Support NeoGAF

[Lime]

The recent launch of Starcraft: Remastered made me think of the golden age of PC gaming where the RTS genre was immensely popular - Dune 2, Comannd & Conquer, Starcraft, Warcraft 2, Age of Empires 2, Total Annihilation, Dark Regin, Ground Control, Dungeon Keeper, Battlezone, Homeworld - all were amazing entries into what was one of the more dominant and popular genres back then.

Of course things have changed, although we've seen some interesting titles in Grey Goo and Deserts of Kharak, the sequels Company of Heroes 2 and Dawn of War 3, and of course all the remastered of the classics like Homeworld 1+2, AoE 2 HD, and now Starcraft.

But I do wonder what the future of the genre is. Is Blizzard even interested in the RTS genre any more? Which developers are still interested in making RTS games? Is it still financially viable or has it merely become a niche genre?

 

[deoee]

Look at Dawn of War 3, Sudden Strike 4 and Steel Division - some recent games you can use to determine how you feel about more modern RTS

 

[Neptonic]

MOBAs have killed them and it's up to indies to fill the shoes left empty by the larger studios
However some of the indie RTS games have been frustrating to play (looking at you planetary annihilation)

 

[Dictator93]

Iron Harvest should be releasing a teaser trailer today!

It looks like a bright future for Dawn Of War 2 styled RTS!

 

[GK_Gats]

Pretty sure they are working on Warcraft 4 even if it's just R&D right now.
And Warcraft 3 Remastered should be revealed soon (Blizzcon?) as they just introduced the PTR.

 

[JoeNut]

i'm really disappointed this genre is all but dead on console, Tom Clancys Endwar was quality, and back in the ps1 days c&C was great.

 

[Robottiimu2000]

We are currently living the future in the form of MOBA..

I'd say a MOBA/RTS hybrid is next up, where we have a tad more control of the "base building" but hard to see the big audience going back to the micro management of the original RTS format.

 

[cw_sasuke]

Warcraft 4 and Pikmin 4 are probably the only ones i would pick up at this point. Otherwise im fine playing the classics.

Not the same but i would love a new Stronghold title.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Hyped for Iron Harvest 1920+.

 

[Robert at Zeboyd Games]

Check out Tooth & Tail - it's doing a lot of interesting things in the genre.

 

[Unstable]

I can't believe I lived to see the death of the RTS genre. Shame, really.

 

[KLoWn]

It's probably pretty fucked, but hopefully not.

I've heard so many times from younger players (well, younger than me anyway, I'm 32) that "it's too hard to play", and I really don't get what they mean, all you do is construct a base and build troops... Unless you're aiming for the top of the ranked ladder in Starcraft pretty much every RTS can be played as casual as you want, as most used to play them back in the day.

 

[KDR_11k]

The big problem for the RTS genre is that the old days we look back to was just us playing with bad players where we could play rather leisurely. We were all terrible at the games and playing extremely suboptimally. The fast-paced hypercompetitive nature of RTSes was always there but without online we didn't play against people who knew about that.

These days multiplayer is always online and will put us up against people who don't just leisurely build a base and then an army, online always requires fast and cutthroat play. RTSes require extreme levels of multitasking that most people aren't up to, hence the fallback to MOBAs which let you concentrate on one hero.

 

[54-46!]

Iron Harvest should be releasing a teaser trailer today!

It looks like a bright future for Dawn Of War 2 styled RTS!

This looked pretty interesting until I read that it was designed for "PS4, Xbox One and PC".

What else have these guys put out?

 

[Syf]

I mean the market has spoken and most people prefer the mechanical ease of MOBAs where you still get some strategy but don't have to worry about managing an army, buildings, resources, etc. Seems most RTS games die fast these days outside of StarCraft. Speaking of Blizzard I'm curious what they're going to do with their next strategy game, because they openly talked about the lack of interest in standard RTS in today's market. Either they make some big changes to their next RTS or they switch the genre.

 

[grandwizard]

Whether reality or just perception the RTS genre lost the appeal to casual players for being too hardcore. It's a sad thing to see but people won't even try RTSs now, and even doing one multiplayer match is out of the question.

MOBAs being team based is a huge reason why they grabbed the large casual RTS base since you can just lose yourself in a team and not have to worry about all the pressure that comes with RTS multiplayer. Even RTS team modes would have people stressing. Only managing one hero compared to micro/macro is huge as well.

Even Blizzard with its amazing matchmaking for SC2 saw lots of people drop it for being too high pressure and 'ladder anxiety'. The sad fact is when it's 1v1, people still really don't like losing even if its perfectly 50% of the time.

If Blizzard really makes another try with WC4 I expect the multiplayer to be hugely focused around coop instead of competitive. I remember them being surprised with the popularity of the Coop modes in SC2 LotV, and they ended up investing way more effort into it after seeing that. Now there is weekly mutations and more DLC commanders to purchase for it. It wasn't that surprising to me because it allowed people to play RTS online without all the pressure that came from a competitive mode, it was like a success story waiting to happen.

 

[megathor]

Whether reality or just perception the RTS genre lost the appeal to casual players for being too hardcore. It's a sad thing to see but people won't even try RTSs now, and even doing one multiplayer match is out of the question.
.

I'm the sort of person that would love to play more RTS'es, and played plenty of AOE when I was younger, but for me, it's not just losing 50% of the time. I've got a 0% winrate on SC2 in the 10-15 MP matches I've played, and it's just not fun. I buy them, play the campaigns and then park them, and get my MP fix from a MOBA instead.

 

[Syf]

If Blizzard really makes another try with WC4 I expect the multiplayer to be hugely focused around coop instead of competitive. I remember them being surprised with the popularity of the Coop modes in SC2 LotV, and they ended up investing way more effort into it after seeing that. Now there is weekly mutations and more DLC commanders to purchase for it. It wasn't that surprising to me because it allowed people to play RTS online without all the pressure that came from a competitive mode, it was like a success story waiting to happen.

Yeah, co-op has been a real bright spot for SC2. Blizzard said at their summit last summer it's by far the most popular mode, and with good reason; like you said, it's straight RTS fun with a friend/ally and basically zero pressure. Got even better when they started adding truly unique commanders like Stukov and Nova. Would love to see them incorporate that whole idea into their next strategy game, if they do one.

 

[Lucumo]

I can't believe I lived to see the death of the RTS genre. Shame, really.

Well, the big downswing came in the early 00s when a lot of studios stopped producing RTS games and with the rise of DotA and then subsequent MOBAs, it was made sure that the genre would never recover.

 

[EvB]

No mention of the only AAA RTS title of th last 12 months?

Halo Wars 2, it’s really great

 

[Evolution of Metal]

No mention of the only AAA RTS title of th last 12 months?

Halo Wars 2, it’s really great

Dawn of War 3 is an AAA RTS game.

Sudden Strike 4 and Normandy 44 are both AA budget games this year.

There are still enough RTS games for everyone, sadly nobody plays them. People are dazed with AoE and Blizzard game remakes, they aren't going to bother to play anything else.

The big problem for the RTS genre is that the old days we look back to was just us playing with bad players where we could play rather leisurely. We were all terrible at the games and playing extremely suboptimally. The fast-paced hypercompetitive nature of RTSes was always there but without online we didn't play against people who knew about that.

These days multiplayer is always online and will put us up against people who don't just leisurely build a base and then an army, online always requires fast and cutthroat play. RTSes require extreme levels of multitasking that most people aren't up to, hence the fallback to MOBAs which let you concentrate on one hero.

Very good point.

 

[Lime]

Check out Tooth & Tail - it's doing a lot of interesting things in the genre.

Wow, that looks super cool. Thanks for the suggestion, I love to see experimentation like this.

No mention of the only AAA RTS title of th last 12 months?

Halo Wars 2, it’s really great

Sorry but the Halo universe is so off-putting to me.

Dawn of War 3 is an AAA RTS game.

Sudden Strike 4 and Normandy 44 are both AA budget games this year.

There are still enough RTS games for everyone, sadly nobody plays them. People are dazed with AoE and Blizzard game remakes, they aren't going to bother to play anything else.

I've been meaning to buy DoW3, but with SS4 and N44, I'm just not into WW2 games any longer after that insane amount in the late 90's/early 2000's.

 

[Ivellios]

I really like RTS but only for the single player campaing, because i can take my time building a good base, creating a army at my leisure, etc. my favorites series were always C&C, Warcraft and Starcraft because their single player were fun with a good story.

So yeah i understand these people that think that competitive RTS are too hardcore, in this case MOBAs are way more simpler and fun, a pity that the community in these is usually trash.

For the future i can only hope for at very least a remaster of WC3, outside of this i have no ideia of any new RTS being developed.

 

[Rodelero]

No mention of the only AAA RTS title of th last 12 months?

Halo Wars 2, it’s really great

I can't help but feel it's not being mentioned because it's not really great.

 

[lucebuce12]

I really like RTS but only for the single player campaing, because i can take my time building a good base, creating a army at my leisure, etc. my favorites series were always C&C, Warcraft and Starcraft because their single player were fun with a good story.

So yeah i understand these people that think that competitive RTS are too hardcore, in this case MOBAs are way more simpler and fun, a pity that the community in these is usually trash.

For the future i can only hope for at very least a remaster of WC3, outside of this i have no ideia of any new RTS being developed.

Exactly how I feel.

 

[FriskyrumX]

Battlezone

Battlezone 1 and 2 were probably some of my favorite RTSs of all time just behind Starcraft, I would really love another in that vain again with FPS elements.. so many hours lost on them.

 

[Lime]

Yeah, I feel the same - I am more into the campaign of the RTS where I can take my time and enjoy the game instead of having adrenaline running through my body while maintaining a high APM. So singleplayer RTS is mostly my jam.

I wonder if that's feasible at all these days - Homeworld: DoK had a really nice campaign and Grey Goo wasn't half-bad, but I wonder if it financially makes sense to even put much effort into a RTS, since it seems people are mostly into the genre due to multiplayer

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

At this point I'm just waiting on Company of Heroes 3 to have lanes and hero units before I quit the genre and never look back.

 

[pislit]

MS owns the rights to Rise of Nations, right?

 

[Nere]

When you lose a moba game you can blame it at your teamates and you will still feel good about yourself, since 1v1 is the mode mostly pushed in RTS these days rather than team games, when you lose a 1v1 starcraft match you have none to blame but yourself and that might make you feel bad. Maybe one more reason for the decline of the RTS genre.

 

[KDR_11k]

Yeah, co-op has been a real bright spot for SC2. Blizzard said at their summit last summer it's by far the most popular mode, and with good reason; like you said, it's straight RTS fun with a friend/ally and basically zero pressure. Got even better when they started adding truly unique commanders like Stukov and Nova. Would love to see them incorporate that whole idea into their next strategy game, if they do one.

True, coop vs AI seems to be the most popular among casual players but very few games cater to that, the only RTS I know of that's designed around coop is AI War (sequel is in the works). Skirmish modes tend to be very limited about that.

At this point I'm just waiting on Company of Heroes 3 to have lanes and hero units before I quit the genre and never look back.

CoH1 had that in one of the game modes added by expansions.

 

[DeadlyParasite]

The last RTS I thought was actually fun was Company of Heroes 1 which came out around 10 years ago. Everything since has been disappointing.

 

[JoeNut]

Iron Harvest should be releasing a teaser trailer today!

It looks like a bright future for Dawn Of War 2 styled RTS!

Heh, this is ps4 ?? retract my earlier post then huh

 

[SecondVariety]

While it feels like Blizzard and Mobas killed the genre some ten years ago, some of the fun survives in 4X games and games like Shadowrun. I'd echo what people say about the 1v1 competition putting players off. And really, it seems like anything that is so mouse dependant (thus no good for a controller or touch screen or even touch pad) is set for a niche audience. Hopefully, we one day get a really amazing RTS from an indie and the genre gets some new fans.

 

[Lime]

The last RTS I thought was actually fun was Company of Heroes 1 which came out around 10 years ago. Everything since has been disappointing.

Deserts of Kharak was really good, imo.

 

[KDR_11k]

Oh, right, a player VS AI RTS is the Creeperworld series.

Deserts of Kharak was really good, imo.

Only in the campaign though, the skirmish/MP seems really limited...

Act of Aggression is also a nice one, it's based on Act of War which was a C&C Generals clone back in the day.

 

[Dictator93]

This looked pretty interesting until I read that it was designed for "PS4, Xbox One and PC".

What else have these guys put out?

New dev team, so nothing IIRC.

Heh, this is ps4 ?? retract my earlier post then huh

Well I imagine it is PC first and only then will it be down ported to consoles like any self respecting RTS would do. If they design the game systems with a gamepad and or filmic framerate in mind... then yeah, I would not think it could be very good.

I am speaking out of an optimism since they seem very dedicated. They had a massive multiple page long survey to any potential players a few months back that covered topiucs very relevant to PC RTS.

 

[osnameless]

I'd love something like Red Alert again. A campaign based on historical/alternate-history events, where you can play both sides. I believe the closest thing to that was Company of Heroes 2.

Oh, and please bring back those live cutscenes. They were so fun!

 

[QuixoticNeutral]

Competitively speaking, SC2 will probably remain the only game in town internationally (with BW remaining dominant in Korea) until whatever Blizzard does next. And it's extremely clear that the successor RTS (probably WC4, maybe something else) is deep in development, as all of the senior staff on SC2 have moved onto an unannounced project, including the folks doing double-duty on Heroes of the Storm.

I hope WC4 takes some chances and experiments as boldly as WC3 did in its own day. I think SC2 stands to receive long-term support as the de facto large-army worker-economy game in the classic style, even if it's in maintenance mode now. WC3's ladder was never that popular, if I recall (UMS really made that game)—the systems were too weird for a lot of people, I think, with its small squads, PvE creeping, upkeep thresholds, hybrid hero/army setup (which just left players with the desire to take a hard turn to one extreme or the other, MOBA or StarCraft). But a game in its position, like a wacky WC4 that doesn't quite play like any RTS before it, would probably stand to perform better in the current environment of streaming and e-sports where game knowledge is a lot easier to come by. If you look at SC2, macro mechanics, worker harassment, unit compositions, and a few offensive timings are all part of the standard playbook even in lower leagues where nobody's execution is any good. The standard of game knowledge at low levels is actually really impressive next to past RTS games.

I'm extremely fond of Blizzard's approach to campaign design ever since TFT, where they make every mission its own game that pushes what their engine and tools allow them to do, synergy with the multiplayer experience be damned. I hope it continues regardless of what multiplayer form their next RTS takes.

There's definitely a vacuum in the industry right now where something like Rise of Nations or Age of Mythology is supposed to be, an offbeat, inventive, and thematically memorable "short-session empire builder" that has enough built-in variety to keep a healthy, casual, non-e-sports community interested. I don't think anything is properly covering that segment right now; the last game I can think of that captured the kind of pacing and macro focus I'm thinking of here is Sins of the Solar Empire.

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

When I think RTS, I think micromanagement hell.

When you play online the decisions you make in the first two minutes determines the outcome of the match.

 

[QuixoticNeutral]

When I think RTS, I think micromanagement hell.

When you play online the decisions you make in the first two minutes determines the outcome of the match.

This is really not the case on the SC2 ladder up to the middle leagues (Platinum or so). Build orders are sloppy enough, scouting is poor enough, and opponents are evenly matched enough that mid-game decisions about attacking, expanding, or adjusting your army composition do a lot more to swing the needle.

One other thing I should add—it's a niche game that won't be setting any long-term trends, but if you want fast but low-micro RTS, all about reading the board state and responding by dropping well-chosen buildings or racing for carefully selected tech, I strongly recommend Offworld Trading Company. I like to describe it as Settlers of Catan for high-frequency traders, and it doesn't quite play like anything else in the field.

 

[EdwardTivrusky]

When I think RTS, I think micromanagement hell.

When you play online the decisions you make in the first two minutes determines the outcome of the match.

That's the thing that's keeping me away from Battlefleet Gothic. I've heard it's very micro heavy at later stages which i usually struggle at.

There again i've just bought "Command: Modern Air Naval Operations" for £18 which isn't micro-heavy but is very deep. lol, what have i done? Damn you, baloogan!

 

[UnemployedVillain]

MOBAs

 

[midasmulligan]

Ashes of the singularity escalation....play it and you'll understand (brilliant AI, streamlined unit management, massive battles that are tactical and strategic at the same time, ect ect)

 

[Shubh_C63]

People like things simple and straightforward now. I even remember a thread here that was advocating to remove Resource Gathering and Base Building in an RTS. To my shock 70% of people was supportive of it.

Warcraft 4 will probably happen - with a twist we won't see coming - will be a traditional WC3/SC2 Strategy base building game but as I said, with a huge twist that will initially put off everyone who are dying for WC4 including me - And will probably launch in 2030.

Calling it.

 

[lazygecko]

When I think RTS, I think micromanagement hell.

When you play online the decisions you make in the first two minutes determines the outcome of the match.

I'd like to think the silver lining of MOBAs is that they have captured most of the micro-obsessed demographic of competitive RTS, which should leave some room to cater more towards macro gameplay in the genre again.

 

[hotcyder]

Adapt and Innovate.

The space race to create the perfect console RTS seemed to peter out with no clear victor. Pikmin is the perfect accidental RTS - but I can't help but feel there's something in-between - the ease of unit management of the former, but with the scale of something like Starcraft.

 

[Raysoul]

I have played RTS mostly for its single player content. I think the genre will have to build upon the single player content than multiplayer content for it to sell to most players. Devs would also have to think on how to make it accessible as RTS is one of the genres that is hard to learn (harder than fighting games imo).

Pikmin already nailed it for consoles.

 

[spons]

Hopefully in dumbed down console games so I can finally play them properly.

 

[sleverfunk]

Oh wow, I just realized SC2 was released 12 years after the 1st sc.
It's been 15 years since wc3 realased, but still no Warcraft IV in sight.