![armies of exigo stop attacking unit armies of exigo stop attacking unit](https://www.gamespot.com/a/uploads/original/gamespot/images/2004/reviews/628119-919920_20041214_004.jpg)
Memorable moments somehow dont really happen any more. Go here, make this and kill object X, is the formula for any story, but how does it suppose to keep you a memory of the game ? If you played Starcraft, you for sure still do remember what happened as Jim Raynor did meet Kerrigan for the first time. In old games they used narrators with good voice, ingame events to attach you to the situation that is happening. RTS developer don't have the time unlike Blizzard to polish balance forever, so they did make some kind of fail save mechanics, recent developers dont understand.Įxample 7, getting you attached to the game, In old games developer actually realised it, so moved most overpowered units behind some kind of lockable high age/tech level. In old games you had an option that it was all dark=shroud.Įxample 6, something is always too strong.įor some reasons it's there, just a certain unit or combination, that goes reduce games strategy to absurdity, where you always use only same tactic. We all know that a territory you can't see is in the fog, It's really difficult to make combat smart, but games where you loose instant your units for sure doesn't make a game smarter.Įxample 5 using your memory = Shroud (AoE/C&C/Starcraft) Just increase speed for connect the dots, doesn't make in intelligent. That damages so many strategy options.Įxample 4 unit abilities and rock/paper/scissors tactics.ĭo you need there than a brain to play such game ? You simply spam an ability and reuse all time same unit vs same unit, modern RTS feels more like connect the dots for 5 year old, than a game where you think and plan. Scouting and planning are no part any more of strategy, start at random location on a random huge map like RA1 or AOE2 is meanwhile reduced to something that does not require any brain power, you know exactly where to go to find your enemy. In older games you could attack enemy base from 360° angle, from anywhere anytime. By less and less size its just make a blob and move only one direction left/right/north/south= win. So are 4 resources and place storage building next to them too hard ? AoE3 did get rid of 1 resource + you don't need storage buildings, just a hint, at certain simplification point economy just stop to make sense.Įxample 3 general map size like C&C, em meanwhile all RTS don't have a map you can call a battlefield. By water only maps, you could play the game with way less units and it was a game, that was never reached again.Įxample 2: Age of Empires Economy.
![armies of exigo stop attacking unit armies of exigo stop attacking unit](https://oldpcgaming.net/wp-content/gallery/armies-of-exigo/13_1.jpg)
On the other hand RTS games do get actually dumber and dumber.Įxample 1: Total Annihilation, you can micro manage your units and with skill avoid to loose them, something other mass RTS games, dont have at all (Ashes Of The Singularity/planetary annihilation/supreme commander), it just mass and units do hit instant, (while in the older title they had certain momentum to turn around, target and fire. On the one hand we have learned to be better, Maybe meanwhile people are too smart to play RTS games ? If we have to set a golden age for RTS I would aim between first C&C 1995 (Tiberium Dawn) till ironically last C&C Tiberium Twilight. There were always deadlines, real life, new approaches to the formula and other new invented subgenres. It's indeed a mystery for the genre, because we do see the developers not reaching the former numbers. You did maybe notice a certain Disturbance in the Force, Especially RTS games and over the course of years I have collected a lot of exemplars.īeside mainstream titles, did you ever hear of these RTS War of the Worlds 1998, Atrox, Axis & Allies, Dark Planet Battle for Natrolis, Dragonshard, Stormrise, Conflict Zone, Kohan II: Kings of War and try many other indie Titles.