Sins of a Solar Empire Dev Claims RTS Is Dying

[Marshall Honorof]

Sins of a Solar Empire Dev Claims RTS Is Dying

Blair Fraser views real-time strategy as too niche to stay afloat.

If you've noticed a dearth of high-profile real-time strategy games lately, you're not alone. StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm is on the horizon, but Age of Empires Online is as complete as it's ever going to get, and it's not as though the Total War or Company of Heroes series garner the same kind of coverage as the latest military FPS or sports franchise. Blair Fraser, one of the minds behind the successful RTS Sins of a Solar Empire, doesn't hold out much hope for the genre as a gaming mainstay. Fraser believes that stagnation in RTS mechanics has fed consumer disinterest, and saving the genre in its current form will be tough, if not impossible.

Fraser points out that many of the most popular and anticipated RTS titles of the day are entries in time-tested franchises without too many innovations. "I'm not seeing a lot of what I used to in RTS," he says. "Company of Heroes 2, StarCraft II, and Age of Empires Online - which is basically shutting down. I don't know how the free-to-play Command & Conquer will turn out. End of Nations is having a bunch of problems." While Fraser acknowledges that some of these series still draw in lots of money, a few big titles in well-established series do not an entire viable genre make. "RTSes, to my mind, are very niche now ... I just think the demographics have changed ... It's a dying market."

One of Fraser's most damning examples is Age of Empires Online the MMORTS based on the hit Ensemble Studios franchise. The game ceased adding new content earlier this month [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/121342-Age-of-Empires-Online-Halts-Development], and while it isn't dead just yet, it may not be long for this world. "I can tell you why Age of Empires Online went out of business," Fraser states. "They had to hit a certain price point that F2P players find valuable. The Team Fortress 2 high-five animation was the same price as an entire faction in Age of Empires Online. The return on investment there just doesn't make any sense."

Fraser hopes to avert many of the pitfalls that have led other RTS series to ruin in his upcoming game Sins of a Dark Age [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/previews/9470-GDC-2012-Sins-of-a-Dark-Age]. Still, even if his game turns out great, it's unlikely that one single title can save an ailing genre. After the StarCraft II trilogy is complete, will there be any room left in the gaming world for real-time strategy?

Source: Rock, Paper, Shotgun [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/02/01/ironclad-on-why-rts-is-dying-moba-needs-to-evolve/]

Permalink

 

[Chessrook44]

As a lover of RTS games (Even if I do kinda suck at them) this saddens me.

 

[DracoSuave]

RTSs need to find a balance between accessibility and depth so they can bring in new players AND develop a standing community. It's an inherent problem in the genre that the depth usually comes at the cost of accessibility.

Unless you're Blizzard and putting out Starcraft 2, name power doesn't really work. Most of the time, dedicated RTS players will just go 'Eh. Better play Starcraft' which is what is causing the games to not get a foothold in the market.

Starcraft 2 is already the new RTS for Starcraft players--someone needs to make a deep RTS for everyone else. Niche unfilled.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

A lot of RTS franchises fell on their swords when they decided to go console. Some (Age of Empires) made some poor choices in sequel features. A lot of publishers didn't help RTS devs at all as well. Shit, I hope SEGA gives Relic the same kind of love they give the Creative Assembly.

 

[Robetid]

I don't think it will ever die, and has the possibility of making a comback with the steam box bringing PC gaming to the living room, instead of locking it away in the basement. Just hang in there and I'm sure there will be a turn around.

 

[Epona]

Age of Empires Online failed because nobody asked for or wanted Age of Empires IV to be an MMO. Company of Heroes was the other type of RTS, the type where you can't base build (unless my memory fails me) and I haven't played Starcraft II.

 

[Akexi]

No Total War love, Fraser? I do have to admit though, there is not a lot of activity in the RTS genre right now aside form Heart of the Swarm and Company of heroes 2 coming out soon, Rome 2 in October, and DoW 3 not having a release date yet.

That aside, since this is the guy from the SoSE franchise, I hope their new game code can flipping multithread.

 

[Bostur]

Soon there will only be one genre left. The linear FPS/TPS with quick time events...

Actually I'm not as pessimistic as Blair Fraser. I think the RTS genre has exhausted itself and needs some rest before new ideas can emerge, it used to be one of the most popular genres after all. It also suffered a hit from the popularity of consoles without mice, you can't really make a proper RTS without a mouse.

It will get a comeback eventually.

 

[Falterfire]

Age of Empires Online failed because nobody asked for or wanted Age of Empires IV to be an MMO.

Nah, the reason AoEO failed was because too many people judged it based on the art style and what they expected it to be based on the terrible terrible marketing put forth indicating it to be more akin to an EmpireVille type of BS instead of what it really is. Plus some terrible pricing decisions made at the beginning of the game ruining the whole point of the 'Free to Play' thing.

 

[Epona]

Age of Empires Online failed because nobody asked for or wanted Age of Empires IV to be an MMO.

Nah, the reason AoEO failed was because too many people judged it based on the art style and what they expected it to be based on the terrible terrible marketing put forth indicating it to be more akin to an EmpireVille type of BS instead of what it really is. Plus some terrible pricing decisions made at the beginning of the game ruining the whole point of the 'Free to Play' thing.

All of that and the fact that nobody asked for nor wanted AOE4 to be an MMO.

 

[Falterfire]

All of that and the fact that nobody asked for nor wanted AOE4 to be an MMO.

Calling it an 'MMO' is misleading though. Aside from being online-only (Which I agree is an issue) it's not really an MMO any more than Starcraft is. Yes, there is loot, but there's a game mode (Called Champion Mode) used by just about all competitive matches that disables loot and level-based benefits.

The single player involves loot and leveling, but that's totally separate from being an MMO type thing and is more related to RPG type elements.

 

[flarty]

Sorry i'm loving tropico at the minute.

 

[Epona]

All of that and the fact that nobody asked for nor wanted AOE4 to be an MMO.

Calling it an 'MMO' is misleading though. Aside from being online-only (Which I agree is an issue) it's not really an MMO any more than Starcraft is. Yes, there is loot, but there's a game mode (Called Champion Mode) used by just about all competitive matches that disables loot and level-based benefits.

The single player involves loot and leveling, but that's totally separate from being an MMO type thing and is more related to RPG type elements.

It's an online game with quests and it's based on gear. Call it what you want, it was unwanted and it's no surprise that it failed. What it came down to was Microsoft deciding to make an online game like everyone else and like everyone else, it failed. It's just like when people wanted KOTOR 3 and instead we got an MMO.

 

[The White Hunter]

Soon there will only be one genre left. The linear FPS/TPS with quick time events..

And when that day comes, we shall rise and say "NO MORE!". Or something along those lines anyway.

Does Pikmin 3 count? Cuz it is an RTS, and I've pre-ordered it anyway. As well as Company of Heroes 2 being a sizable blot on my radar.

Though honestly I do find RTS inaccesible, much like fighters they can be very intimidating to the uninitiated and online play is often like running off a cliff over and over until you actually get good at the game. I simply don't play them as much as I play other kinds of game and part of the problem is I don't always have the time to dedicate to the game. I remember playing Company of Heroes and after 2 and a half hours of struggling I finished a mission, only to come back later and find it had decided not to save ._____. as a result I put it down 6 months ago and haven't touched it since.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

To me planetary annihilation seems to be the only RTS this year (let alone the past couple of years) that's actually keeping the general RTS formula while also innovating at the same time and I'm going to get the game for sure when it coms out.

As for EoN though they are in a bit of a mess I'm sure when they come round to fixing the problems it will become something of a spectacle rather than the latest C&C which has it's singleplayer content cut from it and made only multiplayer while probably going with micro trans just to win which is just plain stale and boring while showing a lack of innovation.

When the new AOE came out the other year it didn't grab my attention at all and still doesn't because they dropped what made it AOE and decided to make it more cartoony and more simple (showing the business isn't getting much money and therefore attempts for a new crowd).

While I do love Starcraft 2 I only play it for it's campaign and skirmish games with friends and bots because the multiplayer portion of the game has become serious to a point where it's not even fun (Yes there are many that dislike having to micro manage every 2 micro seconds like some god tier level Korean).

 

[LordLundar]

RTS's aren't dead but that said, there are more ways to make a bad one than a good one. Believe me I'v played a lot of bad ones. RTS's are basically scaled down 4x games, eXplore, eXpand, eXterminate and I foret what that 4th 'X' is for.

eXploit and it's the third X.

And largely you're right. The conventional RTS when taken to a larger scope becomes a 4x game. It's not necessarily that RTS is a niche so much as it's a starting point for another genre. Once people master the RTS genre where only aesthetics separate them they want more complex so they go to the 4x genre. So devs have a choice, do they make a RTS which is scaled down and simpler mechanics or do they go larger scale and more complex which makes it a 4x? Given audience's push for "as complex as possible" the 4x is an easier money maker.

 

[Zombie_Moogle]

Were RTS ever not niche?

I'm not sure I agree that the market is shrinking; I just think it never changed much at all & is small by comparison

 

[A_Parked_Car]

Will RTS games ever be "blockbusters" like FPS and sports games are? No. Does that mean they are dying? I don't think so.

It is extremely difficult to make an RTS game accessible without dumbing it down. Total War has been trying to do this and has been modestly successful, but the simple fact is that RTS games will have a high learning curve by default. Even the most simplistic RTS games, like RUSE, are more complicated than Call of Duty.

I'm drawn to the more complex games like Hearts of Iron III, which took me 15 HOURS of fumbling around to figure out the basics. I have 375 hours put into the game and I still haven't mastered it.