• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

chrominance

Sky Van Gogh
Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,581
most people are talking about online play when they talk about SC2, or any rts

if you're gonna compare to dota 2 you should compare what online competitive multiplayer entails, since that's all dota 2 is

But I guess that's my whole point. If you're NOT interested in trying to be esports, then MOBAs just aren't going to be interesting.

That's not going to get you to millions of concurrent players.

Yeah, if the claim here is that MOBAs have sucked all the oxygen out of the room because anyone who wants an RTS-like experience also wants a highly competitive multiplayer scene, I guess I can't argue against that. I don't know how many people there are like me who don't care about that stuff but enjoyed RTSes in their prime.
 

coldcrush

Member
Jun 11, 2018
785
I would LOVE a new command and conquer in the style of Red alert 2. makes me sad to think about,. I loved that game so much
 

CobaltBlu

Member
Nov 29, 2017
813
Honestly people don't make the type of RTS games that had been and continue to be the most popular in the genre.

People keep going on about how no one wants to play the hard games, but those are the only ones that still see play. Companies keep trying to make games with easy mechanics but they die off fast.
 

jaekeem

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,743
But I guess that's my whole point. If you're NOT interested in trying to be esports, then MOBAs just aren't going to be interesting.



Yeah, if the claim here is that MOBAs have sucked all the oxygen out of the room because anyone who wants an RTS-like experience also wants a highly competitive multiplayer scene, I guess I can't argue against that. I don't know how many people there are like me who don't care about that stuff but enjoyed RTSes in their prime.

unfortunately not many I think

I love a good rts campaign. but I don't think there is any AAA or even AA money willing to pay to develop that, if there's no multiplayer interest
 

AmFreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,506
A balanced RTS with completely different fractions like SC2 takes a huge amount of time and money and the only up to date game of this kind aka SC2 was completely mismanaged.
This isn't something a few guys can do in their bedroom.
There is a big untapped market for a team (e.g. 3v3) RTS.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,951
Columbus, Ohio
the impressive thing about that isn't how mechanically demanding their reactions or split second plays are though. the hard part isn't pressing the keys really fast or efficiently

it's that they can actually make those decisions at a moment's notice in a high stakes situation

I guess I just consider that mental skill part of micro? I do think the actual physical act or the clicking is extremely impressive as well.
 
Feb 16, 2018
2,680
the genre was on a downward trend before mobas got popular

things like MMOs and FPS games and consoles getting online did a lot of things to grab multiplayer attention
 

jaekeem

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,743
I guess I just consider that mental skill part of micro? I do think the actual physical act or the clicking is extremely impressive as well.

I see

well I think what you're highlighting is the exact appeal of MOBAs over RTS games

you cut away all the crazy clicking and korean apm sc2 wildness

distill it down to a point where there's still some mechanical depth, but it's really about your decisionmaking in the heat of the moment

boom. way less barrier to entry. and that's why people into competitive online games went to MOBAs over RTS games
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
23,397
The thing about turn-based games is that Firaxis' XCOM is a (gaming) cultural touchstone--it made turn-based combat cool again. When XCOM was a hit, it proved that not only can these kinds of games play exquisitely well, but also have sales to match that excellence. It proved there was still a lot of life left in the genre for all to see, and developers were inspired by that.

XCOM led to a golden age of turn-based games.


RTSes just need their XCOM moment and they'll be back with a revengeance. What's happened right now is not so much cannibalisation of the market (by MOBAs), so much as a total eclipse of it. It only takes one game to strike the right chord and revive everything, as XCOM showed. (Seriously, XCOM's influence can be seen in pretty much every turn-based game released since.)

So, yes, RTSes can return; it's a matter of time.
 

DukeBlueBall

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,059
Seattle, WA
A balanced RTS with completely different fractions like SC2 takes a huge amount of time and money and the only up to date game of this kind aka SC2 was completely mismanaged.
This isn't something a few guys can do in their bedroom.
There is a big untapped market for a team (e.g. 3v3) RTS.

Dawn of War 3 could have been that but the game is fundamentally broken.

1. Should have stuck to smaller tactical scale with cover ala DOW2.
2. Should have removed all the annoyingly long animation and channel times for spells and abilities.
3. Remove all the effects, UI components and overall visual clutter.

I don't know what the people in charge were thinking when they tried to combine fan wants (scale + base building) with e-sports ambitions.

Scale doesn't work in 40k when you are bound by the IP to represent units visually. In SC2 they have freedom to design the units to look / behave anyway they want in order to differentiate between unit types. You can't do that in 40k. All you have left is big blob of slightly different looking unit types that you have to slap different icons over for clarity.
 

Jakisthe

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,559
Too hard to get good at, too slow for a general audience to counterbalance how long they take to make, too specialized to foster a competitive scene between games in the same genre, and too hard to slot MTXs into.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,951
Columbus, Ohio
I see

well I think what you're highlighting is the exact appeal of MOBAs over RTS games

you cut away all the crazy clicking and korean apm sc2 wildness

distill it down to a point where there's still some mechanical depth, but it's really about your decisionmaking in the heat of the moment

boom. way less barrier to entry. and that's why people into competitive online games went to MOBAs over RTS games

I think that's selling it short, FWIW. Especially for every day players. But even the best pros are slightly out of position here or miss something on the map there all the time because of some small micro mistake.

I play Dota because I really like microing, I just find it way more interesting to micro one specific entity to the best of my (kinda feeble) abilities. It's not that the physical side is any less taxing it's that I can keep everything square in my head much more easily. I also just think the games are more interesting than competitive RTS.
 

jaekeem

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,743
I think that's selling it short, FWIW. Especially for every day players. But even the best pros are slightly out of position here or miss something on the map there all the time because of some small micro mistake.

I play Dota because I really microing, I just find it way more interesting to micro one specific entity to the best of my (kinda feeble) abilities. It's not that the physical side is any less taxing it's that I can keep everything square in my head much more easily. I also just think the games are more interesting than competitive RTS.

I see

I personally don't consider that stuff micro, but I see where you are coming from in terms of keeping track of everything like heroes on the map/stack timers/csing/etc

and yeah, I agree that is the best part. I don't play anymore because it consumed my life when I did. Still miss it
 

Dylan

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,260
Dawn of War 3 could have been that but the game is fundamentally broken.

1. Should have stuck to smaller tactical scale with cover ala DOW2.
2. Should have removed all the annoyingly long animation and channel times for spells and abilities.
3. Remove all the effects, UI components and overall visual clutter.

I don't know what the people in charge were thinking when they tried to combine fan wants (scale + base building) with e-sports ambitions.

Scale doesn't work in 40k when you are bound by the IP to represent units visually. In SC2 they have freedom to design the units to look / behave anyway they want in order to differentiate between unit types. You can't do that in 40k. All you have left is big blob of slightly different looking unit types that you have to slap different icons over for clarity.

I'm a bit torn, because I actually agree with all your points, but at the same time, I think Dawn of War III was a really interesting game, with a lot of cool ideas. The outright rejection of the game by the fanbase, to me, makes it seem like players are so ultra-conservative in what they want out of DoW that the developers might as well have just remade the previous games instead of trying something new. Dawn of War III had a lot of problems, and the cover system was dearly missed, but there was still an awful lot about that game that worked for me, and I think it could have been salvaged with updates, if it weren't for the playerbase absolutely tanking in seemingly record time.
 

Dylan

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,260
What are the chances we'll see a Company of Heroes 3? To me that franchise is still the Gold-Standard RTS.
 

Moebius

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,386
Your average player will not want to do this to have fun in mp. In order to to be an average player in Starcraft 2 online it takes as much effort as learning an instrument. The popular genre have way lower skill gap and barrier to intermediate skill level.

Not even "I" want to do that. Though I still loved Starcraft 2 and had a ton of fun playing the campaign or playing in teams. You don't need insane micro to be a casual Starcraft fan like I am. I won plenty of matches and consider myself a terrible player, yet I still really enjoyed my time with the game.

Back in the day, Command and Conquer didn't have a ton of micro and it was still incredibly fun. I'm also perfectly happy to fight the computer, either alone or with friends. Me playing against the computer with friends is how I prefer to play RTS games.
 

DukeBlueBall

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,059
Seattle, WA
On the subject, I always thought that Blizzard has a chance to revive the RTS with WCIV. I understand people don't like SC2, but I've always thought that they treated SC2 with the respect that the sequel to one of the biggest games of all time deserved.

for WCIV I think they can do a MOBA + RTS hybrid. The lore and the existing WC3 mechanics provides the basis necessary to justify the evolution of the RTS.

1. 3v3 team based mp.
2. Single objective focused game.
3. Hero drafting / selection in pre-game. Team composition is important.
4. Ability to play the game with only the hero (no investments in army) or with hero + army.
5. Infinite gold generation via creep farming.
6. Neutral creeps drop loots. Higher level creeps drop more powerful loots. Minimal RNG.
7. Simplified base building / teching.
8. Comeback / rubberband / final stand mechanic. (Enforce that teams have incentive to fight to the end and not GG out when they lose a large engagement).
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
Sankara

Sankara

Alt Account
Banned
May 19, 2019
1,311
Paris
Also Total War is neither big nor popular in comparison to the top games in other genres.

it's pretty big and sells more than enough to warrant a relatively high budget for each entry

Yeah, if the claim here is that MOBAs have sucked all the oxygen out of the room because anyone who wants an RTS-like experience also wants a highly competitive multiplayer scene, I guess I can't argue against that. I don't know how many people there are like me who don't care about that stuff but enjoyed RTSes in their prime.

I am in the exact same boat as you chrominance :) I only play RTS games for the singleplayer or non-esports stuff.
 

Hella

Member
Oct 27, 2017
23,397
I'm a bit torn, because I actually agree with all your points, but at the same time, I think Dawn of War III was a really interesting game, with a lot of cool ideas. The outright rejection of the game by the fanbase, to me, makes it seem like players are so ultra-conservative in what they want out of DoW that the developers might as well have just remade the previous games instead of trying something new. Dawn of War III had a lot of problems, and the cover system was dearly missed, but there was still an awful lot about that game that worked for me, and I think it could have been salvaged with updates, if it weren't for the playerbase absolutely tanking in seemingly record time.
I just wanted another epic singleplayer campaign, aka Chaos Rising 2... *sob*

Relic why did you break my heart.
it's pretty big and sells more than enough to warrant a relatively high budget for each entry
Worth noting that Creative Assembly has like, 500+ employees and five teams. (My numbers might be off a bit, but you get the idea.)

They are one of Sega's core pilars of PC gaming.
 

DukeBlueBall

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,059
Seattle, WA
Back in the day, Command and Conquer didn't have a ton of micro and it was still incredibly fun. I'm also perfectly happy to fight the computer, either alone or with friends. Me playing against the computer with friends is how I prefer to play RTS games.

I do too. But companies these days want Dota / PUG numbers of concurrent players for budgets as big as SC2.

That being said, we'll get AA single player focused RTS games like Halo Wars, They ARE Billions and AOE IV because of the rise of indies and game pass.
 

Forerunner

Resetufologist
The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
14,573
MOBA ate some of the audience. Also RTS is an extremely competitive and hard genre to get into. Most players don't want to dedicate the amount of time to learn them. They want a game that is easy to pick up and play, yet still feel like they are being competitive.

The same thing happened with arena shooters. Sure, at its core it's pretty simple and you just shoot people. However, the amount of dedication to get good at them is too much for players. Players would rather just play something easy like CoD and they can enjoy the game without feeling terrible at it.

These games are just too punishing for the average player. If you want a game to succeed nowadays you need to cater to everyone. OW and BF are good examples. You can be complete shit mechanically at them (aiming,shooting, and response time) but there are other ways you can contribute to your team. Anyone can play.
 
Last edited:

Wamb0wneD

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
18,735
It's like complex fighting games where the barrier of entry is just too high to attract a large audience. I wasn't even bad at WC3 back then, but after not playing for like 6 or 7 years I had everyone leaving on me instantly because I wasn't quick enough in the first 3 minutes or because my account was on level 2 lol.
 

Moebius

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,386
I do too. But companies these days want Dota / PUG numbers of concurrent players for budgets as big as SC2.

That being said, we'll get AA single player focused RTS games like Halo Wars, They ARE Billions and AOE IV because of the rise of indies and game pass.

Good point. RTS games in game pass could help inflate the numbers. There really isn't ever going to be an RTS game as popular as PUBG, Dota, etc....that's just how it goes. Is professional pool as popular as baseball or football? No, but it doesn't mean there isn't an audience for it.

It is really sad because I do enjoy RTS but without a studio taking a big risk, we aren't going to get a big budget RTS game any time soon.
 

Nome

Designer / Self-requested ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,312
NYC
Other posters have mostly covered it, but more than any other genre, RTS games are work at the highest levels. And if you lower the skill cap, you basically have a MOBA. Fun anecdote: professional Korean SC2 players were sneaking out of their dorms at night to play League of Legends.

People don't want to deal with multi-unit micro in their strategy games.
 

dhlt25

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,814
I can't talk for single player but in term of multiplayer there're 2 big reasons:

Too complicated (there are so many things you have to do in a match from economy to managing armies to scouting to microing in battle, it's a lot to take in) even when you're decent, it's very easy to fall out of practice

1v1 is too stressful, ladder anxiety is real and since it's a 1v1 game there's no teammate to blame
 

DukeBlueBall

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,059
Seattle, WA
Other posters have mostly covered it, but more than any other genre, RTS games are work at the highest levels. And if you lower the skill cap, you basically have a MOBA. Fun anecdote: professional Korean SC2 players were sneaking out of their dorms at night to play League of Legends.

People don't want to deal with multi-unit micro in their strategy games.

Out of curiosity, do you think the example of simplified team oriented RTS I gave would work?
 

EmptyWarren

Self-requested ban
Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,250
Give me a fantasy RTS with skeletons and lizardmen and ratpeople and murlock guys and dwarves and whatnot and I'll give you 99.99USD for the collector's edition. Until then I slumber.

Not interested in a scifi, alt history milsim, or anything other than a Warcraft but totally not Warcraft RTS.
 

SuikerBrood

Member
Jan 21, 2018
15,487
It's a real shame. I really enjoy rts games. And they don't all have to be as fast paced as StarCraft.

I mostly enjoyed Warcraft 3, a little slower paced and more RPG elements. But it's a very well made strategy game.

The remaster is coming out in a few months. So that's something to be excited for.
 

MrNewVegas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,709
Mate! RTS are thriving! We just got Halo Wars 2 a couple years ago and AoE2R is coming. It's a booming industry!

/s

It's never coming back.
 

Mentalist

Member
Mar 14, 2019
17,976
There are several reasons. Mostly though it was Blizzard's double whammy of

1) BroodWar becoming a major esport, leaving many RTS franchises to chase the same cash cow (that's how we got C&C 4 as well as Empire Earth 3, both of which buried their franchises).
2) WarCraft III both changing the paradigm by bringing in multiple RPG elements (a formula that spawned imitators such as Heroes of Anhililated Empires, and the still-active SpellForce series) AND spawning the MOBA. The latter not only took a lot of the sports playing people away from the game, but also eventually led Relic to abandon their own squad-based RTS sub-genre in favour of a far more tactics-based formula in Dawn of War 2. See also: proliferation of"real time tower defense games", also owing to that secret level in the Frozen Throne Blood Elves campaign;

Special mentions to Microsoft for managing Age of Empires into near oblivion with 3, followed by the online spin-off, before closing Ensemble alltogether, and Chris Taylor's caveman RTS and the shutdown of GasPoweredGames.

Another interesting aspect of the whole thing is Ubisoft eventual abandonment of Settlers and a general trend to "de-RTSify" city builders, differentiating them into a much more simulation-focused genre.

Total War was, and always will be, a refinement of the hybrid Lords of the Realm formula. It's flexible, offers decent range of depth, but ultimately it requires less tactical depth, because all it is is coordination of multiple formations on a small map. It's the closest we have to a "big budget strategy title", but it doesn't really have the same appeal as something like Age of Kings, Microsoft's " lightning in a bottle" mix of town-building and massive armies for the casual crowd. Thankfully. Microsoft appears to have realized this after seeing the ridiculous success of HD re-release (it sits firmly in the top 200 most played Steam games year after year, which is ridiculous for a 1999 RTS), so we have the Definitive Edition coming up, and that just may end up being Windows 10's first "killer app". I'm still wary of letting Relic do Age of Empires 4, because I don't want squad-based, small-scale warfare in my Age of Empires, and that's been Relic's MO ever since they stopped making Homeworld.

The genre isn't exactly dead- we got SpellForce 3, Iron Harvest, new Age of empires game in the works, as well as a whole number of independent projects. But it certainly isn't as big, because major publishers aren't particularly interested in the niche crowd that want to play casual games against computers, while making a bombastic single-player campaign experience and trying to compete with something like StarCraft II on production values is not really feasible for most indies.
 

Nome

Designer / Self-requested ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,312
NYC
Out of curiosity, do you think the example of simplified team oriented RTS I gave would work?
"Could work" is a very different thing from "viable product."
Yes, I think that idea could be fun. I'd at least try it.

Viable product that makes more money than a competing use of resources, probably not. I don't think there's a version of RTS that would be a viable product in today's market. When MOBAs were in their infancy, RTS players looked down on them for being casual. Today, MOBAs are considered the absolute high end of complexity on the mainstream market--and this is actually a debatable point, as every MOBA that's not LOL or Dota 2 has failed.
 

Lorcain

Member
Oct 27, 2017
509
I'm still bitter and sad about Relic fucking up Dawn of War 3 by moving away from what made those games so much fun, and going all-in on the MOBA trend.
 

Poimandres

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,858
Yeah, if the claim here is that MOBAs have sucked all the oxygen out of the room because anyone who wants an RTS-like experience also wants a highly competitive multiplayer scene, I guess I can't argue against that. I don't know how many people there are like me who don't care about that stuff but enjoyed RTSes in their prime.

I don't like MOBAs at all. I like traditional old school RTS. Build a big base, build a bunch of units, battle it out. I was never competitive in multiplayer but still had plenty of fun with other casual players.

I think there are plenty out there like us, and the ceiling for a good traditional RTS is likely several million. You do need "hardcore" players to keep the multiplayer community alive, but the fighting game analogy isn't a bad one. Mortal Kombat for example has huge casual appeal. Not everyone playing multi is going to be trying to enter competitions. As long as you are matched with people in a similar skill bracket everyone is having fun.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,951
Columbus, Ohio
I find it interesting that AoE 2: HD edition has maintained and even grown steadily for years now. I get that it's a (presumably?) good version of an all-time RTS, but it suggests to me that there remains a mid-sized userbase out there for traditional RTS games. It's probably just not worth trying to chase with an unknown title I guess.
 

Akita One

Member
Oct 30, 2017
4,626
MOBA took the best parts of RTS and cut the chafe.

No one likes micro. Micro-management is by nature not rewarding and fun gameplay. We'll see RTS back in style when AI is advanced enough to control units intelligently, and you as the player can delegate to AI as a commander do in real life.

I think a RTS with minimal micro + emphasis on teamwork could potentially work.
Came in to write some similar to this.

There is alot of nostalgia-goggles over RTS games. They have the slowest gameplay in the industry, without the pure adrenaline rush and focus of MOBAs...or the attention to detail and the feeling of reward vs. time spent that grand scale strategy games have. Simply put, the genre hasn't added many new customers in over a decade, and there is alot more competition and genre diversity in PC software sales than it was back when Brood War came out. There was like maybe 3 or 4 successful genres back then, with FPS and RTS games being newcomers.

It was a PC only genre, and other PC genres have evolved outside of the gameplay while taking all of the best bits of a basic RTS game.
 

Rygar 8Bit

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,855
Site-15
Age of the Empires 4, Stronghold 4 and Total War Warhammer 3. Got some alright stuff coming up. Would kill for a C&C and Myth revive though, even a new Star Wars Empire at War or Rise of Nations.
 

NathanS

Member
Dec 5, 2017
450
Because for huge amount of gamers RTS meant "No rush, build a huge base then ram a bunch of large armies together after 30 minutes". RTS started moving away from base building and more into micro and E-sports, which doesn't seem like the majority of gamers want.

To pull from myself the last time this came up:

I'd say once the evolution of RTS started really getting into APM and micro management, a massive drop in the audience and evolution to focus on those things in MOBAs was assured. The combination of "people super into thinking through strategies and strategy games, and also love super twitchy stuff" was never a sustainable market.

On a personal note I know I was playing a general when I got into RTS, and well my vision of being a general didn't involve having to babysit every single solider because they don't know which gun they should use when. I like d being able to see an open flank and sending my heavy units to pin down the enemy well my skirmishers flank the enemy, and having to tell each unit to use ability B, and also having to tell them in precise movement patterns to make the ability work better doesn't add to that, it gets in the way.
 

Deleted member 15227

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,819
With RTS, I've always loved scale and mayhem. Which is why Supreme Commander / Total Annihilation always did it for me. Forged Alliance Forever breathed new life into Supreme Commander with 4-player co-op through the SP campaigns ... the developers are absolute madmen/women.

However, the micro aspect of RTS games have always been a huge downer to anyone wanting to get into it. The fact that you have to play like an automaton yourself to have a chance against another player is a huge barrier and I can understand the decline in RTS popularity in an age where time is precious and we just want to have fun. While I don't like it, I also understand why developers / publishers pushed RTS' towards eSports in order to remain relevant and maintain a return on investment because these games are pretty time consuming to build and maintain.
 

thevid

Puzzle Master
Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,305
I think a lot of other games satisfy the itch that RTS games used to fill for a lot of people. MOBAs are the obvious one. But if you liked to turtle, then something like They Are Billions, Creeper World or Siege of Centauri might be up your alley. If you wanted something larger scale, there are grand strategy games which have exploded in popularity over the last few years (and they are still real-time, not turn-based 4x). Want to focus just on fighting? Maybe Steel Division or Ultimate General: Civil War are more to your liking. And then there are games like Rimworld, Northgard, and countless others that borrow from RTS games.

But there's been a decent number of classic style RTS games. Grey Goo, Ancestors Legacy, the 8-bit series, Halo Wars 2, Ashes of Singularity, and Cossacks 3 are some that come to mind, and I'm sure that's not a comprehensive list.
 

pochi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,135
Team based RTS is gonna be the future.
People just can't handle 1v1 games.

I'm still salty how EA handled CnC.
 

Deleted member 1656

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,474
So-Cal
I'm still salty we never got Endwar 2
can I give you a digital hug for this post? I mean post #2 and BAM Endwar
whodathunkit

It's such an unassuming yet solid, unique game with a lot of personality. And every time I meet another fan of it I've gotta let 'em know, man!
The thing about turn-based games is that Firaxis' XCOM is a (gaming) cultural touchstone--it made turn-based combat cool again. When XCOM was a hit, it proved that not only can these kinds of games play exquisitely well, but also have sales to match that excellence. It proved there was still a lot of life left in the genre for all to see, and developers were inspired by that.

XCOM led to a golden age of turn-based games.

RTSes just need their XCOM moment and they'll be back with a revengeance. What's happened right now is not so much cannibalisation of the market (by MOBAs), so much as a total eclipse of it. It only takes one game to strike the right chord and revive everything, as XCOM showed. (Seriously, XCOM's influence can be seen in pretty much every turn-based game released since.)

So, yes, RTSes can return; it's a matter of time.
seriously though, I agree with this

and the XCOM-moment will be an Endwar spiritual successor or a GI Joe game

B E L I E V E
 

Jawmuncher

Crisis Dino
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
38,397
Ibis Island
Thank goodness we're getting that C&C remaster. That should help get things going. By far the biggest reason the genre lowered was due to there being no flagship title for the genre still consistently coming out.
There were definitely attempts, but things always fell back on "I'd rather just be playing the classics".

As for MOBA, while that is part of the pie. I definitely think there's a big gap between the two for most.
 

DaciaJC

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
6,685
That AoE2: HD Edition ended up doing so outstandingly well on Steam despite just being a remaster of a 15-year old game is very promising. Microsoft finding it worthwhile to remake all of the main AoE titles and even funding development of an entirely new Age game are big reasons why I'm still optimistic about the future of RTS.
 

Oxyrain

Member
Oct 25, 2017
479
I think that since there were so many player archetypes looking for different things in RTS games, it ended up being easier to target specific players and not worry about building systems that players were nonplussed about. Hence MOBAs, Tower Defence/Horde Modes, and City/base builders split out into different sub-genres.

My best RTS memories are coop comp stomping AIs in Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander as well as the 'Chickens' Horde mode in Spring engine games.

I try to play a range of RTSs but the Total Annihilation-likes are pretty much the only ones that can hold my attention.
 

Sibylus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,728
RTS spawned MOBAs, which publishers and devs saw a bigger payday out of.

Situation is repeating itself with the Dota Auto Chess clones.
 

kurahador

Member
Oct 28, 2017
17,533
It's because of the rising popularity of tower defense genre (which evolve into MOBA) and mobile gaming.