RTS Recommendation
- Thread starter Celyn84
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I do like to play Command & Conquer. Not Red Alert though. I'm starting to think he's making excuses not to play, because he doesn't really like it. But he gets a little jealous when I play for a long time, so I guess I could just limit my time. But I feel like some of my skills might get rusty.
Asking him what sorts of things he likes would be good. Is action his watchword? Does he like strategy and problem solving? Plots and story? You already said realism. Does want to be in the thick of it or commanding from above/behind? Does he like grab and go games or ones that you sit down and enjoy for a while? Answering questions like these can better help us place his game.
As far as a non-annoying sounding, mostly realistic RTS game I second Stronghold (I prefer Stronghold: Crusader the best of the series due to better skirmish matches). You get build nice castles and command a good variety of troops (if you can get beyond lack of battle formations: they can walk on top of/through each other).
If you want something more tactical go Rome: Total War (or another in the series). Lots of stuff going on with formations (you can scale battalion size from like 40 to 160 for the standard soldiers) and unit and culture variety. The campaign has a turn based map where you move armies around and do city building/governing stuff and you can still choose to fight realtime (can pause double or triple the speed at any time) or you can let the computer calculate the victor. Or you can stick with just making custom/quick matches which are fun.
There's a good chance that he just likes the simple, old school games but still try new things with him, just don't force it.
As far as a non-annoying sounding, mostly realistic RTS game I second Stronghold (I prefer Stronghold: Crusader the best of the series due to better skirmish matches). You get build nice castles and command a good variety of troops (if you can get beyond lack of battle formations: they can walk on top of/through each other).
If you want something more tactical go Rome: Total War (or another in the series). Lots of stuff going on with formations (you can scale battalion size from like 40 to 160 for the standard soldiers) and unit and culture variety. The campaign has a turn based map where you move armies around and do city building/governing stuff and you can still choose to fight realtime (can pause double or triple the speed at any time) or you can let the computer calculate the victor. Or you can stick with just making custom/quick matches which are fun.
There's a good chance that he just likes the simple, old school games but still try new things with him, just don't force it.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 16,534
- 5,124
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
either dawn of war or company of heroes, both of them have a very good feel to them, in company of heroes your guys will take cover and stuff, its really cool to watch, oh and world in conflict
oh hell Ill just link some vids
company of heroes
world in conflict
dawn of war/ dawn of war 2
you can also find demos of most of them on steam
oh hell Ill just link some vids
company of heroes
world in conflict
dawn of war/ dawn of war 2
you can also find demos of most of them on steam
Well considering that he doesn't want any resource management, a lot of my suggestions are invalid.
However, DEFCON: Everybody Dies seems to be a good match for your boyfriend. It has no resources, bases, tech trees or anything like that, with very basic graphics.
However, DEFCON: Everybody Dies seems to be a good match for your boyfriend. It has no resources, bases, tech trees or anything like that, with very basic graphics.
Complete realism is kinda hard to come by in video games... he knows that, right?
Anyway, I, too, recommend the Dawn of War games.
The first game and its expansions are more traditional RTS with base-building and more or less elaborate tech trees, and it kicks an ungodly amount of ass. All you have to do in regard to resources is plonk down a few generators and conquer and hold strategic points as you spread across the map. To be able to play all the races in multiplayer you need to own the specific game/expansion that introduced them, but to my knowledge there's a complete Dawn of War anthology available for a decent price. Oh yeah, and this is important: Do not install the last expansion, Soulstorm - it's an unbalanced and buggy mess with rage-inducingly frustrating changes to gameplay.
The second game is also good, but not everybody's particular cup of tea. There's no base-building, all your resources are now mined by capturing and holding strategic points and nodes. The game is more RTT (real time tactics) than RTS and employs a cover system, so you need to choose your approach to any skirmish carefully and with consideration to the terrain, otherwise you'll probably get smashed to bits. All in all the game makes up for the loss of base-building by putting a larger focus on squad micromanagement. Also, killing enemies awards you special points which, when you accumulate enough, allow for one of four special goodies to be called to your aid (special attacks or support units).
The singleplayer aspect also sports a fair amount of RPG elements, the most noticable being in-game loot drops and a leveling and upgrade system for your squads.
Anyway, I, too, recommend the Dawn of War games.
The first game and its expansions are more traditional RTS with base-building and more or less elaborate tech trees, and it kicks an ungodly amount of ass. All you have to do in regard to resources is plonk down a few generators and conquer and hold strategic points as you spread across the map. To be able to play all the races in multiplayer you need to own the specific game/expansion that introduced them, but to my knowledge there's a complete Dawn of War anthology available for a decent price. Oh yeah, and this is important: Do not install the last expansion, Soulstorm - it's an unbalanced and buggy mess with rage-inducingly frustrating changes to gameplay.
The second game is also good, but not everybody's particular cup of tea. There's no base-building, all your resources are now mined by capturing and holding strategic points and nodes. The game is more RTT (real time tactics) than RTS and employs a cover system, so you need to choose your approach to any skirmish carefully and with consideration to the terrain, otherwise you'll probably get smashed to bits. All in all the game makes up for the loss of base-building by putting a larger focus on squad micromanagement. Also, killing enemies awards you special points which, when you accumulate enough, allow for one of four special goodies to be called to your aid (special attacks or support units).
The singleplayer aspect also sports a fair amount of RPG elements, the most noticable being in-game loot drops and a leveling and upgrade system for your squads.
A friend of mine who is into RTSs tells me that Pikmin plays just like an RTS, so see if you can find Pikmin 2 as that one has two player competitive and co-op modes. It's not the most realistic, but it's challenging and fun and is one of my favorite games on the GameCube.
I'll throw another recommendation for Company of Heroes, it's not completely realistic but there are a few factors.
You don't have to mine for resources, you get more stuff depending on how much of the map you currently hold, which means you don't have the usual RTS "build a huge army and storm his base" fights, you have lots of little fights for ground. I think that's the main reason I like it, I got bored of building huge army and going to either win or lose in AoE3, seemed like a waste of 30 mins, whereas in CoH you're constantly fighting/holding in different areas.
You don't have to mine for resources, you get more stuff depending on how much of the map you currently hold, which means you don't have the usual RTS "build a huge army and storm his base" fights, you have lots of little fights for ground. I think that's the main reason I like it, I got bored of building huge army and going to either win or lose in AoE3, seemed like a waste of 30 mins, whereas in CoH you're constantly fighting/holding in different areas.
LOL! Also my first rts ever. =)Melgrath said:
Used to play it forever with my brother.
Then we switched to age of mythology.
Now we play starcraft 2. =)
I too recommend Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War. Instead of mining for resources, you actively go out and capture control points to generate income. This encourages a more aggressive and action-oriented resource gathering system, as these points quickly become the focus of fierce tug-of-war battles. When you've got large armies duking it out, the carnage that results is a sight to behold. If possible, try to get the Platinum Edition, which has the Winter Assault and Dark Crusade expansions (try to avoid the Soulstorm expansion, as it's subpar compared to the others).
Sure it's not realistic for ten foot tall super soldiers in power armor to be carving up orks with giant chainsaws for swords, but it's undeniably awesome. Especially since they all sound like Darth Vader. The Warhammer setting is so unabashedly over the top that you can't help but like it.
Sure it's not realistic for ten foot tall super soldiers in power armor to be carving up orks with giant chainsaws for swords, but it's undeniably awesome. Especially since they all sound like Darth Vader. The Warhammer setting is so unabashedly over the top that you can't help but like it.
The OP claims that one reason her boyfriend doesn't want to play rts's is in part because because they lack realism, but yes, some of the best rts's (or even the best games in general) are sci-fi. Once the person in question gets accustomed to rts's, they should pick up StarCraft or something.FortheLegion said: