1-What do you like to see in a RTS game to make you buy it?
2-Whats your style?
3-What kind eco you want in a rts?
4-What units and lategame options you want in your RTS game ?
5-You only for online, play with friends?
6-You want DLC, expansions?
7-How long you think a game must have to be fun for you?
8-How mush you think DLC must cost?
Put your feedback
:
1: Diversity in faction playstyle and unit types
2: I love either stealth hit and run, or air superiority.
3: I like an economy that features more than one resource, and rewards strategic foresight and planing.
4: I like a good variety of units, with uniqueness between factions ie: not all factions having the equivalent units with a different skin. I love late game super-weapons and units.
5: I either play coop with my Wife vs AI, or play local network games with friends and family.6: I'd like significant expansions. Not too keen on DLC unless it is free.7: I prefer long epic games that can last up to an hour (or more on the largest maps), but I do think it should be possible for a quick game if playing on a small-medium map.8: As I said, I don't like DLC unless free. Proper significantly game altering expansions are fine, and I'm happy to pay up to roughly $25 (or more if it really has a lot to offer)
1) What do you like to see in a RTS game to make you buy it?
It is hard to say but a large scale or ties to a game that I previously enjoyed help. If it has a theme/setting that is of interest to me that helps to. Also some games have new/unique/revolutionary mechanics (layers and battle bots in Metal Fatigue; multi-planet combat in Planetary Annihilation). I have bought a lot of RTS games over the years so I guess it does not always take much.
2) What is your style?
I like to play defensively until I can launch an overwhelming and concentrated attack. However I know that it is usually best to expand as more resources are needed (or simply to prevent the enemy form taking them), and probing/harassing attacks are also useful.
3) What kind eco you want in an rts?
I prefer when it is a pay as you go system (like in TA, SupCom, or PA) rather than the buy all at once system (i.e. Command and Conquer). The number of resources is not much of an issue to me (i.e. Fragile Alliance has umpteen minerals to mine [you do run a mining operation] while TA, SupCom, and PA have metal and energy).
4) What units and late game options do you want in your RTS game?
Units? Depend a lot on the setting but I like a good amount of combined arms available: air, land, sea, maybe orbital or subterranean. Both generalist units and specialized units are good, but I prefer that specialized units are not over specialized as to be crippled when logically they should be OK (for example why can’t I shoot an anti-aircraft guns at infantry [or tanks, like the 8.8cm Flak], or my battleship guns at a giant slow moving sky fortress).
5) Online Play?
I prefer to play with friends.
6) Do you want DLC, expansions?
Ideally the game will continually get support until it is time to move onto the sequel, and start over with some new ideas and technology.
7) How long you think a game must have to be fun for you?
If the map is big, and the battles are fun, I could see playing an intense game vs a boat load of AI for hours upon hours (assuming there is a save feature for single player). Generally it should be possible to get to a conclusion in an hour or two, even 30 minutes for a small map.
8) DLC cost?
I think it should cost depending on the amount of work put into it, and how much it can be expected to sell. The company has to make a profit, right?
1-What do you like to see in a RTS game to make you buy it?An awesome Single player Story, games like C&C and TA but in a bigger scale.2-Whats your style?Annihilation Baby!3-What kind eco you want in a rts?I don't like games that you rush and win, my opinion is that you need to build your base first with little expansion till you have enough to throw everything out there.4-What units and lategame options you want in your RTS game?Big units, upgrades and research.5-You only for online, play with friends?Little of everything.
6-You want DLC, expansions? Of course!
7-How long you think a game must have to be fun for you?30 minutes minimum
8-How mush you think DLC must cost?Between $0.99 to max $5, but those DLC should add something to the game like (new Units, New kind and Styles of maps, etc.) and not the look of itI will never ever pay for something that is the same but look different. like (MOBAS)
And for expansions, they should add more Single player Story to the game, new units, new modes.
Base building
Slow build up and pushing waves of units out
I enjoyed TA/PA/WC3 resource gathering which made you expand naturally, but also determine if the resource was worth holding.
Bigger units, longer range weapons but also defensive capabilities. Units that took a lot of resources and made you stop all production to finish building.
SP and MP
Expansions. DLC if it's priced right for what it's offering.
45min-2 hours if it's keeping me entwined.
Depends on what it brings to the game. $5 is marketable and on average tends to provide the enjoyment for the cost.
1 Interesting SP content
2 Boomer in games that allow it
3 Style similar to Company of Heroes
4 A way to end the game quickly if it is a foregone conclusion
5 I hate people, so I only play single player
6 Full Expansions
7 15 minutes
8 Depends what you are getting
1. Interesting Single Player Campaign. I rarely have the time or energy to play online, therefore I play almost exclusively single player. I bought this because only available game of interest with DX 12.
2. Slow build up until I have overwhelming forces.
3. More than one type of resource. Rewards for building and setting up defenses. Lots of gathering and building before attacking.
4. Better, more powerful units.
5. Rarely if ever online. Single player only.
6. Sure, why not, if add story line and more campaign quests. Dislike DLC that create a separate game, prefer ones that add on to the original. Do not mind if a DLC is better if you re-play original.
7. Long is good, as long as I can save whenever I want and pick back up and continue my game.
8. Depends on how good. Do not mind paying for an expansion or DLC that truly adds to teh game.
Probably too late to the party, but i am bored anyway, so....
1. My favourite RTS is Rebellion, so i am looking for games like that. The special thing about it is the scale, combined with the fact, you not only deal with classic RTS elements like combat and harvesting, but need to do all that fairly complex research (in terms of RTS), then there is trade, culture, diplomacy etc... simply it makes you feel bit more like an emperor, rather than fleet admiral, what is sort of unique and i absolutely love it. The only other RTS games ever to give me similar feelings were sort of Cossacks and Rise of Nations.
The other important aspect for me are factions. The game need to have interesting and exciting factions to play...otherwise my interest plummets hard... with Sins, such faction are Vasari Loyalists... i consider all their stuff related to mobility awesome. Not to mention they boast visually very attractive units like Vorastra, Orkulus, Kortul, Vulkoras, etc...
On other hand i bought 2 RTS games this year - Grey Goo and Act of Aggression. Both turned kinda meh for me and one of the main reasons are shitty boring factions. i would not mind basic oldskool small scale gameplay, but both games give me just bunch of run-of-the-mill units to play with, some tanks, hovercrafts, airplanes. There is very little variety, no real surprises, as usual no naval gameplay.... i recall Zero Hour or even CnC3 being far superior games in this regard...
I am yet to play Ashes, or see some actual gameplay footage other than those released AMD related videos, but somehow i have a feeling i might get disappointed initially here as well. At least until navies are added, or maybe another faction. Hope i am wrong though.
2. Slow build up until I have overwhelming forces - as most people over here i guess. LOL or maybe until i build up the stuff i want to play with - exciting T3 units, experimentals, titans, etc...
3. More resources, but not way too much. And i need to have overview how much i have. Act of Aggression was specially shit at this during beta before they improved their UI - at times i have no idea what i can buy and if i have money for it, because it was not meant to have one single resource pool for you as player, rather several ones connected to the storage buildings...
4. Titans in Sins are perfect example how i like it. Especially the likes of Vorastra or Coronata, its fun to XP them fo use their awesome abilities.
5. Single player, comp stomps with my friends. Especially those are fun. Obviously not into competitive gaming, too stressful and those kind of games seem to be short, lot of times giving up on lot of exciting stuff, in order to win early.
6. Yes, more units, factions, stuff and tech to research, additional gameplay aspects. The best RTS expansions are ever played were Zero Hour, Rebellion and Dark Crusade for Dawn of War.
7. until i win (or lose). If it becomes boring before that, because of some stalemate, repetitive shit or too long build up phase (i hate building bases in StarCraft, zillions of workers and buildings, CnC was always better in this regard IMO...)
8. Proportionally to the included content.
Lol Timmy those are the same two I bought this year. (Well I guess three now) Both very underwhelming and today AoA just announced that they won't release a map editor. Apologies for being the odd man out and not answering all the questions, but really what this game needs is for each time I play to feel different. Sins is my all time favorite that game didn't need a single player campaign every time you play it was a different story. Except the story didn't need voice acting it was what it took to win in some 6-7 hour game played across a few weeks.
Too funny. I tied Grey Goo and Act of Aggression as well. They were... disappointing. They are in themselves good games and if Supreme Commander and FA didn't exist they would be great... however, once you've experience SupCom, anything less involved is just.. lacking. Both of these games have potential but they are both on the same level as all the C&C-style games before them.. good for, say, 10 years ago, but not today.
For a game to hold my attention it has to be on a much greater scale while at the same time, playable. Grey Goo, especially, was too graphically involved. Things were not clear to discern and manipulate. Just an overwhelming mass of graphics... really nice graphics, don't get me wrong, but the whole 'at a glance' thing was not possible.
I think what it comes down to is that all these games focus on single battles, not an overall war. That is what SupCom does and that is what Ashes is looking to do. That is what I want in an RTS game. That, and a good story line mode followed by a good skirmish mode.
Nice to see i am not alone to waste money on those 2 games, LOL. But at least i supported RTS devs, hopefully next time they will see that oldschool does not cut it anymore - except for StarCraft.
If Ashes of Singularity and Cossacks 3 will be released at least in some form already this year, those may be very likely 2 more strategies i will buy. If however i will find both lacking, i will probably have to conclude the issue may be with me (not feeling it anymore) and never buy another RTS unless its named Rebellion 2, Homeworld 3 or Red Alert 4.
Personnally I do better with Strategy type Games than RTS but I loved Total Annihilation and its various clones like Supreme Commander 2 - Spring Project. Most RTS don't let you pause to look over the board and map out a bunch of moves ahead - Planetary Annihilation didn't for good while in Beta. Need to have Good AI - I normally don't play multi-player. I like the constant action of RTS but not particularly a fan of memorizing a lot of macro commands to be really good at an RTS
I am more of a turtle - control a section of the map build up your base then move out to destroy - so far in Ashes without going out and taking over all those generators and mining sites early with a Frigate force - you going to get owned like in Planetary Annihilation.
The current economy in Ashes is pretty good - like StarCraft - Metal for ordinary stuff and gas/Radioactives for the heavy hitters. It is hard to see your research progression at the moment - need to show current research total and rate somewhere in future. I like being able to unlock new tiers of building and units.
Current system in pretty good - Frigates then Cruisers than Dreadnaughts from Advanced Factory but another tier of Land Units and Advanced Air units be nice - maybe better Engineers as well
I normally play verses the AIR but a good Multiplayer game might have interest as well.
Yeh I think in today's economy you can't finish everything you want in a game before releasing it so expansions and DLCs to add content or maps is realistic.
It be nice to play short game for hour or two but normally I expect a good game to go on for 4-24 hours with ability to stop and save resume later if I wanted.
simple DLC $5 (maps - minor unit upgrades) - Moderate DLC $10 - major expansion $20
Grey Goo was almost the best rts for me, but it was overall kinda disappointing. I loved everything about the game, however the units were so dull to interact and play with that the whole game just felt meh because of this. If the units were more fun to use Grey Goo woulda been for me one of the best rts games I've played.
Real time Strat 2-Whats your style?
rushing, turtling
alot of sources here in there in different location (AOE/C&C style)4-What units and lategame options you want in your RTS game ?
self sustained economy/trading options5-You only for online, play with friends?
RTS is meant for online game play6-You want DLC, expansions?
OF course without destroying the balance
15 minutes to 3 hours8-How mush you think DLC must cost?DLC should always be 50% MAX of the game cost Put your feedback
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
