[Split] Best RTS Games

[wills370]

I think SHOGUN total war was revolutionary. As i recall when it came out it wasent that well marketed. And became alittle bit of a niche game but still built a stable platform to which many total wars have followed. I would love them to revisit it and redo it in a modern way although for the time. The gameplay and graphics were awsome and really brung huge numbers into maps in a mainstream way. So id say although it was not the most polished of games (the glitch in the castle was always a pain lol). It was the idea that i would put it in one of the best RTS

[blackfang]

shogun total war was a bit fun yes, however i only tried it like a year ago and then i thought that the graphics were horrible so i just played through it and smiled to myself as i deleted it. but i guess when it came out that it may have been quite a good game, i mean i got a game that is terrible now but it was great back then. I remember back when i was little and red alert came out. I was so thrilled that i got it on our family computer and everyday after kindergarten i would call my dad and ask if it was okay to play it. And i usually got permission, so basically i grew up with strategy, first it was ra then ra 2 and then wc 3. Thats my main games, the ones i played the most. So my upbringing was all around computer games and actually horror movies. I mean i watched stuff like starship troopers and the alien films The only thing i was forbidden to watch or play was stuff that involved... "adult content" if you know what i mean. Uff now i am trailing far off, anyways the games i played back then may suck now but they were really good

[Josh Warner]

Originally Posted by Yami-Yagari

Played all of them, including SupCom, medieval 2 total war+expansion, Black&White 1&2, World in Conflict, Warhammer, mark of chaos+battlemarch, Rise&Fall(dunno if most people know this), almost all C&C games, BFME1+2+ROTWK( 2 was IMO better then 1, whatever most people say), Empire TW.

Btw have to ask this, but do you people think The Settlers series can be called RTS? Not all of them, but 1 till 4, because 5 sucks, 6 is oke, and 7 is meh.

2-4 are considered the high period of Settlers by most fans. 5-6 are not really the same game, and 7 is still a large divergence. I tried the demo but didn't care for the victory point system, the total lack of fog of war, and the change to the carrying/storage/population system, the fixed sectors and corresponding resources. While 7 isn't a bad game, I much prefer 2, 3 and 4.

It just doesn't feel like settlers anymore Where's the pioneer wars, where's the finding resources and hearing YIPEE! Overall the victory point system changes the flow and pace of the game, trying to turn it into a fast paced RTS rather than keeping it's economic/supply chain focus, right now it's mostly he who has the best rush strategy that maximizes the starting resources rather than the best economy that wins, which is a shame.

Combat was never meant to be micro/fluid. In a normal RTS, how you control your units and which units you build decides the victor usually, with some level of macroing for resources. In the settlers, it was the opposite. Almost purely how you managed and set up your economy decided who wins, the units were merely a manifestation of that economy to provide a more visceral clash.

[Yami-Yagari]

Yeah, 2-4 are still the best settlers games to date.
Just to bad the people at Ubisoft don't get it yet after 3 settlers games with 3 different ways of gameplay, that they should keep the series retro.