Remastered Command & Conquer, remade The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth, and rejuvenated Age of Empires can breathe life into expiring RTS genre

[Redaktion]

The real-time strategy (RTS) genre has been eclipsed over recent years by the highly popular multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) offshoot. However, it seems RTS fans have not been completely forgotten as beloved titles in the genre, such as Command & Conquer, Battle for Middle-earth, and Age of Empires, are all making comebacks of sorts.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Remastered-Command-Conquer-remade-The-Lord-of-the-Rings-The-Battle-for-Middle-earth-and-rejuvenated-Age-of-Empires-can-breathe-life-into-expiring-RTS-genre.488712.0.html

[thorax]

you know what's funny, here you are talking about saving the RTS game genre and yet you put something like Age of Empires Online on the article which is part of what is destroying every genre.

[S.Yu]

I find turn based strategy just as enjoyable nowadays, Battletech was really nice if not a little limited in scale(i.e. bad replayability), of course not the exact same, and would definitely appreciate a RA4 or another expansion of RA3, Uprising's super units were so fun...for some reason more fun than...what was that game called again, that had superfluous earlier tech tiers and a lot of experimental units that had to be built like structures...
Empires at War and SOTS had real potential too. Especially SOTS...if they had twice the manpower I suppose they could have finished the job instead of leave it half baked. Such a shame.

[Molematt]

I'm rather surprised at the nerve of talking about "reviving" RTSs with... remakes and reboots of what are excellent but possibly rather tired IPs. All of the titles listed are most definitely iconic, but surely rehashed classics are primarily made to appease long-time players rather than draw new faces into the fanbase? And, more importantly for an article claiming to be looking at the health of the genre as a whole: where are more recent titles that also enjoyed success or have endured well without such a storied history?

Dawn of War was sitting on its second acclaimed expac, Dark Crusade, when the last "real" C&C title (TibWars) hit market, and revitalised the Warhammer 40,000 tabletop scene with its sheer popularity - and the poor reception of the reboot compared to its earlier expansions is a big pointer to how developing a line further is better than stripping down its core while layering on production polish.

Sins of a Solar Empire came out at a similar time but broadened the scale even further, saw a series of expansion packs further developing relatively neglected aspects, and is still the heart of a rich modding community with total conversions for a number of other sci-fi franchises.

Halo Wars and its sequel were the only console RTSs to see significant success to date (honourable mention to EndWar), broadening appeal beyond the core PC audience - and said sequel was big enough for fans to highlight its art style in opposition to Halo 4 and 5, an style that 343 Industries appear to have embraced with its newest title.

Ashes of the Singularity freshened the whole formula by shifting balance much more in favour of macromanagement rather than raw APM, which has always been seen as a big barrier to entry for the genre - and yet I see it featured more for its Nitrous Engine benchmark than as a game in itself.

Homeworld is a titan from the turn of the century that went from strength to strength - and while the remaster was rightfully lauded, Deserts of Kharak stands tall in its own right despite being made over a decade after Homeworld 2.

These are just the examples that come to mind quickly - I could talk about more titles like SupCom, CoH (and their respective sequels) and how they still hold up well; or about how Total War, while not strictly an RTS, has still been able to iterate on its core formula across 14 mainline games spanning 20 years, dip its toes into the realms of fantasy, and still do well with its recent releases. Yes, the RTS genre has warned and been eclipsed by MOBAs; but to act as if there have been no good titles since the classics of yore and that we somehow need shiny pretty remakes of them to save it smells distinctly of overly rose-tinted nostalgia at best, or smug elitism at worst.

Or have we forgotten just how well Warcraft III: Reforged went down?

[chris schut]

I have enjoyed Age of Empires since it came out and currently own all including the definitive editions.  I look forward to purchasing AOEIV as soon as i comes out.
I have been searching for other related titles in RTS and some have been very good, others didn't come close.  Saving the genre is a must but if only others could see the joy from these games and start creating more.

[Dude]

It's cute the way you try to blame MOBAs for the developers dropping the ball. The evidence is pretty clear that the genre still has a following when a remastering of the classics still garners the attention it has. It's not that the genre is dead, it's that the developers stopped putting out quality titles under the big banners. The c&c franchise has become a joke, though with EA at the helm that's no surprise.

[Vermont]

I'm rather surprised at the nerve of talking about "reviving" RTSs with... remakes and reboots of what are excellent but possibly rather tired IPs.

<snip>

Or have we forgotten just how well Warcraft III: Reforged went down?

Not sure if I'd reaaally write a whole essay about this, but it pretty much hits my thoughts on the head too. "Modern RTSs bad, what we need are more remakes of the classics from back in my day to save the genre!" is an absolutely atrocious take - most of the new ones with original IPs are perfectly competent, while the flops seem to be mostly coming from those "classic" franchises being milked to the brink of death. But no, I'm sure Tiberian Sun: Remastered: Anniversary Edition: Classic Collection is going to topple League of Legends. Right.