On RTS Games
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
He says, it's not just that he sucks at them, but because "it's not [his] cup of tea." I'm pretty good at RTS', but the last one I played was Age of Empires II: The Age of Conquerors. And even that was a while ago.s69-5 said:
I plainly don't enjoy RTS games. They are frustrating exercises in compulsive micromanagement. The bulk of the "action" consists of camera placement, resource gathering, and troop deployment - all at the same time, all under a stopwatch. I can't help but feel that I should be paid for subjecting myself to that kind of stress. Manipulating troops in battle, the actual "fun" bit, is a relatively minor portion of the game. How is that something people want to play?
Personally, I think Blizzard's insanely high production values rope people into what is otherwise a rightfully niche genre. How many folks would honestly enjoy this game without the story and cinematics backing it up? Is SC2 single-player remotely engaging without the admittedly pretty act breaks?
Multiplayer is obviously a huge draw, but that trades more on the competitive instincts of human beings than the actual objective entertainment value of an experience; people fucking eat competitively, and that shit doesn't looking very fun at all. SC2 is the latest "agreed upon battlefield". This is where the latest and greatest competitions will be held, so you know you'll be there almost in spite of the genre if that's your psychological makeup.
Personally, I think Blizzard's insanely high production values rope people into what is otherwise a rightfully niche genre. How many folks would honestly enjoy this game without the story and cinematics backing it up? Is SC2 single-player remotely engaging without the admittedly pretty act breaks?
Multiplayer is obviously a huge draw, but that trades more on the competitive instincts of human beings than the actual objective entertainment value of an experience; people fucking eat competitively, and that shit doesn't looking very fun at all. SC2 is the latest "agreed upon battlefield". This is where the latest and greatest competitions will be held, so you know you'll be there almost in spite of the genre if that's your psychological makeup.
What's the correct term for this? Faux logic? Backwards logic? You're essentially saying Yahtzee, as someone who places a premium on originality, should be more open to the original experience of playing a game that is clearly not very original. "If you like freedom so much, you should respect other people's freedom to limit your freedom", right? You've basically warped functional language to your purpose. Congratulations on the destruction of effective human communication.Arcthelad said:
I'm not sure an omnigenre game would work, it'd be very hard to come up with something that's challenging to all genres without being impossible for some approaches. I'm not really sure about the chess comparison either, I see what you mean but a lot of the experience of Bioshock comes from your mission to defeat Andrew Ryan so in effect you're just playing to win in virtually all games. Having said that I'm glad you're not going to review the game; if you don't get what makes an RTS a good example of an RTS game reviewing it would be a Brawl-esque barrage of hate mail with a game as popular as SC2.Yahtzee Croshaw said:
a few years ago while I lived in the UK, I actually played a game online that was just like what yahtzee described. It was FPS mixed with RTS. Units got experience and levelled up by doing what they were told. (if you were told to go somewhere a bright beacon of light appeared that only you coudl see) and it was quite fun. you could mine, build buildings and blast baddies. Shame I can't recall the game though...
This is a good choice for Yahtzee.
wouldn't be funny when he made up a review of how good the game was
Its always better when reviewers keep things real rather then when they make up reviews E.G "This game is so good it feels like robbing blizzard wearing a sky mask"
respect for Yahtzee
The RTS/RPG/FPS game yahtzee was talking about is savage 2 its a cool game
wouldn't be funny when he made up a review of how good the game was
Its always better when reviewers keep things real rather then when they make up reviews E.G "This game is so good it feels like robbing blizzard wearing a sky mask"
respect for Yahtzee
The RTS/RPG/FPS game yahtzee was talking about is savage 2 its a cool game
Lol, I'm kinda dissapointed, it would be great to hear him verbally knock the crap out of Starcraft :/ But at the same time I totally agree with why he won't review it. Btw, that game idea sounded pretty cool. Much opportunity for back-stabbing and general rebellious shenanighins sounds great to me XD
Natural Selection and Mount&Blade Warband!
Yahztee you must consider trying games! Both are cross genre games.
NS is an FPS with 1 player as the Commander who builds spawn points, medstations, armories with the aid of the shooters. He places them and they build it. Commanders can also drop guns and medpacks on the fly.
M&B:Warband, well you get to command an army (albeit crudely) and fight on the frontlines with them in third person or first person. And if Lancing someone from the back of a Horse at full gallop sounds like a good time, do have a go at it. It looks like crap but man is the game fun in battle. (not sure you'll have the patience for the single player campaign, buts its a game with cheats built in to expedite any tedious activity)
Yahztee you must consider trying games! Both are cross genre games.
NS is an FPS with 1 player as the Commander who builds spawn points, medstations, armories with the aid of the shooters. He places them and they build it. Commanders can also drop guns and medpacks on the fly.
M&B:Warband, well you get to command an army (albeit crudely) and fight on the frontlines with them in third person or first person. And if Lancing someone from the back of a Horse at full gallop sounds like a good time, do have a go at it. It looks like crap but man is the game fun in battle. (not sure you'll have the patience for the single player campaign, buts its a game with cheats built in to expedite any tedious activity)
I don't like RTS games in general, but I loved Starcraft, mostly for the Zerg. Having said that, I'm not buying this game simply because you can only play the Terrans in SP. That is shit, because you know they'll charge $50 for an expansion or possibly make us wait for another game before we can play as the other races.
I had a similar idea which hasn't been said in the comments yet: GTA mixed with SimCity. One player is the sandbox thug, free to wander around the city and cause as much destruction as they want. The other player is resource managing the city, controlling utilities, construction, and traffic, all indirectly. The SimCity player wants to kill the thug, but he only gets police units if the thug commits a crime. The beginning of the game would be the RTS player trying to annoy or tempt the thug into breaking the law, like control traffic via stoplights to run him over if he crosses the street, or trying to make the crowds constantly bump into him, or even use taxpayer money to mail a sniper rifle to his hideout, betting he won't be able to resist the allure. Because the goal of the thug is to bankrupt the city. Helicopters are expensive, and declaring martial law moreso. A thug that can get the army on him before the RTS player has gathered resources to pay the army could win if they can survive. The RTS player can raise taxes, but then they run the risk of the population rioting.
Want to make it really interesting? Don't tell the thug if he's playing against a human or the AI.
I had a similar idea which hasn't been said in the comments yet: GTA mixed with SimCity. One player is the sandbox thug, free to wander around the city and cause as much destruction as they want. The other player is resource managing the city, controlling utilities, construction, and traffic, all indirectly. The SimCity player wants to kill the thug, but he only gets police units if the thug commits a crime. The beginning of the game would be the RTS player trying to annoy or tempt the thug into breaking the law, like control traffic via stoplights to run him over if he crosses the street, or trying to make the crowds constantly bump into him, or even use taxpayer money to mail a sniper rifle to his hideout, betting he won't be able to resist the allure. Because the goal of the thug is to bankrupt the city. Helicopters are expensive, and declaring martial law moreso. A thug that can get the army on him before the RTS player has gathered resources to pay the army could win if they can survive. The RTS player can raise taxes, but then they run the risk of the population rioting.
Want to make it really interesting? Don't tell the thug if he's playing against a human or the AI.
Though I've yet to put it out there, I've come across the idea of a third faction of mercenaries because it's actually a very elegant solution to another problem: pit two sides against eachother, and there will be inevitably a power upset sooner or later, with players fleeing to the winning side at the first sign of trouble. The mercenaries can even things out, keep the game going longer, by giving them incentives to support the underdog, including the incentive that if one side wins the mercenaries (as good little war profiteers) lose.
Also, give Majesty 2 a spin. It's similar in that it's an RTS played form the perspective of a fellow giving out incentives to free-ranging adventurers. You don't order adventurers to move places, but rather you put bounties on getting things done. Granted, your bands of NPC heroes are thick as stumps, but it's an interesting approach to the genre.
Also, give Majesty 2 a spin. It's similar in that it's an RTS played form the perspective of a fellow giving out incentives to free-ranging adventurers. You don't order adventurers to move places, but rather you put bounties on getting things done. Granted, your bands of NPC heroes are thick as stumps, but it's an interesting approach to the genre.
Eve Online + Dust514. The former being a grand scale space sim, the latter being a merc-based FPS. The touted feature is that the players of the former can hire players of the latter to help them capture important resource planets. The Latter receive XP and Cash and the Former get right to exploit the resources of the planet...if they win.
Interesting idea with the "Two commanders + mercenaries" idea, the only problem is that the mercenaries would probably be so powerful that all strategy would be completely negated. Think of a single-player FPS on Normal, how easy it is to mow down enemies... now imagine if you're the commander that's trying to get those same paper enemies to do something useful.
This is probably a bit like using a pair of tweezers to pull a single mote of discolored sand out of a beach, and I'm likely to get pounced upon for yanking out a "weak flannel of excuses" or something. So be it.
From my perspective, World of Warcraft's story is not "frozen in a single moment of time."
Yes, NPCs and bosses respawn so that every single one of the 11 million people playing the game can either speak to or kill them. Yes, this is a concept that makes any attempt at real storytelling feel redundant and silly. Yes, you're going to be exploring this in your novel.
But there are changes that happen in the game, especially with the advent of instanced zones. This occurred in a few places in Northrend during the last expansion, and will be more prevalent in Azeroth proper come Cataclysm. You enter a zone at a certain level, and by the time you leave that zone, it's different, at least from your perspective because your character undertook the quests to make an actual change.
Again, this is not applicable to the entire world, so saying it's not stuck as it is seems silly to say now. But, I'm a writer of both fiction and non-fiction in the realm of video games. Have the things that come out of my mouth or fingers is silly. This is nothing new, and this post is unlikely to change anything.
From my perspective, World of Warcraft's story is not "frozen in a single moment of time."
Yes, NPCs and bosses respawn so that every single one of the 11 million people playing the game can either speak to or kill them. Yes, this is a concept that makes any attempt at real storytelling feel redundant and silly. Yes, you're going to be exploring this in your novel.
But there are changes that happen in the game, especially with the advent of instanced zones. This occurred in a few places in Northrend during the last expansion, and will be more prevalent in Azeroth proper come Cataclysm. You enter a zone at a certain level, and by the time you leave that zone, it's different, at least from your perspective because your character undertook the quests to make an actual change.
Again, this is not applicable to the entire world, so saying it's not stuck as it is seems silly to say now. But, I'm a writer of both fiction and non-fiction in the realm of video games. Have the things that come out of my mouth or fingers is silly. This is nothing new, and this post is unlikely to change anything.
Yahtzee Croshaw" post="6.223269.7509023 said:Snip/quote]
So your not reviewing it because, you don't do RTSs. While Starcraft has been the mile stone of all RTSs and there are a few missions where you are controlling one unit instead of the entire army (one of these has you as an invisible mercenary called a ghost, sneaking around, ripping apart the enemy from the inside, destroying unit porducing buildings, and dropping nukes while your allies attack the base), I don't hold it against you for not reviewing this.
Of course, you may of saved your self from tons of fanboy rage by not reviewing this, since they would jump at you for the slightest complaint related to anything