A game with a mix between FPS and RTS is currently in development:
Nuclear Dawn
http://www.nucleardawnthegame.com/
Nuclear Dawn
http://www.nucleardawnthegame.com/
On RTS Games
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Personally, as a fan of both the original Starcraft and it's sequel, I don't care that Yahtzee isn't reviewing Starcraft 2. He's said he's an unbiased critic and for the most part, that's true, he's even admitted to liking Final Fantasy 6, despite hating the series now, and I can admit that as much as enjoy the Final Fantasy series I do think that after the 6th game it's been going downhill.
But overall he's made it clear that he doesn't like RTS and that's fine, despite the fact that eh has yet to review a "true" RTS (IMO, halo wars doesn't count as it is a console RTS and the controls on a console are completely incompatible with RTS gameplay, and Brutal legend was a sandbox, adventure, hack and slash, RTS hybrid with too little focus on any one element to be any one kind of game) and honestly he doesn't have to review a genre he has no interest in.
Besides you have to know that he probably doesn't want to put up with the same people who whine at him to review Starcraft 2 immediately turning around and bitching at him for the scathing review he'll no doubt give, remember Borderlands and Brawl? Personally I love the Starcraft games (though the lack of Starcraft ghost did make me think the series began to suffer from the same development hell problem that 3d realms had until it was closed down). I like Yahtzee's reviews, they're funny and they've given me points on and made me want to try out games I would otherwise have not considered playing (saints row 2 and just cause 2 and possibly dark void) but I can understand if he does not want to play this genre.
I'd rather stick to my own opinions of starcraft 2 and enjoy it the way I do. If you want a review for the game, look elsewhere or make it yourself. Yahtzee himself has said that if you really enjoy a game then you shouldn't care what a reviewer says about it.
But overall he's made it clear that he doesn't like RTS and that's fine, despite the fact that eh has yet to review a "true" RTS (IMO, halo wars doesn't count as it is a console RTS and the controls on a console are completely incompatible with RTS gameplay, and Brutal legend was a sandbox, adventure, hack and slash, RTS hybrid with too little focus on any one element to be any one kind of game) and honestly he doesn't have to review a genre he has no interest in.
Besides you have to know that he probably doesn't want to put up with the same people who whine at him to review Starcraft 2 immediately turning around and bitching at him for the scathing review he'll no doubt give, remember Borderlands and Brawl? Personally I love the Starcraft games (though the lack of Starcraft ghost did make me think the series began to suffer from the same development hell problem that 3d realms had until it was closed down). I like Yahtzee's reviews, they're funny and they've given me points on and made me want to try out games I would otherwise have not considered playing (saints row 2 and just cause 2 and possibly dark void) but I can understand if he does not want to play this genre.
I'd rather stick to my own opinions of starcraft 2 and enjoy it the way I do. If you want a review for the game, look elsewhere or make it yourself. Yahtzee himself has said that if you really enjoy a game then you shouldn't care what a reviewer says about it.
NNNNOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! I really wanted to see starcraft 2 get the yahtzee treatment.
What happens if I say that there are custom maps that are 3rd person shooters? (well i think there are some anyway)
What happens if I say that there are custom maps that are 3rd person shooters? (well i think there are some anyway)
Very good, solid and easily applicable idea Yahtzee. You really did it this time.
Tell you what, since we are going for simple things this week, why not make this whole uber game a cross - platform online multiplayer, so a PC user can play with a 360 and a DS user. That would make things even simpler.
I think he nailed the idea on the chess example. It is a game of chess. If you think about it, RTS games are a glorified version of chess, just like football or basketball are the same, or maybe I should say football or basketball video games are the same. You don't take the role of the coach or general. You just control different people, or groups of people at any given time. If you give the pawns any form of "free will", then it's a different game.
The idea of an uber game appeals to me on a theoretical level, but as is in these cases usually, it's more of an alternate reality than a game. It's a sandbox game. And then you need to be cautious not to make it TOO real and make sure it still is a GAME, instead of coming close to reality. Simulation of the "real" has a nasty habit of being either too boring or too complicated, just like a commercial flight sim...
P.S. Then again... look at how succesful M.A.G. has been with this kind of thinking... NOT.
Tell you what, since we are going for simple things this week, why not make this whole uber game a cross - platform online multiplayer, so a PC user can play with a 360 and a DS user. That would make things even simpler.
I think he nailed the idea on the chess example. It is a game of chess. If you think about it, RTS games are a glorified version of chess, just like football or basketball are the same, or maybe I should say football or basketball video games are the same. You don't take the role of the coach or general. You just control different people, or groups of people at any given time. If you give the pawns any form of "free will", then it's a different game.
The idea of an uber game appeals to me on a theoretical level, but as is in these cases usually, it's more of an alternate reality than a game. It's a sandbox game. And then you need to be cautious not to make it TOO real and make sure it still is a GAME, instead of coming close to reality. Simulation of the "real" has a nasty habit of being either too boring or too complicated, just like a commercial flight sim...
P.S. Then again... look at how succesful M.A.G. has been with this kind of thinking... NOT.
Now Yahtzee you sly bastard you almost had it. That idea was almost perfect BUT what about a D.O.T.A format 2 commanders controlling separate teams each team has 3 or 5 player controlled mechas or space marines or what ever the fuck the game is themed about and its basically the commander has to coordinate there RTS forces and use there player controlled fps shooters to assault the enemies HQ the mechas would per say have an upgrade system persistant statistic levels between matches and of course items and guns to buy in map. Also there would be a large graphical problem of the RTS side having to see the same textures as the fps guys so the RTS player would have most computers shitting bricks.
I was thinking the exact same thing. One of the biggest releases of the decade comes out and he won't review it cause it's not his cup of tea. I'm disappointed only cause (will all due respect) it just doesn't seem very professional.Arcthelad said:
do you not see what you just said as hypocritical yahtzee? after all, you keep complaining at folks to try different games yet you won't do this yourself by playing SC2 instead of another shooter or something like that, just saying.
though your idea for mixing the FPS and RTS genre is kinda cool, if raven squad taught us anything, it's just not gonna work, simply because FPS gamers lack the patience of an RTS gamer and thus won't wait around for him to tell them to do something and because meshing RTSs formula (you know, build a base, collect resources, etc.) really wouldn't work IMO, in addition the servers that would be needed to host these types of games simply do not exist yet
now if we're talking RTTs (real time taticals) that's another story
though your idea for mixing the FPS and RTS genre is kinda cool, if raven squad taught us anything, it's just not gonna work, simply because FPS gamers lack the patience of an RTS gamer and thus won't wait around for him to tell them to do something and because meshing RTSs formula (you know, build a base, collect resources, etc.) really wouldn't work IMO, in addition the servers that would be needed to host these types of games simply do not exist yet
now if we're talking RTTs (real time taticals) that's another story
You know, Yahtzee, comments like this don't do anything for you. There are only two ways to interpret something so factually incorrect: Either you don't know what you're talking about (challenging your credibility as a reviewer), or you know it's an incorrect smeary statement and you don't care (which might seem par for your course of tearing down video games, but our respect for you is built on that which you are able to identify as an actual problem with a game, rather than just making stuff up).Yahtzee Croshaw said:
I have a lot of respect for you as a deconstructive journalist, and for a long time you were the only reason I came to the Escapist. Keeping that respect in mind, stuff like this is beneath you. If you're going to hate on WoW, at least hate on the stuff that actually sucks - there's plenty.
Why not just make Majesty with real people substituting for the adventurers? The characters in Majesty don't listen to direct orders anyway.
Oh right, nobody played Majesty because they suck (the people, not the games).
In WoW guilds you have a guild leader that dictates what dungeon the guild runs, who fills which role, and who gets what loot, and people go along with it. Gamers are notoriously bad at getting organized just for the sake of some abstract victory, but they're notoriously greedy when it comes to abstract in-game currency. As for the griefing, you say griefing, I say sabotage. You can't just give up on a good game design because you're too weak to deal with the sort of people it would attract. You build the game to fight back. As long as a merc sticks to his contracts, does them well, and behaves, he gets rewarded with prestige as well as money, which makes his service more enticing to potential buyers. If a Merc goes rogue and starts attacking things that he is not authorized to be attacking, the victim can choose to charge or pardon him (in case there was a good reason for the attack). If the victim charges, the Merc's prestige drops and they get marked as on probation. If the Merc makes a regular habit of this, his Merc license goes poof and he is now full-fledged Rogue. A Rogue loses all Merc privileges, they don't appear on the registry, they can only offer their services under the table (which means no automated contract system that guarantees payment on mission completion), and they can't travel freely. They are now just a wandering gun doing whatever gets their rocks off, but any commander can set his policy to kill rogues on sight, if that's what he wants. If a Rogue gets REALLY bad, they would start acquiring a bounty. Now the commanders are the ones getting paid, and the FPS-player is the target. It isn't just revenge-killing any more, the whole server would want their head. A griefer could get away with tricking one or two commanders and backstabbing them, but then they would be marked unless they go to GREAT lengths to clear their name. The kind of lengths that would take a month or more to complete, like grinding rep to exalted in classic WoW. They could buy another account, but that would mean starting over and paying for the game again. If that's the price they're willing to pay...
Pro tip: most griefers aren't. They'll cry about getting banned on the forums, get banned from the forums, go rage about how much the game "sucks" and then move on to something else.
Also, props to Yahtzee for articulating an idea I've had for years.
Oh right, nobody played Majesty because they suck (the people, not the games).
In WoW guilds you have a guild leader that dictates what dungeon the guild runs, who fills which role, and who gets what loot, and people go along with it. Gamers are notoriously bad at getting organized just for the sake of some abstract victory, but they're notoriously greedy when it comes to abstract in-game currency. As for the griefing, you say griefing, I say sabotage. You can't just give up on a good game design because you're too weak to deal with the sort of people it would attract. You build the game to fight back. As long as a merc sticks to his contracts, does them well, and behaves, he gets rewarded with prestige as well as money, which makes his service more enticing to potential buyers. If a Merc goes rogue and starts attacking things that he is not authorized to be attacking, the victim can choose to charge or pardon him (in case there was a good reason for the attack). If the victim charges, the Merc's prestige drops and they get marked as on probation. If the Merc makes a regular habit of this, his Merc license goes poof and he is now full-fledged Rogue. A Rogue loses all Merc privileges, they don't appear on the registry, they can only offer their services under the table (which means no automated contract system that guarantees payment on mission completion), and they can't travel freely. They are now just a wandering gun doing whatever gets their rocks off, but any commander can set his policy to kill rogues on sight, if that's what he wants. If a Rogue gets REALLY bad, they would start acquiring a bounty. Now the commanders are the ones getting paid, and the FPS-player is the target. It isn't just revenge-killing any more, the whole server would want their head. A griefer could get away with tricking one or two commanders and backstabbing them, but then they would be marked unless they go to GREAT lengths to clear their name. The kind of lengths that would take a month or more to complete, like grinding rep to exalted in classic WoW. They could buy another account, but that would mean starting over and paying for the game again. If that's the price they're willing to pay...
Pro tip: most griefers aren't. They'll cry about getting banned on the forums, get banned from the forums, go rage about how much the game "sucks" and then move on to something else.
Also, props to Yahtzee for articulating an idea I've had for years.
League of Legends is a great mix of an RTS and a more conventional RPG style thing. It's made by some of the same people who made DoTA
I was going to, right away, bring up Natural Selection (because I'm in LOVE with that game), but I see everyone already beat me to it. I also see some people mentioned the Empires mod as well. Another good one. However I think it's ironic and certainly very funny that both games are absolutely plagued by the problems that Yahtzee himself mentioned in this review. If you've played NS at all then you know that you'll have your commander and team barking at you constantly to "DO THIS OR THAT YESTERDAY, NOW!!" or at least to not suck. All they care about is the win and this one aspect can turn action people off right away. Certainly you could play as the aliens and not have a commander but then it's "Who built defense chambers first!?! NOOBS!". Honestly I wish I could talk to Yahtzee and tell him to get in touch with Unknown Worlds Entertainment before Natural Selection 2 comes out. He, quite frankly, has some brilliant ideas and they are certainly a very community driven developer.
If I do remember he did give RTS's a try... the Halo on.... As good as Starcraft 2 is I am sure the same problems would pop up.
The problem I have with RTSs is that it will always boil down to 1 Strategy or the game will force you to use 1 Strategy... They are very much like rail shooters.
The problem I have with RTSs is that it will always boil down to 1 Strategy or the game will force you to use 1 Strategy... They are very much like rail shooters.