1)- Labeling:
I am a huge RTS fan.. the real pure RTS like AOE and Generals. I am sick and tired of what i have to keep up with while trying to discover new games of the same genre, (they could be counted on your hands mind you) here, as well as 99 percent of other games sites do not know how to properly categorize their games. which results in me being so damn frustrated because im scared to buy the game and discover later its more like a RTT, examples of those include (Total war series, blitzkreig, codename panzers, sudden strike). "Strategy" is a really broad term and tactics is only an element in it, when i think of strategy its not only how i attack my enemy but the way in which i want to build my empire, defend it and attack, a real strategy game would have the 'Rock Paper Scissors' formula of Rushing, Booming and Turtling (wont explain that now use google) and so pure strategy games like AOE which has the whole package should only be labled as RTS, where not only u are dealing with battle but also developing your nation. I think it a huge sin to put a Total War and a AOE game under the same damn category, ITS JUST WRONG! we need proper accurate labling system, i have yet to find a game site for that (pls if you know one tell me). Routinely, when looking at such games reviews here or anywhere else (same thing really) i am concerned about a few critical elements, Base Building? Resource Collecting? and other minor factors that help me picture in my mind what kind of game it is, this is what i am looking for, i dont want to read through a 2 page review justto find that out (and often i still dont), unless i want to know how good/bad it is. and there is nothing yet, that serves me this, in my opinion, nessesity.
2)- Cheap Spinoffs:
There are other branched spinoffs of strategy games other than tactical games i like to call "real time role playing strategy" a good example of that is the Warcraft games where theyre are significantly less units because of no real army divisions factor in the game and depends more on individual heroes. there are also games that are a mixture between RTT and RTRPS like (commandos, soldiers heroes of ww2, faces of war, men of war). there are many many many of RTS spinoff games like those previously mentioned disguising theirselves as "strategy" and people actually believing, when in reality they just look like it but are actually based on role-playing (making the game significantly easier to create) I am looking at you ..ahem..Warcraft..ahem.The deception has got to end. and actually very few of the pure strategy games exist as i previously mentioned, probably because they require serious detailed programming thus taking most time and effort to develop than any other genre.
3)- Crappy Campains:
When i play an RTS i naturally never payed attention to the campaign because simply of the nature of RTSs, these games were made for skirmish or against other people and the campaign would have the Role-playing factor so as to consume your time and then brag about how long the game runs which is just stupid. RTS's shouldnt have campaigns unless the campains are actually skirmish battles like "Rise of legends" where you try to conquer more and more land through battles, End Of Story. honestly the AOEII campaigns made me throw up if u ever played it you know what i mean.
do u agree? disagree? will strategy labeling ever change? pls comment.
P.S: i can just put my opinions in a blog, but im too lazy to make one just picked gamespot forums randomly because it was the first place that came to mind.
Log in to comment