What happened to Strategy?

[Mr Scott]

Is it just me, or am i seeing a frightening lack of caring in the real time strategy wold? I know Starcraft 2 is coming out but it really seems that only Korea actually cares, and even then Starcraft 2 isn't the only rts out there. Even reviewers like Yahtzee barely give them notice. Maybe its related to the boom of systems like the wii which box out PCs. Is the genre going the way of the puzzle game? Played only by the few traditionalists and not featured mainstream. What do you think?

Mr Switchy, may I call you Switchy? As one Mr to another I should tell you that I think that there is an incredible library of older RTS's or "strategy games" to be played. Games like Red Alert Generals, and Age of Empires. Or maybe integrate strategy-style game-play into non-RTS games. The micro-managing ability possessed by the RTS fan are a boon to the multi-classed FPS 'Team Fortress 2.' Who knows, that skill may help you be embraced as a leader or help you appreciate a FPS more.

Also, Korea is the land of the free MMO. The first RTS came from the US

 

[Groovewood]

Back off Topic: don't be silly sir, I am clan pestilence, plague monks FTW!

High Elf commander here, don't make me strike you first! (Though, I started them in 6th when they were quite underwhelming)

On topic: I think RTS are still doing really well, as mentioned earlier, there are many big titles coming up. If there is a decline (though I can't see it, maybe because I like RTS' so I'm biased), I think it's due to a general homogenization which is slowly happening in video games now a days. Whilst the genres are still pretty clearly defined, many games are crossing over such boundaries, example: most shooters now include squad elements which are stripped down RTS elements. Wasn't there an RTS recently where you could take control of a hero unit, at which point the game became more of a hack and slash game?

 

[vid20]

There is still some good strategy out there? right? CoH anyone?

I forgot about Company of Heroes! They're developing a new installment for it, too. Looks pretty cool, from what I've seen of it.

Yeah, Tails of Valor. But its gonna be a drastic change to the focus of the game.. you are a single tiger tank taking part IN a giant battle... rather then the commander of an army. But it will include new multiplayer game options, and maps. So still totally pumped for it. Plus, the campaign looks good too.

off topic to you WH's: Plague monks are one of the sweetest Skaven units.. but i have seen them get crunched by cav so many times. Also.. my Assassin loves them as tasty treats. To the He general. i am as of yet to play against 7th ed HE.. it makes me SUCH a sad panda.. as i really like their new list :'( some incredibly sexy models too.

 

[bkd69]

Strategy has always been a niche market, whether on the table or on the screen.

Here you go:
http://www.matrixgames.com/

And Stardock's download service has hefty helping of strategy, though it seems to be dominated by F&SF than military:
http://www.impulsedriven.com/store.aspx

Edit:
Also Europa Universalis looks pretty groovy:
http://www.europauniversalis3.com/index.php
but Napoleonic generally isn't my bag o' tea

 

[Gamer137]

Starcraft 2 does not even have an estimated time frame for release, so publications are going to save the material for things that are just annoucned, or coming out soon.

As for me, yes I am excited for it, but the reason above is also why i'm not "hyped" up for it. I am actually focusing more on RE5.

 

[Remi]

Coh had 8000 people playing multiplayer this afternoon..... Don't think rts games are in any trouble.

 

[Capnrobert]

What about the total war series tbs and some rts i loved medieval total war and rome and im really looking foward to empire tw

 

[Rajin Cajun]

I would suggest World in Conflict because it requires actual team cooperation in Multiplayer and the campaign isn't half bad. Though a word to the wise make sure your comp can run it because it is a total resource hog.

 

[Fearzone]

I agree with the above sentiments: (1) RTSs are too hard for most peoples liking, and (2) the genre doesn't convert well to consoles. So it's a niche PC market. And yeah, if Battle for Middle Earth 2 is one of the more active RTSs still around, that make one wonder if its best days are behind us.

RTSs the last couple years have been faced with tribulations and glorious failures:
1. The best RTS maker, Blizzard, has devoted itself to, ahem, an MMO you may have heard of.
2. Dawn of War was popular but poorly supported with some terrible patches and mediocre expansions while Relic poured it's heart and soul into Company of Heroes, which hardly anyone has heard of.
3. Supreme Commander never really got rolling, probably due to heavy computer requirements making it even more of a niche market than strategy games already are.
4. Universe at War, well idk, I thought it was better than its sales data suggests, and it had an unusually good control scheme, but then again, I stopped the single player campaign in disgust after they [SPOILER!!] killed Orlock [/SPOILER]... and the community was never there.
5. Now, World in Conflict has the greatest RTS engine imaginable; I wish every RTS were ported to the World in Conflict engine... but the gameplay was bland and un-strategic and the story was the kind that thought it should get an Oscar but it was really stupid, so World in Conflict barely scored a blip on the computer gaming scene. I really hope they make more games with that engine, though, or someone licenses it.
6. Sins of a Solar Empire was very fun and was reviewed well and sold well, and had a number of successful innovations, however it failed to develop the story behind its universe, and games take unbearably long so I had to put it down.
7. So the battlegrounds in World of Warcraft have been the most RTS fun I've had in awhile. Unfortunately, your units you cannot just click around, but have to "convince" to act in a coordinated and half intelligent way through battleground chat, and then they start to talk back and call you names if you get too bossy. =p Plus there is that unbearable grinding to get to the fun parts. Ugh!

So, life has been hard for RTSers of late, compared to the cornucopia of shooters and role playing games which have come our way. **BUT** 2009 offers a lot of hope. Starcraft 2 is shaping up to be the best RTS ever, and hopefully will bring people back. Dawn of War 2 may be a contender if Relic keeps what made Dawn of War so fun, and brings in what it learned from Company of Heroes (AND makes the UI more modifiable which was the deal breaker for me and CoH). Red Alert 3 is very much showing the age of the Command and Conquer series but is a likable romp. Having played the beta I'm figuring Battleforge is going to be another glorious failure but time will tell... it's interesting and might catch on.

So anyway 2009 is shaping up to be a very hopeful year for the RTS. This is not the time to be pessimistic about the state of the RTS genre.

 

[Stewie Plisken]

I don't know if there is a drought of RTS games in general, but I miss the ones that required you to work on your economy. I like RA3, because it's outrageous and fun, but the fast shove into the action kind of turns me off. Same with Company of Heroes before, same with Homeworld even earlier.

I was nurtured with raising double walls, setting up twenty farms and slowly building up a massive army before going into battle in AOE2.

 

[Isaac Dodgson]

I'm not even a fan of RTS and i wouldn't say they have died...as people have stated Dawn of War 2 is coming out and i've read most of the hype...as well as Starcraft 2... Halo Wars is bound to grab a few non RTS fans who are none the wiser as well...

 

[Fenixius]

It's okay, people! The genre isn't in trouble at all! I can name a whole of... uh... THREE* games coming out for it! Three big-name ones. And... uh... zero new IP's... so, uh... it's not in trouble! Not at all!


Okay, so, being serious now, there's jack coming out for RTS in 2009. And before anyone mentions, I know StarCraft II doesn't have a definite release date. And before anyone mentions, I know that that has already been said. But, moving on: There are -ZERO- new IP's coming out that I can think of. None. Not one. I could name a dozen for almost any other genre. There's even a new IP flying game coming out (Tom Clancy's HAWX), which happens once every couple years that I can tell, so when RTS is behind flying, which is about as niche as it gets, there's a serious problem. And lets not get into the niche of the niche; the spacefaring 3D RTS. By which I mean Homeworld. There's none of those next year. Or probably the year after, either, but who knows that far ahead.

I believe there to be a serious aversion in publishers and/or developers in these modern days to the idea of creating, developing, marketting, and then supporting an RTS. I seriously hope Dawn of War II is supported as well as the original StarCraft, or as well as Team Fortress 2 if people here weren't there for that.



* Those are: Dawn of War II, StarCraft II, Halo Wars.

PS: Tales of Valour is not a new game. It's an expansion. And therefore does not count towards this discussion.

 

[Nazulu]

RTS is still doing good, Starcraft 2 and Dawn of War 2 are going to make a big entrance plus Red Alert 3 has been out for abit even though I thought it was average!

There are many RTS titles out there, they are just not really mainstream for some reason but it doesn't mean they are bad.

 

[Vortigar]

There was a new Total title coming out right?
And another Lord of the Rings thing nobody's waiting for.

RTS is a genre outside of the spotlight, so its releases don't get reported on as often. I think it's doing just fine. Just like fighting games that still had titles popping up in that period everybody thought it was dead (2000 to 2005) and there're more RTS titles coming out now than fighters during that period.

 

[Novajam]

I don't know if there is a drought of RTS games in general, but I miss the ones that required you to work on your economy. I like RA3, because it's outrageous and fun, but the fast shove into the action kind of turns me off. Same with Company of Heroes before, same with Homeworld even earlier.

I was nurtured with raising double walls, setting up twenty farms and slowly building up a massive army before going into battle in AOE2.

Ha. Oh I've always loved that strategy.

I remember an online game I had with my friend in Age of Mythology where we both just built walls and towers and survived on a contained economy. It was ridiculous. Fully upgraded walls and four towers behind each gate. God times.

Anyway, strategy games are by no means in short supply. Dawn of War 2 and Empire: Total War look set to be some of the biggest games of the year and if you can't wait for that then there are a great range of proven titles out there. Last year we had Sins of a Solar Empire and Red Alert 3. If you haven't already, you could try your hand at World in Conflict, which I've heard is pretty good, and if you're after some personal recommendations then C&C3: Tiberium Wars and Age of Empires 3 are pretty darn good. More tactical? Company of Heroes is amazingly fast and fun, and I've never heard of a bad Total War game.

But don't ever let anyone tell you that strategy is dead. It's just going through a rough patch with the rest of the economy.

EDIT: And Age of Mythology. Can't pass that.

 

[Zac_Dai]

No love for the Supreme Commander?

Not surprised as its physics engines and sheer scale meant that only people who had dual cores could play it.

Massive shame really as it has immense strategic depth.

 

[MercenaryCanary]

Strategy is just too hard for a majority of people to grasp. They prefer the easy 'spoon fed' method of how to get through a FPS.

It is because I can't understand the concepts of compli... compli... compliCATED game uh da play.

 

[Fenixius]

Oh yeah, Empire. I forgot about that totally. Could be good, could be crap, but the setting doesn't interest me personally, which is probably why I forgot. But it is most certainly relevant to the discussion on RTS.

Supreme Commander doesn't get love due to crazy hardware requirements. That, and Forged Alliance was an expansion. I know -one- person who has it. Well, one person who has it and can run it. The other has it, oh sure, but his machine can't even handle it since they updated the graphics in Forged Alliance. It's on the order of Crysis, as far as I'm concered. But it's a much better game.

 

[Nutcase]

Thread title is meh. I thought this was about strategy.

Normal RTS games - at least the likes of Starcraft - have very little to do with actual strategy.
Execution requirements and keyboard gymnastics completely overshadow the strategy part, until you are *very* good.