What happened to Strategy?

[Ibaapzo]

At least by most American standards, players want to be spoon-fed the plot, shoot shit, and go home content, riding into the sunset, enemies slain. Working for that happy ending is just that - work.

I think that gamers these days want gaming as an escape or distraction. They don't want to use their brain to think their way through the story. Left 4 Dead doesn't even have a story. COD, where it has an underlying story, it's spoon-fed. Shoot shit, give me a semblance of story, and that's it. That is was most people want.

Even Mario games (the NES, SNES... "old" ones) are considered "strategy" among some skepticals because of how damned hard the games can be. If you ask most gamers if they've played a Mario all the way through, they'll tell you that they have not. It's too hard.



Investing time and energy into a game isn't ideal anymore. I love the communities of RTS gamers, the few and far between, but the culture is alive and well - just sparse.

 

[theSovietConnection]

I wouldn't bet against an Age of Empires 4 at some point in 2010 either. When games are good enough there don't need to be that many of them.

Unfortunately, its unlikely. Microsoft is breaking up Ensemble Studios after Halo Wars comes out.

 

[SimuLord]

I wouldn't bet against an Age of Empires 4 at some point in 2010 either. When games are good enough there don't need to be that many of them.

Unfortunately, its unlikely. Microsoft is breaking up Ensemble Studios after Halo Wars comes out.

Someone will buy the Age of Empires IP, even if it's not Ensemble. Consider that Rick Goodman made Empire Earth but Mad Doc (now Rockstar New England) made Empire Earth 2 and (ugh) 3. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Big Huge Games (makers of Rise of Nations and the Asian Dynasties expansion for Age 3) got their hands on that property.

 

[Ancientgamer]

What happened to Strategy?

ADHD happend, that's what.

ADHD and it's man-child half-brother FPS rushed strategy beat it around the head with controllers.

But strategy's still there, it only playing dead. It's just playing the long waiting game, because it's strategic.

You can never beat strategy.

For me, it's mostly that I rarely have the time anymore.

Which brings me to my other problems. In most games if you screw up, you can quickload and try again. In an RTS, I'm (oddly enough) terrified that I'm going to lose. Having spent hours out of my day with nothing to show for it. It leaves me distraught. (It's why I stopped play CoH.

 

[Fearzone]

But, moving on: There are -ZERO- new IP's coming out that I can think of. None. Not one.

Without splitting hairs of what exactly constitutes an RTS, we have Battleforge, whose engine at least looks like it's nearly done, and Demigod, which still needs a lot of work but might be out this year.

 

[JokerGrin]

I don't think people are falling for the ol' "Build base, massive army, click in enemy base" type of strategy game any more, god knows there's enough of them. That's how I see Starcraft by the way.

That said, I think Company of Heroes and Dawn of War are fantastic. World in Conflict is very enjoyable too.

 

[Untamed Waters]

Strategy Died with Halo

Because it's cool to bash on Halo! >_>

 

[RenegadeRed]

1. I've watched, dumbass, and I could care less.
2. Do you really think I'm gonna take the time to enumerate every single flaw of the game?
3. People don't know what they like. Starcraft is not perfect at all, and when something comes out that IS balanced people will say it's boring.
4. I didn't say win, idiot.
5. It IS a fail. If they wanted to make the same goddamn thing over again how is it a NEW FUCKING GAME.

I really like how you call me an ignorant, because fact is, you are a blizzard fanboy. So no matter what argument somehow throws at you with a doctorate in human psychology and video game design you won't be able to accept fact.

Go annoy someone else. I'm sure someone over a blizzard forum wants approval for their new idea on how blizzard can scam more gullible people like you.

1. Did you have speakers or headphones on when you watched it? Otherwise why would you say it was soundless? Or are you just too poor to buy headphones?
2. I'm not asking you to enumerate all of them, but you haven't enumerated A SINGLE ONE. Name 2 or 3 flaws and we'll discuss this further.
3. "People don't know what they like?" Boy are you thick, but OK let's just go along with it.
4. "Doing good" in an RTS implies winning, actually.
5. You know ice cream is good and they're still remaking that. Also, SC2 is far from a Copy+Paste of SC1, but you wouldn't know that because you hate SC1 already.
6. Blizzard fanboy? Oh I like Starcraft now I'm a Blizzard fanboy huh. Your logic is so simple. But let's look at your logic again. You said that "People don't know what they like." Since I am a person and I don't know what I like or whether I like Blizzard or not, I cannot possibly be a Blizzard fanboy because I don't know whether or not I like Blizzard. Get it?

 

[Valiance]

NECROMANCY

Also:

Pyronox: A good sequel can be more of the same...
Renegade Red: Losing at the Starleague finals would make you a better player than winning vs a fastest player.

 

[theultimateend]

RTS is still pretty alive and well. The hype for Dawn of War 2 seems to still be huge. I'm pretty sure it has a ways to go before it goes the way of the adventure game.

Hype leads people into another SPORE.

I never let hype judge the quality of a game .

 

[kingcom]

Well, not many come out because people dont buy them, and people dont buy them because it doesnt provide instant gratification like many other games do (this is a generalisation, and im sure there are many of you who simply dont enjoy the thinking experience etc).

 

[RenegadeRed]

Dear being deprived of common sense, intelligence and subtlety,

Thank you so much for taking everything by the letter in order to make your pitiful response, which I may add is laden with falseness and lent intentions, that is also months late.

You have had ample time time to reflect on this, yet you fail utterly to see the point.

F- See me after class.

Oh I didn't know I was being graded. Are you some kind of teacher now? If so where did you get your degree from? University of Change The Topic?

Of course you utterly failed to address the subject material, as usual - instead resorting to nothing but name calling. Thanks for admitting you give up (since you were unable to list even a SINGLE FLAW in Starcraft during the course of something like 5 posts, while simultaneously claiming it has too many flaws to list).

On behalf of Starcraft players everywhere, I accept your feeble surrender.

 

[Turtleboy1017]

What happened to strategy?

Last I checked, strategy is completely fine.

 

[Woe Is You]

You have had ample time time to reflect on this, yet you fail utterly to see the point.

Actually, the only valid point you've had is that you can't pick up Starcraft (or a game in the RTS genre in general) and play from the get go but... really, that applies to just about any other competitive game out there. Can you give me some examples of competitive games where sheer intuition stands a chance against years of experience?

You could at least list a couple of the actual flaws (that are supposedly innumerable) in the game instead of resorting to insults when you're asked them. Your whole point about spamming troops in SC for instance is pretty much false; you won't win any game against a good human player that way. Clicking fast doesn't necessarily mean victory either since it's the amount of useful actions that you'll do that will dictate who'll win.

I will agree that Starcraft is slightly too APM intensive but it seems SC2 will be fixing this. While DOW2's efforts to streamline the genre are admirable, I'm finding that they threw the baby with the bathwater. I was wondering what was bugging me with the game but then I played some Guild Wars today and it clicked: the DOW2 beta felt mostly like GW but with the added misfortune of being imbalanced (it takes at least a couple patches to iron those out in games like these anyway).

 

[Turtleboy1017]

Woe is you, Pyronnox, and Renegade Red, you guys argue waaaaay too much. Let people hate some games and love others, no need to tell them their wrong over, and over, and over, and over (repeat that like 1000 times) again.

 

[lizards]

im a huge lover of rts games but most games classified "rts" are not rts command and conquer is a good example and instead of using tactics you just spam the biggest badassest units you have and most games that ive played that try to get away from that are imbalanced or there are ways to win that just make the game not fun endwar came closest to making a perfect rts in my opinion but the way most people just go for artty and then just spam choppers or some variation of spamming artty as fast as you can make it just not fun and i know they need something to kill infantry in buildings or whatever but really whats wrong with just getting rid of it and using rifles for all things engineer and tanks against all things rifles

:edit starcraft is near perfect but it has its flaws like the fact that you have to collect stuff to build things which in my eyes is dumb that you have to make tanks yourself instead of just calling your command for them which is why endwar came close to me when you capture a point you get more units

edit of the edit: the total war games where as close to perfect in my eyes as it comes but that doesnt really fit in with the rts genre because of the most tactics and plans take place on the world map

edit of the edit of the edit: i know its getting ridiculous but sins of the solar empire was perfect to me except for a few flaws i found in the late game a notable one being spamming like 30 seige frigates bombing a planet then leaving before the person can respond ok last edit i promise

 

[lizards]

shut up pyro hes right