>>268762358 If you want to casually play some old rts that has aged well then Red Alert 2 is what you should play. The sprites are pretty much timeless and the game mechanics are solid and fun, its not really balanced and nobody would seriously claim it but it has a fun single player.
>>268763838 The one ironic thing about SC is that while it is heralded as one of the games that birthed the modern rts basebuilding games it was also according to some the game that spawned a genre that is killing rts.
>>268762358 yes. and yes. In the current sc2 metagame all you need to do is play Terran and then build marines and widow mines and laugh as you steamroll all opposition. You could go pro man. But for serious Starcraft 1 will remain one of my favorite games of all time, and SC2 was fun as hell too. If you don't feel like having to battle the UI and unit pathing like the old days there's a mod to play sc1 campaign in sc2
>>268763228 are you retarded? broodwar has some of the most timeless graphics of any game.
also, based on sales and e-sports involvement, starcraft trumps every other RTS. not to mention it was an objectively superior game for many reasons, but for example the great amount of balance between the 3 races, and another reason was almost no RNG - nothing was left to chance. The only thing that might be construed as RNG was shooting from a low place into a high place, or Reaver's attack was guaranteed to land.
>>268764298 Mobas are ok in my opinion. In my humble opinion measuring how good a game is purely by difficulty and mechanical requirements is kind of silly. One other thing that I sort of dislike is how people look at how many hours of gameplay a singleplayer game has and that is why alien isolation for example has a fuckload of filler content just so that they can market it as a 20 hour game. Just me rambling about stuff that isnt really related.
>>268764595 in the RTS world, measuring a game based on its mechanical requirements and how well balanced the races are is perfectly valid and not silly at all. if you're looking for an in-depth storyline from an RTS, you should seek out a movie or a book.
>>268765037 Balance and mechanical requirements have fuckall to do with each other anon. As worn as this argument is chess has nothing to do with mechanical difficulty and it is considered a pretty balanced game (yes everyone knows the white advantage).
While I agree that BW is an amazing game, you shouldn't argue for it with sales figures and e-sports bullshit. Otherwise, LoL would be considered a masterpiece. BW was successful for the other things you mentioned. Leaving shilling out of it.
>>268765214 ...read the post again bud, I didn't claim they had any relevance to each other, only that they are two of the most important things to judge an RTS by.
>>268765307 comparing a game that came out in the late 90s to a game that came out after the massive changes in the internet is an exercise in futility. i see your point but your contempt for league of legends is unfounded - look at the numbers. world of warcraft was and is parroted as an awful game, but the numbers don't lie. both are good games, objectively.
>>268765718 Why would mechanical difficulty be relevant to anything? I mean we can make any game ever made mechanically difficult if we want but all it achieves is that the game becomes more difficult. This is like saying that certain old rts inherently become better games because they lack micro and macro functions that are considered core features these days since it makes them mechanicallly more difficult. Is call of duty for example a better game than counter strike because you need more buttons?
Do you really believe that big sales and e-sports involvement are criteria for defining good games? To each his own, but you're basically saying shit like Modern Warfare 3 is better than games like Quake 3 Arena, Battlefield 1942, etc.
>>268766020 yes. you are completely correct, actually. it's just like the manual vs automatic transmission discussion. by adding all these luxuries to automotives, culminating at driverless cars, the act of driving is destroyed, and with it the joy, etc. same difference with games. look at starcraft vs starcraft 2 - in 1, you could only select 12 units, in 2 there isn't a limit. this small difference made microing that much more important. by having to manage sub-armies within an army individually, difficulty was created which allowed for the game to be better to spectate/observe. this is just one example.
also, better is subjective. i'm not going to say CS:S is better or worse than CoD because it's futile. different strokes for different folks. however if you're looking at it from how playable it is as an e-sport, or which one is more difficult/impressive to observe, the answer is CS:S.
>>268766718 The difference between mechanical difficulty that is rewarding to master and an overabundance of mechanics that can be considered redundant or the complete opposite of that is really a line drawn in water. At some point once you make it mechanically hard enough nobody will enjoy it no matter how hardcore the player. As for the manual-automatic analogy I dont really mind automatic but its not like I personally mind manual either (not that it was really to be taken literally in the first place).
>>268766289 no that's not what I'm saying. MW3 is a good game in that it caters to a huge crowd and does a pretty good job at being a contemporary/future era FPS. but then you look at things like perks, which make the game nearly impossible to balance, or kill streak bonus, which suffer the same fate, or even the age-old spawn positions issues that CoD has always had, and you quickly realize it's not a good game for e-sports and similarly it becomes a lot less impressive to observe when you know that helicopter gun got 60% of that guy's kills, not himself.
again, the other issue is the dates they came out. the amount of people playing games now is a lot bigger than it was when BF1942, Quake, etc came out. guaranteed, given the same amount of gamers and quality of internet back then, we'd see a lot more people playing those games. a lot of it is the exposure bit... those older games don't have much said about them aside from their respective cult followers, and so others don't find out about it.
>>268767198 that's why we have to draw on the pioneers of the gaming industry, such as starcraft, CS:S, Quake, command and conquer, etc. and unfortunately, this is happening less and less. look at diablo 3 and how big of an abomination that was compared to diablo 2 or 1. pick out any contemporary FPS and you'll see the same issues.
Starcraft 2 is good man, especially if you aren't jaded with the nostalgia goggles of brood war. Each race has distinct playstyles and strategies and years later and the meta still changes when someone figures out a way to do things differently. Don't expect to be a pro straight away and there's going to be a lot of frustrating times ahead if you plan to play online with no prior RTS experience. But trust me dude, theres no greater satisfaction then when everything just works, you've perfected that build order into a strong as fuck opening or you scout that early tech and counter it so hard that you are miles ahead. Just have fun with it, never take it too seriously, but invest the time and it's well worth it.
>>268769920 >Terran bias Big fucking surprise. It's always been that way since beta.
I dropped it when every map was just the same bullshit over and over. Ramps ramps ramps, like a giant fuck you to strategy, and especially a fuck you to zerg who auto-lose unless you manage to do a bunch of damage in the first 5 minutes since the other two factions get the same production out of one base that you get out of 3, without their unit production being tied to fucking larvae. Zerg units in general are also just utter trash and you'll always be stuck using the same 2-3 units every match. In the same way. Over and over.
Starcraft 2 is just plain dogshit. The only people that care about it are gooks that make money off of it.
>>268770172 >Ranked sucks because everyone just does their all in build and leaves
Not like you're given a choice. Especially as zerg. Matches are decided in the first 4-5 minutes every time except maybe at the highest levels of play, and they may as well be playing a different game. For the average player, Starcraft is just plain un-fucking-fun. Even garbage like Company of Heroes 2 at least tries to inject entertainment value into their horribly balanced game.
>>268762358 sc and brood war are really great both sp and multi old warcraft 1 and 2 are worth playing too wc3 is comfy as fuck sc2 is pretty good too though the multiplayer is shit and full of tryhard faggots i stopped playing about a month after release of the first game
>>268770558 Its what happens when you market your shit to filthy casuals. 99% of the players are too stupid and lazy to learn how to actually play the game so they memorize 2 or 3 builds and complain about how the races they don't play are overpowered. This was D rank on iccup, now its everyone but the pros.
There isn't much to starcraft in the way of actual strategy or tactics. The 'skill' in the game is nothing but who can control their production buildings and unit abilities the fastest. Part of why the game is boring as shit when most RTS games have moved on to trying to inject some form of actual complexity into the game to varying degrees of success.
Who wants to sit around just trying to shit out more units than the other guy only to lose to some loser Korean that plays the game 40 hours a week to the point that his chink fingers muscle-memory their way through spamming blinks or some shit? What's even entertaining about that? Where is the STRATEGY in this real time strategy game? It's literally just scouting to find a base, then rushing over a deathball and stutter-walking your units until his ramp is open or medevacing into his workers to auto-win by killing his economy.
Shit ends in 10 minutes because it's basic as fuck.
>>268771632 Managing multiple buildings and units at once, while decisively reacting to your opponent is hard. It is "boring" because to takes a long time to develop the ability and stamina to be successful in the game. Most modern RTS games try to cater to modern lazy gamers by throwing in RNG you cant control and rest periods so you can check your facebook while playing.
>There isnt any actual strategy or tactics in basketball. The "skill" in the game is just running around and putting the ball in the hoop. Who wants to just run around trying to make a basket when some loser nigger that plays 40 hours a week will just deke the shit out of my white ass.
>>268772726 >Rest periods What the hell are you talking about? There are no 'rest periods' in any games I'm aware of.
The problem with gookclick is you have to play gookclick AND NO OTHER GAME EVER if you want to reach the APM necessary to play the game at a level where the game is anything more than winning in 5 minutes with an all-in blob.
There's nothing fucking fun about that. There is no strategy or tactics. It's literally just a pissing match between gooks on who can click the fastest between two points of the map; The units and your production buildings.
Call every other RTS in the entire genre 'casual' if you want, I guess, but at least they are entertaining instead of boring and frustrating.
>>268772726 There's actual tactics in basketball. It's not just unloading bus after bus after bus of black people that collide into each other until one side is overwhelmed and Daquan manages a slam dunk, ending the match in 7 minutes.
>>268773654 Take company of heroes for example. You tell your guys to go to the resource point then watch them capture it for a minute. Build a building, build a unit then send them to the enemy. Right click on the enemy unit and watch the shoot at each other for a while. Rinse and repeat until someone wins. No strategy or tactics. Everything is simplified and cinematic so you can jerk off while you play and you feel like your achieving something so you don't get frustrated or bored. If you lose its obviously because X is op, or the opponent is just loser who has no life.
>>268774130 >Conveniently ignores territory influencing cover mechanics >Special weapons >Unit abilities >Having to exert actual map control instead of just having workers collect crystals safely in your base >Having to actually use most of the units in your roster instead of just spamming 1-2 units to try to end the match in 10 minutes. >Matches boil down to actual tactics and overarching strategy, requiring thinking instead of just being nothing but spamming the same command 25 times in 3 seconds because 'muh APM'.
Yeah, nah. CoH may not be the most 'hardcore' game out there(Not that that actually means anything to anyone outside of /v/), but it's got way, way, way more going on than gookclick instead of HURR GAME IS GOOD BECAUSE IT ENDS QUICKLY 420 BLAZE IT MLG BRO. If you have to have 400 APM just to get to the 'fun' part of the game, the game is dogshit.
No one gives a shit about gookclick because gookclick exists almost entirely for people that play it for money, not fun.
SC 1 USE MAP SETTINGS GLORY DAYS PLAYING REDICULOUS, AMAZING,AND SOMETIMES JUST SHITTY CUSTOM MAPS. SPENT THOUSANDS OF HOURS ON THAT SHIT WITH FULL CAPSLOCK CUSTOM GAME CO-OP. also if you didn't like custom games the game itself was solid. Sc2 failed to succeed sc1 for me by fucking up the arcade, but it's still pretty fun to play I guess.
>>268774943 CoH manages to be fun even when you're losing. >"I'M GETTING FUCKING TIRED OF THIS SHIT >"WE"RE ALL GOING TO DIE" >"Jesus Conrad tie your FUCKING LACES I fucking love gookclick, but damn if when you're behind the game doesn't fucking suck
>>268783854 not op, but I also didn't play SC back in the day. RTS games didn't interest me back then. I was more into the FPS genre. Back then it was the glory days of PC first person shooters. Quake, Counter-strike, Unreal Tournament.
It wasn't until more recent when I finally played SC. It's awesome and I regret not trying it back then. No loss really, cause personally its more of a game I enjoy for the campaigns and not for competitive play.
seriously? people do this? i hardly played either campaign. in my opinion SC multiplayer was what made it so great. SCBW was such a perfectly balanced competitive game. Though i personally found the campaign boring as hell, but then again that's after i had been playing strictly multiplayer for a while.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.