I think we need to input some comments and tell them that SC2 is still at large with a very active community. There are only one or two general comments about starcraft 2 and I don't think that is a fair perspective. Anyone care to comment on that site? Also, do you think RTS is a dying market (post here).
In my perspective, checking out latest RTS games and sales, I definitely think it is a dying market, but I also think that just makes SC2 much more unique. The comments on the other sites are people talking about very old games like Command Conquer. Age of Empires 3 was a very well made game long time ago too. I think the only time the mass of gamers playing a reccent RTS was downloading Red Alert 3 for their consoles and getting confused and uninstalling it. (cmon now, controller != rts). SC2 is still 1million+ strong.
Instead dying they should use the word its a stagnant market. The general gamers and internet user were more intellectual beings back than, than today. Its due the fact the computers and internet is much more easily accessible than before.
Also consoles only favored fps games... and brought people to the game market who can only comprehend stupid fps games.
Though I think by time rts will have its renaissance when people will grow up and will look for complex games than the current top titles. Rise of LOL is a good sign, its not a very complex game, but it surely more complex than fps.
Also it seems that fps market is getting stagnant too, thx that for the retarded companies who release the same game each year... (khmm CoD...)
I blame youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and TV for dumbing down the world...
These same 4 sites are also the reason why very few new sites can run, It used to be if you wanted to run a site fine go for it, if people are interested in it then they will go there. Now its, OH you wanna run a site.... well go fudge yourself, because you dont have the funds to pull everyone to your site like Facebook, youtube, twitter, etc. :P
Just sayin there are better more innovative things out there, yet due to money they dont grow.
Well that is bullshit!.. Ten years or more ago most of those who had PC where a bit integelent at some point the market wasnt about millions of players playing those CnC games or others but there thousands for sure and the players of any games wherent so big either... Anyway the point is that most of the people can afford game machines, like consoles, PCs and that grows the casual gamers audiance more widely than any RTS game cause it have more complex gameplay that doesnt attracts new gamers to play it, like any shooter, rpgs, puzzle games have more accessability in understanding how game works.. So yeah, RTS wont go anywhere to dust, it just wont have such large audiance as those non stratigical games.
That whole News Topic is just for marketing and for new Costumers to attract to this unknown title "Sins of a Solar Empire". Look at that gameplay!!! How any new comer can understand taht chaos on the screen? It would take too much of their time and mostly they still wont get interest in playing such game as they would get less complex game to play.
I think that there always was those dumb people. But in recent ten years all those retards got easy access to internet and other stuff so its easier those get by those people more often than anytime before.
Its always been a niche market. So its not really dying and probably wont(as evidenced with Sc2 sales and strong player base). Your logic is wrong when you look at other unsuccessful RTS games. Blizzard simply holds the monopoly on the genre with both the Warcraft and Starcraft franchise(They know how to make good RTS games). The next best thing is command and conquer(Not talking about Tiberium twilight).
I don't think anything is dieing (as EW says), but more-so that over the last 10-20 years, mid-sized developers have been disappearing or merging into large ones. So you have 300-man teams now, and indie teams... and therefore much fewer 10-40 man teams that we had during 96-04.
Its always been a niche market. So its not really dying and probably wont(as evidenced with Sc2 sales and strong player base). Your logic is wrong when you look at other unsuccessful RTS games. Blizzard simply holds the monopoly on the genre with both the Warcraft and Starcraft franchise(They know how to make good RTS games). The next best thing is command and conquer(Not talking about Tiberium twilight).
It used to be the most profitable in the late 90s to early 00s. At least from the perspective of Germany. StarCraft, Command and Conquer, Age of Empires, The Sims, SimCity, Total Annihilation and their countless clones dominated the charts. But then again the PC has always been very strong in Germany.
I think nowadays people are looking for simple fun. RTS is now dominated by a new breed, what I would call Action-RTS. Games like LoL, HoN, DotA, FarmVille, Plants vs Zombies, and so on. I think these games are what people view as RTS nowadays. I remember one timeI logged onto Battle.net trying to get people to help me test my Point & Click Adventure map, and nobody seemed to understand. I told them about how you had to solve puzzles and they thought I tried to created some sort of Portal.
Good, complex RTS-games will return, much like the Point & Click Adventure genre, as there will definitely be a moment when people get sick of all the FPS and try out something different. I can feel it inside me. FPS used to dominate my PC, but nowadays I'm looking forward to Company of Heroes 2 and StarCraft 2 more than any other game.
On the one hand, I don't think RTS is dying. On the other hand, I can't name much more then two or three RTS games I've played recently, weighed against at least 12 different genre games. On my third hand, I don't think RTS has ever had a very 'dominant' presence. Not that RTS's aren't big or anything, but for basically every RTS I've played I can recall 2 FPSes, 1 RPG and 1 sim-style game. Perhaps it's more a case of ratio involved.
Edit: Whoa guys, hold one freaking minute. I actually read the article.
"Every genre or product gets accused of "dying" when it's no longer in the spotlight, and I doubt we'll ever reach a time where the RTS is completely gone. Still, it has fallen from grace, and certainly isn't where it used to be."
This actually sounds like it could make sense - he's barely saying RTS games are gone or whatever. Additionally, he's Jim Sterling from the Jimquisition. That guy's job is based around ranting.
Total money amounts of gaming industry has increased so much that it isn't really useful to to compare RTS games sale volumes of 90s 2000 to volumes of 2013. How many people played at 90s? Nowadays people all over the world play. At 90s only "nerds" played anything on PC. RTS games are designed for PC mostly because of mouse. RTS games are terrible to play using controller.
i think it's just because no one have idea how to make RTS (only blizzard close to this)
modern RTSes flaws:
1) bad graphics (atmosphere)
its very important, since all good games have it.
i dont mean its about effects per pixel, but graphics should feel not like "yeah we opened 3d editor and made some"
minecraft is a good example, because its gfx is feel natural. Starcraft 1, Quake, Doom, Half-Life had SICK gfx when they were released
so every modern RTS (except sc2) i saw have high poly 3D models, cool textures - but it still looks like "we've opened 3d editor, put >9000 polygons and added 1337 effects, here's da gfx"
2) bad controls (responce)
if you've played many RTSes, you will notice that many of them dont give you feeling where you control selected unit (again, starcraft 2 is an exception)
as a Starcraft 2 Master League player, i've tried to do attack move "marine dance" in warhammer 40k - no way, units didnt listen to me
so if you give order to unit - he should make response immediately, not only "yes sir", but also immediately do something
as i remember, Supreme Commander also dont give you feeling of controlling unit, they're just too slow for respond
huhh, im sorry for my english, i wish i'll learn it enough for writing full article about modern RTSes
so other flaws is:
3) bad balance or no balance at all
4) bad physics (why the f..k in 2013 "terramorphing" is a sooo rare feature? why i cant make my own units from my enemy corpses (and their' corpses even disappear!))
here is + of CoH - game where i saw that my units can cover behind my dead tank
so main idea for my message is - you make slow non-atmospheric RTS with not interesting base construction (and not nessesary) with little possibilities (WTF, u can only use units as u've been said - you cant block tank with spy, you cant fire with rifles into air in WW2 games) with bad setting (future robots, WW2 or low-poly totalwars) and then you say its a niche? yes it is, just because you dont have an idea how to make a really good interesting RTS
so i believe its just not time for an RTS, but they will return
One important aspect is technology. Here is my own rough description of game history:
Computers became powerful enough to handle basic up/down input and graphics -> arcade halls (pong)
Hardware was too expensive -> optimised massproduced hardware -> consoles (sidescrollers & story-rich-games)
Personal computers became cheap enough and were developing rapidly -> need to update often -> stationary computers -> mouse+keyboard type games (rts)
Mobile & social games -> small screen games & touch tech -> simple arcade games reinvented
What I'm trying to say is that RTS had its hayday back in the days when the table-top pc with mouse and keyboard was the norm and best thing you could get. Its not like that anymore: touch is very interesting input device and controllers have become awsome and ergonomic.
But why has FPS survived so well in comparison? They were after all born in the same "era". First I think FPS games have always been more popular. Its easier and simple to control one dude. Secondly I think the FPS genre have much been much better at embracing and using new tech and computational capacity. In RTS games you look down on a landscape. There is a limit to how detailed that can be. In a FPS game you have landscapes and large views, where new hardware can show off. New hardware -> new cool sceneries -> more customers -> more cash -> more games.
I think we will see a small uprise of RTS titles in the next 5-10 years solely because of how popular SC2 is getting (especially with another Expansion coming up) and that the whole MOBA scene is very close to the RTS concept and could inspire new game ideas which are close to both RTS games and MOBAs. Also there's the new C&C incoming which will be free to play. (Stuff like Airmech, which is btw awesome and you should check it out and support it.)
Overall though there are just way more other genres that are more appealing to the majority of gamers, I don't think RTS will ever be a mainstream genre. And it is also a huge risk for development teams to start developing an RTS because of that situation. Developing a Platformer/Puzzle Game/FPS is significantly easier and usually more profitable because of various reasons. And the main drive to develop video games for any development team is to be profitable and be able to keep doing exactly that, which means you mustn't fail with a project and have to deliver a high quality product within a (more or less) fixed time window. And that's just a way easier task for other genres, especially if you are a small team.
I think its just a matter of gaming trends. FPS went through a similar change. Remember the days when Quake Arena and Unreal Tournament dominated the charts? Now it's all about Call of Duty.
As for RTS, the trend has shifted to the MOBA style game, which branched off from the RTS standards. It's what's 'in' right now, and it's easier to pick up and (some might say) harder to master. It's simply a shift in gaming trends. Even fighting games have declined greatly on consoles, but i don't think it's the end for them because you will still have your Street Fighters and Mortal Kombats.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
For Lordaeron!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
http://www.destructoid.com/real-time-strategy-games-are-a-dying-market--243757.phtml
Quote from topic: "Company of Heroes may be profitable, and StarCraft II is an anomaly. But most of them aren’t gonna get big numbers. It’s a dying market."
I think we need to input some comments and tell them that SC2 is still at large with a very active community. There are only one or two general comments about starcraft 2 and I don't think that is a fair perspective. Anyone care to comment on that site? Also, do you think RTS is a dying market (post here).
In my perspective, checking out latest RTS games and sales, I definitely think it is a dying market, but I also think that just makes SC2 much more unique. The comments on the other sites are people talking about very old games like Command Conquer. Age of Empires 3 was a very well made game long time ago too. I think the only time the mass of gamers playing a reccent RTS was downloading Red Alert 3 for their consoles and getting confused and uninstalling it. (cmon now, controller != rts). SC2 is still 1million+ strong.
Instead dying they should use the word its a stagnant market. The general gamers and internet user were more intellectual beings back than, than today. Its due the fact the computers and internet is much more easily accessible than before.
Also consoles only favored fps games... and brought people to the game market who can only comprehend stupid fps games.
Though I think by time rts will have its renaissance when people will grow up and will look for complex games than the current top titles. Rise of LOL is a good sign, its not a very complex game, but it surely more complex than fps.
Also it seems that fps market is getting stagnant too, thx that for the retarded companies who release the same game each year... (khmm CoD...)
@Hookah604: Go
I blame youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and TV for dumbing down the world...
These same 4 sites are also the reason why very few new sites can run, It used to be if you wanted to run a site fine go for it, if people are interested in it then they will go there. Now its, OH you wanna run a site.... well go fudge yourself, because you dont have the funds to pull everyone to your site like Facebook, youtube, twitter, etc. :P
Just sayin there are better more innovative things out there, yet due to money they dont grow.
Well that is bullshit!.. Ten years or more ago most of those who had PC where a bit integelent at some point the market wasnt about millions of players playing those CnC games or others but there thousands for sure and the players of any games wherent so big either... Anyway the point is that most of the people can afford game machines, like consoles, PCs and that grows the casual gamers audiance more widely than any RTS game cause it have more complex gameplay that doesnt attracts new gamers to play it, like any shooter, rpgs, puzzle games have more accessability in understanding how game works.. So yeah, RTS wont go anywhere to dust, it just wont have such large audiance as those non stratigical games.
That whole News Topic is just for marketing and for new Costumers to attract to this unknown title "Sins of a Solar Empire". Look at that gameplay!!! How any new comer can understand taht chaos on the screen? It would take too much of their time and mostly they still wont get interest in playing such game as they would get less complex game to play.
@Taintedwisp: Go
I think that there always was those dumb people. But in recent ten years all those retards got easy access to internet and other stuff so its easier those get by those people more often than anytime before.
@QueenGambit: Go
Its always been a niche market. So its not really dying and probably wont(as evidenced with Sc2 sales and strong player base). Your logic is wrong when you look at other unsuccessful RTS games. Blizzard simply holds the monopoly on the genre with both the Warcraft and Starcraft franchise(They know how to make good RTS games). The next best thing is command and conquer(Not talking about Tiberium twilight).
I don't think anything is dieing (as EW says), but more-so that over the last 10-20 years, mid-sized developers have been disappearing or merging into large ones. So you have 300-man teams now, and indie teams... and therefore much fewer 10-40 man teams that we had during 96-04.
It used to be the most profitable in the late 90s to early 00s. At least from the perspective of Germany. StarCraft, Command and Conquer, Age of Empires, The Sims, SimCity, Total Annihilation and their countless clones dominated the charts. But then again the PC has always been very strong in Germany.
I think nowadays people are looking for simple fun. RTS is now dominated by a new breed, what I would call Action-RTS. Games like LoL, HoN, DotA, FarmVille, Plants vs Zombies, and so on. I think these games are what people view as RTS nowadays. I remember one timeI logged onto Battle.net trying to get people to help me test my Point & Click Adventure map, and nobody seemed to understand. I told them about how you had to solve puzzles and they thought I tried to created some sort of Portal.
Good, complex RTS-games will return, much like the Point & Click Adventure genre, as there will definitely be a moment when people get sick of all the FPS and try out something different. I can feel it inside me. FPS used to dominate my PC, but nowadays I'm looking forward to Company of Heroes 2 and StarCraft 2 more than any other game.
On the one hand, I don't think RTS is dying. On the other hand, I can't name much more then two or three RTS games I've played recently, weighed against at least 12 different genre games. On my third hand, I don't think RTS has ever had a very 'dominant' presence. Not that RTS's aren't big or anything, but for basically every RTS I've played I can recall 2 FPSes, 1 RPG and 1 sim-style game. Perhaps it's more a case of ratio involved.
Edit: Whoa guys, hold one freaking minute. I actually read the article.
"Every genre or product gets accused of "dying" when it's no longer in the spotlight, and I doubt we'll ever reach a time where the RTS is completely gone. Still, it has fallen from grace, and certainly isn't where it used to be."
This actually sounds like it could make sense - he's barely saying RTS games are gone or whatever. Additionally, he's Jim Sterling from the Jimquisition. That guy's job is based around ranting.
Total money amounts of gaming industry has increased so much that it isn't really useful to to compare RTS games sale volumes of 90s 2000 to volumes of 2013. How many people played at 90s? Nowadays people all over the world play. At 90s only "nerds" played anything on PC. RTS games are designed for PC mostly because of mouse. RTS games are terrible to play using controller.
i think it's just because no one have idea how to make RTS (only blizzard close to this)
modern RTSes flaws: 1) bad graphics (atmosphere) its very important, since all good games have it. i dont mean its about effects per pixel, but graphics should feel not like "yeah we opened 3d editor and made some" minecraft is a good example, because its gfx is feel natural. Starcraft 1, Quake, Doom, Half-Life had SICK gfx when they were released
CoH and starcraft 2 also have good gfx (i was shocked when i saw how bullets deplete protoss sheild and then start to hit actual model) how check this, its RUSE: http://cdn.steampowered.com/v/gfx/apps/21970/ss_0542fd543a0adc55d68c6a6e6f337ee7ba26dc20.1920x1080.jpg like... WTF? you think this flat map with bad textures and low poly models is good? NO!
so every modern RTS (except sc2) i saw have high poly 3D models, cool textures - but it still looks like "we've opened 3d editor, put >9000 polygons and added 1337 effects, here's da gfx"
2) bad controls (responce) if you've played many RTSes, you will notice that many of them dont give you feeling where you control selected unit (again, starcraft 2 is an exception) as a Starcraft 2 Master League player, i've tried to do attack move "marine dance" in warhammer 40k - no way, units didnt listen to me so if you give order to unit - he should make response immediately, not only "yes sir", but also immediately do something as i remember, Supreme Commander also dont give you feeling of controlling unit, they're just too slow for respond
huhh, im sorry for my english, i wish i'll learn it enough for writing full article about modern RTSes
so other flaws is: 3) bad balance or no balance at all 4) bad physics (why the f..k in 2013 "terramorphing" is a sooo rare feature? why i cant make my own units from my enemy corpses (and their' corpses even disappear!)) here is + of CoH - game where i saw that my units can cover behind my dead tank
so main idea for my message is - you make slow non-atmospheric RTS with not interesting base construction (and not nessesary) with little possibilities (WTF, u can only use units as u've been said - you cant block tank with spy, you cant fire with rifles into air in WW2 games) with bad setting (future robots, WW2 or low-poly totalwars) and then you say its a niche? yes it is, just because you dont have an idea how to make a really good interesting RTS
so i believe its just not time for an RTS, but they will return
as a good example - planetary annihilation http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/659943965/planetary-annihilation-a-next-generation-rts
new command & conquer is coming..
One important aspect is technology. Here is my own rough description of game history:
What I'm trying to say is that RTS had its hayday back in the days when the table-top pc with mouse and keyboard was the norm and best thing you could get. Its not like that anymore: touch is very interesting input device and controllers have become awsome and ergonomic.
But why has FPS survived so well in comparison? They were after all born in the same "era". First I think FPS games have always been more popular. Its easier and simple to control one dude. Secondly I think the FPS genre have much been much better at embracing and using new tech and computational capacity. In RTS games you look down on a landscape. There is a limit to how detailed that can be. In a FPS game you have landscapes and large views, where new hardware can show off. New hardware -> new cool sceneries -> more customers -> more cash -> more games.
Stopped reading after here because I realized Tainted would be right for everything else he said. I totally agree with this statement.
I think we will see a small uprise of RTS titles in the next 5-10 years solely because of how popular SC2 is getting (especially with another Expansion coming up) and that the whole MOBA scene is very close to the RTS concept and could inspire new game ideas which are close to both RTS games and MOBAs. Also there's the new C&C incoming which will be free to play. (Stuff like Airmech, which is btw awesome and you should check it out and support it.)
Overall though there are just way more other genres that are more appealing to the majority of gamers, I don't think RTS will ever be a mainstream genre. And it is also a huge risk for development teams to start developing an RTS because of that situation. Developing a Platformer/Puzzle Game/FPS is significantly easier and usually more profitable because of various reasons. And the main drive to develop video games for any development team is to be profitable and be able to keep doing exactly that, which means you mustn't fail with a project and have to deliver a high quality product within a (more or less) fixed time window. And that's just a way easier task for other genres, especially if you are a small team.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumI think its just a matter of gaming trends. FPS went through a similar change. Remember the days when Quake Arena and Unreal Tournament dominated the charts? Now it's all about Call of Duty.
As for RTS, the trend has shifted to the MOBA style game, which branched off from the RTS standards. It's what's 'in' right now, and it's easier to pick up and (some might say) harder to master. It's simply a shift in gaming trends. Even fighting games have declined greatly on consoles, but i don't think it's the end for them because you will still have your Street Fighters and Mortal Kombats.