What makes a successful RTS? Gameplay or Realistic Combat?

[punwisp]

Grade A Kill thinks missles missing its target, having units duck and cover and such make a successful RTS, I say its the Gameplay that makes games successful.

Lets see what everyone else thinks shall we?


if realistic combat made one successful, starcraft would have gotten a 9.1 or warcraft a 9.3
Which are classic very popular games

 

[Gilles]

Neither one makes a game. I would say gameplay is more important, but having the little things is a huge bonus.

 

[brad.dude03]

Fun also definetly helps things. The most timeless games in the world are all RTS games, because their graphics are irrelevant, and the gameplay is so powerful that it just draws people in.

Teching is also a must-have in my books.

 

[punwisp]

Yes, but in games like starcraft and warcraft, the gameplay is what made it unique and fun.

Games get higher ratings on gameplay, little on how realistic the combat is.

 

[Tyranid]

Perfectly balanced gameplay.

 

[punwisp]

6 to 0, Wonder what that hints to?

 

[Gilles]

I decided to look up the word gameplay.

From Wikipedia: Gameplay includes all player experiences during the interaction with game systems, especially formal games.

From MSN dictionary: The entertainment value of a computer game, including aspects such as user interface and game design.

From some weird site: Gameplay is a term most commonly used to used to rate, or score the quality of the experience had by gamer while playing a particular game. The term gameplay is often found in game reviews where a score is given based on player experiences during the interaction with game.

What I get from this is that gameplay is how much fun you had playing it. So how can anything compare with it? For Grade A Kill, realistic games provide good gameplay.

Poor poll if you ask me.

 

[Captain Griffen]

Gameplay, but remember intuitiveness is a large part of gameplay, which requires realism in some part.

 

[punwisp]

Yes, I've told him in some cases, yes realism would make it better, I also told him there are games that need realism for it to be good, and others that dont need realism, its all "entertainment" Games like medival 2: total war, realism makes that game amazing. Games like starcraft, only need a little bit of realism, sense it is fantasy and fiction

 

[DuckWTF]

A RTS needs both, not just one so you need realism so a infantry squad doesn't shoot down a plane with just some standard guns and so you wont get bullshit moments and also gameplay for the RTS to stay fresh everytime you play it and also fun.
But like any developer making an RTS they would be stupid not to focus on gameplay before anything else.

 

[Razorbrain]

there is only one thing that makes a game good

ZEEERRRRGGGGLLLIIIINNNGGGGRRRRRUUUUSSSSSSHHHHHH!!!!!

 

[punwisp]

A RTS needs both, not just one so you need realism so a infantry squad doesn't shoot down a plane with just some standard guns and so you wont get bullshit moments and also gameplay for the RTS to stay fresh everytime you play it and also fun.
But like any developer making an RTS they would be stupid not to focus on gameplay before anything else.

2/3 gameplay and 1/3 realism., 50/50 on both wont make it good, they tried a similar path on C&C 3.

 

[DuckWTF]

I didnt say it needs 50/50 I meant that it needs both to make it succesful so you would have more of less of both and we all know Command and Conquer 3 was not all realism because for something to have realism it has to have gameplay and it didnt have any.

 

[punwisp]

It had gameplay, but not very good gameplay, C&C 3 had little realism, not much gameplay. and mostly graphics.

In games you need little realism(unless its a game like medival2:total war) in games they are needed and some they dont, agme slike starcraft 2 dont need much realism. Because it simply isnt that kind of game. Seeing how its all meant for "entertainment" not how realistic it is.

 

[Grade A Kill]

i cant beleive you went to these lengths to anger me punswip

realism makes good gameplay okay? look at C&C3, its just a tank rushing game, you dont need a good mix of infantry or anything like that with your army, its just mammoth tanks.

in a new game i got, soldiers heros of world war 2 (this is just how realistic it is)

I need to place some dynomyte next to a tank artillery unit, the narwall or something like that, so i sneak up to it (useing a few bushes and a small trench), palce the explosives next to it, start crawling away, just then the machine gunner spotted my guy and started shooting (he missed long enough to save my guy), the tank explodes up into the air and lands on the machine gunner, killing him, sparing my guy from death. CAN THAT HAPPEN IN STARCRAFT? DONT THINK SO BIOTCH! also infantry can TAKE COVER!!!

here are realistic features within that game:
-no rock-paper-scissors, T-34 > Tiger tank OR T-34 < Tiger tank
in starcraft- seige tank < immortal OR Seige tank < immortal...oh wait : )

-Infantry can take cover, can be shot out of buildings, or you can shoot a rocket at them to blow them out of buildings
in starcraft- infantry cant take cover, cant even crouch so as to present themselves as smaller targerts.

-you use realistic tactics, for example, attacking the left flank of an artillery emplacement to aviod a frontal confrontaion, take out the artillery and run for it, cuz the moment you run up with a grenade there were on your ass. or advance under a smoke screen
in starcraft- no such thing as even a flank or even any tactical use of a flank, no advancing under the cover of a smoke screen, only thing you can do is build thors BCs and seige tanks, thats all i see in gameplay demos.

Soldiers heroes of world war 2 has better physics too, i use dynomyte to destroy a sniper that was in a building, and the rubble that fell down was like wall chunks n' stuff and my guys could actually take cover behind that, i once used one guy, shot at a halftrack, lured it into a tall grass field and set the field on fire, the fire burnt everyone out of the halftrack. can you set anything on fire in starcraft? maybe shoot down some rocks on top a cliff to make them fall on some Zerglings? no cuz it aint very realistic. in starcraft the nice physics dont change the battle field, its just to look cool.

in soldiers heroes of world war 2, the fact that tanks could miss there target and accidentaly blow up a house is cool, it makes cool looking combat, and makes an expandable dynamic battlefield.
in startcraft, zergling rush and other retarded cheap ass shit like that, thors BCs, collosus, and other small variety armies.

Relism IS gameplay as i have told you, now tell me something rediculus and how wrong i am or something, oh and tell me the difference between gameplay and realism, and for gods sake punswip what the hells the difference between realism and entertainment, play soldiers heros of world war 2 and see that REALISM IS ENTERTAINMENT!!! and once i get my new computer i can make the proper videos to show you, should get it in two weeks once i get my pay checks

 

[Sabertooth]

I disagree and I like SC2 more than your example because of how simple it is. I don't care if my guys duck and cover or sneak up to place mines or tanks flip all over the place.

But this thread was pretty much dead, You should've just shrugged punwisp off.

 

[punwisp]

i cant beleive you went to these lengths to anger me punswip

realism makes good gameplay okay? look at C&C3, its just a tank rushing game, you dont need a good mix of infantry or anything like that with your army, its just mammoth tanks.

in a new game i got, soldiers heros of world war 2 (this is just how realistic it is)

I need to place some dynomyte next to a tank artillery unit, the narwall or something like that, so i sneak up to it (useing a few bushes and a small trench), palce the explosives next to it, start crawling away, just then the machine gunner spotted my guy and started shooting (he missed long enough to save my guy), the tank explodes up into the air and lands on the machine gunner, killing him, sparing my guy from death. CAN THAT HAPPEN IN STARCRAFT? DONT THINK SO BIOTCH! also infantry can TAKE COVER!!!

here are realistic features within that game:
-no rock-paper-scissors, T-34 > Tiger tank OR T-34 < Tiger tank
in starcraft- seige tank < immortal OR Seige tank < immortal...oh wait : )

-Infantry can take cover, can be shot out of buildings, or you can shoot a rocket at them to blow them out of buildings
in starcraft- infantry cant take cover, cant even crouch so as to present themselves as smaller targerts.

-you use realistic tactics, for example, attacking the left flank of an artillery emplacement to aviod a frontal confrontaion, take out the artillery and run for it, cuz the moment you run up with a grenade there were on your ass. or advance under a smoke screen
in starcraft- no such thing as even a flank or even any tactical use of a flank, no advancing under the cover of a smoke screen, only thing you can do is build thors BCs and seige tanks, thats all i see in gameplay demos.

Soldiers heroes of world war 2 has better physics too, i use dynomyte to destroy a sniper that was in a building, and the rubble that fell down was like wall chunks n' stuff and my guys could actually take cover behind that, i once used one guy, shot at a halftrack, lured it into a tall grass field and set the field on fire, the fire burnt everyone out of the halftrack. can you set anything on fire in starcraft? maybe shoot down some rocks on top a cliff to make them fall on some Zerglings? no cuz it aint very realistic. in starcraft the nice physics dont change the battle field, its just to look cool.

in soldiers heroes of world war 2, the fact that tanks could miss there target and accidentaly blow up a house is cool, it makes cool looking combat, and makes an expandable dynamic battlefield.
in startcraft, zergling rush and other retarded cheap ass shit like that, thors BCs, collosus, and other small variety armies.

Relism IS gameplay as i have told you, now tell me something rediculus and how wrong i am or something, oh and tell me the difference between gameplay and realism, and for gods sake punswip what the hells the difference between realism and entertainment, play soldiers heros of world war 2 and see that REALISM IS ENTERTAINMENT!!! and once i get my new computer i can make the proper videos to show you, should get it in two weeks once i get my pay checks

Show me? Jesus, you act like I've never seen this crap, I've seen enough of it, and when I say Gameplay I mean on how well made the game is, balanced and everything. Realism is NOT everything, who gives a crap if units don't duck and cover? Starcraft is about massive units attacking massive amounts of units, for micro management like warcraft, that would be fine, but for starcraft? No, you still don't get it, I keep trying to tell you, its like talking to a wall, Realism is entertainment? This is EXACTLY why I have these arguments with you. How many people actually agreed with what you've said about "realism" Couple tops thats it. I have SEEN videos you have sent me, I have PLAYED games with "realism" Your so narrow minded its not even funny. I have DOZENS of games, many like Rome: Total war, which have "realism" as you speak, a game like that it fits perfectly.

But YOU think a game can ONLY be entertainment and ONLY good if it has bullets that miss, units hiding behind walls, crouching, realistic explosions and so on. SERIOUSLY Do you realize how Laggy starcraft would most likely be with all that un-needed features? Micro management is fine, micro management doesnt exist in starcraft. These games are entertainment, they dont HAVE to have realistic fighting or content for it to "Only" be good and be the "only" entertainment, because ironically, if you tried digging up a debate on that, you would lose by a large degree. I made this thread to show peoples opinions, and obviously they agree. Yes I know what Gameplay is, but a lot of people categorize good game play as a well balanced game, a very well made game with just deep content. C&C 3 had that to a point.

Most RTS games isn't about how realistic the combat is, seriously, that stuff is for certain kinds of RTS games and mainly FPS games. Fits FPS more, Seriously in starcraft 2 you are going to command HUGE amounts of zerglings, now which would you like better, sending your swarm after a large group of units, overwhelming them. Or when the marines start shooting, the zerglings just spread out everywhere and hide and try to attack so they don't get hit. Seriously it takes the fun out of power and control in games.

Yes some realism would make a game better, but thinking what you have been thinking for all genres of games is just too narrow minded and obviously wrong. Now all of this wouldn't of happend if you didn't state everything you said in many of the other threads and PMS as a fact, like Realism is what only makes a good game, that kind of crap you have always said, now if you just stated it as a opinion, that would be better. "REALISM IS ENTERTAINMENT" "REALISM IS WHAT MAKES A GOOD GAME" "ALL UNREALISTIC GAMES SUCK" Seriously this is he kind of crap that always bugged me. Great lengths to make this thread? I talked to you about making this thread, to get some of hives users opinions. You still don't listen, you have been so ignorant its not even funny, every message I got from you, its like you never even read my message, you always assumed I never played this and that or know what a real game is or realistic game is.

Seriously on lot of the games you told me about in situations you blamed the game was very horribly made or something a long the lines of that because you couldn't out smart someone, and they killed you. There just better, but you blame that the game isn't realistic. Seriously its just entertainment, it doesn't have to have realistic everything for it to be good, sure in your opinion that makes a good game, but its not a fact, you state everything you say as facts, which is what caused this problem, a problem you fail to see and just ignore everything I say and just throw the EXACT same crap at me every time. Every time you mention a time in the game or example, like mammoth rush, so what? You lost to it so what does that hint to? Its counterable, pretty much anything is counterable, just because you arn't good at the games doesn't mean they suck which is what you have been implying

Seriously this thread was made quite a while back, and you just now post here?

Seriously I'm done arguing about this with you, its like talking to a wall, you don't listen. Mods you can close this if you like, I already made my point with this thread

 

[Grade A Kill]

i dont like starcraft some for the unrealism but i hate it most for the cheap ass gameplay, that is all to be said, i dont know how anyone ese thinks the gameplay is not cheap ass, what with nydus worms, banlings, colosus n such

 

[punwisp]

Whats wrong with banlings and collosus? lol, Zerg constantly evolve, so them being exactly the same would make them boring, same for all races, though its obvious where they got the idea of collosus, but it fits there theme.

Actually they can fit another race, well another human race, they dont really have a earth specfic army, only a faction based off of a colony from earth

cheap ass gameplay? Your going to have to explain the reasons for that, other then someone pulling something off that surprised you or you didnt counter or didnt know how to counter.

 

[Grade A Kill]

its a long example but ok, and it explains how frustrating starcraft is, this goes back to when i first played RWM and i was begining to realize how angering starcraft was. i went on battle net and went into a game, and here is how it began. Me protoss, He Zerg
oh and incase you may have heard these stoies before, well i dont play it anymore, i quit.

I started gathering resources n stuff, built two gateways (this wasn't a money map) and i was quite sure he was gonna do a ground assault, so i created the perfect counter army, a buncha zealots and 6 dragoons, ten minutes later however, he came in with 9 mutalisks and demolished 6 of my resource gatherers and RAN like a bitch asshole, i had 3 photon cannons there to defend them too. its all down hill from there, i attack with my zealots to his base, didn't know the outcome too well cuz he attacked a second time with 14 mutalisks 2 minutes later the moment i started my attack, and left me with 1 resource gatherer, so i had to dedicate all my resources to rebuilding workers and god dammit that was unimaginably irritating, he comes in and finishes my last workers and runs again, so i call him an ass hat and quit angrily. i seriusly wanted to kick over my computer. that was when i quit starcraft for good, uninstalled it and realized i wastes 40 bucks.

this is before that little incident
(this one is non money map too)
the second cheap ass thing was a 1v1 match i played in a 4v4 map, i'll just say he turtled like a asswipe, 80 seige tanks and 40 missle turrets, he had most on a cliff where more resources were thats where he had his three bases, he turtled and i attacked relentlessly, 4 major attacks, i tried reavers but most his seige tanks were on higher ground and i cant drop one off because of 40 missle turrets. so i attacked with dark templar, dark archons, reavers and god dammit you name it, all failed, then i witnessed him killing his own seige tanks with a scout, didn't know wtf he was doing, so i made another small army thinking i could attack, only to have it crushed by 25 BCs,. so i trried massing corsairs at the last minute...didn't work, he destroyed my main base and my other 6 bases...and people say players dont mass BCs in non money maps, i couldn't do anything over his god damn turtle, nor could i do anything over his god damn BC army and god dammit it pisses me off just thinking back to it

heres another incident, im terran vs zerg (again no money map) this guy launches 40 lurkers about 20 minutes into the game, they run into my base, my defences take out 20 of them, then...they burrowed, they can attack me and i cant do shit, i had detectores but they were shooting spines up my soldiers asses and and also destroyed the detecters, they decimated my entire army in a retarded cheap ass way of burrowing so i pick up my base a try moving it away and...well we won is all i have to say.

but seriusly punswip, im done arguing, oh and by the way, most the reason why people chose Gameplay, DUH is because you made it sound like "whats more important, making a game fun, or making it crappy but realistic"
even though realism is a great gameplay type all in its own.

but you know what, you play starcraft, i'll play something realistic, i will shoot a tank shell through a building, have it come out the otherside and blow the bad guys tank up, that has happened too, and it was the coolest thing ever! i dont wanna argue, when i get my new comp, i will be able to play supreme commander and no other game will matter, except a select few.

and dammit punswip, if you've seen a tank blow up and land on a machine gunner killing him then why the hell would you think thats not cool?!?

 

[punwisp]

its a long example but ok, and it explains how frustrating starcraft is, this goes back to when i first played RWM and i was begining to realize how angering starcraft was. i went on battle net and went into a game, and here is how it began. Me protoss, He Zerg
oh and incase you may have heard these stoies before, well i dont play it anymore, i quit.

I started gathering resources n stuff, built two gateways (this wasn't a money map) and i was quite sure he was gonna do a ground assault, so i created the perfect counter army, a buncha zealots and 6 dragoons, ten minutes later however, he came in with 9 mutalisks and demolished 6 of my resource gatherers and RAN like a bitch asshole, i had 3 photon cannons there to defend them too. its all down hill from there, i attack with my zealots to his base, didn't know the outcome too well cuz he attacked a second time with 14 mutalisks 2 minutes later the moment i started my attack, and left me with 1 resource gatherer, so i had to dedicate all my resources to rebuilding workers and god dammit that was unimaginably irritating, he comes in and finishes my last workers and runs again, so i call him an ass hat and quit angrily. i seriusly wanted to kick over my computer. that was when i quit starcraft for good, uninstalled it and realized i wastes 40 bucks.

this is before that little incident
(this one is non money map too)
the second cheap ass thing was a 1v1 match i played in a 4v4 map, i'll just say he turtled like a asswipe, 80 seige tanks and 40 missle turrets, he had most on a cliff where more resources were thats where he had his three bases, he turtled and i attacked relentlessly, 4 major attacks, i tried reavers but most his seige tanks were on higher ground and i cant drop one off because of 40 missle turrets. so i attacked with dark templar, dark archons, reavers and god dammit you name it, all failed, then i witnessed him killing his own seige tanks with a scout, didn't know wtf he was doing, so i made another small army thinking i could attack, only to have it crushed by 25 BCs,. so i trried massing corsairs at the last minute...didn't work, he destroyed my main base and my other 6 bases...and people say players dont mass BCs in non money maps, i couldn't do anything over his god damn turtle, nor could i do anything over his god damn BC army and god dammit it pisses me off just thinking back to it

heres another incident, im terran vs zerg (again no money map) this guy launches 40 lurkers about 20 minutes into the game, they run into my base, my defences take out 20 of them, then...they burrowed, they can attack me and i cant do shit, i had detectores but they were shooting spines up my soldiers asses and and also destroyed the detecters, they decimated my entire army in a retarded cheap ass way of burrowing so i pick up my base a try moving it away and...well we won is all i have to say.

but seriusly punswip, im done arguing, oh and by the way, most the reason why people chose Gameplay, DUH is because you made it sound like "whats more important, making a game fun, or making it crappy but realistic"
even though realism is a great gameplay type all in its own.

but you know what, you play starcraft, i'll play something realistic, i will shoot a tank shell through a building, have it come out the otherside and blow the bad guys tank up, that has happened too, and it was the coolest thing ever! i dont wanna argue, when i get my new comp, i will be able to play supreme commander and no other game will matter, except a select few.

and dammit punswip, if you've seen a tank blow up and land on a machine gunner killing him then why the hell would you think thats not cool?!?

DUDE, its not a cheap ass game he used PURE skill(this is the first example) He doesnt have to leave his units to attack and have them destroyed, thats a waste, thats why he killed your probes and retreated and came back with a bigger army, its skill, not being a chicken shit thats being very cheap. Also the second example with him turtling. its not cheap either, infact I think turtling would be difficult to pull off, also it gives him a great advantage if you keep making units and sending armies trying to destroy his base while he makes a army of his own, the way you did it, it gave him a advantage, you could have done the same thing, attack with some units from different directions while turtling, so you kinda let yourself open. the last example is also them using skill... If you couldn't counter it in the first place, then hes simply better.

On the last thing you said, Yea that would be really cool, but that has no place in starcraft. The game isn't about how realistic it is. Also your interpretation of what the poll meant was pretty off too. Seeing as how people didn't agree with you anyway when you were stating everything you said as facts.

All I said was how was it cheap ass game play(which it isn't) I already said I was done arguing, also if you didn't want to argue you wouldn't so and you would have taken my advice a long time ago, but you kept going on and on.

Also what game did you see this happen on?

i'll play something realistic, i will shoot a tank shell through a building, have it come out the otherside and blow the bad guys tank up

The only game I can think of offhand you might be able to do something like that is call of duty 4 maybe.

 

[Grade A Kill]

Call of duty 4? that game is soo boring, it was fun the first time i played it, but online sucks, no cooperation at all, even when trying to take an HQ, you run kill some people guarding it, then they respawn outside and throw grenades in and it never stops.

and i did that on Soldiers heros of world war 2, i had my tiger tank, used armor peirceing shells, knew there was a sherman on hiding inside a building waiting for me to pass by to attack my tiger from the side, so i my tiger aimed at the wall, shot, and that shell went right threw and set that tank on fire. it was the coolest thing ever. That game is seriusly the best i think, the only thing worng with it is that tanks are way too easily immobalized, infantry hold way too little ammo, but atleast they can pick some up from the dead people they kill, and last, the fact that you can use 1 tiger tank and take out an entire allied occupied town, 10 tanks 50 infantry and still live. but other than that its great, someone really needs to make an RTS with RTT qualities, perhaps when i learn to programm i'll make a simple one, don't expect good graphics though

and about my first example, the reason i lost so bad, is becaused i guessed wrong that he would attack with hydralisks, and thus, got my ass kicked.

 

[Dreadnought[dA]]

LOL what a whiner Grade A Kill...

Your problem is you don't know how to use what you have available. In Starcraft there are multiple ways to get past your opponents defenses. Protoss have multiple ways of slaughtering missle turrets. Corsairs web ability + Carriers can take care of them. For Siege Tanks, you can use arbiters stasis ability on groups of them then rush in with Zealots and take out the rest. Once they get out of stasis they wont be able to do anything if you surrounded them with your Zealots. Zerg can take out turtlers by using Dark Swarm. It makes all units underneath it IMMUNE to ranged attacks except Reavers, Lurkers, and a few others. To counter Mutas, you need High Templar or Corsairs which easily slaughter them. You didn't scout at all and see what your opponent was building so you didn't have much AA.

 

[punwisp]

Exactly, instead of seeing what you did wrong you blamed the game being too cheap and retarded because you lost alot.

 

[Grade A Kill]

LOL what a whiner Grade A Kill...

Your problem is you don't know how to use what you have available. In Starcraft there are multiple ways to get past your opponents defenses. Protoss have multiple ways of slaughtering missle turrets. Corsairs web ability + Carriers can take care of them. For Siege Tanks, you can use arbiters stasis ability on groups of them then rush in with Zealots and take out the rest. Once they get out of stasis they wont be able to do anything if you surrounded them with your Zealots. Zerg can take out turtlers by using Dark Swarm. It makes all units underneath it IMMUNE to ranged attacks except Reavers, Lurkers, and a few others. To counter Mutas, you need High Templar or Corsairs which easily slaughter them. You didn't scout at all and see what your opponent was building so you didn't have much AA.

I don't know how to use whats available? well first, you have to have those things available, as in already built as if expecting the attack, just like in the starcraft 2 protoss demo, the guy says "the immortal is the perfect unit if your being attacked by seige tanks" well lets say 15 seige tanks come out of the fog of war, and you didn't build immortals, lets say you build stalkers to attack your oppenents base but were attacked first, well now your screwed, now lets say you build up immortals, well the other guy happaned to build up marines to rush you with.

but seriusly to think i cant use whats available? yeah i can, in RWM, the Battle of Seelow Heights, you need to defend a road about a mile long, with limited tanks infantry, ammo, and reinforcements. your being attacked every 5-10 minutes by 100s of infantry, 10s of Russian tanks, your forces are spread so god damn thin, that one part of my road was guarded only by a few machine gunners, and a few AT gun emplacments, and your only reinforcements could range from 6-10 tanks, maybe some infantry, and little ammo, you couldn't ever hope to win at that game, you would pile up all your tanks at the frontline, utterly decoimate 3-5 attacks, then your all out of ammo because you had 8 tanks fire 8 shells into 1 Russian tank, BIG waste of ammo, at one point in my defense i had to substatute tanks from behind the frontline inorder to spare as much ammo as possible until more ammo was sent, which i had to go with out spare ammo for about 2 hours, i also had to use the terrain as well, once i had to fall back to the last line of defense, i had limited tanks, but what i did was this. i littered the road leading to objective with tank blockades, that road went through a narrow cliff, so normally 4 russian tanks could fit through, now only 2 at a time could only fit through, a good use of a choke point i'd say, now the 25 attacking tanks clog up, have to stop leaving them sitting targets from my tanks along the cliff.

i do know how to use whats available, but when you add rock-paper-scissors into the game, and have so you can always build new units, it just ruins it, in RWM your forces must be preserved, in other games, no, they are expendable

 

[punwisp]

It still all falls down to what he said, you weren't prepared for that kind of a attack, is that the games fault? Your not that skilled, thats fine, but blaming it on what you say a poorly made cheap ass game. Theres a LOT of people who still play starcraft, custom and not custom. You learn from your mistakes, you scout a lot, keep an eye on what hes doing, if he can get to you with lots of siege tanks, its your fault for not paying attention to your surroundings and making a decent defense of units to take something like that out.

 

[Sion36]

I'd have to say in most cases realism makes a game for me. Most RTS I've played have a system of "shoot this at someone, and it will turn to hit them" sort of gameplay, while others are more balanced in the fact you don't always hit. All in all, I'd have to say realism makes a game for me.

 

[punwisp]

Balancing really has nothing to do with realism combat unless its in the game. To me Realism combat belongs in FPS games, RPG games and some RTS games like Mideval 2:Total war. Having it in games like starcraft can make things stressful, including if you had a couple of men and or raiding a base. Adding all those Realsim features in most RTS games can make them laggy and it takes up a lot of extra space that really isn't needed.
mideval 2: total war is a example, controlling thousands of units each having its own set of animations and each unit dodging missles(arrows) And when thousands of units attack your thousands of units it can be pretty laggy... each unit fighting on his own using realism animations, To experiance no lag you have to have I think 2G RAM.

Now starcraft on the other hand would still be laggy, because of the amount of detail in the game, and how fast paced it is. It would be nice to have realism in these games, but its just extra space that really isn't needed, it makes the game laggier in larger battles. In FPS however this isnt a issue, sense your controlling 1 guy with a half dozen other teams maybe 30 against 30.

Command & conquer Generals had a lot of realism, and that made the game pretty fun, but things were less detailed graphics.

 

[Grade A Kill]

Generals had realism? i never noticed, name some of the realistic things about it

but dont get me wrong i liked command and conquer generals because it isn't, mass one or two types of units and win, and not much rock-paper-scissors, it was a fun game.
i liked china, making helix helicopters and stuffing them with tank hunters, yeah good fun.

and punswip, you say SC2 cant be realistic but thats because your trying to imagine realism in starcraft 2 gameplay as it is now, but thing is, starcraft 2 could be realistic but blizzard would have to change the entire UI, the entire game for short. imagine if blizzard made a realistic starcraft FPS, then gave you an overview, a pointer, and let you control people RTS style. then it could work out, and i bet it would be more interesting than it is now.

 

[punwisp]

For one I never said starcraft 2 Can't have realism, Never said that, I said it doesn't belong. Its a fantasy fiction game, it doesn't have to be realistic. If you play generals and you watch how units die and shit and so on, it has a lot of realistic feel to it. Why am I starting to think RTS isn't your kind of genre, you think theres only one way to win and thats massing eally strong units... or cheap units. Alot of these games require skill, a noob can't just start playing and own everyone, theres a LOT of people who have been playing starcraft 5+ years, so yea they have skill. Generals isnt the same concept, they have a lot larger variety of units, and most of the time if you mass the same unit, your opponent can destroy that army, because of lack of variety, you can mass quad cannons, rocket soldiers or tanks can take them out with ease, you can mass with tanks, aircraft and rocket soldiers can take them out with easy, you can mass rocket soldiers mixed with machine infantry, quad tanks can take them out with ease.

but dont get me wrong i liked command and conquer generals because it isn't, mass one or two types of units and win, and not much rock-paper-scissors, it was a fun game.

Get the shockwave mod for generals zero hour, one of the best mods out there for it, and its very fun, add the advanced AI. I used to play that game for years, few of the only ways to win with 1-2 units is massing from all directions, flanking them, or if they were unprepared, and dont have the defenses.

The amount of realism you want in the game would take a very long time to perfect and make it work, not to mention make it laggier

 

[Grade A Kill]

when ever i played generals, people hardly massed 1 or 2 types of units, and that was a fun thing, instead of seeing your enemy attack with only battlemaster tanks, some have attacked me with battlemasters, gattling gun tanks, troopcrawlers and a few more, that is what made it really fun, the variety. how even though they had gattling gun tanks, i could still defend with tank hunter infantry, not very much Rock-paper-scissors, the only thing i didn't like was minigunners, the way they could shoot an F-22 out of the sky, never missed a shot while shooting at a super sonic jet fighter aircraft, i remember i faught my brother 1v1 i was infantry general, he was superweapons, i remember attacking with 3 helix helicopters and they got demolished, i forgot they used EMP missles, so i mass tank hunters and minigunners, and rape some stealth commanche helicopters way too easily, when i almost won i tried capturing his particle cannon, and before i could he activated it and burnt my units trying to take it over, one of my guys was running from this huge blue beam, it caught up with him and baked him. that was good fun.

but when i get my new comp i will get generals and zero hour again, i lost my old CDs, and what does shockwave mod do exactly?

 

[Mechanical Man]

Minigunner cost A LOT and infantry gets killed too easily in that game.

 

[punwisp]

Shockwave REALLY balances the game, they add I think 3 new generals, very balanced, they add a lot of units and stuff which is balanced. They didn't overdue it thats for sure, shockwave is most likely the best well made mod out there for it, things arn't overpowered. One of the cool new units in it is a mini-mech kind of thing which when its made can be garrisoned by 1 guy, if its a rifleman it turns into a mech with machine guns, put rocket soldiers in it, it shoots rockets, and so on.

Super weapons are more balanced, and when you get these, get the advanced AI mod, it makes going against the computer REALLY fun, because the computer is smart, and when you go against GLA, they freaking mass you with everything, and its just plain fun.
Though when I play I use the unlimited money cheat, doesnt change game play in SP(cant be used online) Makes it funner, and it can still be hard to fight >_^.

At times I would play Shockwave for about a week then take a break, if you want mass destruction and epic battles, advanced AI mod and Shockwave is for you. Most ,mods they overpower things, or add way too much or just looks crappy and unbalanced, Shockwave is just epic and balanced.

 

[Grade A Kill]

shockwave sounds good, and the AI mod sounds great as well, great games have advanced AI, i will definetly get shockwave, it sounds like a realy good mod. sounds lik it does wonders, just like the Real Warfare Mod for sudden strike 2, balances it and adds more realistic tactics into the gameplay.

ima check out shockwave on youtube, see how it is for my self

 

[punwisp]

Youtube? Its better to go for yourself, also advanced AI mod makes the AI challenging and fun, lots of stuff to blow up, if you want I can give you links to advanced AI mod and Latest Shockwave mod and even tell you how to install it.

Though the money cheat isn't fair, but its still challenging, even having all the money int he world, the AI cans till be hard, because its like Chuck Norris playing them, he doesnt use money, he just makes and sends troops(GLA is hard =O) Though AI cant use the new generals.

Its a very well balanced mod and balances other things too. Mods like destructive mod isnt really fun, 1 nuke takes out 3/4 of a 6 player map, yea realistic but overpowered.
It has a lot of realism, but of course not enough. That kind of RTS game would do great for realism too.

 

[Tyranid]

What I like in RTS is balanced gameplay and atmosphere! This is why I love Dawn of War. In my opinnion the game is just incredibly fun with big armies fighting against eachother. No they do not lower whole city blocks in their wake or kill the enemies by blowing up their own tanks but none the less the game is just plain fun and really entertaining for me.

And yes Dawn of War has it's imbalances, but what do you expect from a game with 9 playable races (when you count in the expansions). Overall, it's still pretty balanced in my opinnion.

 

[I)eadnerzhul]

The best RTS I've ever played was Company of Heroes, and soon to be Dawn of War II, which will feature CoH's unique, one-of-a-kind unit AI and cover systems. Yeah, it's realism, but it's also new gameplay that requires more strategy and thinking thank your average 'right click and let the dull A.I. do the rest scheme'. Medieval 2: Total War was absolutely awesome. Watching huge, climatic battles up-close is just amazing. It really is. And even though you send your armies on a semi-auto rape spree, they still have lots of other values, such as individual unit health/damage/morale/etc.

The thing I hate about RTSes is that they get repetitive. It gets boring building the SAME bases over and over again.

 

[punwisp]

? um building bases isn't repetitive... a base is a base you need them to survive and create units lolz

 

[I)eadnerzhul]

It gets annoying after awhile, building the same bases again and again to have them dissappear the next time you play on that particular map. That's why Dawn of War II is going to be awesome: units/buildings carry on to the next game.

 

[Grade A Kill]

i like RTS games that have no bases, in a way, Thats what made RWM so Balanced, that and the fact that you dont need a particular type of tank to destroy another particular type of tank. if Fraps would work for that game, i'd give ya a few screen shots of the game.

i played dawn of war, it was...well it was okay, vehicles seemed too scarce, some vehicles looked to cartoony, and infantry combat was, well it was just fine.

but my favorite RTS is Supreme commander: Forged Alliance, even though i've only played it 2 or 3 times on my brothers laptop, and that laptop had a crappy video card so and big combat frose up the comlputer. I just can't get over the Strateigic Zoom, and the naval battles, and the dog fights. that is the best RTS i'd say. though that doesn't mean all others aren't good.

 

[I)eadnerzhul]

That's why Dawn of War: II is going to be awesome: units/buildings carry on to the next game.

I was talking about the game their making, not the first Dawn of War. Go look it up somewhere. I got PC magazine, so I know about it.

 

[LordDz]

I should go play Ground Control 2

I agree with you .

I thought you were dead mate? Still arguating about that match in starcraft? Dude, you really need to play more than one match...

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

What makes a successful RTS? Hell, what makes a successful game in general? What kind of question is that? Gameplay mechanics, realism, graphics, storyline, and a myriad of other elements add up to what ultimately constitutes your gaming experience. There's no deciding factor in the fun of a game except what it ultimately boils down to be. If a game has gameplay mechanics a toddler can use with all the realism of the movie Shoot 'Em Up, you could still have Katamari Damacy an awesome game.

 

[Grade A Kill]

I thought you were dead mate? Still arguating about that match in starcraft? Dude, you really need to play more than one match...

well i did play more than one match, it was just that one match that i quit. good god that was infurating. I played many matches before, once i got RWM, thats when i realized how cheap ass the game was and started to hate it. of course it was cheap ass to me all along, but i had to play a realistic game to start disliking the game.

 

[punwisp]

well i did play more than one match, it was just that one match that i quit. good god that was infurating. I played many matches before, once i got RWM, thats when i realized how cheap ass the game was and started to hate it. of course it was cheap ass to me all along, but i had to play a realistic game to start disliking the game.

I mostly hear negative comments about SC like how it sucks and cheap ass just because they suck at the game, a lot of time they think everyone cheats, and dont admit they suck and lot of people are just better and have more experiance.

btw the part where bases get carried onto next game, thats only for campaign bud, not skirmish. Doing it in skirmish takes all the fun out of the game. Campaign however, is different. Dawn of war is a very common kind of RTS, where you build bases. If bases carried on in other games in skirmish, then dawn of war would get a even lower rating, because it takes all skill away.

Btw, Grade A Kill, playing a game 2 or 3 times doesn't really mean much when rating a game how good it is.

 

[Steel_Stallion]

Giant robots with laser beams. Thats what makes a good RTS.

Give me one RTS that has giant robots and laser beams and isnt kickass...

Sup com + Kanes wrath = yay