Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 1:33 AM
Sun Dec 6
30 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
I cannot STAND RTS' in multiplayer, because time played is often the largest factor for winning. And you always end up playing 'that guy' who hasn't stopped playing since the game launched.
11/20/09
I'm not saying there isn't a high amount of skill involved in that process, or that the end game can't be salvaged after a poor start - but in my experience things end up getting way too hectic for them to be fun (to me). And fun is ultimately what I strive to have when I play a game.
For that reason the only multiplayer games I play with any serious regularity are with my friends in a co-op setting.
11/20/09
In the cases where your opponent is much better than you, the game's really over before it began.
In cases of equal or almost equal skill level, a rough start doesn't necessarily mean a loss.
11/20/09
I understand that all, it's just not fun to me. Now playing with a friend in co-op against impossible odds - that's where the fun is even if we'd lose more often than we won.
When it comes down to it I much more enjoy teamwork than I do competition.
11/20/09
Yeah, RTS MP never seems to cater to the crowd that enjoys building monster defenses first. I bet that crowd makes up 90% of the SP only RTS players.
I like employing Blitzkrieg-like tactics, but I prefer building massive/conservative defenses before moving forward, and that's usually a losing cause for most RTS mp games, as speed and the tactics involved with it dominates.
At 36, I can't compete with 17 yearold twitch masters lol
11/20/09
I absolutely love building huge defenses that not only are practical, but look cool too. I've wasted so much time building more troops than I'd never need to complete missions, just because I can. :-) Perhaps too much time.
11/20/09
11/20/09
I suppose I shouldn't mention that of all the games in the series, I had the most fun with Renegade.
11/20/09
11/21/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
Your enjoyment in a RTS doesn't have to be based purely on how well you can follow a BO, despite what some "LOL NUB" spammers may say.
Where the fuck was I going with this entire post?
11/20/09
Who knows, but I'm giving it a thumbs up. =D
11/20/09
I'd hardly put RTS in my top couple genres of games but I do enjoy them now and then. I was hooked on Starcraft the moment I heard the cute sounds the SVCs make as my minerals went up in the tutorial mission.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
I could never get into Dota because of them. Yes, I blame them. The game was old by the time I wanted to start playing, and I was too "noob" for all those elitist and pretentious cunts, apparently. They kept kicking me before I even did anything. After 4 or 5 times of finally getting into a game and playing for a good 30 seconds, I decided I would never try to play this junk again.
Also, I still play some DoW2 with friends that are good at it and we usually win. We all have around 25-30 True Skill. And long story short, the little cry babies we play against keep either complaining that their teammates suck, and most importantly, they keep leaving as soon as they think they are done. No patience at all. No perseverance at all. Even though their stats are equal or better than ours.
So yeah. Probably because they think they're more clever than other humans, RTS players must have one of the highest rate of premature leaving, enraging and plain rudeness in the whole videogame community.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
That guy looks like Dr. Suresh from Heroes.
11/20/09
...which kinda raises the question of why are they tweaking the competitive aspect rather than coming up with something that lets people play with each other rather than against each other?
11/20/09
11/20/09
The only stats I can find for myself are from GTA4 and having played random casual online matches on it for maybe a year or so, I'm standing at 274 losses and 17 wins. It's still fun every now and then but competitiveness is definitely the key.
Nothing wrong with that, either. I mean, if you go online and play against others then it's fairly natural that you aim to win.
Still, I dunno... It's kinda like participating in a friendly 400 meter run but finding yourself competing with Usain Bolt, someone who has more fun running the track the opposite way, or someone who wins by skipping half the track.
11/20/09
Warhammer (the tabletop) kind of spoiled me. Because I know who's available to go up against and can talk to them before a match, it's easy to relax, try new strategies, and have fun in it. Getting on Frozen Throne? Whether I win or lose, I guarantee you I am going to hear the word 'N00B!!' and assorted other trash talk at least 95% of the time.
11/20/09
There are some people who are like that. I was ranked in the top 20 in Warcraft 3 2v2 with over 4000 games under my profile and I still occasionally get called a noob. Generally when I win with a hero harass or lose due to using a risky strategy.
11/20/09
11/21/09
I repair computers for a living (or did, when last I had work). I have to listen to complaining and occasionally insults all day. You can bet I'm not going to put up with much of it in my off-hours. :P
11/20/09
without competition, there can be no progress. we didn't drag ourselves out of the muck by accepting that each of us, in whatever capabilities and methods we chose or were fated with, was equally good. i'm not advocating for a lack of respect or composure, but i think suggesting that people who enjoy competition are unbalanced is silly.
then again, suggesting that one becomes a producer in EA's employ without being a competitive person (or, for that matter, without balancing your life in a VERY work-oriented direction) would be pretty silly, too.
he was saying words as they came to him, and maybe not considering his responses carefully. sometimes people do that.
11/20/09
Honestly, I tried to care about the new generation of Command and Conquer games, but they're just so far behind the times that there's very little reason for them to exist, except I suppose to provide an introduction to decade-old RTS games for the console-only crowd.
11/20/09
Variety is the spice of life, I guess. Although I'd like to see a game where some maps were classic annihilation and others were objective-based.
11/20/09
Something like Quake Wars in an RTS format.
11/20/09
It's pretty terrible when after 11 years I still have a bad taste in my mouth. Of course it doesn't help that my limited excursions into other titles' MP have done nothing to to erase it.
Mauling somebody in an FPS is one thing - at least they're likely to be back in the game in short order. Most FPSs also tend to support multiple play styles. RTSers (in my now-extremely-limited experience) tend to seek out the best build order/play style for a given faction and then robotically stick to it.
That said.. I DO love co-op against a/an computer opponent(s) though. I actually DO enjoy a challenge - but even the hardest AI's tend to have the decency to wait a good 15 minutes before completely crushing you.
11/20/09
In SC/War3/War2 there is a distinct risk reward for early attacks. A failed rush means a loss against a skilled player. Fending off rushes is a skill you need to acquire and early in all the games mentioned you have a distinct defensive advantage. I have a SC replay of my single sunken taking out a dozen zealots without much help. Right after that my team and i razed the rushers bases because they had to invest a lot to make a dozen zealots.
Most SC/Warcraft 2/3 players will often gently attack you to gauge your relative skill level and preview what you are building towards. If they note you aren't prepared then they'll kill you quickly and move on to more challenging opposition.
Why would you want to draw out a match? Wait 15 min? The average SC/Warcraft game is over in 15-20. Waiting 15 min means you are only playing the late game strategies. While it might be fun as a noobies to see the late game tech for people who play 'complete' games it's very sloppy.
11/20/09
It's blatantly obvious that you need to learn how to handle a rush. And it doesn't matter whether a rush is just a person being a jackass or demonstrative of a lack of skill - it is still enough to frustrate some people (myself included) to the point of just not giving a crap.
However I think your comment goes quite far in proving the original point - the average person that gets into multiplayer RTS lives for the victory rather than the challenge/experience.
Why else would you just run in and crush the obviously less skilled person first? Fear of them being a wild card? (ie.. interesting later on). Theoretically you should be able to handle them no matter when the final battle happens.
11/20/09
I'm a decently skilled RTS player. I went through my share of losses in the beginning. But it's simply less fun playing a noob than playing someone with skill. So why draw it out?
I paid my dues early on and lost dozen of games before I actually won one. It's that determination which gets me into games and keeps me playing. I am more determined to play when I am bad at something than when I'm good. I enjoy the challenge. I'm not typical and many stop when they note they are relatively unskilled. I play for the challenge and the adrenaline of playing someone as good or better than me. I feel a euphoric high when I have a close win against a tough opponent. I feel nothing when I win against a obviously unskilled opponent.
Winning is not why I play. Winning against unskilled player is not an interesting challenge or exercise. If wining was all I cared about I'd never take any risks and only play a single proven strategy. But I crave variety. So In war 3 I play random and I experiment often with odd tactics.
I play the whole game, not just the 3 min at the end with the top level technology. Many newer players only enjoy the late game. Its fine but they should expect to lose unless they learn the whole game.
Your opponent won't learn anything if you intentionally handicap your game. If you depend on 15min no rush to get ready then you will have a hard time getting better. If you want to get better you need to figure out the whole game not just the 3 min at the end.
#speakup
11/20/09
The only way I could think that RTS players are unbalanced is that people who are likely a bit more controlling probably lean towards RTS games because of their nature and approach. And to have that control wrest from you by someone else, tsk, it'll make anyone upset.
I remember my friend making a huge stockpile of the Napalm missile launchers in C&C, only to have them wiped out by a Nuclear strike as he was getting ready to attack and crying out "Nooooooo! My barrage!!!!"
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09