This is why RTS shouldn’t focus on the PvP portion of the game. A good campaign and arcade is what Blizzard did and it worked. The greatest thing Blizzard ever ever did was to add in the custom map creator which was fully featured.
Some of them already evolved into a tounerous new goblin of a subspecies (MOBAs) to fill a different niche, the rest stayed the same because they were already good as is. That’s literally how evolution works. You don’t improve RTS by drastically changing the formula, you improve then with graphics, lore, and interesting mechanics within the existing framework. If you evolve the formula then it’s not an RTS anymore.
I’d be happy if they pandered more to controller players without removing the decision making in base building, like Halo Wars did. I always look to Cannon Brawl as an indication of what RTS can still be (by which I mean, not exactly like Cannon Brawl).
I have. It does have base building, but it doesn’t really have choke points the way that StarCraft does. That doesn’t make it a deal-breaker, as I do enjoy that game. In fact, the way it has a controllable character that puts a controller-friendly speed limit on APM is something it has in common with Cannon Brawl.
I watched the trailer and the evolution they’re going with is apparently not making an RTS anymore, but an Action Roguelike. If that’s the kind of evolution we’re talking about, I feel we’ve already stuff in a similar vein (dunno specifically about roguelike though).
And that, too, isn’t new. It’s been done since at least the Spellforce series, or Dawn of War 2.
If you want to see what an “innovated” RTS looks like, check out Beyond All Reason. The base formula is Total Annihilation, but with nearly 30 years of player driven improvements and QoL. That game’s UX is extremely smart, and you can keybind or automate so many things on the fly, freeing you up to make strategic and tactical level decisions , instead of spamclicking for micro. Which, you can also do if you want to.
Thank you, zero k interface is amazing, and their “cold takes” show a design philosophy I constantly find myself wishing I’d find pretty much everywhere else.
They have quite a few posts that are primarily about design philosophy. It’s clear they put a lot of time and effort into it. One of my favorites that has driven a lot of innovation in you can interact with the game is
I was an extremely casual rts player for years playing mainly aoe3. Beyond all reason captured me instantly with the controls. Basically other rts games control difficulty with limited control scheme so you require high apm. Bar gives players as many quality of life controls as they want and allows for long action queues. I can queue up a unit to operate for 10mins while I focus on other parts of the game.
Bar also has basically no pop limit so you’re only limited by the resources you control it also doesn’t incentivize storing large amounts of resources. So wealthy is income focused. This means if you have more map control you have more wealth but because units drop a %of their cost in wrecks if you’re behind and you win a good fight and can control the wreckage field you can catch up.
There is also so much more like the ability to transfer units, metal, energy to other players at 0 cost means working together is op. Strats involve a lot of “communism” and communication to decide where on the map needs the resources.
Example I might have won my side of the map and I’ll send some metal over to another player who is losing so they can stay in the fight. Or my eco player will make units and sell them to players for their metal costs. Which means front players don’t need to pay the metal and energy cost of building a t2 lab they just pay the unit cost.
This sounds a lot like what Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance has been doing for ages, and that expansion came out in 2007. The only difference is the unit limit but that’s mostly for performance reasons (and is rarely hit in competitive matches anyway).
How are these mechanics next-gen if they’re more than 15 years old?
Ive played faf its a very different feeling game. Faf feels awful. I’d say bar is next gen because a total annihilation style game has never been a huge rts title and I think bar is the one that can reach the mainstream rts audience and beyond.
TLDR: Zero-K and BAR are based on the same FOSS engine. Zero-K is less micro with better unit AI. BAR delivers a more vanilla and micro intensive Total Annihilation experience.
Supreme Commander is proprietary closed source and has some different mechanics. Larger but worse maps.
More modern graphics and less unit types but more micro opportunity. Also zero k has buildable terrain in the form of ramps and walls. Bar has terrain deformation but can’t actively do it with contractors.
Idk I haven’t played Zero K but it’s a good rts as well.
For real. Imo the best RTS out there currently. I feel so much more in control of the camera and the units. Whenever I go back to old RTS games now they feel dated and clunky.
The AI is also surprisingly enjoyable for a more casual player like me. It doesn’t cheat (as far as I’m aware) by getting resources or having vision where it shouldn’t. But it does exploit its high APM and it is very aware of what it can get away with in fights. This results in an AI that never does outright bullshit, but in one that does just sneak past the 2mm space not covered by turrets or units and ruins your entire economy. Give it a large open map and it’ll demolish me, but on smaller maps with choke points it’s easier to handle.
I thought everything just went to the 4x formula and/or the micro/hero focused route. I actually wish there were more simplistic Warcraft 1/2 or C&C type games to come out, but I’ll admit I haven’t paid much attention to the genre for awhile, pretty much since StarCraft 2.
I actually wish there were more simplistic Warcraft 1/2 or C&C type games to come out
So do I. There are a few but these are indie projects and in turn their scope is smaller than even those 1990s games. I guess the closest thing is Five Nations which is currently on sale on Steam for under 10 Euro. It’s like a slice of Starcraft 1 where they have taken only the missions with just flying units. At that price point I cannot complain but I’d also like a full price scifi RTS. Not a fan of AoE4 simply because of its “realistic” backdrop. I’m rooting for Tempest Rising after Stormgate was a severe let down.
I hope we will se more non-micro RTS games. More like HOI4, but that takes less than 1 hour to finish a game. Dune and Line Wars are on the right track.
That’s what it was called, I tried to remember the game from a couple of months ago, when a bunch of big RTS streamers were suddenly all playing it for a few days. I’ve never seen a game that got boring so fast.
Typical micro-only focus with basebuilding and economy completely automated and a extremly limited pre-selected tech tree.
If anything, I think RTS need to go back to its roots. I’m not a huge RTS fan, and I’m not particularly nostalgic about the genre, but I have played a few games. My favorite? AoE2! It’s just a damn good game.
Devs or more specifically the parasitic executives who want nothing that a money machine look no further than Factorio as a shining example of how to innovate a gaming experience and genre. It is as easy or difficult and as simple or complicated as the player wants it to be and it’s not because difficultly settings. Your playstyle is the difficulty setting and it feels like there is ALWAYS something new to do, or a wildly different ways to do the same things. Also, their mod support and integration is unparalleled as far as any other game that comes to mind. No micro transactions, no ads, just an excellent game and experience. Sure, Factorio isn’t for everyone but the way it has been build, supported and all of those other elements that make it what it is beyond the core factory building sim ARE FOR EVERYONE. These aspects can be applied to other RTS games in general and can make it feel like a brand new experience while still being exactly what draws players into a specific RTS game.
videogamer.com
Aktywne