Originally Posted by Aametherar
Some of the earlier versions were amazing. I think the main problem with that game was developer/publisher conflict, instead of growing it kept changing and pointing down different paths rather than growing, and sometimes in fact degrading. It would appear that in the end the publishers had it, fired the devs and sold the game to another company who has no idea how to make any changes to the game, which is a shame since it had so much potential, and since it ended up on a version far inferior to some of the previous ones, as well as leaving a lot of elements of the game inactive that were previously active. It's a testament that even though that it's player base has remained as active as it has. Like I said i'm surprised no other companies have taken off that formula since it's so simple yet effective. This would be a bit different as it's an RTS but the concepts the same. I think Red Alert has also used something similar (but very lame) in the past, nothing more than a pretty map to look at before skirmishes really lol.
Well, the extent of such meta strategy games is... turn based games and pseudo real-time browser games. Very simply for other people, to explain what I want - think Total War where the campaign is massively multiplayer. Sort of.
The stigma I think is that it's literally never been tried for a pay to play game. Micro transaction browser games are about the only games to try for such a grand scale. Nobody wants to stick their neck out on the chopping block and hope it translates well and pays off it's initial investment with a good return.