Bad stuff: - Too complicated for casuals - Boring, repetitive phase of building stuff
This is idea, that the building phase must be boring and repetitive pisses me off. Cause it isn't true.
Blizzard has this inane idea, that everyone has the right to an expansion. And if someone plays on 1 base, you shouldn't be forced to counter with 1 base play, there is still some way to expand. I think scouting shouldn't be a choice, but a requirement, that is the heart of strategy games, knowing what your opponent is doing. But in SC2, you don't need to scout if you open with X expand.
This right has to led to where we are now, with long builds up with virtually no action. Blizzard might as well start everyone on 2 bases to save time. Worse, because certain units are countered easily in large economy play, unit compositions become standardized, further reducing variation in a RTS game. Take the 1-1-1 in TvP. That composition (Marine, Banshee, Tank) didn't work in big games, but was awesome on one base...
SC2 has been made into a game of mechanics, strategy is second as good mechanics easily overcomes strategy in SC2.
But it doesn't have to be this way.
Now with all that said, play my map for WC3, Coming of the Horde. It is everything you are looking for OP. And the idea does work.
Agreed Bronze, although in fairness a lot of that homogenisation of gameplay into what we have now has been due to problematic builds and fan reaction to that.
1/1/1 was a bit ridiculous on a map like Xel'Naga Caverns for example, but the general concept that every race MUST be able to expand early, hell even in PvP it's been something they've been pushing and I feel it's taken away some of the strategic and stylistic variety.
Bad stuff: - Too complicated for casuals - Boring, repetitive phase of building stuff
This is idea, that the building phase must be boring and repetitive pisses me off. Cause it isn't true.
Blizzard has this inane idea, that everyone has the right to an expansion. And if someone plays on 1 base, you shouldn't be forced to counter with 1 base play, there is still some way to expand. I think scouting shouldn't be a choice, but a requirement, that is the heart of strategy games, knowing what your opponent is doing. But in SC2, you don't need to scout if you open with X expand.
You don't play TvP i take it.
EDIT: or TvT, or ZvT. Really, it is just Protoss due to the planetary nexus that has that "problem" and it gets lost of criticism for that.
Red Alert 3 was also recently released, thats a big AAA title with decades of history and even has the age old live actor cut scenes going for it.
Lots of RTS titles out, lots of money being sunk into it, and lots of people play them. The foreign scene is the biggest its ever been compared to Broodwar.
The RTS market is growing. Big titles are being released yearly. What this thread seems to be upset by is that what sells RTS games now a days are the exact opposite things that people in TL *feel* was what made BW great. Easier interface, multiselect, simplified combat systems, transparent unit counters, smooth unit movement, etc...
So they ignore RTS titles as they get released as they wait for a Broodwar esque copy.
The problem with RTS is that we need more publishers to take big risks, and to make games to last and be balanced, not to DLC the hell out of them. I think that's the main issue, IMO it is very unlikely for a RTS to be successful in the long term following the same model of, say, Call of Duty, because you don't have that many players. So if a publisher wants to take a risk, there is a loot of room for innovation (just look at Dota, a game that came out from a custom map of another game).
Bad stuff: - Too complicated for casuals - Boring, repetitive phase of building stuff
This is idea, that the building phase must be boring and repetitive pisses me off. Cause it isn't true.
Blizzard has this inane idea, that everyone has the right to an expansion. And if someone plays on 1 base, you shouldn't be forced to counter with 1 base play, there is still some way to expand. I think scouting shouldn't be a choice, but a requirement, that is the heart of strategy games, knowing what your opponent is doing. But in SC2, you don't need to scout if you open with X expand.
You don't play TvP i take it.
EDIT: or TvT, or ZvT. Really, it is just Protoss due to the planetary nexus that has that "problem" and it gets lost of criticism for that.
Protoss actually cares about that too (scouting) because different rushes requires different units to defend. The Planetary Nexus is still the backbone of the defense, but its not the only thing defending them.
Bad stuff: - Too complicated for casuals - Boring, repetitive phase of building stuff
This is idea, that the building phase must be boring and repetitive pisses me off. Cause it isn't true.
Blizzard has this inane idea, that everyone has the right to an expansion. And if someone plays on 1 base, you shouldn't be forced to counter with 1 base play, there is still some way to expand. I think scouting shouldn't be a choice, but a requirement, that is the heart of strategy games, knowing what your opponent is doing. But in SC2, you don't need to scout if you open with X expand.
You don't play TvP i take it.
EDIT: or TvT, or ZvT. Really, it is just Protoss due to the planetary nexus that has that "problem" and it gets lost of criticism for that.
Protoss actually cares about that too (scouting) because different rushes requires different units to defend. The Planetary Nexus is still the backbone of the defense, but its not the only thing defending them.
True, true. Nothing like the paranoia inducing early game TvP though lol
Bad stuff: - Too complicated for casuals - Boring, repetitive phase of building stuff
This is idea, that the building phase must be boring and repetitive pisses me off. Cause it isn't true.
Blizzard has this inane idea, that everyone has the right to an expansion. And if someone plays on 1 base, you shouldn't be forced to counter with 1 base play, there is still some way to expand. I think scouting shouldn't be a choice, but a requirement, that is the heart of strategy games, knowing what your opponent is doing. But in SC2, you don't need to scout if you open with X expand.
This right has to led to where we are now, with long builds up with virtually no action. Blizzard might as well start everyone on 2 bases to save time. Worse, because certain units are countered easily in large economy play, unit compositions become standardized, further reducing variation in a RTS game. Take the 1-1-1 in TvP. That composition (Marine, Banshee, Tank) didn't work in big games, but was awesome on one base...
SC2 has been made into a game of mechanics, strategy is second as good mechanics easily overcomes strategy in SC2.
But it doesn't have to be this way.
Now with all that said, play my map for WC3, Coming of the Horde. It is everything you are looking for OP. And the idea does work.
This man ladies and gentlemen, gets it. Its mostly due to the maps being at fault, we went from having too small maps to now too large AND easy to defend naturals/3rds. We have no compromise.
Bad stuff: - Too complicated for casuals - Boring, repetitive phase of building stuff
This is idea, that the building phase must be boring and repetitive pisses me off. Cause it isn't true.
Blizzard has this inane idea, that everyone has the right to an expansion. And if someone plays on 1 base, you shouldn't be forced to counter with 1 base play, there is still some way to expand. I think scouting shouldn't be a choice, but a requirement, that is the heart of strategy games, knowing what your opponent is doing. But in SC2, you don't need to scout if you open with X expand.
You don't play TvP i take it.
EDIT: or TvT, or ZvT. Really, it is just Protoss due to the planetary nexus that has that "problem" and it gets lost of criticism for that.
Protoss actually cares about that too (scouting) because different rushes requires different units to defend. The Planetary Nexus is still the backbone of the defense, but its not the only thing defending them.
True, true. Nothing like the paranoia inducing early game TvP though lol
Yeah, its not the same paranoia, just one of those "do I need detection? how many forcefields? can I cut stalker production? Should I wall off? etc..." as opposed to "Oh god oh god I need bunkers... and turrets.... and a WM-fuck the oracle got in oksdlkdhgklsdglksglsdkgh!!!"
On May 15 2014 02:54 Thieving Magpie wrote: Red Alert 3 was also recently released, thats a big AAA title with decades of history and even has the age old live actor cut scenes going for it.
Lots of RTS titles out, lots of money being sunk into it, and lots of people play them. The foreign scene is the biggest its ever been compared to Broodwar.
The RTS market is growing. Big titles are being released yearly. What this thread seems to be upset by is that what sells RTS games now a days are the exact opposite things that people in TL *feel* was what made BW great. Easier interface, multiselect, simplified combat systems, transparent unit counters, smooth unit movement, etc...
So they ignore RTS titles as they get released as they wait for a Broodwar esque copy.
Red Alert 3 was released 5 years ago. What are those big titles that are being released yearly? Can you give me a list? You are aware that Command and Conquer: Generals 2 got CANCELLED a couple of months ago?
On May 15 2014 02:54 Thieving Magpie wrote: Red Alert 3 was also recently released, thats a big AAA title with decades of history and even has the age old live actor cut scenes going for it.
Lots of RTS titles out, lots of money being sunk into it, and lots of people play them. The foreign scene is the biggest its ever been compared to Broodwar.
The RTS market is growing. Big titles are being released yearly. What this thread seems to be upset by is that what sells RTS games now a days are the exact opposite things that people in TL *feel* was what made BW great. Easier interface, multiselect, simplified combat systems, transparent unit counters, smooth unit movement, etc...
So they ignore RTS titles as they get released as they wait for a Broodwar esque copy.
Red Alert 3 was released 5 years ago. What are those big titles that are being released yearly? Can you give me a list? You are aware that Command and Conquer: Generals 2 got CANCELLED a couple of months ago?
On May 15 2014 02:54 Thieving Magpie wrote: Red Alert 3 was also recently released, thats a big AAA title with decades of history and even has the age old live actor cut scenes going for it.
Lots of RTS titles out, lots of money being sunk into it, and lots of people play them. The foreign scene is the biggest its ever been compared to Broodwar.
The RTS market is growing. Big titles are being released yearly. What this thread seems to be upset by is that what sells RTS games now a days are the exact opposite things that people in TL *feel* was what made BW great. Easier interface, multiselect, simplified combat systems, transparent unit counters, smooth unit movement, etc...
So they ignore RTS titles as they get released as they wait for a Broodwar esque copy.
Red Alert 3 was released 5 years ago. What are those big titles that are being released yearly? Can you give me a list? You are aware that Command and Conquer: Generals 2 got CANCELLED a couple of months ago?
there are so many incorrect facts in Magpie's post i wonder if its worth correcting. let him live in his dream world. i'd just like to add to your point.
Not Only was C&C cancelled AFTER 4 YEARS in development ( hello SC:Ghost ), but to add insult to injury.
Victory Games (EAs RTS game maker) was mothballed in the same week the game was cancelled.
At this point there is no viable method of EA making an RTS game.
That list includes crappy games, games we wouldn't consider RTS, expansions as well as unreleased onces. If we filter the list and take those with a metascore > 80%, the list looks like this: 2008 C&C: Red Alert 3 2009 Dawn of War 2 2010 StarCraft 2 2012 Wargame
On May 14 2014 07:36 GinDo wrote: Age of Empires 4
One can only hope
Yeah, Age of Empires 4 would be so awesome. Sadly that is not possible as there is no more Ensemble Studios Age of Empires 1-3 were all great but aoe3 has broken game-engine that makes game lag no matter how good compurter you use (multiplayer)
RA3 was a financial disaster. it went permanently on sale for $30 only 9 weeks after its release. The studio that made RA3, EALA was mothballed about a year after RA3's expansion was released. The expansion contained nothing new for multiplayer and sold for only $20.
this is not pricing worthy of a AAA level of investment. Hence, EALA is no more.
On May 14 2014 05:01 urboss wrote: While I'm sure that the SC2 e-sport scene will continue to stay strong for years to come, the future also depends on the development of new titles.
urboss, are you interested in designing something? Because you can actually try out a lot of these ideas in the SC2 editor. For all you know, the "future of RTS" is some kind of SC2 mod that gets popular with younger generations.
I really think there is a difference between: #1 SC2 single player campaign #2 SC2 free to play/arcade/mods #3 SC2 melee - casuals/team games #4 SC2 melee - 1v1 competitive/"esports"
My 2 cents... most people who play SC2 are probably doing #1-#3 and honestly they probably don't give a shit whether Reaper opening is viable in all matchups or whether Blink is OP.
I mean, I know it's important to a lot of us but for the casuals (the larger audience), no...
As far as financials go, we have no idea how many copies of HotS have been sold since release (other than 1.1 million in the first 48 hours). I don't make games for a living but my guess is that if LotV is profitable based on people buying it for #1-#3 alone, then new AAA RTS games will continue to be developed, even if it's just by Blizzard.
On May 15 2014 03:29 urboss wrote: That list includes crappy games, games we wouldn't consider RTS, expansions as well as unreleased onces. If we filter the list and take those with a metascore > 80%, the list looks like this: 2008 C&C: Red Alert 3 2009 Dawn of War 2 2010 StarCraft 2 2012 Wargame
Hardly a big title every year!
As I have said, "So they ignore RTS titles as they get released"
If the complaint is that there aren't any RTS titles being put out there--that is factually wrong. Are many not as good as the top titles? Yes. That's true for all genres of games. Most other titles are only "games we wouldn't consider RTS" because of a narrow elitist view of what you imagine an RTS is.
There are casual RTS games, small scale, large scale, etc... You're literally wanting to ignore all the other releases because they were not Starcraft 2 or C&C?
EPT
