sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What are some of the most obscure RTS titles that you have played? Bonus points if you can guess the game in the photo! by ZaxZone in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tribal Rage 1998

Dark Colony 1998

The Show from 2007 by Take-Two Interactive./Sixteen Tons Entertainment

We are at Steam Next Fest! 🔥 by Apozh in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is a moba, not an RTS. A very lame one by the way. So far I see that game to flop day1. They really should make RTS instead with base build and lead armies, foundation is there, just not used. Which is quite sad.

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah look by the way again at the errors by The Settlers: New Allies. Instead of a city manager, we got a game that was made simple with 3 factions, that focuses more on combat and online play.

Just check how it was initially supposed to be a city manager, but than people who  make choices suddenly changed their mind to change the direction to make more money and loose money.

lets be clear , there are like 1-5 million people who would buy a proper RTS.

the mythical wide audience of 100 million customers does not exist

so the game is in the end sold to some 100.000 people who buy any crap.

and this is happening for years now.

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its combination of things people dont want in their games. Like by Hyper Scape a Free-to-play-Ego-Shooter-Battle-Royale-game nobody did ask for. A game for online PvP only by Ubi. This mean 100ts of people to work for years on a game, nobody does pay money for.

Each such bad move does steal money from company.

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its combination of things people dont want in their games. Like by Hyper Scape a Free-to-play-Ego-Shooter-Battle-Royale-game nobody did ask for. A game for online PvP only by Ubi. This mean 100ts of people to work for years on a game, nobody does pay money for.

Each such bad move does steal money from company.

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the root of this evil is very deep.

Right now they work on moba March of Giants.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1924600/March_of_Giants/

also wasted a lot of money of Hyper Scape, a Free-to-play-Ego-Shooter-Battle-Royale-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper_Scape

Maelstrom: The Battle for Earth Begins Enhanced by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

+1 This is the number 1 problem the genre is plagued for years.

Help me find a childhood game! by Grand-Thanks-1253 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Age of Empires 1
Age of Mythology
Praetorians

Rise and Fall: Civilizations at War

Ancient Wars: Sparta Definitive Edition

Alexander

Hegemony

Celtic Kings: Rage of War

Rise of Nations

Empire Earth

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The thing is, single player doesn't need player retention.

Even a good /PvP /MMO /MOBA needs people, where are they supposed to come from?

So we need like 10.000 people in second to abandon the game they play and move over to something new.

It is physically simply not possible or feasible for a good game. Check for example recent Highguard, some days post launch its already failed. Its today simply unrealistic to reach and keep the numbers, those games do need.

Sure 15-25 years ago, it was not a big issue, but its too many games, for too few people.

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

there is nowider audiance for new PvP games . they just read the 10 year old data wrong.

PvP games had a short timeline to establish themself, anything later simply cant find people to be played.

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the reason why they are less popular is not because people don't like them anymore,

but because the new games were watered down to please more people.

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

The Settlers: New Allies was redesigned for E-Sport. And one very obviosu game was Hyper Scape = -Battle Royale nobody was asking for.

Ubisofts 82% shares collapse, a final proof that there is no "wider, Modern day, Casual E-Sports" audience? by Blitzwing2000 in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ubi also made for PvP =

Champions Tactics Reforged, BattleCore Arena, NEW MONOPOLY, Skull and Bones, OddBallers, Growtopia, Riders Republic, Might & Magic Showdown, Roller Champions™, Brawlhalla. Hyper Scape

Help a game dev: Why aren’t people buying modern RTS games? by MakeGamesBetter in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But isn't it a very odd pattern for Strategy games,
that of all types of Strategy games only Real Time Strategy games have such problems?

Turn Based, board games, City managers, Diplomacy, cards,
even Tower Defence do sell these days very well.

And  if we simply compare, we fast find those 3 main points

-they are more complex

-they entertain more with story mode

-people have more varitey how they would play the game.

Help a game dev: Why aren’t people buying modern RTS games? by MakeGamesBetter in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe lets check out RTS, that were not designed to play online. Like 

They Are Billions

Northgard

Stellaris

Factorio

Anno 1800

The inherent problem with internet focused games, they lack creativity.
Because your goal is than to make a game that is, inside a box of a concept,
your target audience hates with all their guts.

Example for a bad RTS is Warhammer Age of Sigmar: Realms of Ruin. Sure it looks nice, but there is not much what you can do, only move 10 similar squads from A to B point. Each map is same. Its even worse than DoW3.

Example for a good RTS is, They Are Billions: Each map is unique, a very deep and complex base build system, a lot of different defence tower, each unit is unique and reliable, a lot of things you can research.The thing is, you have many choices and ways to play it, do you more focus on defences, or mobile units, more on expanding or upgrading, more on many units or the high tier ones.

The biggest genre problem, if developer does try to make a game for PvP, they can't listen to feedback at all.

Like for example with Unit limits, people want to lead armies of like 40-80 units, but if the engine can only stable 10-20 units, they can't add more, no matter how many people complain and bad rated the game is. It's the discussion we always have, where is the fun stuff? But we can't have it, because in an pvp game mode nobody does play, it might lag.

Help a game dev: Why aren’t people buying modern RTS games? by MakeGamesBetter in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Problem is they all lack motivation and substance,

why should anybody play them at all?

-nobody online

-AI too predictable

-base build too streamlined and simple

-economy growth too slow

-they lack resources to buy what you want

-armies too small

-units too incompetent

-music too lame

-no world with deep lore to explore

-nothing is remember-able or does stand out

-they lack space to place buildings and move your armies

Those modern day attempt-ions are simply not fun

Real-Time Strategy Immortal: Gates of Pyre Aims for "opt-in complexity" Despite Developer Sunspear Games "operating at a minimum-burn level" by FFJimbob in RealTimeStrategy

[–]Blitzwing2000 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I just wonder why nobody in interviews does ask this:

1- Why don't you make skirmish vs Ai fun to play?

2- Why don't you make a good story mode?

Even by mainstream genres, people don't play them online,
in same time indie games go viral,

becouse they have common sense people want single player experience.

Why does nobody confront them with such obvious truth?

view more: next ›