Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

With the advent of Civ 5, I realized something. RTS games are, to be blunt, dead. With maybe 2 good games per year, the genre is becoming more of a side hobby of studios. Take Halo Wars. It was a good game, but it had little re playability, a RTS game's strong suit.

Dakka, what do you think of this great genre going under?

Relic still produces fine (if a little unbalanced) RTS games, but they're about the only ones. I think that the problem is that no one is trying to innovate in the right ways.

Heh Halo Wars, I loved how MS shut down an awesome mod for C&C becuase of that

I just wait for modders to change up the local flavor. RTS games are usually hit or miss, mainly miss. Like empire at war with pretty awesome space battles but imo dreadful ground battles. Really dedicated peeps though make it much more enjoyable


Still waiting for Shogun 2 though, I liked most of the total war series with the exception of empire for obvious reasons

As a Command & Conquer junkie, I can agree. it seems like the RTT is the new way people are going. I love strategy more than actual combat. Hence why I liked Star Wars: Empire At War so much. I tmade you focus on the full spectrum of war, not just combat.

Now for full blown strategy, I like Hearts Of Iron

I've been addicted to C&C RA:3 for a while now. It's a near perfect RTS. Aside from Rise of Nations.

My god, building 90 nuclear missiles and dropping the hammer has never been so fun since RON.

Stormrider wrote:Now for full blown strategy, I like Hearts Of Iron

Sometimes, you dont need super graphics for an awesome game

kenshin620 wrote:

Stormrider wrote:Now for full blown strategy, I like Hearts Of Iron

Sometimes, you dont need super graphics for an awesome game

Holy gak.....

Personally, I find Hearts of Iron too boring, though my family loves it. Of course, I found Risk to be boring, too.

Chess is about where I like my strategy games to be. Fast enough where two players can be going at it back and forth, but slow enough where you have to think about what your doing.

Does anyone remember lord of the rings the battle for middle earth (1), that game was the best RTS i've ever played

chowderhead13 wrote:With the advent of Civ 5, I realized something. RTS games are, to be blunt, dead. With maybe 2 good games per year, the genre is becoming more of a side hobby of studios.

By that logic you could say that TBS is dead as well, Civ 5 being the first one in a long time.

Often you see it just pics up and then drops again, ever repeating. You also see this with genres (post-apocalyptic setting anyone?) and let's be honest, even when it seems that almost every publisher is producing a certain type of game there are only a few gems. Causing studios that perform badly to jump of the band wagon and pursue other game types. Studios that have managed to create a good franchise will only release games once every few years. Like C&C, or Civ for instance.

chowderhead13 wrote:With the advent of Civ 5, I realized something. RTS games are, to be blunt, dead. With maybe 2 good games per year, the genre is becoming more of a side hobby of studios. Take Halo Wars. It was a good game, but it had little re playability, a RTS game's strong suit.

Dakka, what do you think of this great genre going under?

I still adore halo wars, i have over 400 hours and i still play.

RTS games aren't dead. There's still the occasional one that really shines.

But, the genre is well past it's peak from ~10 years ago. Now, the "cutting-edge" games are all FPS. But, that will change in time, as people get tired of FPS and move on to the next genre (my vote is for a Metroidvania renaissance).

I wouldn't call it totally dead, though. Starcraft II just came out 5 months ago and has received great reviews and sales totals.

Sins of a Solar Empire is sort of recent, and I have found it to be very enjoyable as a 3X RTS game.


Halo Wars was horrible BTW.

Starcraft 2 should be your go-to game, as it will thrive on it's immense community and player created content for years to come. The original Starcraft managed to have incredible staying power, not only because of it's great balance and relative simplicity, but also because of tools provided to the player to expand the experience a lot further than Blizzard ever could. Starcraft 2's tools are much more robust; it even allows mods to bend and break genre conventions with ease.

The RTS has never really been a bastion of gaming to begin with. It's fairly limited in scope and potential, generally devoid of any so-called 'strategy' (instead opting for number crunching and time efficiency), and has only ever seen a couple releases a year at most. It's not dwindling any more than it ever has been, it's just in dire need of some very creative solutions to some of it's inherent problems in order to really succeed as it should.

Peter Wiggin wrote:Halo Wars was horrible BTW.

It wasn't a great game, that's for sure. But, it is possibly the best console RTS game ever. They managed to make an RTS that could be played without keyboard/mouse, and that's quite the achievement, IMO.

We'll have to wait and see if someone can make an even better one, but for it's limitations, Halo Wars is pretty good.

Grakmar wrote:

Peter Wiggin wrote:Halo Wars was horrible BTW.

It wasn't a great game, that's for sure. But, it is possibly the best console RTS game ever. They managed to make an RTS that could be played without keyboard/mouse, and that's quite the achievement, IMO.

We'll have to wait and see if someone can make an even better one, but for it's limitations, Halo Wars is pretty good.

If it didn't have the halo stamp and the awesome cinimatics I wouldn't have bought it. Decent game but C&C is better as console RTS imo.

Chrysaor686 wrote:Starcraft 2 should be your go-to game, as it will thrive on it's immense community and player created content for years to come. The original Starcraft managed to have incredible staying power, not only because of it's great balance and relative simplicity, but also because of tools provided to the player to expand the experience a lot further than Blizzard ever could. Starcraft 2's tools are much more robust; it even allows mods to bend and break genre conventions with ease.

The RTS has never really been a bastion of gaming to begin with. It's fairly limited in scope and potential, generally devoid of any so-called 'strategy' (instead opting for number crunching and time efficiency), and has only ever seen a couple releases a year at most. It's not dwindling any more than it ever has been, it's just in dire need of some very creative solutions to some of it's inherent problems in order to really succeed as it should.

I think the problem is that Starcraft 2 is as bog standard an RTS as you'll ever find. Sure the mod community might do something with it but why didn't Blizzard? Why did they just pretty up Starcraft 1 and have another go? The game didn't innovate at ALL.

Peter Wiggin wrote:Sins of a Solar Empire is sort of recent, and I have found it to be very enjoyable as a 3X RTS game.

I will agree with you on Sins of a Solar Empire, TEC all the way.

In terms of my favorite RTS I would be in between Red Alert 2 and Dawn of War.

Grakmar wrote:

Peter Wiggin wrote:Halo Wars was horrible BTW.

It wasn't a great game, that's for sure. But, it is possibly the best console RTS game ever. They managed to make an RTS that could be played without keyboard/mouse, and that's quite the achievement, IMO.

We'll have to wait and see if someone can make an even better one, but for it's limitations, Halo Wars is pretty good.

Good point, game still sucks though. I REALLY hoped that Endwar would be awesome due to voice control, but alas it was not.

RTS has always been the domain of PC's/Mac's. I'm hoping for Diablo 3 on Xbox myself....Diablo ported onto the PS1 was so much better than the PC one. Just couldn't mod it. :/


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyyr wrote:
I think the problem is that Starcraft 2 is as bog standard an RTS as you'll ever find. Sure the mod community might do something with it but why didn't Blizzard? Why did they just pretty up Starcraft 1 and have another go? The game didn't innovate at ALL.

The words "Blizzard" and "innovate" don't belong in the same sentence. They are the MASTERS of "well, this works. Lets polish the hell out of it and sell it again!"....but they deliver a solid product that is never a disappointment.

Peter Wiggin wrote:
The words "Blizzard" and "innovate" don't belong in the same sentence. They are the MASTERS of "well, this works. Lets polish the hell out of it and sell it again!"....but they deliver a solid product that is never a disappointment.

Very true. The exact opposite is Relic's Dawn of War series. The 1st and the 2nd are totally different from each other, some people hate relic for changing the entire system and others love it

chowderhead13 wrote:With the advent of Civ 5, I realized something. RTS games are, to be blunt, dead. With maybe 2 good games per year, the genre is becoming more of a side hobby of studios. Take Halo Wars. It was a good game, but it had little re playability, a RTS game's strong suit.

Dakka, what do you think of this great genre going under?

Wait, are you implying that the other civ games were rts games?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyyr wrote:

Chrysaor686 wrote:Starcraft 2 should be your go-to game, as it will thrive on it's immense community and player created content for years to come. The original Starcraft managed to have incredible staying power, not only because of it's great balance and relative simplicity, but also because of tools provided to the player to expand the experience a lot further than Blizzard ever could. Starcraft 2's tools are much more robust; it even allows mods to bend and break genre conventions with ease.

The RTS has never really been a bastion of gaming to begin with. It's fairly limited in scope and potential, generally devoid of any so-called 'strategy' (instead opting for number crunching and time efficiency), and has only ever seen a couple releases a year at most. It's not dwindling any more than it ever has been, it's just in dire need of some very creative solutions to some of it's inherent problems in order to really succeed as it should.

I think the problem is that Starcraft 2 is as bog standard an RTS as you'll ever find. Sure the mod community might do something with it but why didn't Blizzard? Why did they just pretty up Starcraft 1 and have another go? The game didn't innovate at ALL.

Do games have to innovate to be good? The first person shooter and racing genre don't live on the premise that every game is innovative, nor do RPGs really. Why do RTS games have too?

ShumaGorath wrote:Do games have to innovate to be good? The first person shooter and racing genre don't live on the premise that every game is innovative, nor do RPGs really. Why do RTS games have too?

There's two ways to make great games, IMO.

1) Innovate. Completely redefine the genre and have people ripping you off for years.

2) Perfect an existing genre. Make a game that doesn't really change much from what's out there, but do it better than anyone ever has before, and do it better than anyone will be able to again (at least for years).

There's nothing wrong with trying for #2. In fact, if I list off my favorite games of all time, most of them fit into this category. Innovative games are heralded as "classics" and every gamer will triumph them. But, how many of those can you really expect in a well-established genre?

ShumaGorath wrote:

chowderhead13 wrote:With the advent of Civ 5, I realized something. RTS games are, to be blunt, dead. With maybe 2 good games per year, the genre is becoming more of a side hobby of studios. Take Halo Wars. It was a good game, but it had little re playability, a RTS game's strong suit.

Dakka, what do you think of this great genre going under?

Wait, are you implying that the other civ games were rts games?

I'm glad I wasn't the only one confused by that statement! Granted, I haven't played Civ 5 yet, but even Civ Rev was turn-based . I also like you second point about not needing to innovate to be a great game..I think SC2 is a prime example. And besides, the episodic nature of SC2 does have the upside of providing Blizzard an "out" to provide a very different (more innovative?) game in the expansions.

As for Halo Wars, I played the demo, and it reminded me a lot of the N64 Starcraft port. I'm probably one of only 5 people that bought that game, but I must say, they did a great job porting it to the N64. I thought it controlled pretty well for a console RTS (a lot better than the C&C games I tried playing on the PS/N64!).

Well, if you like RTS pvp stuff try this game!

http://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4cf9b7b553242463831256


I'm completely cracked out on it, as are several dakkites.

I think the problem is that Starcraft 2 is as bog standard an RTS as you'll ever find. Sure the mod community might do something with it but why didn't Blizzard? Why did they just pretty up Starcraft 1 and have another go? The game didn't innovate at ALL.

They didn't have to. They spent so much time refining the editor and making it easy to differentiate from the main game that potentially ruining the perfect balance of the original game made absolutely no sense. You'll get a thousand times more variety out of the mod community than you will from any other game, and you'll always have the incredibly solid standard gameplay to fall back on. Blizzard was wise to do things this way, as it will extend the life of the game far beyond any other RTS and give you thousands of options to keep you from ever getting bored.

ShumaGorath wrote:Do games have to innovate to be good? The first person shooter and racing genre don't live on the premise that every game is innovative, nor do RPGs really. Why do RTS games have too?

Games don't have to innovate to be good but it doesn't hurt. The thing is that with Starcraft 2 it feels like a reskin of Starcraft 1, like someone just prettied up the decade old game and put it out again.

Two good games seems like a lot, to be honest. I think most genres are lucky to have one high-quality title a year or every other year.

If you want to complain about a dead genre, complain about turn-based tactical squad games. Oh, Jagged Alliance, how I miss thee.

Tyyr wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Do games have to innovate to be good? The first person shooter and racing genre don't live on the premise that every game is innovative, nor do RPGs really. Why do RTS games have too?

Games don't have to innovate to be good but it doesn't hurt. The thing is that with Starcraft 2 it feels like a reskin of Starcraft 1, like someone just prettied up the decade old game and put it out again.

Whats wrong with that? Its Blizz's MO. They rip off Warhammer with Warcraft, 40k with Starcraft, make everything a bit more kid friendly, then ship the boxes to Best Buy.

1-UP wrote:Two good games seems like a lot, to be honest. I think most genres are lucky to have one high-quality title a year or every other year.

If you want to complain about a dead genre, complain about turn-based tactical squad games. Oh, Jagged Alliance, how I miss thee.

Yea this is the truth. There are hundreds of games produced every year and probably less than 10% ever reach planetwide recognition (no pun intended )

Honestly I prefer the system in Dawn of War 1 to Dawn of War 2

What happened to real base building?

hearing "New construction options" gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside.... but alas no more.....

I like RTS games with base bulding, some resource management and a load of different units and upgrades that give me loads of differnet stratergies

Some of the best RTS games i've played:

Command and conquer (including Tiberium and the red alert series)
Total Annihilation (Amazing game even with its age, also supream commander was kind of based on this)
Dawn of War
Warcraft 3 (although im guilty of spending most of my time on that playing mods like Angel Arena, custom hero arena, hero line wars, etc)

I think the RTS genre is falling to the sprawling empire builders like the Total War series. Dawn of War is the most recent RTS that I really enjoyed mainly because it tried to innovate and develop a better resource system.