Why did Real Time Strategy genre die out?

[anvi]

This is why we can't have nice things.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

It would be great if Unreal had decent RTS support. So much time could be saved if devs could piggyback off each other’s work rather than reinventing the wheel every time they make an RTS. Networking code, pathfinding code, AI scripting, art assets, etc.

 

[Nirvash]

Again, "true" rts is a bit of a niche genre.
Very few truly like moving ALOT of unit PLUS collecting resources PLUS base building and expansion, everything at the same time.
What is the equivalent for fps? Tarkov permadeath? A rust tryhard server?

I used to be a competitive starcraft/w3 player, then dota appeared, i only wanted that.

Another big reason is the lack of a big competitive FREE rts to go viral.

 

[Eldrin]

In my opinion, it has little to do with market oversaturation and complexity and more to do with the fact that RTS games are naturally PC-centric. And for one reason or another, most developers and publishers still assume that consoles are where most of the money is made. Despite recent evidence to the contrary.

There is also the assumption that RTS games just don't sell. Why make a game that will probably sell a million units at best, with few opportunities to monetize further, when they can make a game that will sell 2 million with greater monetization?. A game like Diablo Immortal, as scummy as it is, probably generates more money for Blizzard than a "Warcraft IV" or "Starcraft III" ever will. Devs don't want some of the money, they want all of the money. Relic Entertainment also shat the bed with the abysmal Company of Heroes 3. Surprisingly, Microsoft is the only one keeping the genre relevant with Age of Empires IV and the upcoming remaster of Age of Mythology, they seem like flukes more than anything.

Shitty monetization practices in general that are allowed to exist are one of the causes as to why quality gaming overall is in decline. Why make a single-player game, when you could make a gacha and just get more money with predatory tactics, tricking consumers into spending millions? Why make an RTS if you could just create one skin or mount to an MMO and get 10x more money without months of developing a proper game - just one mount in World of Warcraft's shop reportedly outperformed the sales of Starcraft II by miles. Yes, ONE mount.

As the majority of people just mindlessly consumes whatever they get served, why should developers care to make better quality products or invest into less financially-safe endeavors. Good games will remain outliers instead of the norm for as long as the masses remain accepting of everything, regardless of the declining scope or quality of the given product, instead of boycotting it all.

 

[MasterofThunder]

Diablo 1 was intended to have MTG-style lootboxes or "expansions" at some point, I believe that was revealed in the pitch document for the game. The greed and intention to cheat players was always there, but the lack of adequate infrastructure prevented devs from getting too greedy. In contemporary times, developers simply figured out the best way to hook players to their games and have the infrastructure to do so, for months if not years at a time. They no longer have a need to produce dozens of games for $60 a pop, risking millions per-title. Companies naturally become risk averse the bigger they are, and once you reach the managerial stage it's no longer justifiable to take any risk at all. The Warcraft III Reforged project was deemed to be a very low priority endeavour by Activision Blizzard, despite being a renowned classic title, they were only willing to do the absolute bare minimum because there was little incentive to do anything more. Blaming budgets is a cope, because the industry makes more money than Hollywood and has for decades now. They just aren't interested because they want the path of least resistance.

Another big reason is the lack of a big competitive FREE rts to go viral.

A free software version of Age of Empires already exists, 0 A.D, but there's yet to be an alternative to Starcraft and the like.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

Again, "true" rts is a bit of a niche genre.
Very few truly like moving ALOT of unit PLUS collecting resources PLUS base building and expansion, everything at the same time.
What is the equivalent for fps? Tarkov permadeath? A rust tryhard server?

I used to be a competitive starcraft/w3 player, then dota appeared, i only wanted that.

Another big reason is the lack of a big competitive FREE rts to go viral.

A single RTS is versatile enough that you can make multiple game modes for the same game. RTT, tower defense, MOBA, survival, commando, co-op, etc. Several newer RTS titles are now including such modes by default in order to diversify their appeal.

I remember that one RTS, Dwarfheim, tried to experiment with a type of co-op in which each player would control a different aspect of a single army, such as resource gathering, base building, and offensive units. Unfortunately, the game didn’t give you the ability for a single player to control more than one aspect, so you had to assign AIs to the others during skirmish or MP. It ultimately failed.

 

[ghardy]

I was browsing some of the usual *Craft pros Youtube channels (Artosis, Grubby, Tasteless), and I saw the name Battle Aces. The mention in the team of a former StarCraft 2 Multiplayer designer piqued my interest. I opened the website: https://www.playbattleaces.com/

Here's a blurb:-
"Welcome to Battle Aces, a paradigm shift for PC real-time strategy games, that allows players to customize a specific Unit Deck before each match. Matches are limited to 10 minutes, making for intense battles, full of strategic depth at its highest levels of play."

The Press Kit is 3.0 GB.

So, it's a card-based game?

 

[thesheeep]

And by RTS I mean war base building strategy. Company of Heroes is different kind of strategy.
Beside those there have been only some low budget games like Five Nations or something like that.
What games are coming out? Can you give some examples from last 5 years?

CoH is still RTS, AND it does have base building, too - very limited, but it is there.
But I get what you mean - that limits the choices of course, but still... just off the top off my head:

• Age of Empires IV
• Northgard (or was that 2018? Eh, whatever)
• They Are Billions & Age Of Darkness & Conan Unconquered (still some others copying that take on the genre)
• Probably some Stronghold
• A Year of Rain
• 9-bit Armies (8-bit Armies might be out of your year range)
• Protectors Of Etheria (WBC3 total overhaul, not sure if that fits your criteria)
• One of the Spellforce 3 standalones was 2019 or later I think
• Probably forgot quite a few (and it's surprisingly hard to find a comprehensive list)

And then there are a ton in development/on the horizon (not just base builders but I bet there are a couple among them):

or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5T-_yr6DNw

Just doesn't quite scream "dead genre" to me

 

[Vic]

Northgard (or was that 2018? Eh, whatever)

yeah that's one of the very few recent RTS releases, tho like you said already 6 years ago

• They Are Billions & Age Of Darkness & Conan Unconquered (still some others copying that take on the genre)

that might be an interesting take on the genre, haven't played them tho

• A Year of Rain
• 9-bit Armies (8-bit Armies might be out of your year range)
• Protectors Of Etheria (WBC3 total overhaul, not sure if that fits your criteria)

trash, not even worth playing

• One of the Spellforce 3 standalones was 2019 or later I think

mix of RPG and RTS, again not a pure RTS and I haven't played it, but fine

Age of Empires IV

duh

so really it's just 2 real RTS games and then a couple genre mixes released in the past 6+ years from your list? and one of them is AoE? yeah, amazing, totally not dead genre

 

[thesheeep]

• A Year of Rain
• 9-bit Armies (8-bit Armies might be out of your year range)
• Protectors Of Etheria (WBC3 total overhaul, not sure if that fits your criteria)

trash, not even worth playing

Eh Protector Of Etheria is great (no wonder, given that WBC3 is still the best RTS/RPG hybrid 20 years later), 9-bit Armies appears to be good at least (not sure, won't play during EA) and A Year Of Rain.... yeah.
Had potential, but was abandoned the moment it released into early access. Big brain Daedalic move to half-ass an RTS release.

so really it's just 2 real RTS games and then a couple genre mixes released in the past 6+ years from your list? and one of them is AoE? yeah, amazing, totally not dead genre

You willfully ignore half the stuff I write, just wave away some of the games that are real RTS because you have some insanely narrow definition of the genre that just doesn't make sense once you advance past 2003 or so, others because you just deem them "trash" without ever having played any and also blatantly ignore that I said there were a lot more, as well as more upcoming

The amount of mental gymnastics you pull just so you can feel negative about the factually positive state of a genre is staggering.
What is it you love so much about this feeling of negativity that you are willing to selectively ignore the world around you? Just let go, man. Accept the fact that things are not as bleak as you want them to be - surely it won't harm you?

 

[Anomander]

And by RTS I mean war base building strategy. Company of Heroes is different kind of strategy.
Beside those there have been only some low budget games like Five Nations or something like that.
What games are coming out? Can you give some examples from last 5 years?

CoH is still RTS, AND it does have base building, too - very limited, but it is there.
But I get what you mean - that limits the choices of course, but still... just off the top off my head:

• Age of Empires IV
• Northgard (or was that 2018? Eh, whatever)
• They Are Billions & Age Of Darkness & Conan Unconquered (still some others copying that take on the genre)
• Probably some Stronghold
• A Year of Rain
• 9-bit Armies (8-bit Armies might be out of your year range)
• Protectors Of Etheria (WBC3 total overhaul, not sure if that fits your criteria)
• One of the Spellforce 3 standalones was 2019 or later I think
• Probably forgot quite a few (and it's surprisingly hard to find a comprehensive list)

And then there are a ton in development/on the horizon (not just base builders but I bet there are a couple among them):

or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5T-_yr6DNw

Just doesn't quite scream "dead genre" to me

Let's again say that by decline in RTS we are talking about games like C&C, Starcraft etc. So base building, campaign and so on. RTS per se are also city builders, Settlers etc. We are not talking about this. Also MOBA can be considered RTS probably.
Northgard is something completely different.
They are Billions looks like some Tower Defence, not full RTS.
Stronghold are also different.
Spellforce 3 is mostly RPG.

• A Year of Rain
• 9-bit Armies (8-bit Armies might be out of your year range)
• Protectors Of Etheria (WBC3 total overhaul, not sure if that fits your criteria)

These are some niche games, not for general public. They look worse than games from 20 years ago. They may be great, haven't played.
Now let's look at some 90-2000 times:
C&C
Warcraft
Red Alert
Starcraft
Total Anihiliation
AoE

And these are just from the top of my memory.
There is no comparison with the list you provided.

 

[Vic]

Northgard is something completely different.

northgard is actually the only good, new RTS released recently, you should check it out

 

[Anomander]

I played it. It is great. But is something different from C&C like. You don't control units directly.

 

[thesheeep]

Let's again say that by decline in RTS we are talking about games like C&C, Starcraft etc. So base building, campaign and so on.

By that absurdly narrow definition, yeah, we do have less games now coming out than we used to.
But still far from none, and still far from "dying out", even with that absurd definition.

Northgard is something completely different.

I played it. It is great. But is something different from C&C like. You don't control units directly.

That proves that you didn't actually play the game or you wouldn't make such ridiculous claims.
You can control all units directly. Some units (scouts/builders) have some QoL automation built in so you don't have to. Military units you have to control manually.

Yes, it does play different than Warcraft or Starcraft or C&C... but guess what, those all play somewhat different from each other as well!
By your logic, one might as well exclude C&C, because those play really different from the -crafts.

They are Billions looks like some Tower Defence, not full RTS.

Stronghold are also different.

RTS? Undeniable.
Base building? Undeniable - even more of that than in any of the classics.
Control scheme? Identical.
A more defensive take on the genre, sure. So what?
Fulfills the definition - fuck off with that goalpost moving.

Spellforce 3 is mostly RPG.

Bullshit. Some missions are RPG-focused. Others are classic RTS base builders, other mixed, same as Spellforce has always been.
Warcraft 3 also had RPG-focused missions and heroes do play an important role in that game as well (not quite as much as in Spellforce, but what the hell kind of arbitrary line is that supposed to be?).

These are some niche games, not for general public.

These words mean nothing. Just another attempt at goalpost moving.

I provided a (very incomplete!) list of RTS games that absolutely fulfill the condition of "RTS with base building", you just handwaved them away with braindead statements.
And continue to move goalposts further and further, until all that remains is "they don't make games EXACTLY like they used to in 98-2003".
Yeah, no fucking shit - that's the same in all of gaming.

Discussing this with you guys is an excercise in futility. You just want to wallow in pity and live in the past for whatever reason.
You can get stuck in 20 years ago and never move forward for all I care, but please excuse the rest of mankind for not living in the past like that.

 

[Anomander]

Yes. For example

• A Year of Rain
• 9-bit Armies (8-bit Armies might be out of your year range)
• Protectors Of Etheria (WBC3 total overhaul, not sure if that fits your criteria)

Is the same league as Warcraft or C&C.
It's the same production value, budget and eveyrthing.
We still have AAA RTS. Nothing has changed.
Ok.

 

[General Disarray]

there are no AAA RTS coming out like they did in the 00s

Age of Empires 4 - decent game overall, not quite as good as AoE2 but what is
Company of Heroes 3 - failure, didn't reach the quality of its predecessors and the community was disappointed
Homeworld 3 - absolute disaster, shit and decline in all aspects compared to its predecessors, both story and gameplay

Now idk if they'd qualify as AAA compared to big Ubisoft series like Far Cry and Ass Creed, but they're big budget, made by big companies, and with a big profile.

There's also Men of War 2, a pretty big budget game by a Russki developer (as big of a profile as it gets for Russki games), but that also disappointed fans due to some bizarre design decisions centered around multiplayer.

God help me... Could you point on the doll where Eugen System hurt you?

 

[JarlFrank]

there are no AAA RTS coming out like they did in the 00s

Age of Empires 4 - decent game overall, not quite as good as AoE2 but what is
Company of Heroes 3 - failure, didn't reach the quality of its predecessors and the community was disappointed
Homeworld 3 - absolute disaster, shit and decline in all aspects compared to its predecessors, both story and gameplay

Now idk if they'd qualify as AAA compared to big Ubisoft series like Far Cry and Ass Creed, but they're big budget, made by big companies, and with a big profile.

There's also Men of War 2, a pretty big budget game by a Russki developer (as big of a profile as it gets for Russki games), but that also disappointed fans due to some bizarre design decisions centered around multiplayer.

God help me... Could you point on the doll where Eugen System hurt you?

What?

Eugen's games are decent, but they aren't really RTS. Then again Men of War 2 doesn't strictly fit the definition either and I mentioned that one... oops!

 

[Vic]

I provided a (very incomplete!) list of RTS games that absolutely fulfill the condition of "RTS with base building", you just handwaved them away with braindead statements.

and now compare that to how many soulslikes, roguelikes, metroidvanias or even CRPGs released in the same timeframe and tell me again the genre is anything but dead

 

[thesheeep]

I provided a (very incomplete!) list of RTS games that absolutely fulfill the condition of "RTS with base building", you just handwaved them away with braindead statements.

and now compare that to how many soulslikes, roguelikes, metroidvanias or even CRPGs released in the same timeframe and tell me again the genre is anything but dead

You are comparing a genre that never had mass appeal (RTS), to genres that always had (action games, no matter the precise form they take).
Btw, you'll find a lot of roguelikes without any mass appeal as they aren't action games.
As I wrote, Starcraft + Brood War sold 10 million in 10 years. While a lot, that's barely comparable to something like Dark Souls (or, hell Elden Ring, with its millions in months).

But if you compare the number of units sold in the RTS genre (and I mean actual RTS genre, not just the ones adhering strictly to "the way things were 20 years ago") from 98-2005 with let's say the last 5-7 years, you'll see very similar numbers.
I'd even go out on a limb and say you'll see there were MORE units sold in recent years.

Yes, the genre is anything but dead.
You don't need mass market appeal to not be dead.
It just broadened and is no longer only one single type of game - not sure if it ever actually was, tbh, although the classic base builder did dominate early on.
Deal with it.

 

[Vic]

You are comparing a genre that never had mass appeal (RTS), to genres that always had (action games, no matter the precise form they take).

come on man, you're trying way too hard to deny the truth. Warcraft 3 had never mass appeal? Do you know how big blizzard was? And still is btw, built on the success of Warcraft 3 and Diablo 2.

you are free to believe your headcanon at least I see you are stubborn as a mule but I know the truth.

But if you compare the number of units sold in the RTS genre (and I mean actual RTS genre, not just the ones adhering strictly to "the way things were 20 years ago") from 98-2005 with let's say the last 5-7 years, you'll see very similar numbers.

THERE ARE (ALMOST) NO GOOD MODERN RTS TO PLAY RIGHT NOW. You can do your research or whatever but I don't have a Warcraft 4 or 5 now do I? Where's my Cossacks 4 or Rise of Nations 2?

Oh wait wait wait, they will remaster age of mythology soon.. AMAZING! Totally not dead genre, soo many titles to play right now

 

[thesheeep]

Warcraft 3 had never mass appeal?

Yes.
In the times Warcraft 3 was big, PC gaming itself wasn't something that was appealing to the masses (of gamers). Only in the mid-late 2000s, the gap between PC market and consoles began to shrink somewhat. Up to that point, consoles were dominating wildly when it came to the masses, and with it the genres that did well on it.

Even among PC games, though. You know what the best selling PC games were in the late 90s/early 2000s ?
The Sims. Half-Life (and then Counter Strike ofc). Diablo II. WoW. Civilization.
Starcraft only comes fairly late on that list.
So, yes, even Civ sold more than Warcraft (Civ 5 did 8 million, not bad). It sure is strategic as well, but not nearly as demanding to play. RTS, especially the classic base builder kind, is prohibitively demanding to most gamers (yes, that means casuals) - this has never been any different.

You are, again, allowing yourself to be blind to actual facts by your personal experience. Get out of that silly mindset and maybe one day you can talk with the grown-ups.
The -crafts sure were popular. Among their peers. Not so much among the broader gaming audience.

You are correct that Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo made Blizzard big. In relative terms. Back then.
What is making their money nowadays, again? And how much bigger are they now than they ever were before?
Rhetorical question.

THERE ARE (ALMOST) NO GOOD MODERN RTS TO PLAY RIGHT NOW. You can do your research or whatever but I don't have a Warcraft 4 or 5 now do I? Where's my Cossacks 4 or Rise of Nations 2?

You cling to the past harder than a bubblegum that's been on the ground for 20 years.
Move forward, old man.
Or become even more bitter, idk. I personally chose the first.

 

[Vic]

What is making their money nowadays, again? And how much bigger are they now than they ever were before?
Rhetorical question.

no, that's a good question actually. blizzard was big mostly on RTS and ARPG, let's look at it now, shall we? Their biggest games right now are:

Overwatch 2 (FPS, 20+ million players?)

Diablo 4... D4 is an ARPG and this genre is doing extremely well with games like last epoch, grim dawn, lost ark and path of exile which is huge and really well made..... if you want to talk about a genre that was back then and still is doing well, this is one

World of warcraft (MMO, 10+ million players)

STARCRAFT 2 (less than 100k players??)

gee, look at that, the biggest RTS player of the 00s isn't focusing on RTS anymore and their latest RTS which is now 14 years old has only a fraction of their total playerbase...

You cling to the past harder than a bubblegum that's been on the ground for 20 years.
Move forward, old man.

so you chose to move away from what RTS actually was and now play a mix of tower defense and rpg... well that's exactly what happened to most RTS players, they have moved on to other genres. you are no different but you can't tell me the genre AS WE KNEW IT isn't dead. it almost pretty much is. there are very few games still releasing, like northgard, and I'm thankful for that but it has become super niche.

what you are talking about isn't RTS, you are purposefully broadening the genre to create an illusion that all is fine

 

[thesheeep]

so you chose to move away from what RTS actually was and now play a mix of tower defense and rpg... well that's exactly what happened to most RTS players, they have moved on to other genres. you are no different but you can't tell me the genre AS WE KNEW IT isn't dead. it almost pretty much is. there are very few games still releasing, like northgard, and I'm thankful for that but it has become super niche.

what you are talking about isn't RTS, you are purposefully broadening the genre to create an illusion that all is fine

Of course only very few games are made to be the very same they were 20 years ago "as we knew it".
All genres change over time. That is just normal.
If you wanna be philosophical: Things change. Nothing stays the same. Welcome to life.

FPS sure did change over time. Even those games made to be "like they used to be" mostly aren't "like they used to be", other than visually for the most part.
Action adventures did.
Hack & Slash (Diablo-likes) did.
ARPGs did.
RPGs did.
Fighting games might be the odd ones out, at least it doesn't look to me like a lot changed here the last 20 years, but I'm no expert on those.
I'm not gonna list all genres, I think you get the point: What the hell DIDN'T change?!

Saying RTS is dead because back then RTS were (not even that much IMO) different than nowadays is just silly.
You could say the same about basically all genres. Are all genres dead? Are PvP FPS dead because games like Unreal Tournament are not popular anymore?

 

[thesheeep]

Look, here, I'll give you this:

Are classic base building RTS dead?
No. But they are less popular than they used to be.

That's really all the numbers can give you here if you want to look at things negatively.

 

[Vic]

Hack & Slash (Diablo-likes) did.

no they didn't. what made an ARPG (diablo-like) good back then is still good now

recent ARPGs:
- Path of Exile
- Grim Dawn
- Last Epoch

all play like diablo 2 more or less

RPGs did.

BG3 is essentially what BG2 was but with more faggotry, the essence remains the same tho. you have tactical combat, companions with their own questlines and romances, you have exploration, etc.

recent RPGs in the style of bg2:

- bg3
- pathfinder games
- pillars
- etc.

even for blobbers, which you could say is another "dead" genre we have stuff like legend of grimrock and the japanese etrian odyssey series which is again, essentially what made blobbers good back then. grimoire, ... ?

FPS sure did change over time. Even those games made to be "like they used to be" mostly aren't "like they used to be", other than visually for the most part.

I never played FPS but from what I can see you still shoot other people in multiplayer in the face, no?

Are classic base building RTS dead?
No. But they are less popular than they used to be.

fine, let's settle on that, but the other part of this is not only that it's much less popular, there are no big players releasing new games. blizzard isn't doing it anymore and the other companies are now gone. aoe4 is just an iteration of an iteration, the rest are remakes.

I would love to play what you call a "classic RTS" with modern mechanics and graphics like it's the case for the RPG genre with BG3 or for the ARPG genre with PoE or the FPS genre with XYZ... but there is nothing like that out there.