Originally Posted by MMO-Champion
Why did the RTS genre die?
I have a lot of thoughts here, but I want to caveat that this is mostly anecdotal and not backed up by data.
First, and probably most importantly, I think Warcraft 3 started a trend that continued with the MOBAs to focus on micromanagement of a single hero rather than micromanagement of an entire economy. A lot of players clearly found the single-character-focus satisfying. RTS games became MOBAs the same way dinosaurs became birds.
Second, back in the RTS heydey, I felt like there were a lot of large games being played on LANs in offices and colleges. Perhaps due to esports, but certainly due to Starcraft 2, the focus drifted more to one-on-one games. Age of Empires was at its best in 3v3 or 4v4, which lent itself well to a lot of casual multiplayer
Third, it used to be more possible to compete in an RTS as a strategic player who made smart decisions and not just a twitch player with good reflexes. To be pro, you need to be good at both, but it's hard to even have much fun these days if you're bad at micro.
Fourth, back in the RTS heydey, you might meet someone, find out they play the same RTS as you, and agree to play together sometime. In later years, you'd quickly realize you were radically different ELOs and just say "Oh." To be fair, this happens in MOBAs as well, but the 5v5 nature helps a little there.
Fifth, I think over time the games just lived out their lifespan. There was such a leap in complexity of everything -- strategies, unit design, counter units, systems -- that it was difficult for anyone but pretty hardcore players to keep up. Yet, if they hadn't keep adding those systems, the engaged players might have gotten bored. I keep hoping that it feels like it's time for RTS as a genre to come back. Not yet.
Finally, I think it is easier to consume the content in an RTS. The developers can try to throw interesting maps or cool hooks at you in single-player, but you're going to see all of the units and buildings pretty quickly in multiplayer. MMOs can continually offer you new things to explore and enemies to fight. MOBAs add new champions. An RTS had to wait for a massive expansion, that in turn added to the bloat I mentioned in #5.
I miss the storytelling of RTS campaigns. RPGs dont do the big stories as well imo
On WoW, I occasionally wished for Warcraft 4, just because it would give us such fertile ground for new stories. (OccupyGStreet
So you agree that RTS died? so sc2 confirmed daed gaem?
It's more that 10 years ago there were like 20 RTS franchises. Now there are a couple. (OccupyGStreet
Maybe "dead" is too strong (and that came from the questioner). But the RTS field is much smaller than when I first got into it. (OccupyGStreet
interesting thoughts - what do you think would have happened if MOBAS were introduced prior to RTS?
I do think RTS delivers a particular experience (you're the commander) in a way few other genres can do well. (OccupyGStreet
4X games make you feel like a leader, but the battlefield is much more shallow IMO. (The rest of the experience is deeper though) (OccupyGStreet
So maybe RTS would have doubled down on that aspect -- less about the hero on the field and more about the soldiers. Shrug. (OccupyGStreet
Isn't the ideal MMO where all content is always relevant in some way and new content is icing on the cake?
IDK. Some sense of progression is nice too. I don't need to be running Keep on the Borderlands when I am 20th level. (OccupyGStreet