Yahtzee's idea reminded me of MAG for the PS3. Doesn't it's combat kind-of work like that? With some players being commanders and others being troops. I never played it so I couldn't be sure.
On RTS Games
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I've had ideas like that before. I was thinking there would be squads of ground infantry, some specialized air units (some in fighter jets, some in bombers, some in transport helicopters) and then there would be the commander, who can see the entire map and can give orders to the other players. Obviously there would be the problem of people not actually listening to their teammates and just running around killing people, but teams that work together would be more successful. Sometimes that's incentive enough, as left 4 dead has shown me.
We've seen Mr. Croshaw's behavior on RTS games on Halo Wars. Most likely even I consider certain RTS games are a game of chess and checkers.
It is amusing if you take the original 1980's game Donkey Kong and while one player controls Mario, the other 3 controls the barrels to see what happens. Most likely that the player who plays Mario will quit, much to anyone who continues to play a losing game.
It is amusing if you take the original 1980's game Donkey Kong and while one player controls Mario, the other 3 controls the barrels to see what happens. Most likely that the player who plays Mario will quit, much to anyone who continues to play a losing game.
I don't think you could ever marry the mentality of your average rts player and and your average fps player. I do think you could merge a turn based strategy game and an fps much more successfully. The turn base commander assigns the missions and the fps guys fight it out on the ground. Imagine mechwarrior 4 mercenaries with strategic commanders offering missions, mercs heiring on to fight it out on the ground.
I think the pictures on the back of the box do enough to dispell any notion that it is an action shooter to be honest.Artemus_Cain said:
As for the greater idea of an FPS/RTS multiplayer hybrid, the problem is, quite simply, forcing cooperation. It's easy enough to round up a buddy to play a game with. Getting three can be a bit tricky. Getting dozens of like minded people to work together is just shy of impossible.
There are ways to address this issue I suppose. MAG attempted to give light RTS elements to squad commanders and leaders but left the player free to choose to follow a command or not. The methods used in that game were about as good as I've seen. First, the sheer number of people present in the game ensures that successfully attacking or defending any particular objective requires at least a mass of troops if not a coordinated effort. Then, you find that you are only allowed to spawn in certain areas of the map ensuring you are always in relatively close proximity to your team each time you die. Finally, players are given an experience bonus for actions taken in the vicinity of an objective they've been ordered to attack/defend/wash and wax.
The trouble with such a system, surprisngly, is not simply the result of griefers and bad players but rather in the hands of those in command. After a few matches in a given area, players come to expect a certain strategy to be used and a certain level of coordination to be in play. The RTS elements then become less strategic and eventualy even the command elements are basically just playing the exact same game as the rest of the team seeing as a bold new strategy is often met with mutiny. This would be the problem in all such games really. One cannot give too much power to the commanding player(s) for fear of alienating the other players. By the same token, without the ability to impact the battle in a meaningful way, players who may be well suited to the strategy aspect won't care for that portion of the game either.
If you want to make the game of thje games which unites all genres you still need to add something simcity-like (the cities could be a "resource" to conquer). This, of course, would only make sense if the game takes place in a perstistent and dynamic world. Best would be a whole planet (or even galaxy/universe). And if you go that far, adding mumorpogerelements could be also conceivable.
I appreciate Yahtzee making a stand on this. I wonder what will come out tomorrow then.
However, for an RTS/FPS Hybrid, I recommend Zombie Master Mod for Half Life 2.
One Guy controls Zombies RTS style, everyone else is a FPS player trying to survive.
However, for an RTS/FPS Hybrid, I recommend Zombie Master Mod for Half Life 2.
One Guy controls Zombies RTS style, everyone else is a FPS player trying to survive.
I would just like to bring up Eve Online:
Players do, in fact, follow orders and roll around in organized fleets, mostly because if they don't they WILL get blown up (and, in Eve, having your ship blown up is costly).
That might be the key: make losing costly enough that players will have a serious incentive to work together properly.
Players do, in fact, follow orders and roll around in organized fleets, mostly because if they don't they WILL get blown up (and, in Eve, having your ship blown up is costly).
That might be the key: make losing costly enough that players will have a serious incentive to work together properly.
Actually...there are quite a lot of games that are RTS/Shooters. Have you ever heard of the HL2 mod, Empires? It allows for one commander that researches upgrades, places the buildings, and commands the players to target this enemy, or build this placed building, or capture this point. It's really cool, but if you are an inexperienced commander you usually get yelled at. A lot. :V
I pretty much have the same opinion on RTSs as Yahtzee. Never been able to get into them. Tried once or twice, but it just seemed... I don't know how to describe it. Dull? Lifeless? It felt like I was playing god, but without all the cool powers god has.
And I feel the same way on this. I love turn base, and I love the Civilization games. Mainly because you can do something else when it's not your turn, and your not rushed to make stupid decisions when not online. Then there's the fact Civ games don't have you as much of a 'focus' I think, but again, I don't know how I would describe what I'm talking about there.CitySquirrel said:
NS2 is in Alpha right now. It's a full game, not a mod.. built from scratch by a small crew of pretty talented folks. Much like SC2, I can tell you from the Alpha that NS2 is just more of the same great game that the original was.Eremiel said:
http://www.naturalselection2.com/
- Tir
What fun is picking to pieces something you don't understand? Things that he doesn't like about Starcraft might be something that RTS lovers find positive. He makes it pretty clear in this article that he doesn't understand RTS games with the whole mercenary idea and having him criticize a game that's in a style he doesn't enjoy isn't going to be very fun to watch because the comments will be filled to the brim of people pointing out the errors of his criticism.sms_117b said:
He's probably not going to give it a try because he doesn't like those games to any extent. He kinda has a rule about giving up early when a game doesn't amuse him enough. And the fact that people ***** and whine about him not understanding the parts that make rts's so fun for people who like them. It's actually one of his better decisions.Arcthelad said:
Your idea about the RTS/FPS reminds me of a demo of a game i got with Age Of Empires: Rise Of Rome. Cant remember the name for the life of me. You were a mothership over the map, and you could spawn different vehicles like helicopters and tanks. You could control them like an RTS, then jump into and control your individual units. It actually was a good idea, but the game was just alright. I never saw anyone else pick this idea up though. The problems with implementing this into a RTS/FPS is the fact people you be way too accurate, taking out heaps of enemy troops with ease, as their shots aren't based on chance and calculations. Still, interesting idea, id like to see it go somewhere.
Also, have you tried DOTA ,Hero Line Wars, or Tower Defence in Warcraft 3? Im not a big fan of RTS games, but I find those games quite fun, especially with friends, but even against AI theyre fun.
Also, have you tried DOTA ,Hero Line Wars, or Tower Defence in Warcraft 3? Im not a big fan of RTS games, but I find those games quite fun, especially with friends, but even against AI theyre fun.
At some point that was tried in the past year or two, it was called "Phoenix Squad" or something, it wasn't exactly your idea, it was a sort of RTS game where you could assume direct FPS control of soldiers at will.Yahtzee Croshaw said:
It turned out to be a terrible game, but I'm convinced your idea has big potential if implemented correctly, the problem is finding a studio versed in both RTS and FPS gameplay development.