Why did Real Time Strategy genre die out?

[Multidirectional]

I'm sorry but i don't see this being true at all when it comes to RTS games.

Once Blizzard stopped patching Starcraft II and there was formed a "balance council" that consisted mainly of pro gamers and some streamers the game ended up receiving numerous small QoL fixes with every patch since, whereas Blizzard couldn't be arsed to do it for many years. It's almost like pro players can get annoyed by same shit as casuals.

 

[cvv]

My theory is very Occamian - it's the graphix. The bling. Simple as that. Stupidity and superficiality are generally reliable multipurpose explanations.

Between 1995 - 2005 RTS provided action fans a great fix in a pretty graphix (for the time) because back then 3D engines were still buttugly and janky AF.

As 3D engines developed and got prettier, most fans migrated to blingier, more viscerul action drugs like FPS, sports games, racing games, shit like that.

There, mystery solved, thread closed.

 

[Lyric Suite]

I'm sorry but i don't see this being true at all when it comes to RTS games.

Once Blizzard stopped patching Starcraft II and there was formed a "balance council" that consisted mainly of pro gamers and some streamers the game ended up receiving numerous small QoL fixes with every patch since, whereas Blizzard couldn't be arsed to do it for many years. It's almost like pro players can get annoyed by same shit as casuals.

I was watching a video of Grubby the other day where he was talking about possible balance changes for WC3 and a lot of his points revolved around fixing limited or boring strategies, and making unused units more viable. Like, right now human mirror basically involves a boring Spell Breaker/Priests slugfest, which isn't particular fun either for them or anybody watching. Apparently, what entertains the pros is multiple and varied strategies, as much as everyone else, but that's only possible for them when the game is truly balanced. For casuals, you can play anything you want and come up with any build order or strategy you prefer. As long as your opponent is on your level, matches are unpredictable and varied and you can still win. The pros by contrast MUST stick to the meta in order to win and that's when balance comes into play because without it their options can become quite limited. When a single unit combination dominates a match, why bother use anything else.

BTW, i also saw his video where he talks about the problems he experienced with SC2 and man, some of that stuff seemed pretty bad, and Blizzard never fixed any of it so no wonder the pros went out of their way to fix it themselves. He talks about a mirror Zerg match that basically went on forever and eventually both sides went AFK to go ask Blizzard if they were watching that shit lmao. I wonder if you know what that was i'd love to see it.

 

[Average Manatee]

Swarm Host was the dumbest unit Blizzard could design and utterly destroyed the flow of the game whenever it was usable. It's like if Terrans could have double range siege tanks that don't need vision to fire.

 

[anvi]

Everything has been said. Here's my recollection of RTSs.

There were too many and they weren't that interesting once you had played one, you played them all. There were a few neat ideas (designable tanks, stealth, emps, etc) but not many. They needed to evolve but the evolution kind of killed it. MOBA was one direction, games like Savage and whatever, they were part RTS and part fun 3rd person action game. But MOBAs evolved to become another stupid thing and there was no RTS left.

At the same time Tower Defense games came along, I really love them, mostly only the ones that let you build a maze. But that evolved too and ended up back where it started. Flagging RTS sales made them attempt games like C&C Renegade. Then Tower Defense games became stale and they ended up making 3rd person shooter hybrids too like Orcs Must Die, Sanctum, and many others. I like them too but it's not an RTS, it's not a good shooter or action game, and usually not a very good TD game either.

There were also some games that tried to be RTS without the base building. Company of Heroes, World in Conflict etc. I hated the former, liked the latter but only really because of the graphics and pretty artillery. The gameplay was kinda crap.

The nail in the coffin was EA raping and massacring as they do. Westwood Studios was awesome, they had ideas and could make stuff. I think the best RTS was Tiberian Sun and they made that. After that EA bought them and it went downhill. Generals was fun but it was less deep and interesting than TS because that's how EA does things. They did a few other ok ones, then C&C4 crashed the series into a wall.

Total Annihilation / SupCom went the exact same route. Bought by Squeenix and then they made a dumbed down version that the fans hated, The End. But try Beyond All Reason, it's really good. Based on the original TA but modified, it feels like a new game.

 

[anvi]

Also, RTS don't work well on [current year] hardware. They can be modern and well made with multithreading and whatever, but as soon as there are a lot of units, things slow down. Graphics wise they seem ok but thousands of units all pathfinding individually in realtime is a problem. They all have small maps too because of this. I want to play one in a huge open world, or an infinite procedural world like Minecraft or whatever. But so far it's about 32x32 max.

 

[anvi]

Also, the genre didn't live long enough to develop some good conventions. Supreme Commander took the roof off the maps so playing other RTSs after that just feels claustrophobic or like my head is being held close to the screen or something. I can get used to it after a while but after playing SupCom it feels very old and unnatural not being able to zoom out a few inches. In SupCom you just whiz the mouse wheel and it zooms out all the way into space so you can see everything and then another flick of the wheel and you can zoom in to wherever you want to be. It's hard to go back from that.

But it is primitive compared to C&C in some ways. C&C had things you could shoot like the Emp and paratroopers and stuff, and much better super weapons. There's also subterranean attacks in TS. I think if a game took SupComs camera and C&Cs gameplay it would have become the standard all the others had to match.

 

[anvi]

Good job ChatGPT

 

[Multidirectional]

BTW, i also saw his video where he talks about the problems he experienced with SC2 and man, some of that stuff seemed pretty bad, and Blizzard never fixed any of it so no wonder the pros went out of their way to fix it themselves. He talks about a mirror Zerg match that basically went on forever and eventually both sides went AFK to go ask Blizzard if they were watching that shit lmao. I wonder if you know what that was i'd love to see it.

I saw that video of his. His main complaints, from what I recall now, were about stuff that's no longer in the game. And he himself mentioned that game is in much better state now. I didn't play it back then, only started during LotV era, at 2017 I think. It would appear that when this David Kim guy left the dev team game actually started improving, as everyone seems to agree that LotV fixed many major issues with the game. I still don't like playing against swarm hosts but they are nowhere near as retarded now as they used to be. They have clear downsides now, unit is utter garbage defensively so often you can just destroy their user by ignoring his attacks and just sending your army to his base. If you stay at home and keep trading out your army with his free units though then you're in trouble as then they can gain massive value over time despite being on lower base count than you. It seems a good thing I came to that game late or I would've dropped it in disgust had I started it when swarm host meta was still a thing.

 

[Lyric Suite]

His main complaints, from what I recall now, were about stuff that's no longer in the game.

Yeah but that's too little too late given the time frames involved. It also mattered to Grubby obviously since all the imbalanced shit was there during the time he tried to make it pro. That they eventually fixed a lot of stuff more than half a decade after he had already given up on the game wasn't exactly a credit to Blizzard.

 

[Falksi]

Isn't the Total War series RTS?

And haven't we had 8 releases in the last 9 years from that series?

 

[Lizard]

The same thing that killed the AA middleground games space, opportunity cost. Everyone wanted to fund the next GTA/CoD/WoW/LoL/etc, publishers wanted to fund one big game instead of like 10 smaller budget ones(but still decently budgeted). Was happening with movies at the same time, hence why there was so much Marvel/Disney and indie arthouse garbage without much seemingly in between as far as traditional genres go.

I keep hearing people blame esports, but were you even still playing RTS when it was in its death throes? I was, and aside from SC2 and C&C4 I can't name a single big esports focus and push off the top of my head. Can you name them? I'm genuinely curious. What I remember was a big push for multiplatform(console trash) for RTS games. A lot of new games and sequels got console focus like C&C 3 and RA3 before the alleged esports push. Then there was the push for the f2p and casual audiences, farmville and shit was huge at the time. AoE online came out, Company of Heroes Online had a beta then got canned, there were multiple new f2p RTS games that never saw the light of day. I can remember watching videos for them looking for the next RTS to play. SC2 happened during all of this, I can only remember C&C4 being the other esports push for RTS. DoW3 came out well after the genre was basically dead. Most of the rts games I can think of off the top of my head were already single player focused. I don't remember Stronghold Esports edition, or Settlers Esports edition. The genre was basically dead at the point where SC2 shows up. They were already trying to find various ways to remonetize it because it wasn't making as much money as GTA/CoD/WoW, not because it wasn't still possible to make money. The devs that made RTS didn't nut up and take over the genre like 4X devs did, they needed to change up the formula.

Seriously what RTS series had a big Esports focus besides SC2 and C&C4? I am scratching my head trying to think of any other big ones.

I boycotted SC2 because it didn't have LAN play btw, not trying to defend the game lol. I only played WoL because I got it as a present from someone who didn't know. Barely touched the multiplayer and still haven't touched to sequels.

 

[ghardy]

So... is it dead yet?

 

[Gilius Thunderhead]

Now that I'm approaching my late 30s, I've started playing RTS again to help combat age related cognitive decline.

 

[ghardy]

Now that I'm approaching my late 30s, I've started playing RTS again to help combat age related cognitive decline.

Do you have any favorites, given that different RTSes emphasize different skills?

 

[Gilius Thunderhead]

Now that I'm approaching my late 30s, I've started playing RTS again to help combat age related cognitive decline.

Do you have any favorites, given that different RTSes emphasize different skills?

I've completed most of AoE's campaigns and I've recently started Dark Reign. My plan is to replay all my late 90s favorites before branching into the new stuff.

I really don't think I'll be able to develop any "skills", I'm just enjoying the aesthetics and the gameplay innovations of each game. As long as I can complete the SP campaigns I won't feel like a total retard.

 

[ghardy]

Have you gotten to Submarine Titans yet? I played that a lot when I was a kid. The setting was fascinating. I liked that the playing of it was somewhat slower than other, more customary games.

And it had underwater nuclear missiles!

 

[Gilius Thunderhead]

Have you gotten to Submarine Titans yet? I played that a lot when I was a kid. The setting was fascinating. I liked that the playing of it was somewhat slower than other, more customary games.

And it had underwater nuclear missiles!

No, I didn't know about it. Looks cool, thanks.

 

[Camel]

ChatGPT
The decline in popularity of the real-time strategy (RTS) genre can be attributed to several factors:

1. Complexity and Learning Curve: RTS games traditionally have a steep learning curve and require significant strategic thinking and multitasking skills. This can be intimidating for new players who might prefer games that are easier to pick up and play.
2. Shift in Gaming Trends: Gaming trends have shifted towards faster-paced action, immediate gratification, and multiplayer experiences. RTS games often require longer play sessions and can be more mentally demanding, which may not align with the preferences of many modern gamers.
3. Market Saturation: During the early 2000s, there was a saturation of RTS games, leading to a proliferation of similar titles that may have diluted the appeal of the genre over time. This could have contributed to a sense of stagnation or lack of innovation within the genre.
4. Focus on Esports and MOBAs: Multiplayer Online Battle Arenas (MOBAs) like League of Legends and Dota 2 emerged as highly popular competitive multiplayer games. These games share some similarities with RTS games but emphasize different aspects, such as hero control and team coordination over base building and resource management.
5. Development Challenges: Developing a high-quality RTS game requires substantial investment in both time and resources. This can be a deterrent for developers and publishers, especially when compared to other genres that may offer quicker returns on investment.
6. Audience Fragmentation: The gaming audience has become more diverse over time, with different preferences for gameplay mechanics and genres. This fragmentation makes it harder for RTS games, which cater to a specific subset of players, to maintain broad appeal.

Despite these challenges, the RTS genre continues to have a dedicated fan base, and there have been attempts to innovate within the genre or blend it with other popular genres. However, it remains a niche compared to other genres that have seen explosive growth in recent years.

Rookie mistake. The optimal strategy is to send your trike through the enemy base without attack anything, park it just behind their construction yard, and watch them blow up their own irreplacable building that lets them build more buildings with their own tanks. Also, having your tanks roll over enemy Sadakaur troops instead of shooting at them is both more effective, funny, and makes a great sound effect!

You could also put your building over an enemy tank.

 

[JarlFrank]

Isn't the Total War series RTS?

Not at all. It's turn based grand strategy mixed with real time tactical battles. It's more of a real time tactics game than RTS.

Classic RTS includes basebuilding. In Total War you build armies on the campaign map, and the battles only include the units you bring to the fight.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

Isn't the Total War series RTS?

Not at all. It's turn based grand strategy mixed with real time tactical battles. It's more of a real time tactics game than RTS.

Classic RTS includes basebuilding. In Total War you build armies on the campaign map, and the battles only include the units you bring to the fight.

Furthermore, Grand Strategy doesn’t have the handcrafted stories that have become a typical part of RTS campaigns. Hypothetically you could create a handcrafted story, such as in Immortal Realms: Vampire Wars, but almost no Grand Strategy games do so.

 

[anvi]

Isn't the Total War series RTS?

Not at all. It's turn based grand strategy mixed with real time tactical battles. It's more of a real time tactics game than RTS.

Classic RTS includes basebuilding. In Total War you build armies on the campaign map, and the battles only include the units you bring to the fight.

Do you like Total War?

 

[anvi]

Chat GPT is a cheeky bastard

 

[Lyric Suite]

The learning curve part is completely wrong and that's right off the bat. If anything the explosion of popularity of the RTS genre is that compared to turn based strategy game the learning curve is non-existant. It takes two seconds to learn how to play an RTS.

Now mastering the game for online play does take a long time but that's a completely different matter and it applies to every game in existance.

 

[JarlFrank]

Isn't the Total War series RTS?

Not at all. It's turn based grand strategy mixed with real time tactical battles. It's more of a real time tactics game than RTS.

Classic RTS includes basebuilding. In Total War you build armies on the campaign map, and the battles only include the units you bring to the fight.

Do you like Total War?

My favorite strategy games, yes.