Are there any RTS games coming with great potential ?

i know grey goo just came out, but its playerbase is tiny.

i was wondering if there are any RTS on the horizon that have the potential of having a thriving community ?

I asked this a couple of weeks ago and sadly no. Imo from the answers I got Coh2 (sadly with its state) is the best out there.

"Act of aggresion" perhaps. Middle of the year

Sorry man, but the RTS genre has had a significant decline in popularity because of the rise of MOBAs. People find it more accessible to focus on one unit instead of entire armies at the moment, so all you've got is the old guard at Blizzard and Relic.

Pity the former Westwood folks couldn't make a decent dent. I bet if they had done something more in line with the original C&C in both speed and setting, they'd be in better shape.

On top of that, EA canceled C&C Generals 2

Nope, there is SC2, then there is nothing for then there is CoH2 then there is a lot of nothing and then there are niche RTS game even for a hipsters like MoW2, grey goo or "pick random title from before 15-20 years, add HD and resell for 30 euro" titles.

So in short, if you don't like SC2 or CoH2, the RTS genre is as good as dead. I personally blame MOBAs for it as they have started dumbing down RTS games to what we know today as LoL or Dota2. Couple that with more and more lazy and less demanding players and you've got a recipe for dead genre.

COH and COH2 gameplay is beautiful. The amount of choices and strategies makes me feel the game deeper in content.
I don't understand how people prefer "simple" games rather than this one. Maybe the complexity is an entry barrier for new players.

I remember when I was a kid that I liked videogames, they were fun but now, at my 29years old I realize that I DON'T LIKE VIDEOGAMES, I JUST LIKE COMPANY OF HEROES. The rest of games (except GTA saga) are worthless for me.

I agree RTS are not trend games. You can find some but not good as SC2 or COH2.

I try Grey Goo this week end. Too classic. Not interesting.

But i repreat. The preview i read about Act of agression is really promising. The economic system especially seems good : oil/aluminium/rare earth have to be collected on the map and carry to your base. Convoys have to be escort and defend rather than your base which is quite hard destroyed. And oil is convert into dollar but alu and rare earth have to be stock and can be stealed.
Also 3 factions with different play style. Just i don't know a lot about combat system. The spiritual succession of Act of war, the dev also of RUSE (particular but interesting game).

This is why we need to ramp up COH2 and get the game in gears! We are the last RTS warriors left lol.

Nothing on the horizon that I know of.

Sins of a Solar Empire, RUSE, Planetary Annihilation to name but a few have tried to develop the genre (imo successfully), but RTS has trouble gaining a foothold in the present gaming community.

Im not sure why. Something about RTS, and strategy overall, either intimidates or simply bores current gamers. Also, to me surprisingly, many people prefer co-op play, rather than against others. In DoW2 for example, as a benchmark, the "The Last Stañd" co-op add-on gained enormous popularity compared to actual DoW2 itself. I think there where more people playing that, than the original game in multiplayer (I dont know for sure).

As Katitof points out, also in WC3 era, somehow Dota, which initially was just something you played as a break from the main release (alongside Battleship, damn I loved that) eventually became more popular than the main release itself.

There is something very psycho-social going on in all of this in this era,, but nobody seems to be able to quite put their finger on it.

RTS used to readily compete with FPS, in terms of popularity. CS/Quake alongside C&C and SC. FPS was probably always more popular, but RTS had hard support. Often it was the same guys playing both as a break from the other for variety.

One angle that is controversial, but imo is significant just as a matter of fact, is the influx of women into gaming. Gaming is no longer as homogenous as it once was to men. Arguably the population is now 50/50. Perhaps it just might be, for some reason, that RTS and strategy overall, simply does not appeal to a great deal of female gamers. Or atleast, to a proportionately smaller female player base, compared to the already small proportion of interested male players.

just took a gander at "Act of Aggression"

it looks gorgeous. looks there will be early access or beta next week.

Good RTSs are hard. They require many hours of regular practice. Sure, they're rewarding in the long run but you can also feel pretty good by pressing 'A' to assassinate.

What I mean is, that the game market is pretty saturated and if you're itching for a dopamine fix, it's unlikely your instinct will be to trudge through hundreds of defeats, replays and guides in order to get good and feel good.

I personally blame MOBAs for it as they have started dumbing down RTS games to what we know today as LoL or Dota2. Couple that with more and more lazy and less demanding players and you've got a recipe for dead genre.

I don't get how so many people here are hating on MOBAS. I like to play traditional RTS games and I like to play Dota2 and Smite. I know many others who do too. Looking at the amount of different heroes, abilities, items and strategies existing in most MOBAS I think they are in fact quite complex. Both live from an active meta where more than a few standard builds or strategies are viable.

I think what RTS games are missing these days is innovation.

I did not see any strategy games being released that brought some real innovation to the table like COH did back in the day with the cover and suppression and so on, I was mind blown.

Or remember Battle Realms anyone? Those were approaches to the RTS genre that brought some new concepts and ideas, and I didn't see a similar game being released nowadays, or do you guys know one? Either it is just Total War 10 with the same stupid AI, or Age of Empires 5000 HD Edition or Stronghold The Crusaders Ultimate Mega Edition 3.

Plus, I think a well-balanced game with less options beats a more complex, but horribly balanced game any day. Though it seems many studios think people just want "features features features" with the same old concept behind it.

Good RTSs are hard. They require many hours of regular practice. Sure, they're rewarding in the long run but you can also feel pretty good by pressing 'A' to assassinate.

What I mean is, that the game market is pretty saturated and if you're itching for a dopamine fix, it's unlikely your instinct will be to trudge through hundreds of defeats, replays and guides in order to get good and feel good.

By the time you get good at it, the game is already dead and people are moving on. That's the sad truth about most RTS games, specially now that F2P MOBA games are becoming huge.

I miss the old ones like Cossacks 1, Battle for Middle-earth or Warlord Battlecry III (this was awesome, 16 different factions, many class for your character and no one was complaing about balance - mostly becasue of mirror-balance in most cases but. Yes, Im not a fan of pure asymetrcial balance).

Especially Cossacks... Huge base-building, 6 different resources, huge armies, many upgrades... God... Such awesome game.

I hope Dinesy will make Star Wars RTS but that's only my dream.

I miss the old one like Cossack 1, Battle for Middleearth or Warlord Battlecry III.

Especially Cossacks... Huge base-building, 6 different resources, huge armies, many upgrades... God... Such awesome game.

I hope Dinesy will make Star Wars RTS but that's only my dream.

Yeah dude those were awesome! Good old Cossacks, totally forgot about it.

RTS has advanced in huge leaps and bounds since the 90s, with all kinds of developments that utilize the potential of more advanced engines, CPUs and GFX cards, mostly so as ro involve a macro gaming perspective on top of the traditional (system limitation) on a micro scale.

None, though, have achieved wide success.

The genre has evolved excellently, from a design and strategy perspecrive. Problem is not there. Its in many people apparently not wanting to play games that require the kind of multi-tasking and strategic perspective that these games demand.

Its perplexing as to why exactly, but I think thats really what it boils down to.

Carronade, are you my brother from another mother?

I miss the old ones like Cossacks 1, Battle for Middle-earth or Warlord Battlecry III (this was awesome, 16 different factions, many class for your character and no one was complaing about balance - mostly becasue of mirror-balance in most cases but. Yes, Im not a fan of pure asymetrcial balance).

Especially Cossacks... Huge base-building, 6 different resources, huge armies, many upgrades... God... Such awesome game.

I hope Dinesy will make Star Wars RTS but that's only my dream.

Empire at War is excellent in space battle, ground battles are just meh.

RTS has advanced in huge leaps and bounds since the 90s, with all kinds of developments that utilize the potential of more advanced engines, CPUs and GFX cards, mostly so as ro involve a macro gaming perspective on top of the traditional (system limitation) on a micro scale.

None, though, have achieved wide success.

The genre has evolved excellently, from a design and strategy perspecrive. Problem is not there. Its in many people apparently not wanting to play games that require the kind of multi-tasking and strategic perspective that these games demand.

Its perplexing as to why exactly, but I think thats really what it boils down to.

Carronade, are you my brother from another mother?

It seems so! Are you a Finnish girl by any chance? I know one and she is using that saying all the time

Guys, please. Just look at the "macro" of today. I can't help it, but tell you, the answer is -> ~Consoles~

Think about it.


Other than that, look at society, what do you see? /Lets not go into it, but just a small portion/

World "leaders" want people to stay stupid, and to not live long, so they won't take over and won't realise whats going on, and keep eating the same toxicated shit that's the cheapest in the shops.

Fine, now, will stupid people want to play an RTS game competetively? Guess what, the answer is no. They'll just, and no offense, I've played LoL for a fair amount of time also, and basically, almost every game title there is, so.

So called "Dumb" people will just go for a seemingly easy game called as LoL, but lets look at it, it's not that easy at all, in fact, looking at how everybody has to choose <one> character at the beginning, even more so in random battles, you can lose the game just by taking a specific champion, because your laner is your counter, it is just bad, it can't be balanced at all, and that is why I've stopped putting time into it.



Now, one last question, or well, thought, when was the last time you guys have seen a really, really good game, with good gameplay, innovation and support?

I don't remember anything from the past 8 or so years, in fact, for me, the last good games were Battlefield 2 (when i was into FPS), Company of Heroes & Company of Heroes Online (I'll exclude 2 cause honestly, this is shit compared to vcoh, if only it still had its old players... Well this game has potential, a lot, but its stabbed in the back by the game owners trying to destroy it so we'll just move on and buy the 3rd title)

And also, I'd be a big fan of MMORPG's, if only there was a title I could play.

I was into Silkroad first, then the only thing I could play from the genre was Aion, both on private, and still waiting for something similiar




Well, thats just my few cents, don't take this as some shitty conspiracy theory, its an opinion you either simpathize with or not