Can RTS Games Work On A Console?
Back to Soren Johnson's 'Designer Notes' blog, then, where he's been analyzing Ensemble's 'Halo Wars' trailer and commenting, in some detail, on how the real-time strategy game genre should be adapting to the console format.
Johnson notes of the trailer: "At the very end of the video, however, there is a tiny suggestion of just how fun an RTS could be on a console. The human side has some sort of orbiting uber-weapon they can use to wreck massive destruction on a specific target. The console interface for this system is a snap - it's simply a huge reticule. Just aim and shoot."
He continues: "Personally, I was hoping that Halo Wars would focus more on these types of interactions - ones where the player is taking advantage of the joystick interface instead of fighting it. RTS's truly need to be built from the ground up for consoles, without the expectation of controlling multiple groups of soldiers." Johnson then references Moonbase Commander, Rampart, Defense Of The Ancients and M.U.L.E. as meaningful touchpoints for those considering a console RTS.
Also useful? Jason 'loonyboi' Bergman's comment on the post, which wraps up a couple of loose ends from the existing high-profile console RTSes: "I'm deeply biased of course, but I fall into the category of people that RTSes will never, ever, ever work as well as turn-based on a console. It's not that they can't be done well...I think EA did a great job with Battle For Middle-Earth 2 (I haven't tried Command & Conquer 3 yet, but I gather it's more of the same). But in that game it felt like the only reason you couldn't pause the game and give orders is because EA made some high-level mandate that you couldn't. The game would have played better if you could."
Comments
I don't see a big difference between a mouse a Wii remote. It seems that a console like the Wii should be able to handle an RTS just fine.
Posted by: anonymous | September 23, 2007 6:37 PM
RTS can work on a console if the controls are actually made for it from the ground up, but no one is risking that so far. Even Halo Wars is just cribbing C&C3's 'good enough' approach, which is rather disappointing.
The wii isn't as percise as a mouse is, but an RTS taking this into account could get the controls right. Doesn't look like anyone is trying though.
The closest anyone has ever gotten to this is the Kingdom Under Fire series, which takes a very different approach, but with great success, by focusing on small groups of units set on waypoints through a pull up mini-map, and spiced with some Dynasty Warriors style combat.
Posted by: Aaron | September 23, 2007 8:18 PM
Why doesn't anyone ever talk about the Pikmin games? They are not exactly RTS games in the tradtional sense but they do offer a series of solutions to RTS controls that are extremely effective.
Posted by: Velops | September 24, 2007 1:11 AM
Actually, Halo Wars' controls ARE made for consoles from the ground up and they're not just "cribbing C&C3's 'good enough' approach". Kikizo just put up an interview with Ensemble Studios' executive producer (http://games.kikizo.com/news/200709/070_p1.asp) which explains some of the processes that led to the formation of Halo Wars' control interface.
Posted by: insane_cobra | September 24, 2007 1:14 AM
I can't read that interview in work, but from the tutorial video they put up, the interface for Halo Wars looked very clunky, and far better suited for the PC.
Posted by: Aaron | September 24, 2007 3:08 AM
There's one thing I find potentially worrying about Halo Wars and that's a multitude of ways for selecting units. I think having such redundancy might be a little confusing to some people (hell, I find it confusing myself and I've been playing RTS games for almost 15 years).
Posted by: insane_cobra | September 24, 2007 6:10 AM
Grim Grimoire, a game released by NIS America, comes to mind as an RTS game that was built from the ground up that seemed fairly successful in its control execution. If the action got too hectic they enabled a pause feature that kind of reminds me of the Baldur's Gate games.
Posted by: Chris M. | September 24, 2007 9:36 AM
What if you took the control up a level, like the Total War PC games? This would give fewer units/things to manage and allow you to focus on the tactics.
Of course there'd be less "action" and "direct control," which seems contrary to the console mindset.
Posted by: steve | September 24, 2007 10:02 AM
Why is everyone just ignoring the keyboard side of things? It isn't just about the precision of the mouse, it's about having a ton of hotkeys at your disposal, for doing things as essential as assigning/retreiving groups, to the essential-in-competition hotkeys for specific buildings and battles.
Posted by: Zabycx | September 24, 2007 11:43 AM
Doesn't anybody remember that the RTS genre was born on the console? Herzog (MSX) and Herzog Zwei (Sega Genesis) adapted to the console's control scheme by making the cursor a transforming, fighting/unit-carrying robot.
And what about Dune on the Genesis?
Posted by: Oasis | September 24, 2007 1:53 PM
Well, it's debatable which game was the first RTS, but The Ancient Art of War and Stonkers (both computer games) are usually regarded as first games with RTS elements.
Posted by: insane_cobra | September 25, 2007 7:32 AM
Ah, I stand corrected. I don't think I've heard either of those titles mentioned in prior conversations regarding RTS origins. Points to you, sir!
Posted by: Oasis | September 25, 2007 6:28 PM
"The wii isn't as percise as a mouse is"
I dunno, I've seen videos of people using the wii remote with far greater precision and accuarcy and speed than I've ever been able to get out of a mouse. I'd say that both mouse and Wii remote can support a level of expertise far in advance of what normal humans do with them.
Posted by: anonymous | September 26, 2007 7:42 PM
Actually RTS games go back a tad further than Ancient Art of War and Stonkers.
Combat Leader (SSI) and NATO Commander (Microprose) both came out in 1983 and were tactical* real time strategy titles.
*Tactical as in no resource gathering.
Posted by: Scott | September 26, 2007 10:19 PM