Where are all the strategy games? (Death of RTS geanre)

[TidusZ]

Planetary Annihilation could have been a SupCom successor, but instead it was just meh. A SupCom successor would get me very excite

 

[Ranulf]

PA is a lot better with the Titans "xpac" and the mod that adds in another faction.

 

[Ajay]

Planetary Annihilation could have been a SupCom successor, but instead it was just meh. A SupCom successor would get me very excite

Yes, but with the ability to add user created maps and some sort of mod system (like SC1/FA).

 

[simas]

the problem with all of these ideas is that they are not console friendly - which is mass market right now. RTS was just either too complex for people to participate in (SupCom), or turned into barebone 'let us rebalance forever' as we are trying to e-sport everything quest (StarCraft). the multi-player crowd want consoles and that experience, the older generation of strategy players may find it boring.

also, if you have not played Sins it is actually not bad. Similarly , I greatly enjoy Creative Assembly Total War games (Total War Warhammer).

 

[Raduque]

. They do not work with consoles

Two words: Halo. Wars.

Both games are on PC now, but were designed from the ground up to be console RTSs, and I played the first one on the 360 and it actually worked just fine.

 

[bystander36]

Two words: Halo. Wars.

Both games are on PC now, but were designed from the ground up to be console RTSs, and I played the first one on the 360 and it actually worked just fine.

Does it play like Starcraft or are there a lot of compromises made?

The basic method of controlling a base and army can't possibly be the same, or it would feel extremely difficult in comparison to a mouse and keyboard.

 

[Yakk]

Yeah Halo Wars controls work fine, they must've worked quite a bit to develop that system to make it work so well.

Haven't played Halo Wars 2 yet, but AI is probably nothing to write home about.

 

[Stg-Flame]

Warcraft 2 was also released on the Playstation and it works perfectly fine. My dad still plays it to this day.

 

[Raduque]

Does it play like Starcraft or are there a lot of compromises made?

The basic method of controlling a base and army can't possibly be the same, or it would feel extremely difficult in comparison to a mouse and keyboard.

There's aren't as many hotkeys. But the core game plays pretty much the same.

 

[bystander36]

There's aren't as many hotkeys. But the core game plays pretty much the same.

If their work around UI to make it work is good, it may catch on in the future. I'm pretty certain most developers have avoided it on consoles in the past, as it doesn't lend itself to a controller. At least not the way it was done before.

 

[Raduque]

There's a demo of Halo Wars 2 on the Windows store with the simplified ui, so you can try it and see how it works.

 

[dud]

Steam often has (good) RTS games for sale at a significant discount from time-to-time. I just added Endless Space to my collection for $1.

The genre lives on ...

 

[Raduque]

Isn't Endless Space turn based?

 

[moonbogg]

Act of Aggression was the closest and best thing next C&C Generals and it only came out recently. The game failed and people don't even realize that the game came and went in failure. Their whole premise was to make a game that was based on the golden age of RTS. They actually delivered a pretty good game, but no one bought it. Golden age RTS is nothing but a fond memory now and AOA's failure proved it.

 

[Yakk]

I really wanted to like AOA, but it just didn't deliver properly. No AI to speak of, so-so campaign and just overall not very fun in MP. To bad really.

 

[Stg-Flame]

AoA didn't feel like Generals to me. I'm glad I tried it on my buddy's PC before spending money on it.

I was always told Grey Goo brought back the traditional RTS style, but it felt more akin to Starcraft 2 than older RTS.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

How do you guys not consider the Relic games RTS? Simply because they (generally) aren't annihilation based and the focus on base building was reduced so much? I honestly believe CoH1 is the pinnacle of the entire genre. However, I will grant you that DoW2 single player was NOT an RTS though.

 

[XavierMace]

Act of Aggression was the closest and best thing next C&C Generals and it only came out recently. The game failed and people don't even realize that the game came and went in failure. Their whole premise was to make a game that was based on the golden age of RTS. They actually delivered a pretty good game, but no one bought it. Golden age RTS is nothing but a fond memory now and AOA's failure proved it.

That's because Act of Aggression was a poor re-hash of their previous attempt (Act of War). That's on my list of games I regret preordering. I played quite a bit of Act of War. Act of Aggression was a step backwards. Their forums were littered with other people saying the same thing in beta and they never changed it. Not as much as SupCom 2 was, but still a step backwards.

How do you guys not consider the Relic games RTS? Simply because they (generally) aren't annihilation based and the focus on base building was reduced so much? I honestly believe CoH1 is the pinnacle of the entire genre. However, I will grant you that DoW2 single player was NOT an RTS though.

Usually because of the minimal unit count. I am a fan of both DoW and CoH1. But the low unit count is frustrating. They don't have to go all the way to the SupCom end of the spectrum. But the mods that increase the unit count make it a far more enjoyable game (IMO) and from everything I read, the sequels limited it even further. That's a tactics game at that point, not a strategy game at which point they would have been better off going all the way like World in Conflict and removing base building entirely.

 

[DeathReborn]

How do you guys not consider the Relic games RTS? Simply because they (generally) aren't annihilation based and the focus on base building was reduced so much? I honestly believe CoH1 is the pinnacle of the entire genre. However, I will grant you that DoW2 single player was NOT an RTS though.

Think of the games like DoW2 as Squad Based Strategy rather than RTS as that's what you do, manage a few squads.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

Well, DoW2 essentially removed base building. You just had a structure where you upgraded tech levels. I don't think they needed that though, because a drop in system like Ground Control 2 is probably a bit more elegant and appropriate for WH universe. I think there was still a point to base building in CoH/DoW1 since they were still structures you had to put at risk. I get the tactics point, I guess I just find that more interesting than managing my production queues in 3 of the same unit producing buildings. We'll see how DoW 3 goes. On one hand they've upped unit counts, but on the other they've changed it to a push gameplay mode that makes the victory progression almost moba like. I really felt the VP system was the best we've seen in an RTS. It kept games tight focused and action packed and prevented people from just turtling.

 

[dud]

How do you guys not consider the Relic games RTS? Simply because they (generally) aren't annihilation based and the focus on base building was reduced so much? I honestly believe CoH1 is the pinnacle of the entire genre. However, I will grant you that DoW2 single player was NOT an RTS though.

Who ever said Relic games to NOT be RTS. Heck, Relic (IMHO) produced the absolute best RTS game ever ... Homeworld and by default, it's derivatives. Too bad they were acquired by THQ in 2004 and then sold to Sega in 2013. They were a top-notch developer ...

 

[Majes]

The best RTS ever made is actually the reason RTS games have been in decline for years now. Warcraft 3 was far and away the best RTS game but it also spawned all of the MOBA games that dominate the PC landscape at the moment. Most of your Tower Defense games also came out of Warcraft 3.

What Warcraft 3 made people discover is that most gamers are terrible at RTS. While there is still a pretty solid community of people playing W3 ladder most people realized that controlling many units and buildings efficiently was beyond their abilities so they moved into custom games. These custom games eventually broke out of Blizzard's campaign editor to become League of Legends and DotA, not to mention a few others.

I personally think that Blizzard is done with the RTS scene, which is tremendously depressing considering they are also probably the only company that could bring back the RTS glory days.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

The best RTS ever made is actually the reason RTS games have been in decline for years now. Warcraft 3 was far and away the best RTS game but it also spawned all of the MOBA games that dominate the PC landscape at the moment. Most of your Tower Defense games also came out of Warcraft 3.

What Warcraft 3 made people discover is that most gamers are terrible at RTS. While there is still a pretty solid community of people playing W3 ladder most people realized that controlling many units and buildings efficiently was beyond their abilities so they moved into custom games. These custom games eventually broke out of Blizzard's campaign editor to become League of Legends and DotA, not to mention a few others.

I personally think that Blizzard is done with the RTS scene, which is tremendously depressing considering they are also probably the only company that could bring back the RTS glory days.

Eh... TD started with Starcraft really, WC3 definitely kicked off the MOBA craze though. They also advanced TD enough to be relevant and get it's own spinoffs though.

You would likely get some people arguing for SC over WC3 (I personally hate the hero system), but WC3 is a fantastic one. I think we may need some delineation between base-building RTSs and squad-based RTSs. They're intrinsically different aside from being isometric and having units, and both can be superb in the proper game (see CoH1 and DoW2, as well as Starcraft/warcraft series, C&C:RA).

 

[BlitzPuppet]

CoH2 has been stuck in a never ending cycle of "balance tweaks". Nothing more frustrating than having things constantly change to the point of having to relearn everything seemingly every time a patch comes out.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

What Warcraft 3 made people discover is that most gamers are terrible at RTS.

This is actually a pretty critical point, and one of the reasons I like the relic VP system so much. Traditional RTSs allow turtling too much, which of course will never work against a competent player. But if two poor players match off they really won't learn anything from each other. In the VP system, even bad players have to actively and constantly manage their units and control the map which I really believe forces people to improve much faster.