Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

XConsidering it's me this request for RTS game comments will sound odd

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> XConsidering it's me this request for RTS game comments will sound odd Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
XConsidering it's me this request for RTS game comments... - 4/16/2002 7:08:44 PM   
Les_the_Sarge_9_1

 

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline 		Ok I am likely going to confuse the forum here,..... but assuming I gave a ****,...... (and I obviously have some interest, or I wouldnt have posted this), can anyone comment on the world of RTS games that have tangible connection with the real world's military past
(ie I am right now saying I am not interested in hearing about RTS games that happen in a fictional La la land).

I ask because I have zero knowledge of them. I have no knowledge of titles, how old the game might be, what manner of existence they had/have (ie platform they can be played on such as console machines).

I have seen Medal of Honor on a PS1 cartridge recently. But I have no knowledge of the game.

The world isn't just our incredibly dull to some looking Turn based designs I suppose.

So I am looking for input on the RTS scene. What sucks and what glows in the dark eh. Opinions ARE wanted here.
But make sure you tell me why a game sucks, or why it should be played at least once. Ramble on guys.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Post #: 1
RTS Games - 4/18/2002 1:17:54 AM   
John David


Posts: 373
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: Montreal, Quebec
Status: offline 		Sarge,

As far as my experience with RTS games, They have been with games like Blizzard's Warcraft series which was fun, and Sid Mier's Civilization seies which are great.

As far as purley millitary games go, Microsofts, Close Combat series was good, but the control of the small sprite like soldiers and the point and click fest that the games became were very frustrating at times.

RTS games are fun, but the management of the game resources and control of individual units make them difficult and time consuming.

I have played other RTS games besides of the one's I listed above, but these have been my observations of the genre through the majority of them.

Hey, if one strikes your fancy, give on a try. Believe it or not, I tried the demo of the 3DO demo for Army Men RTS, you know the computer version of the little green plastic soldiers. It was really fun, and I might go out and buy the game! The older versions of the Army Men games were also cool, but were hard to control and move the units around. This new game however is the first RTS version and it, from the demo I played seemed fun.

I too look forward to reading other post's here in this thread to see what other's have to say.

John

_____________________________

The only thing good about war, is it's ending!


(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 2
- 4/18/2002 2:04:22 AM   
ravensclaw

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 4/17/2002
From: uk
Status: offline 		i too have to agree with john that rts games are difficult to manage at times but i found them to be as enjoyable as turn-based games

one that i would recomend is War Commander, which is a squad level ww2 game starting with Operation Overlord ,but he's right in saying pick one that takes your fancy cos what one person may find fun you may find frustrating.if in doubt try to find a demo to give it a try first:)

_____________________________

[IMG]http://www.thoraa.net/pics/breasteagle.jpg[/IMG]
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left."

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 3
- 4/18/2002 2:44:37 AM   
Les_the_Sarge_9_1

 

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline 		Thanks for the input guys.

By the way though, Civilization is turn based. I am currently having touble NOT playing Civilization 3 which is hands down the best of its genre (that being world building turn based strategy). The AI might not be overly brilliant, but even on easy mode a bad choice will get ya pounded.

I have seen the Army Men games, although while I briefly owned an early version for computer it suffered from lack of keyboard friendliness. I have seen it on consoles where it is kinda fun. I am suspecting it will appear soon on my son's PS1 heheh.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 4
Civilization - 4/18/2002 3:21:39 AM   
John David


Posts: 373
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: Montreal, Quebec
Status: offline 		Sarge,

Yes, I forgot that Civ was a turn based game:o

And yes, Civ 3 is great.

John

_____________________________

The only thing good about war, is it's ending!


(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 5
- 4/18/2002 5:04:42 AM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline 		I used to have the really old version of Army men....made by Airfix:D Now there was some REAL RTS !:D

_____________________________




Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 6
- 4/18/2002 5:34:13 AM   
Nixuebrig

 

Posts: 1138
Joined: 1/2/2001
From: (c) Lübeck, now Berlin
Status: offline 		Try Europa Universalis II, covers the whole world from 1492 to 1819, it is one of the few RTS even I as a turnbased fanatic like.

[url]www.europa-universalis.com[/url]

Greg

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 7
- 4/18/2002 6:28:33 AM   
Fred98


Posts: 4430
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline 		The first post in this thread asked about “RTS” games. Which I understand to mean Real Time Strategy.

There are none.

All strategy games are turn based.

If instead you mean Real Time Tactical there is one.

Close Combat.

But there was another. 101st Airborne.

I have just received a copy of this game but I have not yet got around to loading it. I thought it was turn based but from the manual it seems to be Real Time Tactical. The men in the squad take turns to perform actions but it is not a turn based game.

I will report here what I find. The sequel, 82nd airborne, is due out soon and it will have improvements over 101st Airborne.

Back to Close Combat.

The accusation by the CM crowd that Close Combat is a click fest is extremely irritating to us Close Combat players.

I have been playing Close Combat for more than 5 years now. Mostly H2H and against worthy opponents.

I have assaulted so many hedge lines and so many buildings right across Europe I have lost count.

I have defended bridges and captured them. I have fought in hot sunny weather and freezing snowy conditions. I have sent tanks across hard open plains and through thick mud and snow.

And all along the way thousands of sprites have died for me. The death of each sprite cut me to the bone.

Close Combat has been a great game. And a part of my life.

Many games have ended with a feeling of exhilaration when things go right and feelings of despair when they go wrong.

Many games have ended with me feeling totally drained. Afterward I need to sit up and relax for a while and calm down before I go to sleep.

But now days I work long hours and I don’t have the time to play H2H against a regular opponent. So I have instead turned to turn based games.

The beauty of a turn based game is that you can play it at any time irrespective of my working hours. And I can play it in a relaxed manner.

Sure they can get exciting and tense but its nothing like the feeling of playing Close Combat. After all there are 24 hours between turns. The definition of a wargame is “Chess with 1,000 pieces”. Chess too can be played by email.

I have been playing turn-based games now for 6 months against worthy opponents. IE:, playing one game in particular – The Ardennes Offensive. Of course Matrix is to publish the sequel – the Korsun Pocket. I am looking forward to this game.

But for a Real Time Tactical game – go for Close Combat and play it H2H against a regular opponent.

-

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 8
- 4/18/2002 6:51:08 AM   
ravensclaw

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 4/17/2002
From: uk
Status: offline 		i hav to agree with you on the point of Close Combat

the only one i hav played is A Bridge To Far , but that is due to my intrest in the para side of things:) , and i found that it was a very tense game with the battle being able to change dramatically in the course of just 5 mins when one of your luckless squads is suddenly cut down by a withering hail of hot lead:) , but as you said that did amplify my enjoyment of that game even if i had to cut down on my playing time so it was only played at weekends

i cannot comment about h2h as up until recently i was without internet access and i don't as yet rate my skills in any game worthy enough to tie up the time of a more experienced player

but before i lose the point of this post all i realy wanted to say was that i agree that the adrenaline russ that you get from an RTS/RTT game is well worth some of the frustrations from its unmanageability:)

_____________________________

[IMG]http://www.thoraa.net/pics/breasteagle.jpg[/IMG]
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left."

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 9
Still A Click Fest! - 4/18/2002 9:07:19 AM   
John David


Posts: 373
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: Montreal, Quebec
Status: offline 		I'm sorry, but I have to disagree.

I like Close Combat allot, but to say it is not a click fest game is,in my opinion, wrong! It also is a very hard game to control when playing scenarios with allot of units. The sprites are very small and it is easy to loose track of where they all are in the heat of battle, especially in H2H games.

I too have played the game since it first came out, and I still play it. i liked the game so much that I even bought SSi's version "Invasion Normandy".

As far as all games being turned based, well that is wrong too. Warcraft and similar games DO NOT have turns to them. The opposing forces react to whatever your units are doing. There is no end of turn. The scenario ends when the conditions for it are met. that is what makes it real time as oppossed to turn based.

Again, I am not knocking the Close Combat series of games, heck I own them all! However most people I know, reviews that I have read and comments from players all over the web for years have said that it is a click fest and that it can be very frustrating. but it is still a great game and I would recommend it to anyone!:)

John

_____________________________

The only thing good about war, is it's ending!


(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 10
- 4/18/2002 10:09:26 AM   
Fred98


Posts: 4430
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline 		\\\ Clickfest ///

If I need to issue 10 orders then I click the mouse 10 times
If I were playing a different game and issue 10 orders I click the mouse……….10 times.

But because Close Combat is live, those 10 clicks could happen in 20 seconds – thereby giving the impression of a clickfest.

The reality is, I use the keyboard for many orders with my left hand and keep my right hand on the trigger (the mouse) ready to fire in an instant.


\\\\\ It also is a very hard game to control when playing scenarios with a lot of units /////

This seems to be a personal thing. Some people can handle it and some cannot. The maximum number of units is 15 - not "large" at all.

And I have no problem having one group of units put in an attack, a second group put in a feint and a third group sit in defensive positions - all at the same time.


\\\\ The sprites are very small and it is easy to loose track of where they all are in the heat of battle, especially in H2H games. /////

Again this is a personal preference thing. Some people can do it and some cannot. I have had a 17” monitor for most of those 5 years and a 19” monitor for most of the last year. Its great. EVERY game is better for the large monitor.

If I happened to have 2 tanks in the scenario I mentioned there would be one with the first group and one with the second. I am always organised and never misplaced a unit.

You can also assign the 9 numbered keys to units and I always assigned mortars, AT units and critical units to a number. Looking far the mortar team? Hit 1 !

\\\\\ Warcraft and similar games DO NOT have turns to them /////

Warcraft is a fantasy game. The original request in the first post was to avoid fantasy games.
-

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 11
- 4/18/2002 10:37:38 AM   
John David


Posts: 373
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: Montreal, Quebec
Status: offline 		First off, you give the impression that some people can handle the game navigation and some can't.

I don't have this problem and I am simply stating what thousands of other people have commented on this game.

Apparently, you only read what you want from my post and ignore the rest! As I said, I like the game, but most people, whether players or game developers have stated that this, along
with the sprite sizes in the game made it difficult at times to play.

If this was not so, why don't we see other games that were developed using this game engine?
You can argue all you want, but the facts speak for themselves.
This type of game engine and mechanics were not used in subsequent games by developers.

You can disregard the comments of all these people who either commented or reviewed the game if you wish, but I like to speak from what I have read over the years, from developers and players, as well from my own experiences.

Besides, does the saying "don't shoot the messenger" ring a bell?

As I said, I LIKE THE GAME and would recommend it. But we all have to be able to see the good points with the bad for anything in a game or, in life for that matter, and not see everything with rose colored glasses!

As far as my bringing up Warcraft, I know it is a fantasy based game, and Les wanted to keep those out of recommendations, but you brought up the point that there are no RTS games, only turn based. Your quote "There are none.
All strategy games are turn based." Wrong! And whether you like it or not, Warcraft no matter it's setting, is still a strategy game!

Finally, there are other RTS games out there. Whether they are in the fantasy genre or not is the point. Your premise is that there were none. Warcraft and many other games like it including the new Army Men RTS game which I spoke of in an earlier post prove that! In fact, Army Men RTS works on a clock countdown for scenarios, not turns. While playing the scenario's, both sides are acting and re acting to one another's moves. That is what RTS means!

Your arguments are based on points from your opinion, while mine are based in facts. Not my facts that I made up, but from the sources that I stated about the reviews and comments about Close Combat over the years it has been out. If you have not read them, look it up. If you like the game, great so do I!
Just try to keep an open mind and see it from both sides.



John

_____________________________

The only thing good about war, is it's ending!


(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 12
- 4/18/2002 11:35:08 AM   
Fred98


Posts: 4430
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline 		“ First off, you give the impression that some people can handle the game navigation and some can't”

Yes that’s exactly what I said. I reckon it is the only reason Combat Mission ever got off the ground.


“Besides, does the saying "don't shoot the messenger" ring a bell??”

Absolutely! As this is a public forum plenty will read it so the message gets passed on all on its own :). That’s the point that is missed regularly on these forums..


“Apparently, you only read what you want from my post and ignore the rest! “

Errr no, as there is no body language it is easy to miss-understand.


“If this was not so, why don't we see other games that were developed using this game engine? “

Because Atomic refused to sell it or license it. They were asked.

“This type of game engine and mechanics were not used in subsequent games by developers.”

Incorrect there. Matrix’s Close Assault is intended to take up where Close Combat left off. It will be much the same but have many improvements that Close Combat players have asked for and Atomic ignored.

“As I said, I LIKE THE GAME and would recommend it.”

Yes you have said it a few times now. I have no reason to doubt it.

Your comments on Warcraft and Army Men are irrelevant. Les asked for RTS games that are not fantasy. I said there are none.

“Finally, there are other RTS games out there.”

Then please list them. That was Les’s original question. Of course if they are fantasy then Les and myself have no interest and should be left off the list. If Les had asked for fantasy games I would not have bothered to read the second or subsequent posts.

Joe

BTW I too was born in 1959. I spent 5 months travelling in across Canada and loved the place. It is odd that we Sydneyites love Vancouver and Vancouverites love Sydney
-

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 13
OK Joe - 4/18/2002 10:14:07 PM   
John David


Posts: 373
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: Montreal, Quebec
Status: offline 		Ok Joe,

we both like the game and would recommend it. I just pointed out some criticisim that have been mentioned by both gamers and reviewers over the years.

As far as RTS games go, my point was that there are RTS games. Close Combat is one. You call games as tactical and not as strategy. We are arguing about the same thing as everyone else refers to these type games as RTS not RTT.

Anyway, the important thing is that we both like the game, and have gotten many enjoyable years from them.

Glad you enjoyed your trip to Canada. When was it that you were here? Hope you can visit us again someday, preferably in the Summer:cool:

John

_____________________________

The only thing good about war, is it's ending!


(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 14
- 4/19/2002 6:32:10 AM   
Big Bill

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 3/24/2001
From: LI. NY. , USA
Status: offline 		Sarge, I don't know how far back you like to go to fight your battles but I found Sid Mires Gettysburg enjoyable, Also the Great Battles series ( Hanibal, Alexander, Ceaser ) is a nice derversion ( no gun powder yet! ). I know the GB series won't
play on Win XP so I still have my old computer for that one.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 15
Another Option - 4/19/2002 6:44:56 AM   
GROND

 

Posts: 119
Joined: 4/3/2002
From: hollywood
Status: offline 		Titans of Steel is not turn based but built upon a clock. Every action that you dictate to one of your units takes a certain amount of time to execute. The beauty of this system is that one can take time to ponder a move, decide upon that move and then the game will continue until that action is completed or another player has an action complete at which point they will be given their chance. With up to 16 units on a side there is no sense of turns whatsoever just the ongoing flow of time in a firefight. A short battle can be over in 3-500 game seconds a large one in 2-3000. The game also features hidden movement from every units perspective. Each unit in the game can see (displayed) only what parts of the map are not blocked by obstructing terrain. This allows for a level of sneakiness that is unparalled in my 37 years of gaming experience. Not of course that I... would take advantage of such a thing (look of angelic innocence) :)

Matrix has 1.4 as freeware (8.5 meg) with a commercial release of Warring Suns due out at around 300mb.

_____________________________

Hetzer

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 16
- 4/19/2002 8:54:13 AM   
Les_the_Sarge_9_1

 

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline 		A good simulation is always a good simulation.

Although about the only pre WW1 fighting I generally do is in a Civilization style game. Where I am creating from the ground up.

I have seen a few games out there that do look like well donegames. Never let it be said, that I think the games out there, that I don't care to play, are not well done (I don't like blondes eh, some people just don't want the popular choice hehe).

I watched a few playings of a game I think it was called Shogun. I think its real time. Had an interesting feature, if your run your troops ragged "before" a skirmish, they tend to say the heck with it and run from the opponent. A very nicely modelled reflection of the troops portraying human tolerances.

Have appreciated the input thus far.
About the only snafu in the posts thus far is a dedication to fussing over symantics.

RTS is very much Tactical. Its called Strategy only due to circumstance when the genre first appeared.

Its the same folly that calls all role-gaming "Dungeons and Dragons". if I tell you I play Alternity, no one knows what I am talking about if they are not an RPG fan.

Its the same way with term "wargames". I do not refer to any game that has no connection with any actual past warfare, by that term.
Therefore I tend to exclude Command and Conquer for instance in my own personal parlance as being an example of a wargame. This is just me of course. So I don't expect any to actually totally agree with me.
Additionally I tend not to refer to a Civilization type game as a wargame. I tend to call them world builder sims.

What I find mostly comical is discussing wargames of the non computer variety. It is a very significant detail when people can no longer relate to games that predate computer domination.
I have Steel Panthers and The Operational Art of War which I use as my computer yard sticks I hold up to all others for comparison.

But even more so, I put all computer games up to a spotlight, and force them to compete with the likes of Squad Leader/ASL, Panzerblitz/Panzer Leader/Arab Israelis Wars, Third Reich/ A3R, Fortress Europa/Russian Front, and Russian Front.
I played all these titles to death. I still play them. They can do what they do much better than any computer game I have encountered.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 17
- 4/19/2002 9:05:42 AM   
brent_2

 

Posts: 1990
Joined: 3/27/2001
From: Rheingau, Hesse, DE
Status: offline 		Shogun is an excellent game, one of the few I keep coming back to outside of Close Combat. The combination of Strategic map and combat is very appealing.

_____________________________

I'm essentially graphically and history oriented, unfortunately to connect the two I have to do maths. I hate maths.
CSO_Brent

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 18
Sorry About That! - 4/19/2002 9:30:42 AM   
John David


Posts: 373
Joined: 3/21/2002
From: Montreal, Quebec
Status: offline 		Sarge,

i'm sorry that I got off target in this thread arguing about semantics with Joe. Sometimes, in the midst of trying to be understood when you think that you did not explain yourself properly, you loose site of what the thread was about in the first -place:rolleyes:

Suffice it to say, we both recommend Close Combat, no matter what form of game you want to call it.:D

John

_____________________________

The only thing good about war, is it's ending!


(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)
Post #: 19
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> XConsidering it's me this request for RTS game comments will sound odd Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.563