OpenRTS new Civilization-like game project

[vovan]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
You also have to remember part of Civ 4 is code bought from outside.

Bought is the key word, not obtained from free sources.

Vovan

[Sava]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I have always thought the "real time strategy"* games are silly. None that I have seen have any real depth, most are clickfests and the computer players rely on the fact that a CPU can move** much faster than a person.

I guess a significant part of this is, when everything is moving constantly in such a game, there's very little time available for thinking.


* It is not real time. I have no idea why this was not corrected a long time ago.

** Not literally, of course.

I have always thought the people who bash RTS games are people who have poor reflexes, can't think under pressure, can't formulate strategy quickly enough to react to changing situations; and due to these factors, they lash out against the genre because of their own lack of skill.

[DrSpike]

Damn, I agree.

[Rommel2D]

One things for sure- the name 'Real Time Strategy' may be somewhat appropriate for some of the games like Starcraft or Command & Conquer, but its a comical misnomer applied to the whole genre. AoE and RoN?

Can we call Civ PBEM Real-Time?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Sava
I have always thought the people who bash RTS games are people who have poor reflexes, can't think under pressure, can't formulate strategy quickly enough to react to changing situations; and due to these factors, they lash out against the genre because of their own lack of skill.

Is this why you do poorly?

[DrSpike]

As comebacks go that's pretty bad.

[Straybow]

Originally posted by Sava
I have always thought the people who bash RTS games are people who have poor reflexes, can't think under pressure, can't formulate strategy quickly enough to react to changing situations; and due to these factors, they lash out against the genre because of their own lack of skill.

Ah, yes. The ad hominem comes out...

My reflexes, thinking under pressure, strategy, etc are more than adequate to deal with any AI or game design I've tried to date. I haven't tried the various Total War games and suspend my judgement about them.

Now back to the facts: The RTS genre generally substitutes time pressure for game design depth.

[DrSpike]

I don't agree with that. SC: BW (for instance) in MP is one of the deepest and most perfectly crafted games ever, reaching a state of balance no TBS I have ever played has ever come close to, SP or MP.

Granted it's a different depth than you find in good TBS's. It's still depth though, and characterising (even generally) the entire genre as substituting time pressure for depth just isn't right.

[Solver]

Yes, SC:BW (or just SC) is one of the best MP games of all time, but if you've ever seen the pros play, it's blatantly obvious that a lot of their skill comes from reflexes. You still have to make some right choices in any RTS game, but a perfect knowledge of strategies, without having the reflexes, will not get you great results.

[DrSpike]

Again not entirely true. Micro is very important, but it's more than micro that makes a good player. Granted this wont be evident to someone that isn't a good player themselves, but it is nonetheless true.

[Solver]

Good reflexes are about more than micro. I agree that a good player is more than micro - but being able to, for example, simultaneously keep an eye on the economic base and the military forward base is reflexes. And if you can constantly issue your build orders 2 seconds faster than the opponent, that adds up.

I'd like to think I know what I'm saying here... I have never been a very good RTS player, I'm merely average, but I do have a fair bit of experience.

[Nikolai]

What is SC:BW?

[Solver]

Starcraft. BW is the Brood War expansion. Shame on you.

[Nikolai]

Ah! Starcraft! Why didn't you say so.

[Solver]

Because I'm hardcore, and all the hardcore people know Starcraft without even having to mention it by name .