The future of RTS games - Page 65

On July 27 2014 18:29 MajorBiscuit wrote:
I spent 150 hours in DOTA 2 with no prior experience in the genre other than some toying with it when I was very young in the WC3 days.

I certainly see what the appeal is. When winning it is a very fun and enjoyable game. However, the worse thing is at the start of the match when you say hello to your team and none replies, or some reply in a different language. Then you know you are in for a 35 to 40 minute match where you cannot communicate to do anything. In a game where teamwork and planning is crucial this is simply terrible. You can't forfeit the match because Valve (and rightly so) punishes leavers; so you are stuck in a game where you know you can't have fun but you can't leave.

Don't get me wrong it is a very fun and deep game and it blends elements of RTS and RPG in a very organic way on top of being completely free. It is certainly not as complex as Starcraft. Its complexity arises from the great volume (hero roles, abilities, items, team fight) of knowledge you need to acquire before being able to make competent decisions. Where as in Starcraft complexity arises from the amount of variables you need to take into account while making decisions and at the same time executing them. To me that is a purer form of strategy, as is to be expected from a RTS.

Now why this sort of game is more popular than Starcraft seems to be the question bothering many people of the RTS community. The answer is simply that it is free. A huge chunk of its audience comes from Russia where F2P games are pretty much dominating the PC market. These are people that will not even consider a game if it has a pricetag on it.

The large amount of heroes allows for deep character cosmetic customisation, which in turn allows this F2P model to be viable. Additionally, at the scrub level that you and me and the average person will play, a MOBA or ARTS as the Dota community likes to call it, it simply requires lower APM, and is generally easier for someone to play. Your item decisions might suck, your skill build might suck, your map awareness might be non existant, hell you might not even manage to get more than 5 last hits. but if your team's cores get early kills and start to snowball you might still win the game. In Starcraft you simply cannot do that, unless if you are playing with someone who equally fucks up. The opposite if possible as well. You might be the best player out of the 10 in your match, but if your team does not communicate or coordinate it is very difficult to win the game.

For someone who has like 1 hour a day to play a game, playing Dota 2 is a coin flip as in that time you can only get 1 game, maybe 2 games if you are fast. But unless you have a group of people that can play with you, playing in pubs carries a high risk of not having a nice time.

On July 27 2014 19:28 Spaylz wrote:


That is an excellent point. It's one of the flaws of Dota and most MOBAs, since pretty much all of them have a game format which requires you to spend on average, at least 30 minutes.

Blizzard seems to have understood that, and is aiming for a shorter game format with HotS. A game of HotS lasts something like 15-20 minutes I believe, sometimes bordering on 30. The pace of the game is fast (as opposed to Dota's rather slow pace), thus allowing players to not be stuck in the same game for too long if they happen to have unpleasant teammates.

I think it's smart. It's really why I miss solo games, or 2v2 games. In WC3, a game lasted 10-20 minutes, sometimes more but rarely so. Dota 2 is a good game and all, but it is true that having to commit an hour for each game is kind of a turn off.

On July 27 2014 17:41 chrisolo wrote:


Because all the remaining BW fans would go to Irvine and riot down the HQ of Blizzard. Since it would completely destroy the remembrance of Broodwar, as they would include shiny totally unneccasary effects, which destroy the visibility of the game and other stupid stuff. It would be basically a SC2 in even worse conditions.

Lets just keep it at SC2.

Leave Broodwar alone!

On July 28 2014 01:07 FT.aCt)Sony wrote:


I played Brood War from 98-08 so I understand how you feel. From a business perspective, it's the smarter thing to do because it would generate money and it wouldn't cost much to remake in an HD format because the game is already there. It's not a fresh title.

On July 28 2014 02:15 plgElwood wrote:
In other Words:

Pleaaaaase give us Warcraft 4 !

On July 28 2014 03:02 Phanekim wrote:
fads come and go. the moba f2p moba will run its due course. there was a boom in rts back in day as well. bank on that.

On July 28 2014 04:37 Zealously wrote:


This is assuming that Brood War's original audience is still there waiting for an HD remake and hasn't moved on to play other games and that the remake wouldn't change any of the mechanics that were a side effect of the technological restraints rather than conscious design choices.

Among other things.

On August 04 2014 09:46 meshfusion wrote:



i agree with you, everything goes in cycles - right now MOBA are on the rise- in many years from now there will be something newer and hotter to get the spotlight.

speaking about the same topic.. i really really liked WC3:TFT I hope Blizzard is going to do Wacraft 4 after the next-gen FPS shooter game. There's heroes so its a biiit closer to a MOBA but there is also a small amount of economy (although not as important as Bw/SC2)

On July 27 2014 18:09 althaz wrote:

IMO that's a bad argument - C&C 4 sucked, but you can't solely blame the lack of base-building. Sure, I prefer games with base building, but done right, with a new IP (repurposing an existing one where the fans are all expecting base building is almost certainly a terrible idea) it could make for a good game. C&C 4 ripped out base building but failed to replace it with anything else to do.