opponent. It's not very creative, granted, since you probably knew what you wanted to do before the match even started, but it's difficult and it requires awareness, focus, and quick thinking.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>no one is forcing you to win >just have fun
I wish it was all that simple
But one is hardly possible without the other
Its rarely you have a game so close that loosing feels good
Also yeah sure you can play without looking up meta but all it does is you taking a long route to learn all this
Because other people follow meta, and you can see what they are doing, so you start to yake notes and copy them and in that way you will be following the meta just not as efficiently and it will take you 10 times longer to learn it
2 years ago
Anonymous
I was trying to say that as long as the game matchmaking system works, you will get wins even if you're playing like an anti-meta goofball. You'll also get losses, about half of the time. That's only a problem if you think it's a problem.
But if you are instead focused on winning and improving and climbing the ranks, then I don't know why it would bother you to learn from others. That's what everybody has to do. No shame in it.
2 years ago
Anonymous
its a npc complaint, you see the same things with card game players (mtg for example) that whine about "netdeckers" because they can't win with their shitty brew
2 years ago
Anonymous
>whine about "netdeckers" because they can't win with their shitty brew
everybody has to be original and creative just like meeeeeeee
2 years ago
Anonymous
>shows up to casual locals with a tier 0 netdeck >wtf why don't people like me fricking npcs
every time kek
2 years ago
Anonymous
Difference is a size of a playerbase
I played mtg and our club was like 25ppl
If someone created a tournament winning deck that wasn't that big of a problem
Because you still need to play with the deck to feel it and how to play it, and later people know already what you are and they have tools to deal with you
But when playerbase is big enough then it goes to >oh im playing A i need to build a wall like this and be aware of X harass and he might drop on me at 6 minute mark so i have to scout there
And it never really changes
2 years ago
Anonymous
holy frick you're moronic lmfao
2 years ago
Anonymous
Im sorry that you are so blind that you fail to see a clear pattern in that
Understandable. And you're right it is repetitive, in the same way that all competitive activities with static rulesets are repetitive. Chess is just trying to trap the king over and over, basketball is just trying to get the ball in the hoop over and over, rts is just trying to defeat the enemy army over and over. The goal is the same every time and there's almost always an established meta.
If the competition itself doesn't excite you there's no reason to play. But that's not a flaw with rts or with competition as a concept, it clearly appeals to huge numbers of people even if it's not your thing.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Not really
Multiplayer grows old really fast on me since its just the same thing over and over
Ganker doesn't play games if you think these are good posts
2 years ago
Anonymous
If you like grinding its okay dude
I don't
I play rts for the campaigns and custom shit
2 years ago
Anonymous
>refuse to think >this is the genres fault
I can see why RTS filtered morons like you
2 years ago
Anonymous
You greatly overestimate the need to think in these kind of games
2 years ago
Anonymous
>outright admit you don't think about what you're doing >then try to have a discussion about multiplayer
ahahaha
2 years ago
Anonymous
Its like i talk to rick and morty fan who unironically belives in the iq pasta
>Why did this genre die?
Because RTS games used to have something for most people to enjoy >Good singleplayer campaigns for casuals to play >Robust map editors for custom games >PvP for sweaty asiatics to minmax
but then esports took off and companies stopped making their games appeal to all three and started strictly appealing to the PvP minmaxers only to discover that people who spend their entire lives minmaxing Brood War aren't going to jump ship to a new title. Oh and MOBAs took off too.
It's NOT dead. The classics are alive and well. They're so well made that anything new has to compete with games from 20+ years ago. Not many other genre of game is like that.
Want to make a new RTS today? Well, if it's not as good as Broodwar or SupCom why would I give a shit? So the bar has been set very high.
I received my first ever donation this morning to keep the Dark Reign website alive after running the project four years. I've received plenty of offers in the past but today was the first time I actually accepted one. RTS lives on.
I thought LineWar was pretty cool and innovative, if simplistic. Did you read my post? Standards have been set extremely high by RTS games from 15year+ ago. Just keep playing the classics. RTS ages like fine wine. It's like Chess. Do you hate Chess because it's not new? Zoom ZO0m.
Chess is not a genre you moron
Sure old games are "alive" (receiving next to none updates, and not growing they playerbase) but the fricks who play broodwar will play broodwar and only broodwar tillthe end of their days.
they're happy playing their old RTS games, are you? Chess is a strategy game that's timeless and many RTS games are the same. Strong rulesets. Servicable SFX/Grahics. People still play them 20 years later. They will still play them in 20 years from now.
Who is going to play AAA flavor-of-the-month shit even five years from now? Ten years? TWENTY YEARS from now? Nobody. RTS will outlast them all.
Cool words that you try to put in my mouth
I haven't mentioned graphics no any other bullshit like that at all
I just want to play a game that i haven't played yet
2 years ago
Anonymous
Tempest Rising soon. Basicaly the C&C4 we never got.
When everyone was new at RTS's, it was more fun to play because people didnt have much more strategy than A+Move at the enemy base and they still had to learn mechanics. Then everyone got good and casuals left it for dota and explored elsewhere. So no new blood sustains it.
I can boot up outpost 2 and show it to you on twitch or something. I believe you can get an iso from outpost universe or a number of abandonware sites and try it yourself too.
>hey to get the most out of multiplayer you really need to think critically and humble yourself
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ITS ALL asiaticCLICK REEEEEE
Thanks for the good discussion Ganker
Starcraft and AoE are alive and well, the genre isnt dead.
But yeah, its kinda stagnating. Little new games come out and the ones that do dont stick.
I guess there are multiple reasons. The genre is hard to monetize. The genre is hard to function as a social network (which is the main purpose of a lot of games today). The genre is just very competitive and hard to get into.Mobas being very similar but fixing the first 3 problems taking a lot of market share away.
I hope one day we can have another big name RTS again. But as is, I still enjoy playing SC2 and AoE2 ladder.
shitters don't understand that the reason for their low apm is that they haven't the slightest idea of how to play the game so they have to sit there reading tooltips and getting stuck in the tech tree and having there economy shut down with nothing to do because they forgot to build workers or supply buildings.
The popularity of RTS was a time and place. Before RTS became a thing all you had was turn based strategy games until RTS came around and people would marvel at how you could watch battles unfold right before you and issue commands in real time. This isn't exciting anymore to the average player because other genres can and do offer similar levels is spectacle without all the hassle that comes with RTS.
Here's thing big red pill on RTS games from a 90's PC gamer. They were only made because they were relatively simple to do so and you could get them looking really good for the time. When good looking 3D games became more common, they didn't really have a place anymore as few people actually enjoyed RTS gameplay that much.
I've mastered every genres there is but RTS, which one should I go for? Aoe2 or SC2? I tried Warcraft 3 (both reforged and classic) and the units felt so slow and there is a turnrate in the game that made me not enjoy it and I heard SC1 also had turnrate/delay on units
I heard micromanaging in AoE2 is bad but the macro is super fun and it does look fun, I feel like SC2 might be fun too but it looks deader than AoE2
Help appreciated
sc2 you need higher apm and there are way more cheese strategies you autolose to if you don't scout like dt rush. Micro is less important in aoe but there's plenty of micro potential especially in the earlierr ages with archers or scouts, its not that you can't micro but that 99% of players are better off using hteir limited apm to spam and build more units rather than controlling the ones they have lategame
sc2 races are also way more different which can be a + or -
I enjoy macro more than micro honestly but I still want the micro to feel nice so I was thinking of either playing Zerg in SC2 or AoE2, seeing the early game in AoE2 looked more fun with the macro you're talking about (archers/scouts, finding food, kiting it to your center etc) than SC2 tho
I thought AoE2 had more cheese than SC2 too
I'll give AoE2 a try first then, I imagine AoE2 is way more popular than AoE4 right?
yeah aoe4 is mid, aoe 2 is kinda just better, also zerg has the least micro terran has the most. There's very little cheese in aoe 2 and the only ones that do exist won't auto win you the game like a cannon rush or proxy voidray or something will
I'm biased towards AoE2, but the other anon is right. If you love crazy fast micro and more asymmetrical factions then definitely try SC2 out.
I think AoE2 is more balanced in that both fast players and slow players can win successfully. Macro execution and micro speed are both important whereas SC2 is more weighted towards micro.
>games about building civilizations fade out as more blacks and women pick up gaming as a hobby
I'm sure this is just a coincidence
>what they did to Dawn of War
>play SS
>SoB
>build holy icon on listening post
>50 req and 20 power or whatever it was
>cancel
>get 50 req and 20 power refunded
>build holy icon
>50 req and 20 power
>cancel
>get 100 req and 40 power refunded
>build holy icon
>50 req and 20 power
>cancel
>get 200 req and 80 power refunded
>repeat until everybody stops playing multiplayer
>or it gets patched
>whichever is first lol
12 year old me used to rage at getting wiped by sisters 5 minutes into the game AGAIN
Blacks are more OG in video games and geek shit than the average white homie, blame the women but dont blame the 13/50
t.Black person
>Blacks are more OG in video games and geek shit than the average white homie
nerd shit has been around since at least the 70s, meanwhile you had no idea any of that stuff even existed until you were issued an obamaphone in like 2014
I've never seen a blackman be an RTS fan
I've played +10k hours of blizzard rts games + a lot of other rts games t. non-amerimutt Black person
unicorn
Are you the deck guy?
its 13/60 now
True about fighting games tbqh.
All the blacks I know play GTA on consoles. RTS games would probably melt their brains.
>mfw the only good melding of RTS and RPG is a shitty Turk game
I love Mount & Blade but I wish a more competent studio would put together a game like it.
I want Mount and Blade in the Kenshi setting
get new material
people complain fighters are too difficult so we cant never have another good rts
because you need big IQ to play it and theres no sexy opposite sex you can fap to and make fanfics about
also AoE isnt a great example of RTS games, it was like entry level in ~2004 of RTS games
>theres no sexy opposite sex you can fap to
never stopped me
>RTS
>big IQ required
you people are talking about hardcore pvp or something right? You can't have actually have felt smart completing the campaigns or beating bots in just about every RTS ever, right?
Likely this. Observing the RTS genre from the outside became synonymous with optimal gameplay, which isn't a great appeal. It also was hard to innovate the core well gameplay.
>you people are talking about hardcore pvp or something right?
2/3 comments you replied to mentioned things that only happen when fighting another player
so yes
>also AoE isnt a great example of RTS games, it was like entry level in ~2004 of RTS games
lol fricking moron
>and theres no sexy opposite sex you can fap to and make fanfics about
>AoE isnt a great example of RTS games, it was like entry level in ~2004 of RTS games
this. every aoe game is just the most basic of basic rts games. sure you can 'master' them by being an autist and do the same building route every game, min maxing your peasants and build route.
I consider aoe games extremely boring and bad. When I tried the 3rd I beat a guy on my first try, he was playing it for like 10 years... he got so irrationally angry he hates me ever since. lol.
that being said I played a lot aoe2 multi and it wasnt much fun.
and then everyone clapped
aoe 3 had ridicilously low cap and there was a peace time at the start...
I would beat your mediocre ass too in any of your favourite rts games, first try.
>and theres no sexy opposite sex you can fap to and make fanfics about
WRONG
I exclusively play rts
the problem isn't IQ, it's macro
macro (while pleasing to autists like me) is basically just looking up build order and repeating until you become speedy gonzalez
micro (you know, combat, aka the "fun" part of the game to most people) isn't even relevant until you are good enough at macro to do it basically on autopilot. multiplayer for nearly every RTS is just "who is better at macro" until you reach the highest tiers of play.
>chess on steroids
again, not until the highest levels
I really doubt there are many people on this board (let alone this thread) who are good enough at their chosen rts for this meme to be true
What RTS games do you recommend?
It used to be good but then it got into the hands of minmaxing autists (particularly from worst korea) and became great.
However greatness comes at the cost of accessibility. For example, box art armies get mogged by single unit compositions which in turn have no chance against actually balanced armies who again get fricked by properly microd single unit comps which in turn gets mogged half of the time by macro beasts and so on. NormalBlack folk barely have the brain capacity to play fortnite and you actually expect them to both memorize shit and innovate? Frick.
>le asiatic meta argument
Even setting aside you don't need to be an autistic minmaxer to enjoy 1v1s (matchmaking exists for a reason: it matches you with other shitters) things like campaigns, custom games, coop, team games, etc were made precisely for people like (you) who complain about the supposed "overly competitive" nature of RTS, and yet you still don't play them. The truth is RTS is a niche genre that filters morons like yourself, who never actually liked it.
Why the frick are you assuming that I dislike the competitive nature? It's the direct reason that it is good but also the direct reason for it being a niche genre forever. SC2 was a blip on the radar but as you can see we are back to status quo.
>campaigns, custom games, coop, team games
this is so wrong, every RTS post 2004 had budget, second-rate copy paste afterthought campaigns and content suites exactly because they wanted to pander to MP obsessed homosexuals after Starcraft made it big, including changing core gameplay so much to pander to them even the meager offerings were no longer fun to play
name some of them
C&C3+Expansion
RA3+Expansion
C&C4
Grey Goo
Dawn of War 2
Dawn of War 3
Supreme Commander
Supcom 2
8-bit insert name here games (there's like 41 of them)
that's just off the top of my head
>C&C4
I keep forgetting it exists, no joke
are you implying that supreme commander is bad?
the SP is dogshit
Planetary Annihilation too
I don't think it has a campaign at all
Dawn of War 1 not mentioned
One of the best RTS games of the past 20 years
It came out way before starcraft 2
Dude was talking about shitty RTS games
Dawn of War 1 is not a shitty game
Neither is Company of Heros
What ever happened to Relic?
Dawn of War 2 has a full singleplayer campaign with tons of voice acting, side missions, and a loot and upgrade system that is completely absent from the multiplayer mode. It's basically an rpg. Also the devs removed macro and resource gathering from the game entirely.
This is evidence that they were chasing after the Starcraft multiplayer scene?
> full singleplayer campaign
it was full of repetitive dog shit missions
and DoW2 was MPgay central, asscancer victim TotalBiscuit used to like it, c'mon
this
top of my head is AOE4
generally I agree but starcraft 2 is supposed to have a decent campaign. They also tried adding some coop and other shit but people still just kept playing mp
>starcraft 2 is supposed to have a decent campaign.
Yeah, it was supposed to have one. Except it ended up being pretty shit in comparison to BW.
WoL
>Eh campaign design, eh storyline.
HotS
>Slightly better campaign design, the story tanks quite a bit though.
LotV
>Get to do the last mission with a full brood war protoss army as your layout. Pure kino. Fricking bash my head against a rock storyline.
depends on what game you play, i remember playing sc2 10 years ago with gold/platinum players all i had to do was mass producing units and A + LMB on enemy base to win the game, completely 0 macro involved
>There is no social aspect and no team to blame for your shitty performance
aka competitive gameplay kek
meh, twitter "artist" inserting his own characters instead of taking ingame characters and anime'ating them
you havent even touched RTS if you think all AI is easy especially when they have huge advantage
> attack move up to gold/plat
You're lying. That shit barely flies in bronze half the time.
it did work at the time idk about now, i regularly was taking advantage of people playing passively or cheese meta (like protoss backdooring with stalkers) and focus on economy
the biggest classic was me playing zerg vs terran id usually had 3/4 bases while enemy was sitting tight gathering tanks around his only base. my brood lords would tear everything while tanks are fighting endless streams of hydralisks
literally right click hatchery on enemy base FTW
RTS is too hard for the average braindead gaymer
You are basically playing a fast paced 1 v 1 match of chess on steroids. You make ONE 1 second mistake and you can lose the match
There is no social aspect and no team to blame for your shitty performance
what nerds can't understand is that normal people aren't dumb, they just don't want to be bothered spending hundreds of hours learning how to minmax a game
if you're a shut in with no friends then any time consuming activity will good because you'll be getting something to dedicate your life to for months, but for the average person there's more going on in life so games are just a way to have fun and take breaks from other aspects of life, besides, intelligent people challenge themselves developing real skills for high paying jobs, not learning how to efficiently do things in a game for nothing more than a victory screen
>normal people aren't dumb
hahaha
>hundreds of hours learning how to minmax a game
holy shit you are on Ganker, we already spend hundreds of hours shitposting
why are you so mad? did your gf(male) beat you in age of empires?
So that's why we are all professional shitposters.
They hated him because he spoke the truth.
On average normies are moronic. But the difference between someone good at a game and someone great at a game is hyper autistic levels of dedication that no self respecting person should consider.
You are fricking WRONG my friend. You could only believe what you're saying if you are a normalgay yourself or if you rarely have to interact with them. I swear to you, the most simple things need to be explained to them, I regularly have to talk to these fricks like they are children, I can't give them the respect I would give to someone I know is intelligent because they literally wouldn't know what to do with it, they could not engage with me on topics I'm interested in and so it's pointless treating them as though they are intelligent people with interesting insights to share with me, because they simply aren't.
The moment you drop your superiority complex is the moment you'll be happy
>they just don't want to be bothered spending hundreds of hours learning how to minmax a game
because that was really necessary for AOE2 where you could just spam units you thought look cool
cute puglet
>spending hundreds of hours learning how to minmax a game
Learning isn't that hard for most games, probably and especially including the ones you like
This is the problem with RTS games. You bought into the competitive meme. People who aren't bugs don't care to play a kps competition.
Because nobody bought all the creative strategy games and everybody bought starcraft. So now RTSs are synonymous with optimal meta gameplay.
>now RTSs are synonymous with optimal meta gameplay
I loved RTS for fricking around and beating AI, as soon as other people, PvP and competition gets involved, it's all just "if you don't have your barracks by 87 seconds, might as well give up"
Besides some battle micro, RTS games are so cut and dry with its timings and calculations, it's like you're just following and executing someone else's blueprint and if you don't do that, you lose.
The same to an extent happens in MMORPGs and similar, get X equipment and Y talent or you suck.
You have to either introduce ever-changing, shit-tons of variables like Path of Exile does to keep things fresh or you're just calculating and executing someone else's work over and over. RTS are the pinnacle of this problem and it's why it died out.
I always liked playing against bots. It’s not hard or anything, but it was fun building a little civilization and watching it grow. Multiplayer never appealed to me in RTS’s.
Like this guy said the RTS genre was THE game's game genre. People were treating RTS's like city builders but the way you're supposed to play them was too arcadey, metagaming heavy, dumping buildings in a nonsensical blob-like way like a homosexual, harvest spamming, and ideas that were cool like technology being entirely focused on how fast you progress, which triggered a lot of autism.
Eventually the RTS genre made way for like Dungeon Keeper, Evil Genius, Startopia, Anno, and DF-like games like Rimworld and Banished. THOSE games survived, but RTS died like piss on the weeds.
Because all the good players use macros so it's not fun playing against literal cheaters.
everyone wants to play them differently and still want to win
yeah this is honestly it. I love turtling and building a huge fortress. my friend and I would play without siege units and make huge meatgrinder battles. too bad thats not how you are supposed to play the game
People don't despise it. They despise that it became minmax macro shit across the entire genre.
This.
buy homeworld deserts of kharak
I had a friend who played that a lot. He died.
Are those two facts related?
>Play RTS
>Tired of just cheesing bots
>Play online lobbies
>Get shitstomped every game
Gee I wonder why people despise RTS games.
Don't playing ranked modes for a while help with that? If you keep losing you'll eventually be placed against players of your own skill level, no?
This. Tryhards ruin the game and make it impossible for noobs to learn how to play. Not to mention that when you aren't a try hard chink who plays the game 12 hours a day the other players are extremely toxic to you for being a noob.
The "solution" was for people to make host games saying "noobs only" in shit like warcraft 3 but ofc they would be swarmed by tryhards and ruined.
That said I still had a blast playing WC3 it's sad that it's not very fun to play online anymore because the only people who still play it are tryhards. Was great when there was a large casual player base.
For every person getting shitstomped there is another person doing the stomping.
Wow so this is the genius intellect of an rts player
You're just saying you hate the game because you suck at it.
That comes back to the point made that the reason RTS is not that popular is because you have to not be moronic to get good at them and almost everyone on Earth is moronic.
You are a moron though?
Setting.
Like it's always Medieval or WW2 and stuff.
I'd like to have an RTS that is based on anime girls for a change.
Out of the big 4 you have two sci-fi, one medieval and one near future title.
The RTS genre was already perfected in the late 90's/early 00's.
And as perfect as they were (some of the greatest games of all time), there was no where else to go.
There's a reason AoEII still has a community 23 years on.
The only thing left for the genre was to dumb it down and sell micro transactions to zoomer morons (MOBAs).
The real answer is they are just boring. no one wants to watch tiny guys fight from an aerial view, people want to be up close to the action and have more individual control over their own character
>The real answer is they are just boring.
>Lack of strategy in them.
/thread
cool deathball
the real killer of RTS games btw: giant deathballs where nobody can tell one unit from another and it takes hours upon hours of training to tell two-units apart in the gray, low-contrast 'next gen' graphics.
Honestly it's this. Modern graphics were a huge mistake because it made everything into a muddy mess that's hard to tell the difference between everything on the field. It's no surprise its' heyday was the era of high-contrast sprites and obvious differences between even the tiniest unit.
compgays and devs sucking their dick
Too indirect.
>Select normal difficulty
>Ok enjoyable but its impossible to lose
>Select moderate
>CPU already with 200 Paladins in my base while I still in feudal.
Best answers. RTS games on standard difficulty tends to be too easy while moderate or higher difficulties has the most inconsistent and annoying difficulty spikes that just waste your time.
They turned from comfy base builders into multiplayer sweat-fests
They're pretty comfy tho
>webm ends before the result of the battle is witnessed
Whoever made this webm is a moron. Probably you the idiot who saved it and posted it.
Blue was getting surrounded close-range and had no garrisons or towers made or even the most flimsy of palisades to funnel them, it was over.
Also watching again, that was Viper. So maybe he did win it. Though idk why the frick he let that happen in the first place. Those things wipe the floor with two-handed swordsman
good luck with multi-pronged attacks 2bh
The best time to play RTS games was when the internet was still new so you played with friends or locals at LAN parties. Playing AOE2 or Dawn of War with people you know in person is comfier than getting matched with a stranger who build orders you to deletion.
Also the focus shift to competitive online. Everyone remembers warcraft 3 for the custom games. Everyone remembers command and conquer for the atmosphere and story.
Lack of strategy in them.
>Lack of strategy in them.
elaborate
it didn't die, it just changed to grand strategy and went for depth. Unless you're looking for a unit spamming game, those are mobas now
what about resource extraction and base building games? that's the fun part of rts, after all
it's inherently a sweaty genre for autists
normal people moved on to mobas where player skill is above macros and spastic APM
RTS games died out because of their incompatibility with consoles and the asiaticclick memes scare away all the zoomers that jumped onto the PC bandwagon to be like their favorite streamers
requires thinking and decent reflexes
I miss watching my buildings progress through the ages on Empire Earth.
EE was objectively better than AoE2 in every way except the camera/view controls.
>EE was objectively better than AoE2 in every way except this gigantic overarching flaw that touches every facet of the game
I love EE anon but c'mon dont downplay this.
Absolutely not. EE is only good if you are a little kid who just wants to do botmatches and frick around for a couple hours. AoE2 actually functions as a game with decent rock/paper/scissors, an expanding arsenal, and actually good graphics and sound.
>you VILL live in the pod
"Fans" killed RTS
I love it when compgays get btfo, like in this thread
People hate RTS because they're very stressful to play. I for one would love to see an RTS that did away with fog of war. If you're the better player you shouldn't need it anyway. Do chess players whine about their opponent being able to see their pieces? Is chess not a strategy game?
Chess is turn based, meaning once you make a move you're locked in an interlocking assembly which forces you to eat knives often to achieve a better position.
base building shit fell off a cliff, which sucks
i liked making aesthetic bases with impenetrable defenses
layers upon layers of bunkers, barbed wire, houses that fit just right
RTS was doing great until asiatics figured out you can attack, retreat, attack, ad infinitum. And the faster you click, the more you can do that, and other things.
Then very quickly RTS went from armies fighting each other and sieging bases, to autistic clickfests no one but asiatics wants to participate in.
>asiatics figured out you can attack, retreat, attack, ad infinitum
What in the literal frick are you talking about?
he described micro?
No he seemed to be describing some sort of specific tactic that somehow ruined every single RTS, which has never been a thing ever. If a Korean 4pools you, that's not doing what he said.
Doesn't matter. Try to imagine what would happen if Starcraft didn't have fog of war for a second. Cheese automatically no longer works and the game becomes about making better decisions than your opponent.
It matters but sure let's move on.
Cheesing would still exist for asiaticclickers because just making the damn units faster than the opponent can react is often the path to victory.
What you describe can also happen and is the design thinking behind AOE1: you can focus on controlling your army or controlling your econ but not both. "Decisions" in your scenario would simply become a game of watching your opponent's moves and countering them continuously.
Naturally, the UI elements of the enemy players are still hidden as are transport details, hidden units or targetting reticles for things like Nydus canals.
>Cheesing would still exist for asiaticclickers because just making the damn units faster than the opponent can react is often the path to victory
You're a complete fricking moron because the only reason cheese works if that you don't see it coming due to fog of war. Cheese is VERY EASY TO STOP by definition.
>What you describe can also happen and is the design thinking behind AOE1: you can focus on controlling your army or controlling your econ but not both
What if I just play fast enough that I CAN do both?
>"Decisions" in your scenario would simply become a game of watching your opponent's moves and countering them continuously.
So why don't chess players just counter their opponent continuously? Oh wait it's because their counters risk putting pieces out of position and weakening them elsewhere.
You're a fricking teenager, it's so obvious.
>Cheesing would still exist for asiaticclickers because just making the damn units faster than the opponent can react is often the path to victory.
That's not cheese, that's called economic victory and is also how you win wars in the real world.
I've seen plenty of games where pros do pick up on what their opponent is doing but still cannot stop them, usually because of a hole being made regardless resulting in unrecoverable worker loss.
Most cheese is just converting micro into enough early econ deficit so result in eventual victory.
>fast enough that i can do both
Well then the devs would want to crush your attention span even further to preserve their design philosophy or scrap the game and rebuild the architecture & design entirely because you're breaking it. Many such cases.
>just counter their opponent continuously
That's one of the things which does tend to happen. Do you play chess only holding your asscheeks tight and never sacrificing your queen? Chess games vary a lot, even more than pro RTS games imo, though the comparison is obviously unfair because of the centuries. This does highlight one of my beliefs: that if Blizz had let SC1 & 2 stay as they were at launch players would have eventually dug for new strats and adapt to those continuously. Boxer always did this to much fame.
>I've seen plenty of games where pros do pick up on what their opponent is doing but still cannot stop them
Yes, because they found out too late BECAUSE OF FOG OF WAR.
I'm talking to a bot.
DeWalt, a Russian, ended 2 - 3 against Barracks a minor "asiatic" pro without people helping him.
A chinese broodwar player was close to defeat the best amateur
We might send the best outside of korea to see if he can level enough to beat amateurs
You are bad at games
>this arbitrary evidence of whatever the hell I'm talking about happened
Gold star for you, schlomo. Back to the cabin.
this
>superior economy
>superior army
>lose battle because other dude exploits some right-click meta strat that was never intended by the dev
Literally never happens. Unless you're playing against the avatar of the Korean spirit himself, good macro will demolish micro 9/10 times.
>the avatar of the Korean spirit himsel
Flash, MarineKingPrime, Innovation, Bisu, Boxer etc.
Ah frick it, any korean then?
Thing is, the average Gankerirgin won't out-macro them either, so the micro aspect doesn't really matter.
>fb_img
Holy shit kill thyself
>Literally never happens.
You literally never play games.
Feel free to provide some examples of someone with
>superior economy
>superior army
getting mogged only because his opponent is a micro god.
I just play PvE with friends in AoE2 at this point because of this. I just want a comfy RTS session.
moronic take
they hated him because he told the truth
I've been watching Warcraft 3 matches and they seem to be just fine, armies get built, armies clash, bases get sieged
Completely agree, when Starcraft tournaments began RTS died.
I hate multiplayer gays so fricking much
competitive, "meta" homosexualry and epeen obsessed weirdos need to die
it led to the creation of mobas, and sweaty starcrafts compgayging and "ladder" homosexualry, which is supremely gay
did it hurt your feelings when you discovered people were better than you
no? it just ruins games, which, again, is what this is all about at its core.
Name 3 good RTS that got ruined by MP gays.
>goalpost moving
kys
comp/metagayging being a thing means rts are no longer comfy, and are designed with those types of games in mind.
"being mad about losing to better players" is rich.
i dont give a frick about that shit. that's the problem. my interests are not being supplied by the market at all.
moving
You claimed it ruined games so feel free to post games that got ruined by catering to MP gays. Surely you aren't just a shitposting homosexual, right?
the fact that there's no games that focus on single player base building, fighting, and it's all been replaced by few units, micro intensive moba style garbage or micro/macro shitfests like starcraft ?
see the progression of dawn of war series for a real time degeneration of the genre as an example.
the entire genre was molded to suit homosexuals like you instead of upstanding citizens like me.
>the entire genre was molded to suit homosexuals like you
Black person I haven't bought a new RTS since SC2 (which was sorely disappointing). Also, the Stronghold guys kept trying with what you described, maybe if Black folk like you actually bought games instead of endlessly whining online you'd see more of it. And the degeneration of RTS into MOBAs is only proof that the brainlets are winning, not that the asiatic crowd is being catered to.
This entire thread is just one moron seething. He has a Hollywood vision of strategy in his head where he spends ages coming up with 200 IQ plans and "out thinks" his opponent, and his opponent isn't allowed to do anything to prevent himself from losing to his masterful plan.
"Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics."
- US Gen. Omar Bradley
Even decorated real world generals think the seether is a moron. He either needs to stop playing games that involve unit production, or shut up.
Command&Conquer
Warcraft
Age of Empires
I'll admit I don't know anything about cnc but
>warcraft
>the poster child of custom games in rts
>ruined by mpgays and not the braindead company that executed it just so they could sell it again
>aoe
>anyone caring about any aoe but 2
>implying that aoe 2 doesn't have more sp content than ever before
>the poster child of custom games in rts
you mean the poster child for 40 different lobbies of DOTA Allstars, where you had to fricking dig just to find a game of Uther Party
MPgays even managed to destroy customs by giving way to the blight that is MOBA, and thus MPgays are directly responsible for the focus on trash like HOTS and the death of WC3
>anyone caring about any aoe but 2
people had to stick to 2 because devs shifted hard into pandering to MPgays after it
>implying that aoe 2 doesn't have more sp content than ever before
implying that AOE4, the one new game in the series, wasn't a forced MPgay tailored failure and dumpsterfire
clinging to aoe2 remake adding another cheapo set of mission is cope, devs clearly showed they do not give a frick nor are willing to learn, and will always prioritise mphomosexual game design and pandering over making a good sequel to 2
>C&C
all the C&C games starting with Generals were MPgay designed shitfests trying to bandwagon SC's asiaticclick gameplay
people blame 4 for killing the series, but it was flopping by RA3 because C&C3 showed that they're just going to resking Generals' shitty gameplay and fail yet again to get MPgays on board a franchise famous for live action cutscenes and building lots of tanks
>>the poster child of custom games in rts
Uhh no, Brood War had way better maps.
Broodwar had like 12% of the customs WC3 had
Quantity doesn't mean quality bro. Name a single UMS game on WC3, that was better than Diplo Infi. Today's world would be much better if Infi got the standalone game ports and not dota.
wc3 had the best customs?
>footmen wars
>tower defense
>DOTA
srsly. It spawned the DOTA and TD genres.
You new to Ganker? Everyone knows dota originated from Starcraft, it's called ASShomosexualS for a reason. And like I said, the world would be a better place if dota didn't grow anyways.
Also, pretty sure tower defense also started on BW.
AoS was shittier than dota that's why everyone played dota and not AoS
>dota originated from Starcraft,
thats Aeon of Strife, distant ancestor of Dota allstars
There were 100000 wc3 custom rts maps that were better than that, I'm sure. Personally I liked Warlock, Island Troll Tribes, Dota, escape maps etc though. Starcraft is mostly just good for standard, the customs are shit compared to wc3. Sorry senpai.
Brood war custom maps were extremely limited in comparison
People being better at a game than you ruins it for you? I fail to see how this isn't just you whining about losing to a better player. You're looking back with rose tinted goggles at a time when you were an ignorant child.
dude, my favorite game is AoM, AoE 2 and Warcraft 3, but i don't play them online because people killed them with competitive meta and shit.
The best thing to do is gather friends to play, throw Black Florest in AoE2, progress to the last Age, build a huge army and start a diplomacy play with your friends.
I remember one time when i was the strongest in the game and one of my friends made an treat with me to attack another friend, but the moron tried to back stab me! Thank God i knew to never belive my friends in this game and managed to destroy them both lololololol.
It's soo very cash money playing with friends only trolling.
Because the genre was popular because there weren't really many alternatives and people didn't know better.
not like we have that many alternatives now, im constantly playing old games and occasionally something fairly new
Deserts of kharak and that grey goo game.
There's that ww2 mech game but it's pretty bad
AOM remake soon though
If you want to just build a base why don't you just play city builders?
Fricking this. If you hate PvP so much go play PvE. If an RTS dev would make a game with a fun PvE mode maybe it'd catch on.
>Randomly generated maps
>Random objectives
>Random enemies
>Team based
Ever play Deep Rock Galactic? Imagine being sent on random missions like that, except the gameplay is RTS. Then obviously there can be PvP mode for the sweaties.
Battleforge has essentially all of this
Starcraft, RA3, Ao2:DE has coop campaign
Battleforge actually fixed this as well. You make units sluggish and hit and run doesn't work anymore
lack of vision. There is a lot of cool stuff some games tried and a lot of stuff completely untouched. Spellforce mixed RTS and RPG
Universe at War had interesting factions and turned every asset on the map into a resource.
Warzone, Earth 21X0, Impossible Creatures allowed you to design your own units
city builders are not fantastical or fun, and there aren't outside threats to fight to spur your progress.
you can remain an irrelevant shithole forever in city builders.
also engaging in a fake economy that is obtuse and worthless is less satisfying than personally mining resources to expand.
I mean a lot who played for building pretty cities and maps did.
Those who liked big battles left for Total War.
The ones who liked the ruling aspect turned to GSG.
The only people left are nostalgiagays trying to replicate their childhood - who won't play newer games in the genre anyway - and autistic asiaticclickers.
Like I said above, the genre was popular because there weren't many alternatives and/or people didn't know better.
>The only people left are nostalgiagays trying to replicate their childhood - who won't play newer games in the genre anyway - and autistic asiaticclickers
This, harsh truth that tards will never accept
That's basically what happened but rts had way more character and an actual goal
Also as an aside multiplayer has always been the mode of choice for the minority of players. Catering to muh e-sports bullshit is what killed the genre.
The "City Builder With RTS Turtling" genre fusion isn't too big yet, only They Are Billions hit it big
That's what everyone did
do y''all think aoe2 now more popular than sc2?
Dead genre
>Why did this genre die?
Same reason fighting games died: too multiplayer focused. Once companies figure out only autists care about multiplayer and focus should always be on single player mode, they'll come back.
Multiplayer is the only thing keeping RTS games alive, dummy.
You think AoE2 would be having global tournaments sponsored by Red Bull if it was just a stream of somebody playing the campaign by themselves?
Because it was catered to nerds, DOTA was made by an autistic nerd.
DotA was made by a series of nerds passing the baton to each other.
These games require some work. You have to build a base, balance an economy, upgrade your equipment, etc. Most zoomers can't handle that shit. Games like Total Annihilation would have had them running to their troony discords to complain.
I just want some modern equivalent to RoN or EE, a civ RTS, is that too much to ask?
because they're hard and people complain when anything is hard
just look at all these people who want an SP rts where they beat on brainless ai without any strategy because they don't want to lose to other players online
>just look at all these people who want an SP rts where they beat on brainless ai without any strategy because they don't want to lose to other players online
you are incapable of understanding why single player rts is fun while i am perfectly capable of understanding why multiplayer rts is fun.
you are less than me.
>just look at all these people who want an SP rts where they beat on brainless ai without any strategy because they don't want to lose to other players online
brainlet compgay take as usual
>look at all these people who want an SP rts where they beat on brainless ai without any strategy because they don't want to lose to other players online
Actually the reason I don't play most RTS games multiplayer is because of build order meta homosexualry, I just think that's a really tedious thing to have to get good at so I won't waste my time, instead I'll play Wargame: Red Dragon or something else without basebuilding if I want to fight against humans in a strategy game.
>instead I'll play Wargame: Red Dragon
*napalms the road out of your spawn*
gg 🙂
Napalming my spawn with what? a jet? all the way over here this early in the game? yeah I don't think that jet is gonna make it back home
you know I never understood this hate against build orders
it's a game, so of course there's gonna be some level of optimization for what you should do right at the start, it's like complaining about chess openings
Chess is turn based. RTS build orders crunch your nervous system.
Most games your scout will reach their base early enough to spot exactly what the opponent is doing.
On some level you will always have the fog of war regardless: your screen shows only one small part of the map, cloaked units remain stealthed in any scenario for consistency, you can't view boarded units, you can't see the enemy queue.
At the same time, you're just being a whiny c**t because Fog of War could always be disabled in Starcraft and AOE.
>I never understood this hate against build orders
Building things quickly/in a particular order just doesn't feel like a rewarding skill, but it is, in fact in mp strategy games with basebuilding the result of the game is often decided within the first few minutes before any combat takes place at all.
That is quite simply boring. Watching builder units construct buildings or gather resources is not entertaining at all, but this is actually where most of the decisive shit is happening in these games - that's boring to me.
Just rush.
Yeah I'll rush to go play wargame or something
Well I guess for one thing in chess it's only a few turns carrying out the "meta" opening moves and even then some variation becomes immediate based on what your opponent does. Not to mention both players in the early game would be making their moves immediately so little time is wasted.
In your typical RTS it's a little while doing the same shit at the start every time and it's always a fixed time.
that "little while" is a couple minutes at most, and it's not like there's only ever one build order in a game
Supposedly there's no reason for it to be a couple of seconds. Think about how quickly a game of chess gets going because both players already know the opening moves off by heart and will waste no time moving pieces.
But that's not immediate, it's a reaction that first requires you to get a scout over to their base.
>it's a reaction that first requires you to get a scout over to their base.
How is reacting to what you see your opponent do or having to do something to actually revealing his actions a bad thing?
>Well I guess for one thing in chess it's only a few turns carrying out the "meta" opening moves and even then some variation becomes immediate based on what your opponent does.
Same applies to RTS. You're supposed to scout and react to what your opponent does. Good luck blindly completing your "meta build order" if the other guy decides to go for the rush.
>it's like complaining about chess openings
well guess what
>Build order meta homosexualry
It's okay anon, not everybody's physiology is made for playing games requiring a brain.
Do they still make FPS/RTS hybrids like Natural Selection and Battle for Newerth? I miss those games and I doubt anyone plays them anymore.
Raging +40y/o crybabies are still into Natural Selection.
Because I actually just want to build pretty bases and not actually strategize, much less play against other humans.
So I stopped building pretty bases in skirmish AoE2 and started just playing colony sims/city builders/tower defense instead
From the way Ganker acts I'm pretty sure I did the right thing since you guys seem to hate "casualgays" that only play single player.
Zero-K beats them all and it's free
People started playing MOBAs instead.
I wouldn't call them people.
Those people were never RTS players in the first place.
>Lying on the internet
I miss the old starcraft 2 interface. It had its issues but it was full of soul
arthritis
1. the skill ceiling is extremely high so it's inaccessible to casuals unless the ladder is very, VERY segmented
2. strategy games require thinking moreso than reflex and a lot of people don't want to have to think in their games
3. the people who DO enjoy thinking often want time to think about their moves, that's why turn-based strategy games like civ and real time with pause strategy games like most of pdx's library are a lot more popular
4. nobody who really enjoys RTS wants to spend a bunch of time relearning everything from the ground up, which is why only a few big names tend to have success
>why is the genre dead
>because of [reasons]
>YOUR JUST CASUAL BRAINLET GENRE IS PERFECT
Every
time
Kek true
They just don't want to accept they are the problem
You need to kill your hands to play rts, and to get to that point you'll have grind a lot to memorize shortcuts and get good reflexes with the mouse but at that point most sane people would have given up because they have better things to get good at
PCs shrinking market share combined with RTS only being viable on M+KB
>pc's shrinking market share
that's not a thing
What's the percentage of gamers who play video games on PC today as opposed to during the heyday of RTS?
probably larger. rts carried PC gaming back in the day and even then it was dwarfed by console/handheld. starcraft in its heyday never held a candle to mario, final fantasy, halo, and the other big names of console gaming. even doom's popularity was vastly overshadowed by later comers like goldeneye and halo. it was consoles that brought laypeople and casuals were the biggest market by a large margin. a lot of people in the 90s didn't even have a computer and in the 2000s i recall countless magazines fortelling the death of pc gaming.
it wasn't until a little while after orange box came out and steam started popularizing pc gaming that it started to take off, and even that wasn't an immediate thing. pc gaming now has grown a lot since then, although it was overshadowed by mobile gaming which captured a large number of people who do not consider themselves gamers.
there's also the fact that consoles used to have fairly unique architecture that enabled some interesting titles. ps3's architecture in particular was much hated by devs but also was different enough that some really cool stuff came out. these days, most console games are identical on every platform and (outside of nintendo's library) usually get ported to pc, and nintendo's stuff just gets emulated.
Remember consoles couldn't really do shooters as well as pc too so stuff like quake doom and others were popular on it. It took until Halo to really take off console shooters
they were, but at that point in time a lot of people didn't have PCs. i had one because my dad worked for IBM, but i knew a LOT of friends who didn't have a PC until like the early to mid 2000s. on the other hand, the reason goldeneye was so big despite the controls being complete dogshit was because it was accessible to a lot more people -- lots of people had N64 and ps1, so games on those systems were accessible to a majority of people. quake and unreal were extremely popular relative to the number of gamers who played on PC, but the total number of people who played on PC at that point was overall fairly small.
I dunno, it just seems that PC used to be more relevant to the gaming scene, whereas now it's more for indie games whilst AAA devs develop for consoles first and maybe port to PC later. And that obviously means you can't have a game that doesn't work with a controller. The opposite isn't a problem, especially when they started making controllers that you can use with PCs.
the delayed release to PC is more (a) to avoid piracy and (b) for exclusivity deals with sony/microsoft than for any technical limitation. these days engines like unity and unreal have options to build on whatever platform you want pretty much, so porting is very little effort - it's mostly QA work to make sure it runs properly on a bunch of different hardware profiles since with consoles you usually only have a couple.
there's no real platform-specific innovation driving it like there used to be and for most games these days the expectation is they'll eventually make it to pc if they don't launch there at release. people also have enough stuff to play where new titles aren't as exciting as they used to be -- look at the hype difference between old E3 and the last E3 we had. sure there's still SOME hype for new titles, but it's NOTHING like what it used to be. that's why people are willing to wait 6 months for something to come out on pc, or 12 months to get it for half price on pc.
if anything, it's not so much any one platform dominating these days as it is a blurring of the lines between the platforms altogether. i think we're already at the point where there's no substantial difference between pc and console gaming and they're largely treated as the same thing.
>the delayed release to PC is more (a) to avoid piracy and (b) for exclusivity deals with sony/microsoft than for any technical limitation.
Except the obvious techical limitation of having to work on a controller. People have tried to make a console RTS. None of them really succeeded.
asiaticclick killed the genre
>most players are just casuals who just love playing and turtling with frens
>nowadays every new RTS is designed with asiaticclick in mind while there's a separate genre out there that caters to number autists and city builders
>Blizzard fully embracing MMOs in the early-mid 00s spelled doom for the genre, even SC2's campaign is soulless outside of Wings of Liberty - the last game where the OG Blizzard crew of WC/SC worked on
>Blizzard also JUSTed WC3's remaster and has permanently killed the IP in favor of WoW
>there's only so much Warhammer 40k RTS you can churn out until series fatigue kicks in
Stunned and surprised that EA hasn't shat out RA2/YR remaster alongside with Relic doing a Dawn of War remaster
>RA2/YR remaster alongside with Relic doing a Dawn of War remaster
Never gonna happen
AoE chads rule supreme.
I think the bigger issue with asiatic click is that people completely forgot why asiatic click was even a thing in the first place. It was because the AI was so stupid that clicking really fast made them smart. Instead of it being a thing of the past they made a shitty mechanic that servered no reason in to the main mechanic of the game. To make it worse is that the only reason why asiatic click was so rewarding in the past was because of how much effort you needed to do in order to make your units not be moronic, now we have perfected unit AI, so to justify asiatic click they added in a bunch of mechanics that end up just feeling like meaningless work rather than actual skill.
Age of Empires community is too arrogant to have a simple PvE lobby. It's like they WANT their community to die.
>PvE lobby
What's that?
I wonder why janny wants to delete
>the only reason why the government would want to disarm you after 243 years is because they intend to do something that you would shoot them for
from an RTS thread while leaving thousands of disgusting offtopic garbage on the frontpage.
Also leaving "what's a PVE lobby?" unanswered as if it isn't on-topic, the for-free operating frick.
What's the point of attaching random, unrelated images to your post in a thread that is mostly on-topic discussion? Especially boomer-tier milquetoast shit like that.
Subconscious programming. Next question.
The post itself had on-topic text people could've answered.
>make complete non-post
>attach attention grabbing image because you know your post is worthless and will be overlooked by itself
>hurr durr y no one answer me?!
>read post
>say it's non-post
Hurr durr. As I said, go clean up the rest of the filth-ridden board.
>10-20 years ago
>you play against friends with moronic, but fun strategies
>win or lose, you get some fun memories and banter
I still remember spamming dogs in RA2 and using them to cleanup paratroopers my friend spammed
>now
>you play against online sweatlords where they try to execute the cookie-cutter strategy
If you lose, you can only seethe, if you win, they say "gg" and leave. Both victory and defeat feel empty.
>10-20 years ago
>have friends willing to play games with you
>now
>have no friends, have to play against people you hate online
this is the reason rts "died"
the fricking song names in AOM
Pure kino
They just look so bad
I look at games like AOE4 and I can't help but notice the washed out colors and downgraded looks of the game.
Doesn't look that different from other AoE games
SOVL - soul, I guess - soulless. Simple as.
nah
OH SHIT OH FRICK I'M LITERALLY DYING FROM SOVL OVERDOSE - meh
AOE4 had no colors dude. It's showing even in your image. It feels like they desperately wanted units to stick out so they just bleached everything.
The white fog everywhere also doesn't help
Whoever's doing UI work for a lot of companies are complete imbeciles. Somehow that carried over to UX as well: gross scaling of ammo and units, washed out colors, weak-ass illustrator drawn cultural symbols instead of nicely painted artworks aoe1 had, buildings not looking as aesthetic as aoe1 either.
Somehow the elefants still look kino at least.
Your pic exemplifies how it's uglier than AoE3 at a distance.
The genre peaked hard and early, there's nothing to add when AoEII, Warcraft and Starcraft already cover everything and have fans that are hard to woo with anything else.
Pretty much this. Add Total Annihilation/Supreme Commander and CnC and there really isn't much left to do.
Oh yeah, how could I forget CoC.
Company of heroes 2 is also very good and isn't a click fest like SC2.
Age of empires 4 is also pretty good imo
>genre
There's plenty but nobody willing to innovate and the sale counts aren't sexy either. Nobody wanted to make a modern Harvest Moon so one guy just reaped all the profits.
uuuuuuhhhhh i still want to have new rts's made with b***hin' stories, you know... frick if i give a frick if the genre peaked, jesus...
aoe4 is UGLY
it's a mobile game that they fashioned into a pc game, somehow. that's what makes it so shitty looking. shit graphics style, shit zoom, shit everything. like, no joke, why didn't they create a patch where you could zoom out more, it can't be so fricking hard for them to do? they did it with the aoe2 remaster, and i think they did it with the aoe3 remaster too, so why not with aoe4?? it boggles the mind, literally. this is relic we're talking about, we're not talking about a noob company here, we are talking about experienced devs. why did they frick up the zoom? and why the cartoon graphics???? this is literally the goddamn age of empires series we're talking about, a legendary fricking series, why the fricking disrespect????? truly, it boggles the mind...
Is Submarine Titans any good?
Someone give me RTS recs, I've only played AoE 1
AoE2
starcraft
warcraft 2
warcraft 3
aoe 2
supreme commander
rise of nations
company of heroes
never played them but the dawn of war games maybe
Age of mythology
Basically the same but with a good story
Homewrold Deserts of Kharak
Homeworld Remastered Collection
aoe2 and 3. age of mythology. company of heroes series. starcraft series. empire earth series. red alert series. dune series. warcraft series. homeworld series. i can't remember any others.
dawn of war 1: base game(GOTY edition) is my favorite campaign so far. winter assault's is a let-down, dark crusade is a risk-style map where you fight other factions and need to take land. soulstorm is only for mods because it's fricked otherwise.
Warlords Battlecry, Warlords Battlecry 2
the third one isn't as good but has a longer campaign.. They changed summoning mechanics for the undead race among other things in order to sustained siege tactics, which was the only real trump card versus a pure merchant build, shifting the meta from resource management, upgrade order, tiered armies and planned sacrifice to merchant&command build to the extreme, then rush with cheap units asap. Still quite fun in single player, but unless you are in a house-rules community that bans the merchant build, pvp was ruined in it.
in order to nerf sustained siege tactics*
I think they never cared about gfx and the casual players moved on to shit like Clash of Clans
GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE GOT MY ROCKET LAUNCHER RIGHT HERE
>stinger
>hitting a land vehicle
????
>real time strategy
>is actually a real time tactics game
Name 3
What's your strategy for winning said RTT game, anon? Oh.
>strategies are just a bundle of tactics
you're blowing my mind here
The game is played in real time.
The game can be won by the team with the best strategy.
The game is tactical.
Welp, RTS has been there all along.
>Modern RTS
>Trying to mod it in any way, shape, or form is a goddamn nightmare.
>Developers offer zero tools, tips, or support for modding.
the red alert ads were legendary. they'll never have the balls to recreate those ads. 'nuff said.
I don't get how Brood War is a competitive game. It's a buggy cheesy solved mess of shovelware.
cuz it's fun
its the RT i dont like
turn based is more strategic than tactical
Factorio, Rust and Satisfctory ARE the RTS genre. Multitasking games with no real depth like BW and AoE can rot in their ghettos.
>Real time strategy
>No strategy
Everytime
usually only one civ is overpowered and wins whoevers fingers are fast enough to create the first villager to collect resources
it's not a game of tactics but ritalin
Memorizing dozens of hotkeys and build orders is as meaningless and visually unsatisfying as memorizing fighting game combos; not a lot of people want to do it. RTS was my favorite genre growing up, by the way!
Need something built... Or blown up?
CoH3 comes out in 2 months but its clear that they don't have the funds to make it as compelling as CoH1 or 2 even
Any good laptops for RTS gamin?
because people are playing them in a way that "I personally" don't like, and regardless of how "I personally" play them that's just unacceptable
I only played them for the campaigns
espurts killed it
how did esports kill it?
Made Blizzard greedy enough to make insane mandates for SC2 and bury KESPA and all other competing esports greenfield companies.
and what exactly did that do to every other developer that wasn't blizzard?
and even what you're saying seems like it just hurt esports and not rts
Well yeah it did hurt esport and in doing so killed most of the interest the games already had. You think MOBAs are popular with kiddos because they're just hella fun? Nah, it was the thriving esport scenes that popularized them because people will jump at the chance of winning gorillions.
Dota was a fun party game we played in internet café as a child
Sure but it was still SMALL as an audience. hundreds of MILLIONS have played it since then.
Anyway, personally I'd rather have few games with a steady audience than many shitty ones or with flakey audiences.
There's a reason AOE1 had 50 units maximum. HP was supposed to abstract for each unit per point otherwise it made little sense. It could've had phallanx soft in the back but they couldn't get it balanced in time for release and just didn't bother.
Changed the perception of the genre from something fun to something competitive and difficult
looking at this thread that's a believable hypothesis
so basically esports "killed" rts because people are too dumb to make their own opinions
People aren't going to buy a product advertised as something they don't like
the only reason most people bought rts games in the first place was because they knew nothing about them in an age where the internet didn't exist in it's current state
Nah dude I'm pretty sure I could fire up RA2 or AoE2 right now and have some fun, those are beloved classics for good reason
that's not what I meant, I'm saying most people bought them knowing nothing about the genre as a whole even if they turned out to be good games
Oh shit man good point my bad bro keep it up you're killing it homie
esports, meta circlejerking
the simple answer is RTS is an extremely niche genre, and its popularity is just a consequence of it having a lot of individual things people like
People didn't like RTS, they liked building cool cities -> move to city builders or civilization
People didn't like RTS, they liked groups of ancient armies fighting -> moved to total war or similar games
People who liked microing their troops around moved onto mobas, people who liked the strategy elements moved to turn based tactics games
only people who like the very specific combo of building up AND micro AND strategy WHILE under real time pressure actually enjoyed the genre for its own sake, there's a reason why in aoe2 or warcraft/starcraft you had literally half the playerbase just doing the campaign or custom scenarios, even at the genres peak the people who were actually playing an RTS in the RTS game were a minority
>the simple answer is RTS is an extremely niche genre
Except it's not and people want RTS games. The issue is that new RTS games are ass in every aspect.
why do you keep posting this fricking meme? my homies and i loved playing rts's for the stpry and the awesome LAN, god damn, dude, stop posting this stupid fricking meme, it's just not true.
wow you and like 5 people play RTS'S? i guess they aren't niche and sell millions with playecounts in the high hundered thousands and they also come out like one every 3 months
Surprised nobody mentioned the real reason.
You have to babysit literally every single unit and greenlight EVERYTHING that happens in your civilisation. The units have zero autonomy, so there is zero unpredictabled or hilarious stuff than can happen aside from surprise attacks by the enemy.
It's basically like playing with little action figures, moving them from point A to point B.
That is a little unsatisfying. There is just not a lot of interesting shit that can happen except different variations of enemy troops which you have to defeat in a paper, stone, scissors kind of way. But you can't even enjoy the combat because you have to babysit like 40 villagers at the same time all the fricking time.
I think that a big problem with rts is that they are either too fast or too slow, i don't know why people don't learn that warcraft 3 speed was perfect
For the same reason why other niche genres exist, hardly anyone who isn't a vet can get over the wall that's been put over RTS games for over 20 years
>oh nice an RTS thread I bet it won't be moronic
OH LORD
>I bet it won't be moronic
where have you been the past 10 years
>hop on Ganker
>"m-maybe THIS time it'll be different"
I have to stop doing this to myself
Still love the game but my micro skills are garbage.
Low IQ casuals took over gaming and culture in general, plus a good RTS is hard to make and corporations don't want to make something difficult, only things they can churn out on a production line.
Boring
I only played Age of Empires 2 to make cool looking medieval cities when I was 10
I still watch videos about it and tournaments but I have no grasp of RTS games at all
people got the dumbs. can't play them
esports shit has made all games try to appeal to it
i want devs to know, not everyone wants to play starcraft with 500 billion fricking APM
1.remove shit like animation cancelling, eg like archers in age of empires being able to fire faster if you micro them intensly, introduce turning speed similar to dota to stop that
2.fricking stop min maxing balance to be as "flashy" and "exciting" as possible for esports, noone gives a rats ass about that
3.actually fricking make singleplayer content so people have fun offline and theyre not forced into MP from the start, on that note making singleplayer only RTS games would be nice because those fricking died
Ahh yess. The moron asking for casual gameplay mechanics.
did you read the post my dude? you are the moron
The entire genre was shit but people pretend like it was popular because it is old.
Because pc gaming died with Vista in 2007.
IT'S FRICKING BORING!!!!!
>Why did this genre die?
Because it became less about strategy and more about memorizing meta builds and clicking as fast as possible, and quitting if you missclick once
why do you play like that if you don't like it?
Because grand strategy games absorbed all of the RTS player base.
RTS isn't dead. The real issue is the massive divide between those who just want to play single player and those that want to play online. CoH2 was a massive hit, yet despite this only 1% of players ever hit the achievment "play 3 online matches". SC2 almost died way soon till they finally added in coop mode with the ability to choose commanders to alter your army. IN fact the coop mode is played more than vs. Even with AoE now being a literal behemoth still less than 1% of the player base ever touches online, but almost 100% of players do go through the story and challenge modes. The devs of Age of Empires online reported that the entire reason why the game failed was because it did not launch with PvE or skrimish options, which they found out the vast majority of people play. So the real big issue isn't that RTS is dead, but that devs constantly try to make RTS games that heavily focus on multiplayer rather than trying to make an interesting single player. To add insult to injury nu devs lack creativity. They do not create interesting worlds or game play. Name another RTS that has mechanics like zerg creep, or protoss reavers needing to build their ammo. At most a modern RTS will offer a unit like a seige tank, but that's about it. They do not try to think of new ways units can work or even just copy mechanics. They just make them as simple as they can be as they are neither creative nor compitent enough to do anything else, which says a lot since the devs that pioniered RTS had less time, money and tech.
It sounds really cool on paper and then I remember my reaction time is subpar and I’m too lazy to learn real life skills, let alone micro and macro. Like MOBAs, it’s more fun to spectate than to play
I played a couple games of AoE2 last night. I'm going to play another in a few minutes. I only play 1v1 ranked because if it's not ranked the other player will get salty if I don't follow some unspoken rule.
It's a fun genre. I hope more games come out. It's deep and complex like MOBAs but you don't have to rely on other people.
Company of Heroes 3 and Homeworld are the only notable releases coming out maybe try CoH1 and see if thats your thing
>Genre only works on pc so AAA won't touch it since they could just make any other game with crossplay and reap more money
>To outsiders every game look the same but in a different flavors of "Build and research stuff to crush the other people doing the same" while with something like CSGO vs TF2 there are vastly different first person shooters at a glance
>A split between people wanting good solo content and people who only care about multiplayer
RTS FANS KILLED RTS
fricken christ, haven't we been over this a thousand times, already? it's because the fricking money men made two or three crap rts games in a row and then collectively decided that the whole fricking genre had died, damn....
Such as?
so what are some of these games that asiaticclick changed that people talk about?
people keep saying that all the devs catered to esports gays in their design decisions, but what games did those devs make?
i have an old CD of SC2 WoL that's completely broken, installs but won't do anything but show script errors on the launcher and not update
despite just werking on my shitty laptop 10 years ago
anyone know what hoops i have to jump through? compatibility mode? i just wanna play bot matches frick online
might as well ask here, all results on forums are just "update ur drivers lol"
download it from your battlenet account?
npcs and most birdbrain idiots are too stupid to participate.
not even kidding many people simply cant learn how to play even the most simple strategy games.
It take sforever and everybody turtle up behind a billions defence.If there is a super aggro race like zerg in starcraft or china in command and conquer they ether get team up by everyone else or they steamroll everyone.
>Waaaa! too hard! I do not know what my opponent is doing! I can't react to it! Fog of war is stupid!
Learn to scout
>Waaaa! my opponents cheated and followed a guide!
Learn a build order
>Waaaa! It is LITERALLY impossible to learn how to play these games!
It has never been easier to learn RTS with the amount of information and tutorials out there.
and yet the genre is still dead and you are here defending the shit that made it die
Happy to see it die like that than having shitters ruin it I guess.
>It takes skill and that's why it died!
lmao
okay dude, ill be enjoying my actual fun games now while you continue to kill RTS with your le epic mlg micro skills
the shit that made it die is just information. it's just info most people didn't have.
RTS games are unfeasible to play with the tard controller
red alert on ps1 was fine
I wouldn't know because I played it on a huge fricking tower with a keyboard, mouse, and CRT monitor
what we (i) need is turn-based strategy on the scale of command and conquer
It use to be fun as shit online in the old days and call me stupid but the koreans and people that play 12 hours a day made the fun machine take a shit and die
>Why did this genre die?
Because even when they were selling really well most people didn't actually enjoy playing them, they enjoyed the single player or custom scenarios.
It's like fighting games, you unironically need to be built different to have your cute little settlement with perfectly space buildings get completely fricking trashed by some dickhead tower rushing you and instead of ragequitting the game go "ok, how do I beat this"
Meta build orders killed RTS games
>ywn play Warcraft 3 again
They didn't die out.
RTS is just a odd genre out where instead of a constant slew of new titles every year the old pillars of the genre managed to stay popular.
It's too big of an endeavor for indies to pick up and AAA studios only make 2 games and small studios are sort of few and far between.
Also if any new ones do actually come out they often fall into the esports trap where they focus more on the games being competitive instead of focusing on them being fun.
Its complicated, but i think one of the MAIN reasons is that the devs that make them died out or abandoned the genre. Think of how westwood, ensemble, etc. have died and you realize the people that want to do RTS just end up being bankrupt or going to other genres.
I enjoy Age of Empires 3 and I'm glad it's still getting new content. That said the online scene is full of hypersweats.
>Why did this genre die?
didnt, more players than ever
>Yet another 'RTS is dead' thread by moron homosexual OP that doesn't even play RTS games
Abloo blo bloooo there isn't a starcraft 27 or C&C 2713890, RTS is DEAD!
God I wish you homosexuals would stop talking like you know any god damn thing about the genre. It's more alive than it's ever been before currently and we're spoiled for choice on great looking games coming out in 2023 and we've had some bangers this year too. Frick off back to your gay ass hero shooters and half assed FROM hack and slashers.
What's the game in pic?
We're actually getting a full set of new moderately big budget RTS in 2023, so calling the genre dead is a bit of a stretch.
Stormgate - Blizzard Stacraft/Warcraft-like
Tempest Rising - Command and Conquer-like
Sanctuary Shatter Sun - Total Annihilation-like
Homeworld 3
This in addition to tons of smaller indie games like crossfire, dorf game, muriet, etc. Pick a game and play it homie.
You're wasting your time, any homosexual calling the genre dead is just some nostalgia queer crying about not getting a new C&C, who hasn't actually played an RTS game in 10+ years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_real-time_strategy_video_games
>Tempest Rising
>checks store page
>"2 epic single player campaigns with between-mission cutscenes."
>can immediately tell it's gonna be glorified skirmish maps
>Iron Harvest comes out
>really cool unique setting and lore
>fun campaign
>UGGHHH IT'S JUST A SHITTIER COMPANY OF HEROES
fans just can't be happy themselves
It was just a shit game.
Cool concept bad execution
>long gameplay session per game
>require high apm and high focus/brainpower so you can't "just chill and play a comfy game"
>pve ranges from too easy to way too hard for all the wrong reasons
>pvp is incredibly sweaty and there is no "I just play for fun" option, you're tryhard or you're getting fricked
AoE4's problem is that you can't deliver it with less content than AoE2 if you want to replace AoE2. It's a tall order where they need to have all the civs from all the expansions and map types and then more. As soon as they released it with less than a 20 year old game, it was doomed. People played the new campaign, thought it's cool civs are much more unique, saw the multiplayer was worse and just went back to what had more.
It had several causes that led to its demise.
First was the death of LAN and the Birth of Online Multiplayer
Second was the death of the Campaign in favor of the E-sport.
And third was the rise of the Moba.
World of warcraft is probably also partially to blame
Why do people think RTS are harder than any other competitive genre online?
I have seen friends get into league of legends and lose their lane every time for months straight and thats babies first moba.
People b***h and complain about fightan and I got to red ranks in 4 months in tekken of never playing a fightan.
If you put the work in, its no different than literally any game
People just want wins handed to them
cause it requires more IQ.
>micromanagement
>macromanagement
>quick decision making
>foresight
etc
LoL is moron version of DOTA, polar opposite of RTS high skill ceiling
>Why do people despise RTS games?
they're low iq
Try the Galaxy Angel trilogy.
>We got the rockets!
We got the rockets!
>We got the rockets!
We got the rockets!
>We got the rockets!
Been playing a ton of Dark Omen lately, it's still hard as nails
I used to almost break my mouse frantically clicking to power up units in hand-to-hand
>TO THE DEATH!
frick me, theres an old game with similar graphics ive been trying to find for many years, except the units looked more 3d
it had gore and i think the demo had a mission with undead coming out of a river and some pumpkins you could smash
annoying thing is i saw a compilation of easter eggs few years ago on yt and it had mentioned the game, but it didnt mention the name and few days later was taken down for copyrights
The intersection between cool army battles and playing a game to win doesn't line up as I envision it in my head. And because I don't want to go through the hassle of learning and optimizing a build order Im less likely to enjoy it.
The cool visuals of large armies fighting it out cant be enjoyed too much in an rts because you've got to constantly be looking around the map and managing economy too. That's a certain kind of fun but for me it's more often stressful and work and not laid back vidya like i'd like.
AI typically are too moronic or even if competent not particularly satisfying to beat.
Total war used to be the game for people like me but since warhammer and the faster pace of the game I cant even enjoy watching battles because they're over in 5 mins. Medieval 2 and prior units would duke it out for a couple of minutes before crumbling or routing.
Someone needs to make a game with delayed unit orders and a maximum number of orders allowed. Let the superior tactics and strategy play it out instead of autistic unit behaviour manipulation and intense micro dictating every single game in the genre.
That said Im glad AoE is in a second golden age and i'm hype for AoM.
turn-based with a several factions/players is too tedious for most. thats why real-time age of empire is king
How do the 'modern' versions of AoE 1-3/M hold up? I got my original discs of the series, although missing a couple expacs.
Narrative and presentation demands rose, but the genre was not equipped for it.
Give it to me straight lads, is AoE 3 actually good?
Yes but not compared to AoE2 so it might as well not exist.
As far as 3d RTS games went for the era it was pretty good, alongside having some formation features I wish AoE2 was better about.
But it boils down to what
said.
AoE3 is a fricking great game and absolutely worth a playthrough, its greatest crime is simply not surpassing what could very reasonably be called literally the best RTS ever made, and who can blame it for that?
tell me how to enjoy AoE 2
Right now all I say is a game where you rush militia and get to Castle ASAP
Dawn of War 1 is the best RTS game ever made
>Only requires an APM of about 4 for multiplayer, anyone can enjoy it
>Every faction is fun and unique
>God tier soundtrack
>Amazing 40k autism army paint customization
>No Black folk, no women (except sexy elves and space nuns)
All that is required of the player for a perfect experience is to use the grid keys mod and camera zoom mod.
>played the shit out of DoW since beta
>many lan parties had
>DoW 2 comes out
>oh boy here we go
>mfw
>last stand
Ganker is so absurdly casual it's insane
I wouldn't mind learning a new rts. What are some rts games with an active multiplayer scene of enough players that you don't recognize names and a newbie can find other newbies? Other than the obvious blizzard rts and age of empires.
I like rts because i have a tested iq of 137
So you're a moron?
Top 0.7%
Wow that's pretty moronic
Black and White 1 and 2
Frick Microsoft for ruining this franchise
Homeworld 3 is literally the only game I've been genuinely excited about in the last 10 years.
>Ganker STILL thinks "muh clickspeed" is all that matters
Christ isn't there a real board for actual players?
yes, /vst/
Shut up
No one talks about WC3 there
Because companies stopped making fun RTS and started making esports bait
Don't care about multiplayer
People who play pvp only are the most miserable homosexuals on this planet with their head permanently stuck in between their cheecks
Just give me a good singleplayer one with fun mission design
Supreme Commander FAF is still alive and well
The casts are the best
Anyone else hate when you have to actually engage with a games mechanics? How am I supposed to watch xqc on my second screen and film tiktoks if I have to actually play the game fr fr on god
Grasping at straws
MP is so fricking boring its insane
Just grind the same strategy till you climb the rank enough for your satisfaction
Sounds like a horrendous game, glad RTS isn't like that
Cope all you want but i played it
Everyone tries to cheese the other one to win under 15 minutes to get imaginary internet points to get a badge
Unironically reddit teir
Holy shit where do you morons come from?
Im sure youll get that sticker
Just do 56 more games
?
Do you like any multiplayer games at all?
Not really
Multiplayer grows old really fast on me since its just the same thing over and over
Yeah when you're moronic, when you start actually thinking it gets amazing and dynamic
Uh huh
homie i played it
Dont try to fool me
>do the same thing over and over like a moron without thinking
>blame the genre
Yes thats what it became
Either copy others or lose
ahahhaha holy shit does Ganker REALLY
You are braindead genuinely
You homosexuals cant be honest if it saved your life
Holy shit
If you're playing MP and only doing the same strats without thinking then no shit it'll stop working
It didn't stoped working
I just got bored
Sure if i come back in sc2 now after a decade it will be different but once you figure out what's working or look up the meta its back to the grind
LMFAO
Here's your last (You) homosexual, this is terrible shitposting even for Ganker
Sure, run
everything that anon said is correct, I'm confused as to why you find this controversial
you can literally just look up vibes b2gm series and copy them exactly and it will carry you straight to platinum with 0 brain power
it's not super stimulating, dude. the only circumstances in which you are correct are
1) gentlemen's agreement among friends
2) everyone playing is at the same level of macro prowess
Dude he is clearly just coping and arguing in bad faith
For him rts is a holy genre that only literal geniuses can play because otherwise game just wouldn't load unless you pass mandatory IQ check
Lets hope he doesn't choke on his own farts
It sounds like you dislike how difficult it is to come up with new and effective strategies by yourself. I get that. If your goal is to win and get good, it's much less effective to experiment on your own than it is to simply look up a guide written by an expert.
But, you do not have to focus everything on winning and following the meta. That is not required, no one is forcing you. You are free to play as you like and if the game has a functional matchmaking system you will find evenly-matched games regardless. You can experiment, you can mess around, only it won't be optimal. That doesn't matter if you're still having fun.
Also, it does take brainpower to implement and follow a plan and keep everything working properly in the heat of a match against a competent opponent. It's not very creative, granted, since you probably knew what you wanted to do before the match even started, but it's difficult and it requires awareness, focus, and quick thinking.
>no one is forcing you to win
>just have fun
I wish it was all that simple
But one is hardly possible without the other
Its rarely you have a game so close that loosing feels good
Also yeah sure you can play without looking up meta but all it does is you taking a long route to learn all this
Because other people follow meta, and you can see what they are doing, so you start to yake notes and copy them and in that way you will be following the meta just not as efficiently and it will take you 10 times longer to learn it
I was trying to say that as long as the game matchmaking system works, you will get wins even if you're playing like an anti-meta goofball. You'll also get losses, about half of the time. That's only a problem if you think it's a problem.
But if you are instead focused on winning and improving and climbing the ranks, then I don't know why it would bother you to learn from others. That's what everybody has to do. No shame in it.
its a npc complaint, you see the same things with card game players (mtg for example) that whine about "netdeckers" because they can't win with their shitty brew
>whine about "netdeckers" because they can't win with their shitty brew
everybody has to be original and creative just like meeeeeeee
>shows up to casual locals with a tier 0 netdeck
>wtf why don't people like me fricking npcs
every time kek
Difference is a size of a playerbase
I played mtg and our club was like 25ppl
If someone created a tournament winning deck that wasn't that big of a problem
Because you still need to play with the deck to feel it and how to play it, and later people know already what you are and they have tools to deal with you
But when playerbase is big enough then it goes to
>oh im playing A i need to build a wall like this and be aware of X harass and he might drop on me at 6 minute mark so i have to scout there
And it never really changes
holy frick you're moronic lmfao
Im sorry that you are so blind that you fail to see a clear pattern in that
Understandable. And you're right it is repetitive, in the same way that all competitive activities with static rulesets are repetitive. Chess is just trying to trap the king over and over, basketball is just trying to get the ball in the hoop over and over, rts is just trying to defeat the enemy army over and over. The goal is the same every time and there's almost always an established meta.
If the competition itself doesn't excite you there's no reason to play. But that's not a flaw with rts or with competition as a concept, it clearly appeals to huge numbers of people even if it's not your thing.
Ganker doesn't play games if you think these are good posts
If you like grinding its okay dude
I don't
I play rts for the campaigns and custom shit
>refuse to think
>this is the genres fault
I can see why RTS filtered morons like you
You greatly overestimate the need to think in these kind of games
>outright admit you don't think about what you're doing
>then try to have a discussion about multiplayer
ahahaha
Its like i talk to rick and morty fan who unironically belives in the iq pasta
Best campaign?
For me it's age of mythology. Fun characters and a good mix of scenarios
>Why did this genre die?
Because RTS games used to have something for most people to enjoy
>Good singleplayer campaigns for casuals to play
>Robust map editors for custom games
>PvP for sweaty asiatics to minmax
but then esports took off and companies stopped making their games appeal to all three and started strictly appealing to the PvP minmaxers only to discover that people who spend their entire lives minmaxing Brood War aren't going to jump ship to a new title. Oh and MOBAs took off too.
I like how pvp homosexuals now complain how genre is dead even though they got exactly what they wanted
Any RTS that take from the C&C school of thought of just building mass armies to defend your base/throw at the enemy?
I like how you can easily tell who's a normalgay and who isn't by the moronic twitch lingo they use
How do you distinguish twitch lingo
I assume its twitch, could be twitter, but you can easily tell.
>I like how
outed
RTS games evolved into MOBAs. Literally in this case, MOBAs started as mods for rts games. Why is beyond me, they're much worse.
They were party games.
It would be like if they decided to make blood gulch warthog only a "sport" with hundreds of thousands of dollars up for grabs
wait until this guy hears about smash tournaments
What's a game like xhero siege?
I dunno, what even is xhero siege
2 words.
ENGLISH ARCHERS.
>Carried again by my English Longbows
It's NOT dead. The classics are alive and well. They're so well made that anything new has to compete with games from 20+ years ago. Not many other genre of game is like that.
Want to make a new RTS today? Well, if it's not as good as Broodwar or SupCom why would I give a shit? So the bar has been set very high.
I received my first ever donation this morning to keep the Dark Reign website alive after running the project four years. I've received plenty of offers in the past but today was the first time I actually accepted one. RTS lives on.
Name a good rts that was released in the past, lets say 7 years
Deserts of kharak
I dunno if dune or starship troopers are good. I haven't played either yet
I thought LineWar was pretty cool and innovative, if simplistic. Did you read my post? Standards have been set extremely high by RTS games from 15year+ ago. Just keep playing the classics. RTS ages like fine wine. It's like Chess. Do you hate Chess because it's not new? Zoom ZO0m.
Chess is not a genre you moron
Sure old games are "alive" (receiving next to none updates, and not growing they playerbase) but the fricks who play broodwar will play broodwar and only broodwar tillthe end of their days.
they're happy playing their old RTS games, are you? Chess is a strategy game that's timeless and many RTS games are the same. Strong rulesets. Servicable SFX/Grahics. People still play them 20 years later. They will still play them in 20 years from now.
Who is going to play AAA flavor-of-the-month shit even five years from now? Ten years? TWENTY YEARS from now? Nobody. RTS will outlast them all.
It helps a ton that RTS devs all agreed on a general UI layout and handling from Starcraft onwards.
Cool words that you try to put in my mouth
I haven't mentioned graphics no any other bullshit like that at all
I just want to play a game that i haven't played yet
Tempest Rising soon. Basicaly the C&C4 we never got.
Someone make a real RTS thread next time
Original or Remaster Homeworld?
easy, its resentment that we haven't gotten Warlords Battlecry 4 yet.
i lost the fricking discs
i have original discs of games and i still pirate them cause im too lazy to get a CD reader, who tf has those anymore
When everyone was new at RTS's, it was more fun to play because people didnt have much more strategy than A+Move at the enemy base and they still had to learn mechanics. Then everyone got good and casuals left it for dota and explored elsewhere. So no new blood sustains it.
I am playing Age of Darkness.
It's pretty good
The switch to full 3D removed all SOUL from these types of games.
C&C Generals would like to have a word with you.
play Dark Reign
The RTS that made me wish every other RTS let you assign patrol routes.
Outpost 2, WBC, WBC2, WBC3, SC, C&C all let you assign patrol routes, what shitty rts are you playing
>Outpost 2, WBC, WBC2, WBC3, SC, C&C all let you assign patrol routes
in 1997?
yes?
I can boot up outpost 2 and show it to you on twitch or something. I believe you can get an iso from outpost universe or a number of abandonware sites and try it yourself too.
WBC is what, Warlords Battlecry? Never actually touched that series, how was it?
More RTS needed to have alt-history campaigns the way Empire Earth did
It's like the perfect genre for it but I never hear of it ever being done much.
>hey to get the most out of multiplayer you really need to think critically and humble yourself
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ITS ALL asiaticCLICK REEEEEE
Thanks for the good discussion Ganker
I wish I could play Achron
Starcraft and AoE are alive and well, the genre isnt dead.
But yeah, its kinda stagnating. Little new games come out and the ones that do dont stick.
I guess there are multiple reasons. The genre is hard to monetize. The genre is hard to function as a social network (which is the main purpose of a lot of games today). The genre is just very competitive and hard to get into.Mobas being very similar but fixing the first 3 problems taking a lot of market share away.
I hope one day we can have another big name RTS again. But as is, I still enjoy playing SC2 and AoE2 ladder.
e-sports fricking ruined the genre by turning it into "who can mash buttons faster"
wut lmfao
You won't get anywhere in any game mashing buttons
moron
Meant for
>refuse to scout
>refuse to learn
>refuse to use your brain
>god this game is so bad
RTSgays don't like to believe it, but the genre really just boils down to who can click faster.
It doesn't, there's pro Terrans with an APM of 70
Besides which Epm is what matters
not really
shitters don't understand that the reason for their low apm is that they haven't the slightest idea of how to play the game so they have to sit there reading tooltips and getting stuck in the tech tree and having there economy shut down with nothing to do because they forgot to build workers or supply buildings.
The popularity of RTS was a time and place. Before RTS became a thing all you had was turn based strategy games until RTS came around and people would marvel at how you could watch battles unfold right before you and issue commands in real time. This isn't exciting anymore to the average player because other genres can and do offer similar levels is spectacle without all the hassle that comes with RTS.
Here's thing big red pill on RTS games from a 90's PC gamer. They were only made because they were relatively simple to do so and you could get them looking really good for the time. When good looking 3D games became more common, they didn't really have a place anymore as few people actually enjoyed RTS gameplay that much.
The genre isn't dead, it's just a little stagnant. There have been several big Age of Empires tournaments this year.
I've mastered every genres there is but RTS, which one should I go for? Aoe2 or SC2? I tried Warcraft 3 (both reforged and classic) and the units felt so slow and there is a turnrate in the game that made me not enjoy it and I heard SC1 also had turnrate/delay on units
I heard micromanaging in AoE2 is bad but the macro is super fun and it does look fun, I feel like SC2 might be fun too but it looks deader than AoE2
Help appreciated
sc2 you need higher apm and there are way more cheese strategies you autolose to if you don't scout like dt rush. Micro is less important in aoe but there's plenty of micro potential especially in the earlierr ages with archers or scouts, its not that you can't micro but that 99% of players are better off using hteir limited apm to spam and build more units rather than controlling the ones they have lategame
sc2 races are also way more different which can be a + or -
I enjoy macro more than micro honestly but I still want the micro to feel nice so I was thinking of either playing Zerg in SC2 or AoE2, seeing the early game in AoE2 looked more fun with the macro you're talking about (archers/scouts, finding food, kiting it to your center etc) than SC2 tho
I thought AoE2 had more cheese than SC2 too
I'll give AoE2 a try first then, I imagine AoE2 is way more popular than AoE4 right?
yeah aoe4 is mid, aoe 2 is kinda just better, also zerg has the least micro terran has the most. There's very little cheese in aoe 2 and the only ones that do exist won't auto win you the game like a cannon rush or proxy voidray or something will
kk, to be honest I also want to avoid playing a blizzard game again so I'm going with AoE2, ty for the help
I'm biased towards AoE2, but the other anon is right. If you love crazy fast micro and more asymmetrical factions then definitely try SC2 out.
I think AoE2 is more balanced in that both fast players and slow players can win successfully. Macro execution and micro speed are both important whereas SC2 is more weighted towards micro.