Is the RTS genre dying?

Posts: 1,077
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/02/ironclad-rts-genre/

according to ironclad developers it could be. This will truly be a sad day if more developers begin thinking this way.
Reply Quote
Posts: 6,097
It certainly isn't as popular as it could be because RTS games are significantly less casual-friendly.
Reply Quote
Posts: 17,147
Clearly this is simply a sign of the slow but sure decay of an environment that encourages one to compete, challenge themselves, and strive to think outside-the-box in first-world nations. Ironic considering the fact that it was this type of environment that made these nations so wealthy and powerful. Ah, but this was how the Romans fell, no? History may never repeat itself, but it always rhymes.

trololololol

But in all seriousness, there's a thread in the C&C forums about the same topic. Sort of sad, but I remember back when people considered Apple just about dead...
Reply Quote
Posts: 4,319
Every year, more people are added to earth. Every year, more people get computers and internet and the means to play games. The genre is not going to die.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,077
I hope you guys are right. I would hate to think of SC2 as the last RTS game ever made.
Reply Quote
Posts: 10,665
If anything its getting more popular
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,873
playing an RTS in depth is like a second job and the majority of people just try to relax and absorb themselves into the game rather than thinking about an RTS.

So while i wouldnt say the amount of people is increasing the people who plays RTS's tend to stick with RTS's they just move around to other strategy games.

For example, i have stopped playing starcraft and am now playing a different strategy game in civ 5 right now.
Edited by HeavyFresh on 2/1/2013 9:30 PM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 192
It's not that it's dying, it's that game developers are not putting out the quality of them that they used to which is true for most game genres out there. Many companies only see the quick $$$$ provided by a game and don't care about the longevity or quality of it.
Reply Quote
Posts: 9,885
02/01/2013 09:29 PMPosted by HeavyFresh
civ 5 right now.

Aztects OP

02/01/2013 09:29 PMPosted by HeavyFresh
So while i wouldnt say the amount of people is increasing the people who plays RTS's tend to stick with RTS's they just move around to other strategy games.

I would have to agree with this. I came to sc2 for online play when DoW2 finally died(last time I was on only 900 users when the average was 2000-3000 just a few weeks before). I also play total war quite abit.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,873
02/01/2013 09:33 PMPosted by sfpDonFonzy
Aztects OP


i like the romans haha, i just build roads everywhere and roads right into their base as i conquer it.

Makes for fast reinforcements.
Edited by HeavyFresh on 2/1/2013 9:34 PM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 9,885
02/01/2013 09:34 PMPosted by HeavyFresh
i like the romans haha, i just build roads everywhere and roads right into their base as i conquer it.

I just love the culture boost you get early on. Makes it so easy to get ahead in the early game and just steam roll.
Japans pretty good to.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,873
I prefer Rome and Carthage but thats probably because i played too much RTW
Reply Quote
Posts: 924
02/01/2013 09:24 PMPosted by Zerglor
If anything its getting more popular

but the amount of active players are far less than in season 1...
Reply Quote
Posts: 4,319
02/01/2013 09:42 PMPosted by HeavyFresh
I prefer Rome and Carthage but thats probably because i played too much RTW


Download the classical era mod that revamps the classical techs and blocks you from medieval. Then download a true placement large europe map. Rome and Carthage may start equal to every other civ you place in the game, but legion and elephants take over very quickly.

Go do it now. You will thank me. So epic
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,650
ironic that civ would come up -- civ is not an rts (not Real Time). it's similar in some ways, but the experience is way different... much more relaxed and less stressful, but also less exhilarating.

you can see a real difference in the communities, demographics of real time strategy vs turn based strategy games... so RTS may well be dying, even if TBS is doing fine, and vice versa. just pointing out some facts.

personally, i dont think RTS is going anywhere. Like 7 years ago CRPGs were 'dead' and then bethesda started doing stuff, mass effect came out, and badassery ensued.

edit: by the way, civ4 is best civ.
Edited by SlylockMcFox on 2/1/2013 9:51 PM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,873
will do , sounds sick
Reply Quote
Posts: 9,885
02/01/2013 09:51 PMPosted by SlylockMcFox
edit: by the way, civ4 is best civ.

Meh. You need both expansions for it to be really worth playing. I do love it.(Aircraft carriers are so sexy as are missle boats) but the whole stack of doom mechanic really gets boring after awhile. And civ 5 brought back raged units which I really missed. Still both excellent games.

And ya Civ is a turn based strategy as opposed to real time but there was a point where turn based games were considered more or less dead. Civ and Might and Magic saved the genre.
I think RTS's will be fine. They are hard games to play with other and take dedication and skill to learn. So it will always have a smaller user base as opposed to other games. But that isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,650
idk, i may be just the typical older games elitist, but the reviews and stuff i read for civ5 do not look promising. the economy/city management especially sounds much worse and more gimmicky than civ4. how's the ai, though, is it challenging?

i may have to give it a whirl just to confirm my pessimism.
Reply Quote
Posts: 9,885
02/01/2013 10:04 PMPosted by SlylockMcFox
idk, i may be just the typical older games elitist, but the reviews and stuff i read for civ5 do not look promising. the economy/city management especially sounds much worse and more gimmicky than civ4. how's the ai, though, is it challenging?

Well for the AI I am inclined to say yes. In 4 I could win on Prince np. Monarchy was about 50/50.
Been playing 5 for about a month now and I am still stuck on the second difficulty. It could just be the changes of mechanics though as going from 3 to 4 took a long time for me to adjust.
As far as economy management it is different. You don't have the direct control that you used to which kinda sucks. But I like what they did with strategic resources. I also like how you customize your government. And in the expansion the ability to customize your religion is really awesome. The battle mechanic is fantastic though I love it. Allot more strategy involved than there used to be. I wouldn't say it is better than 4 hands down. But I do like most of the differences and would definitely recommend.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,205
Good games make genres work, and multiplayer just broadens the appeal.

Turn based tactical games were almost non existent. Then they released X-Com: Enemy Unknown, which was fantastic. Turn based strategy is very rare - you get a Civ game. Most developers nowadays are either big box which push shooters and action games, or Indie developers which do push out strategy games but don't do RTS's very often - Sins of a Solar Empire is one of the bigger names besides SC for strategy that's recent. Which is a shame, since certain genres like space combat and RTS can be a real blast to play.

StarCraft 2 isn't an anomaly, Sins isn't an anomaly - if you make a decent product that isn't absurdly arcane and hard to get into people will buy it. Especially in genres that aren't flooded for choice.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]