I think the concern ends up being that a sub-par system will replace a superior one to conform to the console market. The once PC dominated FPS market went this route and many PC fans still complain about the differences (it's a noticeable difference, but the console's love affair with melee combat added a different favor to the genre). The RPG genre is caught in between complex controls accessed through various menus (Dragon Age) and wafer-thin gameplay controls (Fable III)... not to knock either system, but fans of PC style RPGs are clearly concerned their genre will disappear.Irridium said:I think it deserves praise solely for showing that you can have halfway-decent and easy-to-use RTS controles on a gamepad. Yes it needs some refinement, but its still pretty amazing they were able to make the controls not suck.Netrigan said:World's Tallest Midget.Irridium said:Because it was a Halo game.
Seriously though, its the best console-RTS there is to be honest. Managed to make the controls not horrible, and was rather fun. Sure it wasn't that good when compared to RTS's on a PC, but its still the best console RTS there is. At least in terms of controls.
I get what you're saying that it's the best RTS on a console, but that's not exactly praise for a fan of PC RTSs. Not a fan myself but unless the game adds some cool facet than it's asking for praise for what is considered sub-par by RTS standards.
Unless a developer can figure out a way to create a RTS that is brilliant *without* the qualifier "for a console", a console-based RTS is never going to get respect from RTS fans. It's simply too wide a divide in quality. "Halway-decent" controls is really faint praise in the grand scheme of things. Halo: Combat Evolve was arguably as good as a PC FPS (mind you, it's usually console fans making that argument, but it's, more or less, in the neighborhood of PC standards), but no one seems to be saying Halo Wars was anywhere close to a high-point in RTS history.