The RTS genre is dea-

>>382722529
>RTS
>TW game

You're a retard.

>>382722741
>you control armies and fight in real time
>not RTS

>>382723619
>campaign map is turn based.
>a good part of the game is spent managing settlements.
>RTS.

>>382724318
That just means it's a RTS with additional turn based gameplay. TW games combine multiple genres together including RTS, kinda like 4x games.

>>382725031
Truth

>>382725031
Consider that it is possible to play and beat most campaigns without personally fighting battles. It isn't optimal, but it is possible. It's inaccurate to label a total war game as any particular genre.

>>382722529
Total War is Real Time Tactics, not Strategy.
Dumb nigger.

TW games are super popular. There is like 5-6 of them on the top 100

>>382726634
>Real Time Tactics
Not a genre. Literally. There's not a single source that proves it's actually a genre, Steam doesn't have a tag for real time tactics.

What people call "real time tactics" is just RTS with no base building, which make sit just a shitty RTS.

File: OP is a retarded faggot.jpg (225KB, 1888x387px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1888x387px

>>382727046
>>382723619
>>382722529
>>382725031

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_tactics

once again, you're a retard.

>>382727046
>Men of War is shit
>Combat Mission is shit
>Close Combat is shit
Lol

>>382727258
They're WW2 games, they're shit by definition.

>>382727226
>wikipedia
>source
Nice one.

>>382727571
Thanks for proving your ignorance, also wikipedia is a better source than Steam.

>>382726634
>only gook-clicker is RTS

>>382727701
>wikipedia
>better source than even the wind out of your ass
Lmao.

>>382725031
>>382725112

do you even know what RTS means?

the other anon is right, TW games are RTT, anyone who disagrees is a fuckin retard

>>382729890
>TW games are RTT
How can they be something that doesn't exist?

File: 1195796203360.jpg (114KB, 658x493px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 658x493px

>tfw RTS is so fucking dead we try to hijack another game now
Is this the future?
I just want a good RTS game, fuck AoE remaster cash grab.

>>382730851
anon just google RTT and stop embarrassing yourself

>>382732482
How about you actually present a credible source that proves RTT is something that actually exists?

File: Apollo_Embarrassed.png (73KB, 270x203px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 270x203px

>>382729496
>>382732646

You know Wikipedia has sources, right?
It lists them at the bottom of every page.

I'm really glad to hear your a good noodle for listening to everything your teachers tell you, but you gotta learn stuff on your own sometimes, mate.

>>382732743
>You know Wikipedia has sources
Then present those sources and not wikipedia nonsense.

File: Capture.png (107KB, 1702x423px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1702x423px

>>382733221
Which one would you like to see?
Or would you rather I summarized them all and posted it on one convenient webpage.

Oh, wait...

>>382733379
>Which one would you like to see?
The credible one that states that RTT is actually a genre. With a proper quote, of course.

>>382733698
4chan doesn't let me post duplicate files, anon. And posting that many links makes it think my post is spam.

How about you go into the wikipedia article you clearly never even opened, click on as many links as you like, and you can tell me which of them don't refer to Real time Tactics in one way or another?

>>382722529

>1 rts game in the top 100
>doesn't even break 20k daily
>t-the genre isn't dead y-you guys

What are some RTS with good single player campaigns? Already play CoH.

>>382734419
No actual source? It's OK, it's not like I didn't know that RTT isn't a genre already.

>>382722529
dam battleborn sure looks a lot more dead now.

File: goalpost in the act of being repositioned.jpg (431KB, 1600x1064px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 1600x1064px

>>382735141
What do you mean no actual source?
I posted 16.
In one post.
Some of them even have quotes directly stating "RTT" or "Real Time Tactics"

Oh, but those don't count. Because those don't agree with what you're saying. Right?

>>382735313
>I posted 16.
No, you didn't. You posted wikipedia nonsense, I asked to be linked directly to a source and provided a quote.

>>382734961
>doesn't even break 20k daily
>doesn't even break this retardedly huge number that only pure multiplayer or meme games with millions spent on marketing reach
LMAO. TWWH has more concurrent players AND peak players than Skyrim and Witcher 3, you're retarded.

File: Untitled.png (354KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 1920x1080px

>>382735517
That's exactly what my image was.
Here's another image of direct links to sources provided with quotes.
I would post them, but I can't post 100+ links in 4chan without being banned for spam.

So I guess those 100+ links just don't count, because you're too retarded to find them yourself.

>>382736010
I didn't ask for more wikipedia nonsense, I asked for ONE credible source followed by ONE quote.

>>382727046
>Steam doesn't have a tag for real time tactics.

Steam doesn't have a tag for half the genres out there.

File: 1489136774160 - Copy.jpg (63KB, 426x296px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 426x296px

>>382736217
>I asked for ONE credible source followed by ONE quote.
How about you read a single letter in the image I just posted, then?
Because I just posted several.
>those aren't credible because I say so
Whoa kid, that's some pretty flawless logic right there.

I don't think you realize but for every (You) you give me, you're giving me 1 (You) as well, you're breaking even. You're going to have to be at least twice as retarded if you want to make a profit.

>>382727046
>muh steam tags

Fuck off retard

>>382736686
You didn't post anything other than wikipedia nonsense. All I've asked is for you to link me directly to a single credible source and provide a single quote from that source that defines the "RTT genre", yet you've completely failed to do even that, so we can safely conclude that "RTT" is not and has never been a genre.

>>382737024
Yes, funny how the biggest and the only videogame distribution platform in the world that matters doesn't recognize your nonexisting genre as a genre, huh?

File: 1485212519501.jpg (82KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 960x960px

>>382737075
>http://www.ign.com/articles/2006/04/08/the-state-of-the-rts?page=3

>From big to small, one of the other challenges for the genre is classification and all of the subgenres that are slowly growing into genres in their own right. One of the most prevalent is the real-time tactical game (RTT).
From the very first link in the very first image I posted.
How's it feel, being so spinelessly retarded that you can't even do a basic search on your own without needing to be spoonfed? To be so entitled that you ignore countless pieces of evidence that clearly contradict your claim and just be A OK with that? And to be so blatantly petty that I can already tell you your next words will be:
>IGN
>Credible

Nice work double posting btw, thanks for the free (You), I'd give you 2 back in return, but I think I've fed you enough.
Good night, faggot.

>>382737570
So you've just posted a source stating RTT is a subgenre of RTS and have proven my point that RTT is not and has never been a genre. Congratulations.

>382737767
>slowly growing into genres in their own right. One of the most prevalent is the real-time tactical game (RTT).
no more you's for you. You're not even trying anymore.

>>382737872
Still no source stating that RTT is a genre? It's OK, I've known that all along and have never expected any other result.

File: 1488659533177.jpg (3KB, 120x117px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 120x117px

>382737952
I posted one specifically stating that RTT is a genre.
You can go ahead and pretend it says something else though.

>>382738109
You've posted one specifically stating that RTT is not a genre, but a subgenre of RTS.
You can go ahead and pretend it says something else though.

>>382738298
See >>382737872

>>382737305
Give me one quote from a credible source that says Total War games are RTS.

>>382722529
Total War is not RTS, jackass.

File: WHTW official.png (519KB, 955x424px) Image search: [Google]

519KB, 955x424px

>>382738382
No actual arguments? It's OK, it's not like you've ever provided any.

>>382738668
Here you go, straight from the official site. It's not a TBS, because battles are carried out in real time, it's not a 4x strategy game, because it does not possess all of the elements and it's not a RTT game, because RTT is not a genre. Thus, WHTW is a RTS with some minor elements from other genres.

>>382739279
Forgot to add: it's also not a grand strategy game, since it lacks the empire management and diplomatic depth of such games.

>382739279
>because RTT is not a genre
See >>382737872

>>382739279
No where does it say real time strategy, because it's not. Fantasy strategy game maybe, again, give me a credible source with a quote that says it's real time strategy.

>>382739515
>Fantasy strategy game
Not a genre.

>credible source with a quote that says it's real time strategy.
The official definition states it's exactly that and, unless you can prove it's wrong and the game belongs to some other genre, I don't see a reason do doubt it.

>>382739279
>>382739402
Its fun seeing the lengths people will go to so they dont have to admit they're wrong.

>>382739804
The website clearly says it's a fantasy strategy game, so, by the source you provided, that's what it is. The official description does not say real time strategy, it says real time battles, which is not real time strategy.

>>382739804
I don't see a credible source with a quote.
I see an image you posted.
I need you to post the link, and the quote, and then I'm going to ignore your post until you stop posting it and then that will prove I'm right.

How much longer do you think your mom will let you stay up? I can do this all night, kid.

>>382722529
I would not call that a rts, more of just a general strategy type game since it has lots of combined elements.

>>382722529
Good. RTS isn't really strategy, it's just actions-per-minute.

>>382740156
>retards actually believe this

>>382739442
>>382739806
Its fun seeing the lengths people will go to so they dont have to admit they're wrong.

>>382739442
See >>382737952

>>382740002
>The official description does not say real time strategy, it says real time battles, which is not real time strategy.
But that's exactly what RTS is:

>My inclination is to lean towards Blizzard's Rob Pardo who explained an RTS as simply "A strategic game in which the primary mode of play is in a real-time setting."
http://www.ign.com/articles/2006/04/08/the-state-of-the-rts

Battles are the primary aspect of TWWH with empire management being the secondary element, since it's simplified compared to the previous TW games that didn't even have in-depth empire management, compared to grand strategy games in the first place. Since the primary mode of play in TWWH is combat and combat takes place in real time, it's a RTS.

>>382740012
>I don't see a credible source with a quote.
I've already provided a source with a direct quote on what a RTS is in this post earlier.

>I need you to post the link
Already did.

>and the quote
Already did.

>and then I'm going to ignore your post
You can ignore factual evidence all you want, nobody is forcing you to not be retarded,

>>382740914
No really. I don't think you understand. I get paid to shut down shitters like you. I take joy in teaching you privliged fucks what the real world is like.

The very source you posted states the game is a Fantasy Strategy game, which you denied. That's the official source from the developers. Ign's opinion on the matter means nothing.

>I already did.
Nigga you did it just now. That's not already doing it.
Man you must have major autism if you think I can read your post as your posting it.

You can ignore factual evidence all you want, nobody is forcing you to not be retarded,

>>382740914
>But that's exactly what RTS is
Wrong, there's real time battles in Call of Duty, would you argue that's an RTS?

>My inclination is to lean towards Blizzard's Rob Pardo who explained an RTS as simply "A strategic game in which the primary mode of play is in a real-time setting."
You're using someone from a completely different company's definition of what an RTS is. The quote by the game developers of Total War states it is a "Fantasy Strategy Game."

>Battles are the primary aspect of TWWH with empire management being the secondary element, since it's simplified compared to the previous TW games that didn't even have in-depth empire management, compared to grand strategy games in the first place. Since the primary mode of play in TWWH is combat and combat takes place in real time, it's a RTS.
Again, you're wrong, real time battles are not an RTS, plenty of games have battles that happen in real time that aren't RTS. Face it, you're wrong, it's a Fantasy Strategy Game.

>>382741215
>I get paid to shut down shitters like you.
So you don't get paid anything? Because you sure as hell suck at your "job".

>the game is a Fantasy Strategy game
No such genre and the source doesn't state that it's the genre of the game. It's a description of the game: i.e. the game takes place in a fantasy setting. The official statement says that the game is a strategy game and that battles take place in real time and, according to Blizzard, that's enough for a game to be considered a RTS, unless combat is not the primary element of the game, which is not true in WHTW's case.

You can ignore factual evidence all you want, nobody is forcing you to not be retarded,

>>382741535
I'm sorry kid, but Me, the Other guy, and even you yourself have posted evidence saying your blatantly wrong.

And I don't know if you know how jobs work, but job payby the hour, I can draw this out as long as I want to.
In fact, I intend to keep you up all night. You think 9:00 is a good time to fall asleep? how about 11:00?

Hey congrats on taking my advice though, you posted twice as retarded and now you've got twice as many (You)'s rolling in.

Anon is merely baiting, or he doesn't know the difference between tactics and strategy.

>>382741286
>there's real time battles in Call of Duty
Call of Duty is not a strategy game, so it cannot belong to the RTS genre by definition, but nice try, this nonsense is almost on the level of "Doom is a RPG, because you play the role of a Doomguy". Almost.

>The quote by the game developers of Total War states it is a "Fantasy Strategy Game."
Yep, that's the description of the game along with the statement that it has real time battles, not the statement that the game belongs to the Fantasy Strategy genre (this genre does not exist).

>You're using someone from a completely different company's definition of what an RTS is.
I'm using the definition of a person who actually has the credentials to define what a RTS is. It's called citing an actually credible source.

>real time battles are not an RTS
On their own? No. However, when real time battles are the primary gameplay element of a strategy game, the game is a RTS. It's your irrelevant opinion against the words of someone whose opinion actually matters.

>>382741692
Stating that you're right and I'm wrong without providing any arguments is surely going to convince me. Again, you must not get paid much, because you are really bad at your "job".

>>382742027
>>382742241

>Call of Duty is not a strategy game
You got a source to prove that?
You don't think there's strategy behind taking cover and setting up loadouts?
>Fantasy Strategy genre (this genre does not exist).
(Citation Needed)
>It's your irrelevant opinion against the words of someone whose opinion actually matters.

I don't need to say anything else,as the post you just replied to states, you've been proven wrong on multiple points by multiple people including yourself. You want me to summarize for you?
Ok
>"RTT is not a genre"
>Posted evidence that RTT is a genre
>Oh, so you don't evidence then
>Fantasy Strategy is not a genre
>"Posted evidence that Fantasy Strategy is a genre
>Oh, so you don't have evidence then

You're the one that's not providing any arguments here, kid.

>arguing over the nomenclature of niche game genres

Autism personified

>>382742473
>You got a source to prove that?
Yep. How about any video game outlet including the official site that states that Call of Duty is shooter?

>Fantasy Strategy genre (this genre does not exist).
>(Citation Needed)
Huh? Are you so retarded you're asking me to prove the existence of something that does not exist? How about you prove Fantasy Strategy is actually a genre.

>I don't need to say anything else
Correct, you have already proven that you are incapable of presenting sources, using proper argumentation and don't have any arguments or sources in the first place, just your irrelevant opinion which you're better off keeping to yourself. Also, the fact that you're trying to present your irrelevant opinion as being more valuable than that of a someone who actually works in a company that has defined the RTS genre, implies that you might need to seek psychiatric help.

>>382742027
If your arguments are determined by people who you decide are credible, which for some reason don't include the makers of the game, arbitrarily decide what genres exist, and disregard what the actual developers write on the game's website , there is no point having a discussion with you.

>>382743678
>If your arguments are determined by people who you decide are credible
This is hilarious coming from someone who implies that he has the right to disregard the credentials of those who have actually defined the genre.

>which for some reason don't include the makers of the game
Oh, but it does. I fully acknowledge that WHTW is a strategy game set in the fantasy setting, because that's what the makers of the game have stated, because they sure as hell didn't state that "fantasy strategy" is a genre, which is something you're trying to pass their words for.

>arbitrarily decide what genres exist
But I'm not the one pulling arbitrary genres out of their ass, like the mongoloids stating that RTT is a genre and providing no proof.

So, yes, in the end, there's no point in having discussion with you, because you haven't presented even a single argument throughout the thread.

File: 1497590519604.jpg (75KB, 520x763px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 520x763px

>>382743362
>Incapable of presenting sources
Oh look, whats this?
>>382737570
>>382736010
>>382733379
>>382727226

It's the source I posted. That fact alone blatantly proves you wrong, not even what the source actually says. You claim I haven't posted a source, and I have. You have lost.
>using proper argumentation
>It's only proper if I say it is
You are the one who doesn't know that in an argument you need to discredit the evidence, not ignore it.
>and don't have any arguments or sources in the first place
I already posted my rebuttal to that above
>just your irrelevant opinion which you're better off keeping to yourself
You're the only one posting opinions here, friendo. I've posted a direct link, and countless images of links that all say your wrong.
Everything I've posted has facts to back it up. Unfortunately you're not in a high enough grade level to read or learn how to find credible evidence on your own, so you didn't actually read any of the posts or evidence that proves you wrong.
> Also, the fact that you're trying to present your irrelevant opinion as being more valuable than that of a someone who actually works in a company that has defined the RTS genre
I already posted my rebuttal for the opinion part, and who exactly did you post that works in a company that has defined the RTS genre?
You posted 0 links. not 1. not a single one. You haven't posted a shred of evidence while I have posted countless pieces of evidence, and you claim that I am the one that has irrelevant opinions and poor argumentation?

I find it funny to me that you don't understand the hole you've dug yourself into. I've explained already that my intention is to keep you up until your brain damaged infantile brain can no longer stay awake, or until your mother comes in and explains that your bed time was several hours ago. Your claims that I'm poor at arguing can only, and I do mean only, be proven by you not responding any longer.

File: 1448926153612.png (291KB, 500x381px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 500x381px

>>382744059
Right, which the whole thread has told you Total War is not an RTS, because it isn't. RTS is alive because Total still has plenty of players and is a real time strategy game since it requires strategy and the gameplay happens in real time. And since NBA 2k17 fits that same description, that's even another game that proves RTS isn't dead. What a fucking joke.

>>382744169
>It's the source I posted.
Yes, sources that have proven my point about RTT not being a genre.

The rest of your post is just verbal diarrhea. In short, let's recap:
1. You have provided a direct quote stating that RTT is not a genre, but a subgenre of RTS.
2. I have provided a direct quote from a credible source (a person who actually works in a company that has defined the genre and has the credentials to define the genre) stating that a RTS is "a strategic game in which the primary mode of play is in a real-time setting".
3. I have provided a link to the official site of the WHTW devs stating that WHTW is a strategy game with real time battles.
4. Since real time battles are the primary gameplay element of WHTW, then, according to Rob Pardo's definition, it is a RTS.

That's it, these are the arguments. The rest is just verbal diarrhea you've been spouting.

>>382744545
>which the whole thread has told you Total War is not an RTS
>the whole thread
Who? Oh, you mean some random people who don't matter? OK, nice opinions, but they have nothing to do with actual definitions from credible sources, which I have already posted.

File: 1498948178399.gif (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

>>382744729
>>382744169
>>382733379
>>382733221
>>382732743
>>382729496
>>382727701
>>382727571
>>382727258

Weapons grade autism, bait, and braindead redditard newfags replying to it all seriously

I have to say, I've been on /v/ for a long time and this is easily one of the most autistic arguments i've ever seen.

>source this
>NUH UH THAT AINT NO SOURCE
>how bout you source it then?
>NUH UH THAT AINT NO SOURCE

And by "autistic" I don't mean how we often use the term colloquially, I mean I think most of the people involved in this argument is actually on the deep end of the fucking spectrum. It's actually kind of embarrassing to think that I frequent the same website that you all do. I mean, what kind of discussion can really be had when I'm having them with some of the most autistic people I've ever had the displeasure of interacting with.

I feel like if there was ever a sign to leave this place, it was this.

File: 1478876703989.jpg (109KB, 1024x577px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1024x577px

>>382744729
>1. You have provided a direct quote stating that RTT is not a genre, but a subgenre of RTS.
False, The source I posted directly states that RTT has grown into it's own genre, a statement I've pointed out to you countless times and you have yet to acknowledge that
>2. I have provided a direct quote from a credible source (a person who actually works in a company that has defined the genre and has the credentials to define the genre) stating that a RTS is "a strategic game in which the primary mode of play is in a real-time setting".
False, that evidence was already discredited: That description is way to generic and the link you've posted doesn't override the original point of that subject, being that the developers of TW referred to the game as a FSG and not an RTS
>3. I have provided a link to the official site of the WHTW devs stating that WHTW is a strategy game with real time battles.
False, Would you mind posting that link again? Because I'm not seeing it. Anywhere.
>4. Since real time battles are the primary gameplay element of WHTW, then, according to Rob Pardo's definition, it is a RTS.
See >>382744545

You didn't think you could just lie your way out of this did you? Clocks ticking, anon.

>>382745041
The most embarrassing thing about this thread is people trying to present wikipedia as a source in and of itself, then quoting the links given in wikipedia only to prove that the nonsense posted on wikipedia does not correlate with what's written in the actual source. I've seen this happen many times and this is the reason no educational institution allows their students to EVER quote wikipedia.

shit thread

>>382745274
>has grown
You haven't even read your own source. YOu're not only delusional, but also incapable of reading comprehension. Also, don't splurge your verbal diarrhea in the thread, nobody is going to read your nonsense beyond the first sentence anyway.

>>382745317
lmao

>>382745419
you really like the word "nonsense" don't you

File: Capture.png (84KB, 770x551px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 770x551px

>>382745317
>then quoting the links given in wikipedia only to prove that the nonsense posted on wikipedia does not correlate with what's written in the actual source
But you see anon, if you had actually read the article, you would realize that this part never happened.
But of course, you can't read. That's too much work. You just think ignoring evidence and spitting out a handful of big words will make you sound smart. Oh wait... Hang on. "Intelligent." Is that the word you wanted?

File: 1496989904353.gif (26KB, 158x132px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 158x132px

>>382744545
>>382744169
Why even make the distinction between RTS and RTT though? Both terms give a potential player an idea of what they're getting into, and that is a game where you recruit and select various units to go fuck up that guy over there in real time, some times you even need to be aware of unit match ups and terrain.

>>382744545
>false equivalence

This is the same as saying that call of duty, team fortress and quake are mobas since they have multiplayer, are primarily played online, the players are often battling each other, and they take place in an arena.

>>382745690
>is growing
So you're posting more proof that you can't actually read?

File: 1468741750307.gif (22KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 512x512px

>>382745040
At least it's video games

>>382744832
please tell me what you would call a "credible source" for the wishy-washy bullshit that is video game genre naming

remember that """""""""action-adventure""""""""" still exists and it's just as meaningless as ever

>>382735076
>Already play CoH.
Stop now, you've experienced the peak of the genre.

>>382746028
>please tell me what you would call a "credible source"
Statements from people who worked in companies that have released genre-defining games aka statements from the only type of people who actually have the credentials to provide definitions.

File: 1491483029978.gif (3MB, 286x258px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 286x258px

>>382745816
The same reason why /v/ doesn't consider smash to be a fighting game. Whether it is or isn't is the point here so I'm not going to go off on a tangent about it. They're very different despite having similarities with other games.
>>382745898
>They've (They have) ( past tense) been (past tense) breaking out into their own for a long while (extended period of time) (past tense)
Nice work only reading the first sentence and not the title of the paragraph or the closing statement, which both acknowledge that RTT exists, which your entire argument was that it doesn't exist.

Note that you didn't even acknowledge that it was a subgenre until that was posted the first time. You insisted over and over that it doesn't exist and that it's not a real genre. Then something comes along to prove you wrong so you had to move the goalposts so that you could be right, and now here I am forcing you to move the goalposts even further.

>>382746349
And why is that?

>>382745041
there are no games so all thats left is this

>>382746349
>cite a statement from people who never get to talk plainly about their games because their PR department is always hovering nearby making sure they only use the hottest buzzwords instead

>>382745690
>>382745898
was it autism?

>>382746360
>Note that you didn't even acknowledge that it was a subgenre
Why would I care about it being a subgenre? If RTT is a subgenre of RTS, it's still RTS.

As for the first part of your post: "have been breaking out" != "have broken out". The statement implies that the action is not yet finished (it will never be finished), which means that RTT games are still a subgenre of RTS. You lack basic reading comprehension and logical thinking skills.

>>382745816
The point being, is that an RTS is more of the type of game where everything is managed in real time, Starcraft, AoE, and newer stuff like Supreme Commander and Planetary Annihilation. Resources and unit creation and management is all handled in real time, and setting up is more about excellent quick decision making. An RTT is more centered around strategy and carefully planning before the battle actually starts, so when you you fight, you actually have tactics planned out and can actually focus on fighting and not on resource management and unit creation. It matters to me what it's called because I am horrible at RTS but can actually play and enjoy RTT.
And as for this false equivalency, it was to show how ridiculous his definition of RTS is. A genre isn't defined by what one developer says, and that was to point out how any game could fit under the definition he was providing. If you look at a single sentence description of a genre, you can fit almost any game into any genre. If we just shoehorn any game into any genre, then labeling a game as into a certain genre is meaningless. Especially for games that have such different styles of play, for example, Total War and Starcraft.

File: 1480455091318.jpg (67KB, 400x392px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 400x392px

>>382746885
So I guess Cheese and Yogurt just doesn't exist then?
Only Dairy.

Because, once again, you claimed it simply didn't exist up to that point. Not that it was a subgenre nor that it didn't matter that it was a subgenre, your claim was, actually, hold on, let me quote you:
>>382730851
>>382732646
>>382733698
>>382735141
>>382737075
>>382737305
And now that you have to acknowledge that it exists, you claim that because it's just a subgenre it doesn't matter, thus you had to move the goalposts again, just like I said you would. You see how predictable you are now, kid?

>(it will never be finished)
(Citation needed)

>food comparison
There, I replied for you. What now, fag?

>>382747225
>A genre isn't defined by what one developer says
>a genre isn't defined by what the developers of the genre-defining games say
A genre isn't defined by irrelevant of literal whos either.

>>382746360
Smash has less in common with fighting games than Total war does with typical RTS', the gameplay that Total War focuses on, which is the real time element, is the same as an RTS which is
>click to select
>drag to select multiple groups
>click on enemy unit to issue an attack order
>click on on pathable terrain to issue a move order
>watch your dudes kill or be killed

making it an RTS and making RTT a redundant name on par with calling difficult ARPGs Souls Clones and thinking it's a genre on its own.

>>382747462
And what informs your opinion on this subject?

>>382747395
>it simply didn't exist up to that point
And I still claim so, because that's the truth. RTT is not a genre, such a genre does not exist.

>(Citation needed)
>proving the existence of something that does not exist
How about you prove that RTT is actually a genre? You, know, like you were supposed to do from the very beginning.

>>382747546
I have never stated my opinion on the subject and I won't do so now, because it's irrelevant. I've only stated facts supported by credible sources aka the statements of people who have the credentials to define the genre.

>>382747462
Of course it's not, but as a general rule in genres, what the majority perceives something to be is usually what it is defined as. And from the general majority says here, Total War is not RTS.

>>382747520
So mobas are RTS now? Good to know.
Fucking retard.

>>382740914
Also wow, I just gave the article you posted as a source here a read, check this little nugget out, both sources you have provided now say Total War isn't an RTS.

>Oddly enough, this means that games like Rome: Total War are actually excluded from this definition as you can make a terrific argument that they are technically strategy games with a real-time component.

>>382747746
>And from what the general majority says here
>here
Where? Oh, you mean in the asshole of the internet with a population that constitutes an insignificant fraction of the entire strategy game playerbase? Unless you have a link to a survey of all strategy players expressing their opinions on whether RTT is a separate genre or not, you don't get to use the ad populum "argument".

>>382747714
Nice reading comprehension. I was asking what informs your opinion of who is "relevant" to the naming your genre, which is an opinion you have made clear in this thread. It would be nice to actually know why you're arguing this point.

File: 1476585187712.jpg (15KB, 217x201px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 217x201px

>>382747602
>How about you prove that RTT is actually a genre?
I did. Multiple times. You can pretend I didn't all night, hell even for the rest of your life if you like, but I have more than proven it's existence with a hell of a lot more sources than you.

Unless you are implying that subgenre's are not genre's. To go back to my comparison: Is cheese not dairy? You're not lactose intolerant are you, because if you were I'd have to ask you to test that theory for me.
>>382747714
Your opinion on the subject is "A genre isn't defined by irrelevant of literal whos either."
Those are your words, and those words are your opinion, anon wants to know why you have that opinion.
Another fantastic demonstration of your godlike reading comprehension.

>>382747942
The thing you've quoted comes from a literal who journo, not the Blizzard employee he (and I) was quoting, so it's as relevant to the discussion as your personal opinion.

>>382747986
So why post a topic in this tiny asshole of the internet saying
>The RTS genre is dea-
if you don't care what the majority says it is?

>>382748028
>>382747714
>to the naming your genre
sorry, I have brain cancer. meant to say, "to the naming of a genre."

>>382748028
>I was asking what informs your opinion of who is "relevant" to the naming your genre
The people who actually make the games that define the genre? I have no clue what you're even asking at this point? Who else can define the genre? Literal whos with like you? LMAO.

>>382748069
The only thing you'Ve proven is my point about RTT not being a genre, congratulations.

>Your opinion on the subject is "A genre isn't defined by irrelevant opinions of literal whos either."
That's not an opinion, that's a universal fact. Your name is nobody, you don't get to define shit.

>>382748083
And the blizzard employee is a literal who too, you arbitrarily define these people as literal whos if they disagree with you. His job involves video games as much as the blizzard employee, so his "credentials" are just the same.

>>382748397
>And the blizzard employee is a literal who too
He's an employee of a company that makes genre defining games, he has more credentials to speak about the genre than you, me and everyone in this thread combined. If you're arguing this, you need psychiatric help.

File: Untitled.jpg (104KB, 1051x323px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1051x323px

>>382748360
>The only thing you'Ve proven is my point about RTT not being a genre, congratulations.
I don't follow. I've posted a link clearly proving it's existence, and you've gone through hours of mental gymnastics to state otherwise.

>>382748360
>The people who actually make the games that define the genre? I have no clue what you're even asking at this point? Who else can define the genre?
Marketing? The communities that build around these games? The FGC might be a bunch of sweaty nerds, but the so-called "fighting game" genre would be fucking dead without a community to keep it alive. You need people to sell these games to, so your bizarre claim that the people who play the games are wholly unimportant to their identity is an opinion, and it's one you need to back up.

>Literal whos with like you? LMAO.
Your bait is showing, try to keep a lid on it. Maybe get some sleep.

>>382748623
>growing
>been breaking out
Again, you don't even understand how English works, what is there to discuss with someone like you?

>>382747804
But mobas are as different from RTS' as Smash is to fighting games, specifically in the sense that in all games that are commonly referred to as mobas the player is only controlling one unit at any given point in time no matter the game with only a few exceptions per-game. And Smash is a fighting game and so is For Honor.

File: 1476748472278.jpg (41KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x375px

>>382748759
>you don't even understand how English works
coming from someones whose vocabulary is so limited their posts are all practically the same post with the same wording even when someone proves you wrong.

You've been saying the same shit for hours and I've been shutting that shit down, sometimes even with your own words and links, every single time. You literally couldn't make this easier for me.

>>382748746
>The communities that build around these games?
M8, I've already stated this: you are not the community, don't try to present your irrelevant opinion as that of the entire community, because you have no right to speak for all of them. Unless you have the results of a poll on the opinion of the entire strategy game playerbase about the state of RTT, the only thing you have is your irrelevant opinion, while I have the statement of someone who actually makes these genre-defining games.

>>382748993
>more verbal diarrhea without a single argument
It's OK, it's not like I expected anything else.

>>382732272
>Cash grabs
Some of us either never played them or only had the expansion on disc. It's nice being able to play the full complete game.

File: 1482433909712.gif (236KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 500x500px

>>382722529

Yeah, you're retarded. Total Warhammer is more of a single player game than it is online. I myself have put in 469hrs into the game, most of that bulk is single player, I fiddled around multiplayer but it isn't a well balanced tight game for multiplayer. At least they admit this, unlike Blizzard and that horrendous piece of shit Starcraft2 where they have the fucking GALL to call it a competitive esports game.

Starcraft2 was more unbalanced and wonkey than TotalWarhammer.

File: 1459653201246.jpg (138KB, 680x916px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 680x916px

>>382748970
>And Smash is a fighting game and so is For Honor.

As much as I'd like to continue this until the wee hours of the morning, lets not open that can of worms, we'll be here all week.

>>382749075
>>382735141
>>382737952
>It's Ok, ________
>>382744729
>>382745419
>>382749075
>verbal diarrhea

Like I said, limited vocabulary.
Put some creativity into your insults, and put some creativity into your arguments while your at it.

File: ss+(2017-07-03+at+11.03.01).jpg (149KB, 1541x238px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1541x238px

>>382749003
Why are you so opposed to game consumers trying to make sense out of genres? Do you want us to be stuck with shit like pic related forever?

>>382749243
>even more verbal diarrhea

File: 1442070961269.jpg (25KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 450x450px

>>382749384
>even more copy pasted drivel
I'm sorry that I've come up with different counterpoints and arguments while your still spouting the same shit you started this with. Maybe you'll learn how to use more words after you graduate.

>>382749323
>Why are you so opposed to game consumers trying to make sense out of genres?
I'm not, I'm opposed to mongoloids trying to present their shit opinions as the consensus of the entire community.

>>382749460
So what the fuck is the purpose of your argument? Why are we here?

File: Really.png (196KB, 473x471px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 473x471px

>>382749460
You're not implying that 100 games, half of them with reviewers, consumers, and/or developers quoted and referring to the game, by name, as an RTT or Real Time Tactics game, is not the consensus, are you?
See >>382736010

Actually, hold on, Let me respond for you
>wikipedia nonsense
As if that's a counterpoint

>>382749575
The purpose of his argument is "RTT is not a genre"
Which has been proven wrong, rebutted and even gotten some comparisons for metaphoric effect.

>>382749575
>So what the fuck is the purpose of your argument?
To argue that RTT is not a genre and I have done so by providing statements from people who make genre-defining game. The people arguing against this are either proving my point with their sources, are presenting their own opinions that are irrelevant or are presenting their irrelevant opinions as the consensus of the entire strategy game playerbase, which is something they have no right to do. Thus, I consider myself to be right and for good reason.

Retards deny the fact that an RTS is an RTS
furthermore its the best RTS in years
Oh /v/ never change

>>382727571
There are sources on the Wikipedia page.

>>382749897
>To argue that RTT is not a genre
No, I'm talking one layer beyond that. Why are you arguing that RTT is not a genre?

>>382749897
>The people arguing against this are either proving my point with their sources
literally never happened, the only person in this thread whose sources came back to bite them is you. You went through a plethora of mental fuckery to ATTEMPT to make one of my sources bite me, and you failed, multiple times.
>are presenting their own opinions that are irrelevant
Opinions presented by this poster: 0
Opinions presented by you: >1

Actually, I lied, I've posted my opinion about you plenty of times, but if you can find one opinion I posted about the RTT genre please shove it in my face so I can explain how you misread what I posted.

>>382750003
Then why quote wikipedia in the first place and not the source directly? I'll tell you why: because the bullshit on the wikipedia page does not correspond to what is actually written in the source and is a loose, subjective interpretation of the source material. This is the reason you'll get laughed out of the auditorium, if you try to quote wikipedia in your Master's thesis, for example.

>>382749870
>100 games, half of them with reviewers, consumers, and/or developers quoted and referring to the game, by name, as an RTT or Real Time Tactics game
Post one such game, then post concrete evidence the majority of the playerbase for said game considers this game explicitly a RTT game, i.e. NOT a RTS game, but a game of a separate genre.

>>382750031
Because I don't like dumbfucks pulling arbitrary definitions out of their asses.

>>382750262
>more verbal diarrhea

>>382750418
>Because I don't like dumbfucks pulling arbitrary definitions out of their asses.
welcome to language and the creation thereof

File: 1460954745167.png (142KB, 290x348px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 290x348px

>>382750418
You do realize that the sources at the bottom have a quote from those sources right next to them?
What do you think those quotation marks next to the sources are for? Look at >>382736010 again. Every single time a word is underlined in red, that is a direct quote from a source acknowledging that a game is a genre you arbitrarily decided doesn't exist.

You are the only one posting opinions about the RTT genre, and you are unable to refute that, which is why you responded to>>382750262 with ">muh verbal diarrhea" for the fifth time.

>>382725031
It's an average turn based game with a real time combat gimmick.

>>382735076
Command and conquer generals / zero hour

>>382750770
There's no point in posting wikipedia links, when you can post direct ones, since, when you start posting and even reading wikipedia bullshit, you can end up proving your opponent's point, which is exactly what happened in your case.

>>382722529
Are you literal retard? It's not an RTS.

File: Untitled.png (67KB, 744x730px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 744x730px

>>382751272
>you can end up proving your opponent's point, which is exactly what happened in your case.
I think the words you're looking for are "beating your opponent out," which is exactly what happened in my case, because as I just said, every, last, link in >>382736010 proves you dead wrong. completely and totally.
And here, since your such a pretentious faggot, I'll post the links to these ones as well.
http://www.gamerankings.com/pc/63451-commandos-behind-enemy-lines/index.html
>Commandos is a real-time tactics game set in World War II that puts you in command of a small squad of elite troopers
>https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/abomination-review/1900-2537810/
>It's a real-time tactical action game with very little underlying strategy.
http://www.ign.com/articles/1999/07/14/fighting-steel
>Fighting Steel is a 3D, real-time, tactical naval wargame that focuses on surface combat in the years 1939-1942.
>https://www.engadget.com/2006/10/12/syndicate-ea-replay-video-revealed/
>The game combines several different genres like real-time tactics, shooting and simulator into something that was pretty ahead of its time when it was released.

I posted all of these a long time ago, and you refused to accept it because your middle school homeroom teacher told you wikipedia is a crime.
I'm sorry that you were too retarded to do any of that yourself. What variant of autism do you have? How much longer did they say you have to live?

You are the one who has been eating his own words this whole time. You are the one who has been shouting meaningless opinions this whole time. That's the fact of the matter.

>>382751413
Thank you for your insight, I will put it with all the other irrelevant opinions from this thread.

>>382750890
>turn based game with a real time combat gimmick
That's why every turn-based related aspect of the game (i.e. every empire management aspect) has been simplified while battles have been been given more tactical depth than ever before due to the biggest mechanical unit variety the franchise has ever seen, amirite? If you think real-time battles are not the primary gameplay element of TWWH, you haven't even played the game.

>>382751714
I've went through the descriptions of all these games and all of them name them as strategy games. Since all of them are real-time games, they're RTS as per definition of actually credible sources. I fail to see how this proves RTT is a genre and not a subgenre of RTS.

File: IGN Commandos.png (312KB, 1010x788px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1010x788px

>>382752337
Here's what I'm talking about, by the way. In other words, you're still spouting nonsense without presenting a single piece of evidence of RTT being an actual genre.

>>382752337
>actually credible sources
Right, sure. That clearly means that all 120 of the sources on the image I posted hours ago are wrong, and the 1 source you have is correct.
> I fail to see how this proves RTT is a genre and not a subgenre of RTS
1:Your argument was RTT does not exist. Just because you changed your argument after you realized you were wrong doesn't make you right the whole time.
2:It's probably because you also failed high school

Many posts ago:
>>Why are you so opposed to game consumers trying to make sense out of genres?
>I'm not, I'm opposed to mongoloids trying to present their shit opinions as the consensus of the entire community.
I repeat, is 120 sources not a consensus?

File: 1444341851800.jpg (53KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1280x720px

>>382752687
and since your multiposting now, allow me to remind of what you've said and implied:

>>382730851
>>382732646
>>382733698
>>382735141

>Subgenres are not genres, therefore pork is not meat, nor is cheese dairy.

Your logic betrays you. There is nothing you can apply that logic to that makes sense.

File: 1499056216638.gif (405KB, 359x371px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 359x371px

kill everybody in this thread

>>382752732
>That clearly means that all 120 of the sources on the image I posted hours ago are wrong
You haven't posted any sources apart form the one where we found out that your source actually supports my argument. Simply providing a link is not posting a source, you have to actually post the quotes for them to mean anything. I'm not going to do this for you, because it's your task to prove my argument, supported by credible sources, wrong.

>Your argument was RTT does not exist.
Yes, such a genre does not exist. This is my argument still and it's the truth, seeing how you've failed to provide any evidence to the contrary.

>120 sources
Where? All I see is your verbal diarrhea and a bunch of meaningless links.

Anyway, since you're completely unable to provide any actual arguments, are too retarded to even read your own sources and provide the quotes, there's nothing more to argue with you. RTT is not a genre, it does not exist and TWWH is a RTS as proven by actually credible sources and you will just have to accept that.

Now, I'll leave the last word to you, it's the least I can do for a retarded, anime image spamming child.

>>382733379
You chose the source that fits with your argument, it's not us who are supposed to do the work for you. You never made it out of university huh?

File: 1498124974886.png (62KB, 899x547px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 899x547px

>>382753972
>You haven't posted any sources apart form the one where we found out that your source actually supports my argument.
Stopped reading there.
Look at this:
>>382751714
There's a lot more than 1 source here. Links, Quotations, all of it. But it doesn't count because you say so.
You haven't read anything I've posted, you probably weren't capable of doing so.

You are by far the most disappointing autist I've ever spoken with. Gotta give you credit though. It takes a certain level of thickness to completely ignore every last word someone says to you, probably why you weren't able to read anything I posted: you couldn't learn how to read because you didn't learn how to listen first.

>Total War
>RTS

At least it's a discussion.