Real-time strategy (RTS) games are a genre of computer wargames which do not progress incrementally in turns.[1] Brett Sperry is credited with coining the term to market Dune II. [2] [3]
In an RTS, as in other wargames, the participants position and maneuver units and structures under their control to secure areas of the map and/or destroy their opponents' assets. In a typical RTS it is possible to create additional units and structures during the course of a game. This is generally limited by a requirement to expend accumulated resources. These resources are in turn garnered by controlling special points on the map and/or possessing certain types of units and structures devoted to this purpose. More specifically, the typical game of the RTS genre features resource gathering, base building, in-game technological development and indirect control of units.[4]
The tasks a player must perform to succeed at an RTS can be very demanding, and complex user interfaces have evolved to cope with the challenge. Some features have been borrowed from desktop environments, most prominently the technique of "clicking and dragging" to select all units under a given area.
Though some game genres share conceptual and gameplay similarities with the RTS template recognised genres are generally not subsumed as RTS games.[5] For instance, city-building games, construction and management simulations, and games of the real-time tactics variety are generally not considered to be “real-time strategy”,[6]
Contents |
The genre that is recognized today as "real-time strategy" emerged as a result of an extended period of evolution and refinement. Games that are today sometimes perceived as ancestors of the real-time strategy genre were never marketed or designed as such at the original date of publication. As a result, designating "early real-time strategy" titles is problematic because such games are being held up to modern standards. The genre initially evolved separately in the UK and North America, afterward gradually merging into a unified worldwide tradition.
In the UK, the genre's beginning can be traced to Stonkers by John Gibson, published in 1983 by Imagine Software for the ZX Spectrum, and Nether Earth published on ZX Spectrum in 1987. In North America, the first game retrospectively classified as real-time strategy by many sources[7][5] is The Ancient Art of War (1984), designed by Evryware's Dave and Barry Murry, followed by the sequel The Ancient Art of War at Sea in 1987, though Dani Bunten Berry's (of M.U.L.E fame) Cytron Masters (1982), developed by Ozark Softscape and released by SSI, also has been considered the earliest game of the genre.[8][9]
Some writers list Intellivision's Utopia by Don Daglow (1982) as the first real-time strategy game.[10] In Utopia two players build resources and carry out combat by proxy. It contains the direct-manipulation tactical combat now common in that the players can assume direct control over a PT boat and sink the opponents fishing boats. Another early example from the same year is Legionnaire on the Atari 8-bit family, written by Chris Crawford for Avalon Hill. This was effectively the opposite of Utopia, in that it offered a complete real-time tactical combat system with variable terrain and mutual-help concepts, but lacked any resource collection and economy/production concepts. As a result, this game might be better considered an early forerunner of the RTT (real-time tactics) genre.
Herzog Zwei for the Sega Genesis in 1989 is the earliest example of a game with a feature set that falls under the contemporary definition of modern RTS.[11][12] In Herzog Zwei, though you only control one unit, the manner of control foreshadowed the point-and-click mechanic of later games. Also, control and destruction of bases was an important aspect of the game, as were the economic/production aspects of those bases.
Notable as well are early games like Mega Lo Mania by Sensible Software (1991) and Supremacy (also called Overlord - 1990). Although these two lacked direct control of military units, they both offered considerable control of resource management and economy systems. In addition, Mega Lo Mania has advanced technology trees that determine offensive and defensive prowess. However, it was with the release of Dune II from Westwood Studios (1992) that real-time strategy became recognized as a distinct genre of video games.[4]
Although real-time strategy games have an extensive history, some titles have served to define the popular perception of the genre and expectations of real-time strategy titles more than others,[4] in particular the games released between 1992 and 1998 by Westwood Studios and Blizzard Entertainment.
Westwood's Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty (1992) introduced all the core concepts and mechanics of modern real-time strategy games that are still used today,[13][14] such as using the mouse to move units, and gathering resources,[5] and as such served as prototype for later real-time strategy games. Its success encouraged the development of such games as Warcraft: Orcs & Humans (1994) and Command & Conquer (1995)[4][14]--which, in turn, became influential in their own right.[5][14] Command & Conquer became the first popular RTS game to utilize competitive multiplayer. Command & Conquer, as well as Command and Conquer: Red Alert, became the most popular early competitive RTS games. These two games came into competition with Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness after its release in late 1995.
Total Annihilation, released by Cavedog Entertainment in 1997, introduced 3D units and terrain and focused on huge battles that emphasized macromanagement over micromanagement. It thus featured a streamlined interface that would influence many RTS games in later years. In 1998, Blizzard Entertainment released the game StarCraft, which became an international phenomenon. The game's inclusion of the Battle.net matchmaking and ranking system popularized competitive multiplayer for RTS games. Collectively, all of these games defined the genre, providing the de facto benchmark against which new real-time strategy games are measured.
The real-time strategy genre has been relatively stable since 1995 and additions to the genre's concept in newer games tend to be introducing more units, larger maps, terrain and similar, rather than innovations to the game concept with new games generally focus on refining aspects of successful predecessors. As the paragon example of gameplay refinement, Cavedog Entertainment's acclaimed Total Annihilation from 1997 distilled the core mechanics of Command & Conquer, and introduced the first 3D units and terrain in real-time strategy games. In 1997, Ensemble Studios tried to combine elements of Civilization with the real-time strategy concept in Age of Empires by introducing ages of technologies. This combination was refined further by Stainless Steel Studios' Empire Earth in 2001. GSC Gameworld's Cossacks: European Wars series took the genre in a different direction, bringing population caps into the tens of thousands.
Populous: The Beginning (1998) and Homeworld (1999) were the first completely 3D real-time strategy titles. Homeworld was notable in that it featured a 3d environment in space, therefore allowing movement in every direction, a feature which its semi-sequel, Homeworld Cataclysm (2000) continued to build upon adding features such as waypoints. Homeworld 2, released in 2003, streamlined movement in the 360° 3d environment. Furthermore, Machines, which was also released in 1999 and featured a nearly 100% 3D environment, attempted to combine the RTS genre with FPS although it was not a particularly successful title. These games were followed by a short period of interest in experimental strategy games such as Allegiance (2000).
It is only in approximately 2002 that 3D real-time strategy became the standard, with both Warcraft III and Ensemble Studio's Age of Mythology (2002) being built on a full 3D game engine. Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns introduced classic wargame elements, such as line of supply to the genre. Battle Realms (2001) was another full 3D game, but had limited camera views.
The move from 2D to 3D has been criticized in some cases. Issues with controlling the camera and placement of objects have been cited as problems.[15][16][17]
Relatively few genres have emerged from or in competition with real-time strategy games, although Real-time tactics, a superficially similar genre, emerged around 1995. In 1998, Activision attempted to combine the real-time strategy and first-person shooter genres in Battlezone, while in 2002 Rage Games Limited attempted this with the Hostile Waters games, and Natural Selection, a game modification based on the Half-Life engine.
A few games have experimented with diversifying map design, which continues to be largely two-dimensional even in 3D engines. Earth 2150 (2000) and Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun (1999) allowed units to tunnel underground, effectively creating a dual-layer map. In addition, units could even be transported to entirely separate maps, with each map having its own window in the user interface. Three Kingdoms: Fate of the Dragon (2001) offered a simpler model: the main map contains locations that expand into their own maps. In these examples, however, gameplay was essentially identical regardless of the map layer in question. Dragonshard (2005) emphasized its dual-layer maps by placing one of the game's two main resources in each map, making exploration and control of both maps fundamentally valuable.
Some games have moved toward an increased focus on tactics, with titles such as Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War (2004), Star Wars: Empire at War (2006), and Company of Heroes (2006) replacing the traditional resource gathering model, where designated resource gathering units collect the resources used for producing further units or buildings, with a strategic control-point system, where control over strategic points progressively yields construction/reinforcement points. Dawn of War and Company of Heroes also replaces individual units with "squads".
Others are moving away from the traditional real-time strategy game model with the addition of other genre elements. An example is Sins of a Solar Empire, released by Ironclad Games, which mixes elements of grand-scale stellar empire building games like Master of Orion with real-time strategy elements.
In a typical real-time strategy game, the screen is divided into a map area displaying a bird's-eye overhead representation of the game terrain, units, and buildings, and an interface overlay containing command and production controls and often a "radar" or "minimap" overview of the entire map. The primary form of input is the mouse which is generally accompanied by keyboard shortcuts, with which commands are given and the map is scrolled. Gameplay generally consists of the player being positioned in the map with a minimal production base capable of creating the basic units and buildings that are needed to start playing. Later, players progress to eventually create increasingly powerful units and buildings, or a small force, the core of which is generally a unit capable of establishing the initial production base. Thereafter, the game is typically a race of resource gathering, technology research and unit production to claim territory and suppress and defeat the opposition through force or attrition.
Micromanagement refers to when a player's attention is directed more toward the management and maintenance of his or her own individual units and resources. This creates an atmosphere in which the interaction of the player is constantly needed. On the other hand, macromanagement refers to when a player's focus is directed more toward economic development and large-scale strategic maneuvering, allowing time to think and consider possible solutions. Micromanagement frequently involves the use of combat tactics.
Because of their generally faster-paced nature (and in some cases a smaller learning curve), real-time strategy games have surpassed the popularity of turn-based strategy computer games.[18] In the past, a common criticism was to regard real-time strategy games as "cheap imitations" of turn-based strategy games, arguing that real-time strategy games had a tendency to devolve into "click-fests"[19][20][21] in which the player who was faster with the mouse generally won, because they could give orders to their units at a faster rate. The common retort is that success involves not just fast clicking but also the ability to make sound decisions under time pressure.[20]
The "clickfest" argument is also often voiced alongside a "button babysitting" criticism, which pointed out that a great deal of game time is spent either waiting and watching for the next time a production button could be clicked, or rapidly alternating between different units and buildings, clicking their respective button.[22]
A third common criticism is that real-time gameplay often degenerates into "rushes" where the players take turns throwing swarms of units at each other.[23] For example, the original Command & Conquer gave birth to the now-common "tank rush" tactic, where the game outcome is often decided very early on by one player gaining an initial advantage in resources and producing large amounts of a "tank" unit—an initially relatively powerful but still quite cheap unit—which is thrown at the opposition before they have had time to establish defences or production. Although this strategy has been criticized for encouraging overwhelming force over strategy and tactics, defenders of the strategy argue that they're simply taking advantage of the strategies utilized, and some argue that it's a realistic representation of warfare. One of the most infamous versions of a rush is the Zergling rush from the real-time strategy game StarCraft; in fact, the term "zerging" has become synonymous with rushing.[4]
The fourth criticism of the RTS genre is that units are often considered disposable, which may further amplify problems with the genre's gameplay. Units are often "thrown" at opponents.[20] In classic strategy boardgames, units must be marshalled and preserved, as indeed forces are in real battles. The RTS genre thus is claimed to "infantilize" the strategic decision-making process.
A fifth criticism of the RTS genre is the importance of skill over strategy in real-time strategy games. The manual dexterity and ability to multitask and divide one's attention is often considered the most important aspect to succeeding at the RTS genre. According to Troy Dunniway, former Westwood developer who has also worked on Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars, "A player controls hundreds of units, dozens of buildings and many different events that are all happening simultaneously. There is only one player, and he can only pay attention to one thing at a time. Expert players can quickly flip between many different tasks, while casual gamers have more problems with this."[24]
In response to these criticisms, features which reduce the importance of fast mousework have emerged, enabling the player to focus more on overall strategy. For example, "queuing" allows a player to put in an order for multiple units at once from a single building, as opposed to requiring a player to return to that building to order each unit separately.[4] The ability to set waypoints allows a player to give multiple movement commands to a unit at once.[4] Most games also give each unit strengths and weaknesses, discouraging players from easily defeating an opponent with simple "rush" or "swarm" tactics in favour of more balanced armies.
Though strategy and tactics in military terminology refer to long- and short term military objectives, usage in strategy wargames generally diverges from dictionary definitions and identifies the terms with base- and economic versus combat management. Taking this into consideration, real-time strategy games have been criticized for an over-abundance of immediate and minute (in this context referred to as "tactical") considerations when compared to the amount of strategic gameplay found in such games. For instance Chris Taylor, lead designer of Supreme Commander, apparently unaware of the real-time tactics genre, argued, using conventional meanings of the terms, "that although we call this genre 'Real-Time Strategy,' it should have been called 'Real-Time Tactics' with a dash of strategy thrown in."[25] Taylor then posits his game as surpassing this mold by including additional elements of broader strategic scope.[25] Curiously, real-time strategy games have also been criticized for their lack of combat tactics. In this case, real-time tactical games have been suggested as a suitable substitute.[18]
A debate has emerged between fans of real-time strategy and turn-based strategy (and related genres) based on the merits of the real-time and turn-based systems. Some titles attempt to merge the two systems: for example, the role-playing game Fallout uses turn-based combat and real-time gameplay, while the real-time strategy game Homeworld allows the player to pause the game and issue orders.
Real-time strategy games made for video game consoles have been consistently criticized due to their control schemes. The PC's keyboard and mouse are generally considered to be superior to a console's gamepad. RTS games for the consoles have generally met with mixed success.[26]
Total Annihilation (1997) was the first real-time strategy game to utilize true 3D units, terrain, and physics in both rendering and in game-play. For instance, missiles in Total Annihilation travel in real-time in simulated 3D space, and can miss their target by passing over or under it. Homeworld and Warzone 2100 (both released in 1999) advanced the use of fully 3D environments in real-time strategy titles. In the case of Homeworld, the game is set in space, offering a uniquely exploitable 3D environment in which all units can move vertically in addition to the horizontal plane. However, the near-industry-wide switch to full 3D was very gradual and most real-time strategy titles, including the first sequels to Command & Conquer, initially used isometric 3D graphics made by pre-rendered 3D tiles. Only in later years did these games begin to use true 3D graphics and game-play, making it possible to rotate the view of the battlefield in real-time.
Recently, real-time strategy games have more commonly incorporated physics engines, such as Havok, in order to increase realism experienced in gameplay. A modern real-time strategy game that uses a physics engine is Ensemble Studios' Age of Empires III, released on October 18, 2005,[27] which used the Havok Game Dynamics SDK to power its real-time physics. Company of Heroes, released on September 14, 2006, is another real-time strategy game that uses real-time physics as a part of gameplay, including fully-destructible environments as well.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||