Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1411273 Posts in 69323 Topics- by 58380 Members - Latest Member: bob1029

March 28, 2024, 01:59:58 AM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsPlayerGeneralWhy don't I see rts indie games?
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6
Print
Author Topic: Why don't I see rts indie games?  (Read 9415 times)
motorherp
Level 3
***



View Profile
« Reply #80 on: October 30, 2014, 02:43:10 AM »

You could design a system where you don't have to construct buildings or one where you don't even manually have to produce units.

Z did that, it worked pretty well ->

Logged
Sik
Level 10
*****


View Profile WWW
« Reply #81 on: October 30, 2014, 12:34:59 PM »

That description sounds like what Nectaris would be if it wasn't turn-based (you start with a preset amount of units, and the only buildings are factories already there and you have to conquer them - you can only get more units by capturing the factories with them inside). Alternatively there's

which lets you create new units, but again no new buildings, you have to capture them (but then again that game has its own set of unusual mechanics, both for being an early RTS and for having to account to being limited to a D-pad).

In practice again the real issue would be pathfinding and a decent AI for computer players (which you'll want for single player). The

works around the former by just being a hall instead of a 2D map, so you can get away by just moving forward with the occassional obstacle dodge hack. AI is always going to be an issue though unless you make it multiplayer only (which would suck).
Logged
Chef Boyardee
Level 1
*


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: October 30, 2014, 01:37:38 PM »

The guy who made Knights of the Chalice made an RTS called

. It doesn't look remotely enjoyable.
Logged

Check out my game

BigThink
Level 0
**


View Profile WWW
« Reply #83 on: November 24, 2014, 11:04:34 AM »

Uhh my guess is that it's friggin hard! Just imagine, all the models, textures, polish, functionality AND balancing! Damn man it takes time! But it should be totally worth it I guess since they are super awesome!  Durr...?
Logged

Hey there! Just opened an YouTube channel about various game development topics! Check it out https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGCv7wwpwETEH0kkd_CYlfQ
RJAG
Level 0
***


View Profile
« Reply #84 on: November 30, 2014, 07:41:34 AM »

I'd like to see a pixel-art RTS game.
It is certainly possible. Nothing is holding anyone back from bringing in a retro art style to an old school RTS style.
What I'd love to see, is a remake of some of the more awesome- but neglected RTS titles of our youth.

Empire Earth, the original, was one of my favorite games. There was something about being able to play from Cavemen to Futuristic that just made me love it. You could choose your epoch, even lock them for a WW1 or WW2 game, lock the range so you could start as cavemen and end as bronze age, etc.
Fun stuff.

I've had a few RTS game ideas.
One, was a RTS theme- which was prehistoric. Cave men, dinosaurs, etc. A great theme to blend in Survival Mechanics with RTS gameplay.

Another, was a WW2 theme- which looked/played like Company of Heroes in a multiplayer game, but for each individual player- they took the role of a single specialized unit. The idea was born from how overwhelming RTS games (like Company of Heroes) can be, but how fun it is to control one really powerful unit (A CoH sniper, a single CoH tank or armored car in early tech, etc.)
Basically an idea inspired by Company of Heroes + World in Conflict + Natural Selection.

However, these would probably be at the bottom of the list of games I want to make- for many reasons. Art requirements are very heavy, gameplay is not well conceived (would require a lot of prototyping and balance). They're also multiplayer, possibly even MMO (matchmaking for potentially thousands of people at the least). Complex AI for NPC fights, Smart AI so you aren't frustrated, amazing but performant pathfinding, etc.

RTS games are awesome, but even if I didn't have resource limitations- I think they'd still be at the bottom of my list. They take so much time to play, the skill gap between players is extremely large even if they only have a 10 game difference. The AI usually sucks after you learn how to beat it (while also being extremely difficult due to its impossible micro-management ability). In other words: Most RTS AI just cheats the user, because it's too stupid to play fair. Lots of work there. Too much develop time spent for too little player-fun gain. Although my latter design fixes a lot of the problems (especially for casual gamers).

Still not as fun as a SIM or God-game, FPS-RPG, Adventure game, story-based game, or Survival genre. (I also have a few other ideas that have no genre, which sounds way more awesome to make than a RTS.)

Although one of my favorite games ever was the standalone warhammer 40k game "The Last Standalone". It was a 3 player vs NPC game with 20 rounds and amazingly designed and perfectly paced RPG elements. Freaking phenomenal. I can definitely see myself making a game like that. Just never had a good idea for one.
Logged
RJAG
Level 0
***


View Profile
« Reply #85 on: November 30, 2014, 07:50:23 AM »

Part of me thinks that RTS games are just not that popular. Especially when MOBA games are very similar, but far better for many people.
I myself love RTS games and MOBA games (I love all genres, to be honest.) RTS games were at one time my favorite genre. However, they are a huge time sink and a big stressor. I've never felt so stressed out than when in a match in Company of Heroes. It's the opposite of casual. Even my craziest battles in League of Legends was less stressful.

Think about the premise of a RTS, then a MOBA.

With a RTS game, you have to micro-manage hundreds of units, base building, strategy, tactics, and worry about your opponent. It is overwhelming for all but the most experienced of players.
Very often, the person with the best micro-management (clicks per minute) dominates. This is just bad design. It's very stupid, and extremely unfriendly to most people who don't want to get rolled because they couldn't stay competitive with hundreds of games under their belt. While MOBA games do this too, it doesn't feel as overwhelming. You can recover from a match easily. Even if it snowballs, at least you didn't lose your entire army- you just died a few times. It feels like less of a loss in MOBA. You aren't stressed out when you lose or win- you play for fun.
You have to think. A lot. Tons of stress on your mind.

In RTS, you rely on yourself. In MOBA, you rely on OTHERS. Four others. That alone is a huge stressor for RTS games and a huge de-stressor for MOBA games.

WIth a MOBA game, it is incredibly tense and brutally fun- but you only have ONE unit. You have to strategize, but you do this before and during the game, in a quick and simple way. "I need magic defense. So I know I should get this item instead of my usual attack item." Easy. Lower stress.
You have to micromanage, but you only micro-manage one unit. You micro a ton, you click a lot, you time it right- but only with ONE person. It's manageable. It doesn't expand or explode your mind. You worry about your opponent, but not if they are going to sneak in and destroy your base with a lame tactic. You don't have to worry about their tech level, their build order. You just look at their items, and keep map awareness. It's manageable.

RTS games are very UNmanageable. Too many units to keep track of.
MOBA games are very MANAGEABLE. Only one unit, and it is of vital importance.

Just look at some of the new innovations. Company of Heroes was a HUGE success, and so were the Warhammer games. They took AWAY the base building. Made it more MANAGEABLE.
World in Conflict took away everything (base building, entire army focus) but the fun part- combat. It made it more MANAGEABLE.
Even Supreme Commander was awesome, because it was all about the MACRO, not the MICRO. It was a lot more MANAGEABLE.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2014, 07:56:33 AM by RJAG » Logged
starsrift
Level 10
*****


Apparently I am a ruiner of worlds. Ooops.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #86 on: November 30, 2014, 10:50:00 AM »

With a RTS game, you have to micro-manage hundreds of units, base building, strategy, tactics, and worry about your opponent. It is overwhelming for all but the most experienced of players.
Very often, the person with the best micro-management (clicks per minute) dominates. This is just bad design. It's very stupid, and extremely unfriendly to most people who don't want to get rolled because they couldn't stay competitive with hundreds of games under their belt. While MOBA games do this too, it doesn't feel as overwhelming. You can recover from a match easily. Even if it snowballs, at least you didn't lose your entire army- you just died a few times. It feels like less of a loss in MOBA. You aren't stressed out when you lose or win- you play for fun.
You have to think. A lot. Tons of stress on your mind.

In RTS, you rely on yourself. In MOBA, you rely on OTHERS. Four others. That alone is a huge stressor for RTS games and a huge de-stressor for MOBA games.

You forgot to mention age. Age is a huge factor in APM. I have no delusions, there's no fucking way I'm as fast as some of you kids.
And I think the inverse is true about stress. I know a lot of people who will happily play an RTS, knowing that if they fuck up, it's because they fucked up - but couldn't stand fucking up because some random person they don't know fucked up in a MOBA.
Logged

"Vigorous writing is concise." - William Strunk, Jr.
As is coding.

I take life with a grain of salt.
And a slice of lime, plus a shot of tequila.
Alevice
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #87 on: November 30, 2014, 12:31:18 PM »

And yet, Starcraft 2, one of the most micro intensive games of the genre, is still trumping everything by relic. Alas.

Also, there is an APM threslhold where eeryone is in proportional equal ground and there your tactics and overall strat wins.
Logged

s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #88 on: November 30, 2014, 12:46:53 PM »

tbh dota and later mobas probably did a better job at streamlining the rts genre than any of the relic games by doing pretty much the exact opposite: removing a lot of the macro and focusing instead on single-unit micro. i have this bullshit hypothesis (that i'm really not sure about at all because im not that knowlegdeable about the genre) that the micro is the real heart of the RTS and the macro is secondary.
Logged
pelle
Level 2
**



View Profile WWW
« Reply #89 on: November 30, 2014, 01:34:21 PM »

A good thing about doing your own (indie) RTS is that you can take away all the parts you don't like, or just want to experiment with not having. In fact you probably have to take away most parts if you are just a single developer, so just focus on the few you have time to do well. I would for instance most likely take away micro-managing 100s of units and anything remotely giving an advantage to fastest clicker (because I am old and slow and obviously do not want to suck at playing my own game duh:) ). Still Real-Time, but focus on Strategy.
Logged
Alevice
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #90 on: November 30, 2014, 02:09:20 PM »

tbh dota and later mobas probably did a better job at streamlining the rts genre than any of the relic games by doing pretty much the exact opposite: removing a lot of the macro and focusing instead on single-unit micro. i have this bullshit hypothesis (that i'm really not sure about at all because im not that knowlegdeable about the genre) that the micro is the real heart of the RTS and the macro is secondary.
Its funny because pretty much DOW2 focused on that, by giving less units and removing global upgrades and focusing on individual unit customization and positioning. In fact, the startegic point palcement resmebles the lane format a bit too much. But you have a really valid point, since basically the Last Stand, where you micro a single unit hard was the pinnacle of DOW2 in terms of popularity.
Logged

pelle
Level 2
**



View Profile WWW
« Reply #91 on: November 30, 2014, 02:16:17 PM »

What I'd love to see, is a remake of some of the more awesome- but neglected RTS titles of our youth.

Empire Earth, the original, was one of my favorite games. There was something about being able to play from Cavemen to Futuristic that just made me love it. You could choose your epoch, even lock them for a WW1 or WW2 game, lock the range so you could start as cavemen and end as bronze age, etc.
Fun stuff.

Did you try Empires: Dawn of the Modern World, a later game by the same designer? It is similar but I think much more fun. Not as many eras, not as many different nations/units, but a more focused design. Of course he also designed Age of Empires before he did Empire Earth. All three games very well worth playing to look for great ideas to stealreuse. But my favourite RTS is still Rise of Nations. But for all those games I usually lock them to one or just a few eras because there are always something about some eras I do not like. I don't really care much for that whole attempt at following a civilization through ages gimmick. It just ends up with too many units and buildings and you know you are going to dislike some of them (like the spies in Rise of Nations).
Logged
Zarkonnen
Level 1
*


Games! Kittens! Wine!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #92 on: December 07, 2014, 05:09:06 AM »

So I'm making an Indie RTS, Airships: Conquer the Skies. It's definitely an underserved genre, though arguably things like Prison Architect are RTSes too.

I very much agree that the introduction of 3D served to make the RTS genre worse, as it's much harder to quickly get information from a 3D view than from a 2D one. This is one of the reasons why my game has 2D graphics, though unusually, it's a side-on view, not a top-down or isometric one. (Thus I avoid "isometric art is hard".)

It's definitely not the easiest kind of game to make, though. Making a game realtime raises the difficulty. Making it networked raises the difficulty again. In my case, the game's action is leisurely enough that I could stick with a TCP-based lockstep model.
Logged

RJAG
Level 0
***


View Profile
« Reply #93 on: December 07, 2014, 11:15:39 AM »

What I'd love to see, is a remake of some of the more awesome- but neglected RTS titles of our youth.

Empire Earth, the original, was one of my favorite games. There was something about being able to play from Cavemen to Futuristic that just made me love it. You could choose your epoch, even lock them for a WW1 or WW2 game, lock the range so you could start as cavemen and end as bronze age, etc.
Fun stuff.

Did you try Empires: Dawn of the Modern World, a later game by the same designer? It is similar but I think much more fun. Not as many eras, not as many different nations/units, but a more focused design. Of course he also designed Age of Empires before he did Empire Earth. All three games very well worth playing to look for great ideas to stealreuse. But my favourite RTS is still Rise of Nations. But for all those games I usually lock them to one or just a few eras because there are always something about some eras I do not like. I don't really care much for that whole attempt at following a civilization through ages gimmick. It just ends up with too many units and buildings and you know you are going to dislike some of them (like the spies in Rise of Nations).

RoN was one of my faves too. In fact I am pretty sure I liked it better than EE1.?

I always locked my eras, often strictly or in a small range. I just loved EE bc it felt like 8 games in one. Cavemen, Roman\Greek, Medieval, Renaissance, WW1, WW2, Modern, Future.

My dream RTS (theoretically) would be EE1's 8 techs (listed above), RoN's core, Supreme Commander's base building, Company of Heroes combat-but on a smaller level like WiC with generals like DoW and rpg elements of DoW's TheLastStand, or instead of heroes/generals Supreme Commander's huge boss mechs. I also loved Battle for Moddle Earth2, but that  might just be bc it is LOTR.
Logged
Squidly
Level 1
*

You See Here a Profile


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: December 13, 2014, 12:25:04 AM »

This is from an RTS gamer: RTS's are very, very, very, difficult to get right and their community is, well, almost entirely dead.

To make an RTS you need:

Pathfinding

Isometric/3D Art

An AI Alogirthm that doesn't suck
AND/OR
Multiplayer server/network skills

AND THEN you have to INNOVATE, because what's the point of playing Command n' Warcraft Clone 2056?
Logged
Sik
Level 10
*****


View Profile WWW
« Reply #95 on: December 13, 2014, 03:09:46 AM »

Isometric/3D Art

Eh, I disagree on this one, a top-down view can work just as fine (and it'll be probably easier to program, at that).
Logged
MeshGearFox
Level 9
****


When you have no one, no one can hurt you.


View Profile
« Reply #96 on: December 14, 2014, 07:55:22 AM »

Because RTS games weren't popular in the 80s, ergo you can't make one with shitty retraux sprite art and chip music.
Logged

starsrift
Level 10
*****


Apparently I am a ruiner of worlds. Ooops.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #97 on: December 14, 2014, 08:27:29 AM »

Oh, Mesh. <3
Logged

"Vigorous writing is concise." - William Strunk, Jr.
As is coding.

I take life with a grain of salt.
And a slice of lime, plus a shot of tequila.
adrix89
Level 0
**



View Profile
« Reply #98 on: December 14, 2014, 12:56:26 PM »

I don't think Indie RTS has any insurmountable problems.
For network there are libraries/frameworks that can help and its not that data intensive, if everyone wants to make a MMORPG then they can damn well challenge then netcode for a rts.

Pathfind is a none issue, there have been plenty of techniques and information to work with as well as libraries and we have powerful CPUs, we can brute force it if all else fails.

Isometric/3D Art can be done on a budget. They can raise some funds with kickstarter that can handle that.

AI and balance are the scary boogieman but can be tackled by a courageous game designer.

I think we will see Indie RTS in the future, I think the problem is the right concept has not been found to refresh the formula of RTS.
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: December 14, 2014, 09:14:14 PM »

Path finding is more complicate than just a technical decision:
- have two group of unit with two destination
- and they cross each other in a bottleneck
- and they have unit with different speed
- and they need to fit in an oddly shape destination
- and they must not take odd detour, due to the congestion of traffic, that will make them alert the enemi

You don't see plenty RTS but TBS are plenty, turn based solve all problem of ai and path finding, one at a time.

FUCK TOWER DEFENSE AND MOBA if you don't mention "tug of war" game, moba is basically tower defense + tug of war + return fire

GUI fucking gui need an evolution

FUCK ISO when you have top down view like dune 2

Also what about soba: single player offline battle arena, you have multiple character against the enemy.

Also we need action RTS
No build time react by spawning immediately as long you have the resource, feel like a fighting game Who, Me?

 Evil
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic