On RTS Games
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
I should've known you didn't play RTS' after your ExPunc about Kinect/Move.
But an RTS where you get to actually join the action? Already been done at least twice:
Batallion Wars and BWii for the Gamecube and Wii [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeO3233fBKw]
Battlezone 2 for the PC [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGJXk03TLkw]
But an RTS where you get to actually join the action? Already been done at least twice:
Batallion Wars and BWii for the Gamecube and Wii [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeO3233fBKw]
Battlezone 2 for the PC [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGJXk03TLkw]
I know he hates RTS, but if he played it, he would not rip it apart - because the single player storyline is fantastic, and he will get caught up in it. On lower difficulties it's very newbie-friendly, the branching missions let you skip things you find too hard or annoying, and the super RPG-style upgrades between missions can let you breeze through the annoying bits.
Anyone can absolultely have a blast and would admit it was a fun game if they played it - I'm astonished to admit it, but the single player campaign is just amazing.
Anyone can absolultely have a blast and would admit it was a fun game if they played it - I'm astonished to admit it, but the single player campaign is just amazing.
Zombie Master is a pretty fun hl2 mod that's a fps/rts hybrid.
One player chosen at random is the Zombie Master; he conjures and controls legions of the undead to slay the humans.
Meanwhile the humans have to work together in FPS mode to fight against the undead hordes.
It actually works really really well and I certainly suggest trying it if you haven't.
Think L4D if a 5th player controlled the AI director.
One player chosen at random is the Zombie Master; he conjures and controls legions of the undead to slay the humans.
Meanwhile the humans have to work together in FPS mode to fight against the undead hordes.
It actually works really really well and I certainly suggest trying it if you haven't.
Think L4D if a 5th player controlled the AI director.
Yahtzee, sign me up for that game!
And while you're at it, throw in a pair of those nuclear pogo sticks.
And while you're at it, throw in a pair of those nuclear pogo sticks.
I do enjoy WarCraft as a strategy game, I only have WarCraft three. You get the fun of a pseudo-rpg and can send in your commander in to help if the minions can't handle it.
It really drew me in to Azeroth as well.
It really drew me in to Azeroth as well.
I suppose on a difficulty curve level that system could work quite well. Early on Generals would only have a small amount of resources to pay with, but the tasks required would be simple enough to only warrant such small rewards. As the Generals build and develop, so too do the mercenaries and their arsenals, and they have to pay more and more for larger tasks. What could be interesting is special, commando units that the general could hire that would be tougher than their basic infantry, and geared toward the specific goal of fending off the PC mercs. They would come in similarly sized squads, but would work as a team thanks to the AI control. This would force the mercs to work together similarly, which would worm out petty griefers. Again, this all depends upon play testing, but it could work for both types of players, as specific attack orders from the generals would appear as mission objectives for the mercs. The only problem would be how to incorporate a graphical system that was pleasing enough for the Mercs but didn't wreak too much havoc on the General's CPUs.
I like how WWII Online did it. I'm not exactly sure how it worked, that's because I haven't played the game enough, but I believe there were these HQ guys looking over the whole campaign (campaigns are basically the war in Europe, that restart whenever one faction takes over, which can take weeks/months). HQ suggest what towns to attack, who needs support, etc. Then you have 3 different groups on each faction. Army, Airforce, Navy. After choosing one of those you choose an "attack group." (forget what they're actually called) These attack groups have orders/goals to take over a town, defend one, or attempt to take out an attacking camp of the other faction.
In the army, you can be an Airborne trooper, a normal infantry, or a vehicle driver. Trucks are used to set up spawn points by the battlefield, so infantry can spawn closer than the attack camp. There's a limit to how close you can get, though. You can also drive armored vehicles, and use AA guns. I remember a time in a huge city battle, 5 tanks in a row came in once we cleared an area, and told us to hop on so we could get to another part of the battle. Quickly after getting off, the tank I was sitting on blew up, so it felt like a movie.
Airforce spawn at an airbase and have orders to either support the infantry in a battle, whether it be through destroying attacking planes, or attempting to destroy the vehicles and infantry on the ground. Some airforce attack groups also might have bombing orders, to destroy attacking/defending ships, or to bomb the hell out of the infantry. Navy have boats, of course. I haven't played as them, but it's basically the same thing as the other groups. Support and attack, except in water.
It may not have a complete RTS element, and racing fans aren't going to get some Lamborghini to run over infantry with, but I think it combines many genres extremely well, and it being an MMO, some people messing around isn't a problem. Note, I haven't played the game in a while, so some of this information might not be completely true.
In the army, you can be an Airborne trooper, a normal infantry, or a vehicle driver. Trucks are used to set up spawn points by the battlefield, so infantry can spawn closer than the attack camp. There's a limit to how close you can get, though. You can also drive armored vehicles, and use AA guns. I remember a time in a huge city battle, 5 tanks in a row came in once we cleared an area, and told us to hop on so we could get to another part of the battle. Quickly after getting off, the tank I was sitting on blew up, so it felt like a movie.
Airforce spawn at an airbase and have orders to either support the infantry in a battle, whether it be through destroying attacking planes, or attempting to destroy the vehicles and infantry on the ground. Some airforce attack groups also might have bombing orders, to destroy attacking/defending ships, or to bomb the hell out of the infantry. Navy have boats, of course. I haven't played as them, but it's basically the same thing as the other groups. Support and attack, except in water.It may not have a complete RTS element, and racing fans aren't going to get some Lamborghini to run over infantry with, but I think it combines many genres extremely well, and it being an MMO, some people messing around isn't a problem. Note, I haven't played the game in a while, so some of this information might not be completely true.
SC2 does the RTS basics right. Dawn of War 1 kept these basics and then added a slightly different type of combat. Company of Heroes took that and made RTS combat a much more interesting experience.
SC2 is not innovative like DOW and COH, but it is a solid RTS. It is easy to get into and has a interesting campaign. I was worried Blizzard would do a DOW 2 or it would be a standard RTS, but somehow they just made it do the basics so well that it is a great game you can play again and again.
Why you wouldn't review a game with a good story line, easy on noobs, and different from your FPSs that you whine about never changing, is beyond me. It's not that you don't understand the genre, it's that you don't like it.
SC2 is not innovative like DOW and COH, but it is a solid RTS. It is easy to get into and has a interesting campaign. I was worried Blizzard would do a DOW 2 or it would be a standard RTS, but somehow they just made it do the basics so well that it is a great game you can play again and again.
Why you wouldn't review a game with a good story line, easy on noobs, and different from your FPSs that you whine about never changing, is beyond me. It's not that you don't understand the genre, it's that you don't like it.
Me and probably most people suck at RTSs when they first start playing them. That was, I found, the appeal: to become good at something I'm bad at. I mean I suck at brawlers too but there was no appeal to become good since the gameplay is just too... basic. RTSs are deep and rich and overcoming the growing pains of multitasking and resource management rewards the effort with enjoyment in spades. Being God looking down upon an army and sending sacrificial lambs to their death is a sadistic bliss no first-person perspective can provide. Moment to moment decisions between spamming troops and teching up is the slot machine equivalent of multiplayer with all the same addictive fun. It is a taste that is worth acquiring.
Battlezone 1 I loved, and it was similar but sadly underappreciated.SAMAS said:
Also Brutal Legend, and we saw how well that went over in Zero Punctuation. I thought it was great though, probably my favorite game of 2009.
Also battlegrounds in World of Warcraft play like RTSs, to the degree that other players are willing to listen to me instruct them how to play. Many times it is just a bunch of idiots running around like retards. But often a group will appreciate one of the experienced players taking on an organizational role.
Well, since Natural Selection came up in every page of comments, I'll add my voice to the chorus. It was awesome, it was hard as fuck, and you could play it as a RTS, as a FPS with guns, or as a FPS with alien abilities. It was everything an AVP game should be, and more.
This is not to say that it would work if you had 200 people on each side, but you can do 10x10 easily, and if the commander is good he even makes up for people who can't shoot for shit.
This is not to say that it would work if you had 200 people on each side, but you can do 10x10 easily, and if the commander is good he even makes up for people who can't shoot for shit.
I see a lot of people have mentioned Savage, but has anyone talked about Planetside? I have very very fond memories of that game, it was basically Battlefield inside an MMORPG. Never found anything quite like it since.
Savage: Battle for Newearth is already 7 years ahead of you Yahtzee.
That and like, 4 other games.
It's a good concept nonetheless, but the truth is that gamers do not want to take orders from anyone; it's an ego trip. The sole reason it works in the MMORPG scenario is because without competent cooperation, they aren't getting their shinies. The same idea is what drove the level-grind races in Diablo 2; and why that game is now a whole different load of boring "Why fucking bother?".
If I haven't made this perfectly clear yet; the GRIND is the motivation, nothing else (ok, maybe social obligations and friendships matter too, but that just means you have friends).
People might assume that WINNING would be a good reason to follow orders, but everyone has their own idea of how to win (and most of them are dead wrong or plain awful at tactics/strategy). This was the chief problem with Savage, and every other game of this type; while mob strategies can beat any individual, it can't beat true cooperation.
I've had games of Savage where my 4 LAN buddies listened to my orders and accomplished far more than the other 16-17 players on my team, and I won't claim to be anything beyond competent.
That and like, 4 other games.
It's a good concept nonetheless, but the truth is that gamers do not want to take orders from anyone; it's an ego trip. The sole reason it works in the MMORPG scenario is because without competent cooperation, they aren't getting their shinies. The same idea is what drove the level-grind races in Diablo 2; and why that game is now a whole different load of boring "Why fucking bother?".
If I haven't made this perfectly clear yet; the GRIND is the motivation, nothing else (ok, maybe social obligations and friendships matter too, but that just means you have friends).
People might assume that WINNING would be a good reason to follow orders, but everyone has their own idea of how to win (and most of them are dead wrong or plain awful at tactics/strategy). This was the chief problem with Savage, and every other game of this type; while mob strategies can beat any individual, it can't beat true cooperation.
I've had games of Savage where my 4 LAN buddies listened to my orders and accomplished far more than the other 16-17 players on my team, and I won't claim to be anything beyond competent.
IIRC there was this free space sim/RTS that was something like that called Allegiance.
EDIT: Also, in Battlefield 2 and 2142 with the commander it's basically this.
EDIT: Also, in Battlefield 2 and 2142 with the commander it's basically this.
RTS already works with FPS, its called ArmA II and its expansion Operation Arrowhead. I recommend you give them a try Yatzee, they openess will suprise even you.Yahtzee Croshaw said:
EDIT: btw the mission you can do that in is Warfare and another is CTI. Suggest you try bennys warfare tho.
I really wanted yahtzee to point out the flaws to SC2 cause im a fanboy and cant see them but you dont force a vegetarian to eat meat so oh well. On another note, why not give Battalion Wars for the Gamecube or Wii a go? It wasn't good but I thought the 3rd person RTS thing was neat.