Lets talk about RTS as a genre

Discussion in 'PA: TITANS: General Discussion' started by dawnbringerhun, February 7, 2016.

?

If it possible, do you want Upgrading Units and/or choosing Factions in PA?

  1. Yes, I want to Upgrade Units and choose a Faction

    9 vote(s)
    24.3%
  2. Yes, but I just want to Upgrade Units

    2 vote(s)
    5.4%
  3. Yes, but I just want to choose a Faction

    12 vote(s)
    32.4%
  4. No, I dont want to Upgrade units or choose a Faction

    14 vote(s)
    37.8%
  1. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    4,793
    #thelegioniscoming2016...
    Corgiarmy and Ksgrip like this.
  2. Ksgrip

    Ksgrip Active Member

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    242
    #thelegioniscoming2016...[/QUOTE]
    It is going to be the next vanilla. I hope Uber sees the importance that we as a communkty are giving to it and add it to base game when the mod is finished
  3. Ksgrip

    Ksgrip Active Member

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    242
    Is really neccesary to bash someone who you don't even know with that passive agressive approach? You stuart and ghost
  4. g0hstreaper

    g0hstreaper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    553
    First: Community* check yourself before you try and walk in on something that doesn't involve you.

    Second: I posted my opinion and left, If you look at what I posted "Another one" this is a response to the whole point of the thread to be another cry to uber to cater the game to the Authors tastes instead of actually playing the game as is (Because it is quite balanced besides mass zues) while s....wait am I defending myself about a argument with a argument.... forget you 10/10 took the b8 and ran with it. If you actually read how this started Stuart started it and I responded in kind so look at 1st point kthxbye
  5. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,868
    Likes Received:
    2,989
    Right, lets move on from this somewhat unnecessarily aggressive direction which also seems to be going down the quite childish "he started it" route.
    Lets discuss rather than skirmish.
    cdrkf, Ksgrip, Greendolph and 2 others like this.
  6. elodea

    elodea Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,694
    Likes Received:
    3,040
    Really strange how aggressive such an innocuous topic can become. People need to realise that their opinions are just their opinions. No-one is the God who dictates exactly how games should play - that's antithetical to the creative spirit and nature of the industry. The 'feminists' tried to do that and they got a huge backlash through gamergate.

    Like ingredients in a soup, you don't need to put e.g. tomatoes into it to make it a soup. If you did, it would become tomato soup, but if you didn't it would just be tomato-less soup.

    RTS is simply a delineation of games from a time where turn based was the technical limitation. The draw being alot more mentally demanding and time sensitive, the genre naturally evolved towards depth of gameplay and over time designers have come up with many different features and mechanics that contribute towards that.

    Along the way however you very quickly discover that accessibility and depth are things that trade off against each other so the question becomes how much depth can you pack into the game without making the game a nonsensical inpenetrable mess. There isn't a clear cut line because we all want different things in our entertainment, and thankfully we have a wideish market that can cater to different segments along that gradient.

    Personally, i like depth in gameplay so i enjoy tech trees and factions and the like. That doesn't mean a game can't still have depth without these things though.
    stuart98, cdrkf, oksidi and 2 others like this.
  7. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    4,793
    Well said, also I think there are so many definitions of 'depth'. I've always maintained (to me at least) TA had huge depth, although derived in a totally different way to most RTS games of the time.

    The Blizzard 'Craft' games used a combination of unit abilities, upgrades and a a tier system to control pace and the interaction between units. I remember at the time many Warcaft / Starcraft fans didn't see any depth in TA as a unit in that was just that. You couldn't upgrade it, there were (almost) no special abilities or upgrades and the tech structure was very flat (t1 -> t2). Yet in TA we had the simulation of projectiles, LOS and complex terrain which meant that a unit in skilled hands could become vastly stronger than the same unit controlled by a less experienced player. TA traded the timing / learning required for activating the various abilities in the optimum sequence for more complex situational awareness and micro management of a unit (e.g. I can get my AK into their base and circumvent that laser turret by maneuvering it accurately down the blind spot created by that solar collector) and a large emphasis on clever positioning (these rocket units get extended range by being on the high ground).

    I think where people make a mistake though is to assume that adding all these things together would automatically be better. Would Starcraft 2 actually play better if you added fully simulated projectiles, complex terrain and so on, on top of it's already vast set of unit abilities and interactions? Would PA actually be better if we had loads of special powers that could be activated? I'm not so sure more is always better, as at some point the game moves from being 'challenging' to down right stress inducing due to the level of concentration required to play.
    stuart98 likes this.
  8. Ksgrip

    Ksgrip Active Member

    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    242
    Aka supcom. Even Pa is ******* stressfull at some times
    stuart98 likes this.

Share This Page