______________________________________________________________________ THE LEGACY OF POWERMONGER
First... Mr. Geryk /does/ at least mention Peter Molyneux's early work, but while he expends a sentence or two upon "Populus", he completely failed to describe the game "Powermonger".
(See here: [LINK DELETED] this is about the only place to obtain the game, anymore, unless you're lucky enough to find it in a bargain bin.)
This game is critical if you want to talk about the history of real-time strategy. You obtained and managed resources, including food for your troops. You raised troops from among your people, keeping in mind that the more conscripts you took, the fewer would remain to keep your people prosperous. You managed your holdings. You dealt with terrain differences, such as hills and water. Weather and seasons came and went. Most importantly, conquest. All of the critical elements of RTS play, and exceedingly innovative for its day.
Though there were only a few different unit types, they were different enough to be interesting. Individual soldiers might be armed with different weapons, depending upon the resources and artisans available to you. Your subcommanders in the game - acquired by conquering their home territories - even had a certain amount of personality, given that this was a very early '90s game. They could either command armies, or they could be sent on dangerous spy missions to obtain intelligence on the enemy, such as unit placement. You could also construct catapults and cannon with which to help obliterate and subdue your enemies. And when you entered battle, the spirits of the dead would amusingly rise into the sky as angels. A great touch. ;-)
What's more, Powermonger included a rotatable 3D interface long before Myth or other titles did! Molyneux truly revealed himself as a visionary with this title. Consequently, I can't excuse the omission of this game from such a lineup.
______________________________________________________________________ ENTERING THE BATTLEZONE
Since Mr. Geryk chose to add Baldur's Gate, of all things, to his listing, I feel that it would not be amiss for me to suggest Battlezone as a superior alternative.
Battlezone was a hybrid title, combining elements of combat shooters, resource management and real-time tactical and strategic thought. Like Myth, Battlezone was more focused upon the battle side of things. It played as if you really /were/ the commander of a mechanized battle team. However, you still had to find, and guard, adequate geothermal power sources and fields of scrap metal in order to build and augment your forces. Also like Myth, Battlezone gained tremendous critical acclaim but did not sell as many copies as it truly deserved. Its successor, Battlezone II, was a disappointingly limp effort but could not overshadow the gaming experience that BZ1 provided.
Another golden oldie, in Ascendancy you constructed your own ships - specifically deciding what equipment you wanted them to have - and built colonies on the worlds you were able to acquire. Ship vs. ship combat. Planet vs. ship combat. You travelled between star systems using "space lanes", and researched new capabilities along the tech-tree. Major advances in technology could be obtained if you happened to colonize a planet which contained alien artifacts. No description I could write would do this game justice... suffice it to say that I and some of my friends still load up this title and play it regularly. If only it had multiplayer, it would still be spanking many of today's titles! ;-)
Still, the single-player game is like digital crack. Especially when you download the free AI patch. Someone should tell the folks at Logic Factory to get off their collective derrier and make a sequel.
Now, just a couple more things before I finish.
______________________________________________________________________ MAKING SACRIFICES
I'm wondering why the games, Homeworld, Ground Control, Sacrifice and Black & White, weren't mentioned. I can perhaps see the omission, since the topic of the article is the "history of real-time strategy games". But I do expect for them to occupy a place in future such history articles.
'Nuff said, since most should probably know about these, and this post will already be a bit longer than some of the readers can tolerate. Go find a search engine if you don't know about these.
______________________________________________________________________ DISPELLING THE MYTH
This is a lesser item, but I did feel that it perhaps deserved more attention that Myth predated Starcraft by about a year or more, making the Blizzard game a throwback of sorts, even if its popularity cannot be challenged. But then, how frequently in our society, and even in the computer gaming subculture, does revolutionary, or even evolutionary, thought make a strong enough impression upon the mainstream? It's regrettable, because this is the reason why me-too titles abound and companies like Looking Glass and Bungie either go out of business or sell to larger companies.
Ah well. Gaming will be around for a long time... I just hope that as this industry "matures", its creative spirit will continue to prevail and provide interesting products for we bleeding-edgers.
It says in the title 1989-1998, so no, nothing from last year.
If they ever do 1998-present, they should (but won't) mention Allegiance. It is, in my opinion, one of the "best games
no one played." Unfortunately, since it was multiplayer, the fact that no one else played it (or even know much about it) means it wasn't much fun for those of us that did. Still, a *great* concept, and I hope other companies don't shy away from trying this approach again because of this game's failure.
[quote] As well meaning and lucid as your reply is, I had to elide the reference to a warez site.
If you have a problem with me editing your posting, let me know, and I'll delete it in its entirety.
_/ C
[/quote] Sure... fine. Your site. Your decision. I'm okay with you making that limited alteration, but would normally prefer that you contact me within a reasonable period, and generally before doing such a thing.
--- (Here's where I debate the issue, since I'm a forum nut ;-) ---
I mean, I can understand what direction you're coming from, but the severity of response? A simple link to another website?
I've been aware of various cases involving linking between websites. Websites that don't want to be linked to. Entities that don't want websites to link to certain other websites, yadda yadda. I'm also aware of the Digital Millenium Rape Act... do YOU agree with it?
I did identify the game as "abandonware"... it is both nearly impossible to obtain and quite old. I say "nearly impossible", because the main chances one would have for gaining one's own copy are either a) through an auction site such as E-bay, and/or by simply downloading it from an abandonware source. I have never seen it in a bargain bin, and I shop quite frequently. There is no denial of revenue to the former publishers or developers of the title, since they are no longer publishing it and have not been doing so for some time!
I'm curious... do you delete any reference that anyone makes on these forums to various items such as MP3 and other file-sharing clients? What about links to hotline servers and/or the client software which is used to access various warez servers? Is encouraging the use and/or simply informing individuals of the existence of such things more or less threatening to intellectual property rights? Realistically.
Is encouraging the use and/or simply informing individuals of the
existence of such things more or less threatening to
intellectual property rights? Realistically.
Our site policy for removing references to certain material is not grounded in some moral stance. You will probably find the spectrum of opinion within #CP# on such topics. Rather, it was set by me and helps ensure the existance of the site based on where and how it is currently hosted. Carch made the particular call here and I'll trust his judgement.
Comments
http://gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/
[url=http://gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/]http://gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/[/url]
Still interesting.
No mention of games from last year like Kohan.
Still, great stuff! My current favorite #2 RTS (Sacrifice) gets good mention in there. #2 behind Myth, of course!
_/ C
The recent article at GameSpot (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/index.html) regarding real-time strategy titles has some interesting omissions that I just thought I'd correct.
______________________________________________________________________
THE LEGACY OF POWERMONGER
First... Mr. Geryk /does/ at least mention Peter Molyneux's early work, but while he expends a sentence or two upon "Populus", he completely failed to describe the game "Powermonger".
(See here: [LINK DELETED] this is about the only place to obtain the game, anymore, unless you're lucky enough to find it in a bargain bin.)
This game is critical if you want to talk about the history of real-time strategy. You obtained and managed resources, including food for your troops. You raised troops from among your people, keeping in mind that the more conscripts you took, the fewer would remain to keep your people prosperous. You managed your holdings. You dealt with terrain differences, such as hills and water. Weather and seasons came and went. Most importantly, conquest. All of the critical elements of RTS play, and exceedingly innovative for its day.
Though there were only a few different unit types, they were different enough to be interesting. Individual soldiers might be armed with different weapons, depending upon the resources and artisans available to you. Your subcommanders in the game - acquired by conquering their home territories - even had a certain amount of personality, given that this was a very early '90s game. They could either command armies, or they could be sent on dangerous spy missions to obtain intelligence on the enemy, such as unit placement. You could also construct catapults and cannon with which to help obliterate and subdue your enemies. And when you entered battle, the spirits of the dead would amusingly rise into the sky as angels. A great touch. ;-)
What's more, Powermonger included a rotatable 3D interface long before Myth or other titles did! Molyneux truly revealed himself as a visionary with this title. Consequently, I can't excuse the omission of this game from such a lineup.
______________________________________________________________________
ENTERING THE BATTLEZONE
Since Mr. Geryk chose to add Baldur's Gate, of all things, to his listing, I feel that it would not be amiss for me to suggest Battlezone as a superior alternative.
Battlezone was a hybrid title, combining elements of combat shooters, resource management and real-time tactical and strategic thought. Like Myth, Battlezone was more focused upon the battle side of things. It played as if you really /were/ the commander of a mechanized battle team. However, you still had to find, and guard, adequate geothermal power sources and fields of scrap metal in order to build and augment your forces. Also like Myth, Battlezone gained tremendous critical acclaim but did not sell as many copies as it truly deserved. Its successor, Battlezone II, was a disappointingly limp effort but could not overshadow the gaming experience that BZ1 provided.
(See the GameSpot review here: http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/reviews/0,10867,2538156,00.html)
______________________________________________________________________
GAINING ASCENDANCY
(See here: [LINK DELETED])
Another golden oldie, in Ascendancy you constructed your own ships - specifically deciding what equipment you wanted them to have - and built colonies on the worlds you were able to acquire. Ship vs. ship combat. Planet vs. ship combat. You travelled between star systems using "space lanes", and researched new capabilities along the tech-tree. Major advances in technology could be obtained if you happened to colonize a planet which contained alien artifacts. No description I could write would do this game justice... suffice it to say that I and some of my friends still load up this title and play it regularly. If only it had multiplayer, it would still be spanking many of today's titles! ;-)
Still, the single-player game is like digital crack. Especially when you download the free AI patch. Someone should tell the folks at Logic Factory to get off their collective derrier and make a sequel.
Now, just a couple more things before I finish.
______________________________________________________________________
MAKING SACRIFICES
I'm wondering why the games, Homeworld, Ground Control, Sacrifice and Black & White, weren't mentioned. I can perhaps see the omission, since the topic of the article is the "history of real-time strategy games". But I do expect for them to occupy a place in future such history articles.
'Nuff said, since most should probably know about these, and this post will already be a bit longer than some of the readers can tolerate. Go find a search engine if you don't know about these.
______________________________________________________________________
DISPELLING THE MYTH
This is a lesser item, but I did feel that it perhaps deserved more attention that Myth predated Starcraft by about a year or more, making the Blizzard game a throwback of sorts, even if its popularity cannot be challenged. But then, how frequently in our society, and even in the computer gaming subculture, does revolutionary, or even evolutionary, thought make a strong enough impression upon the mainstream? It's regrettable, because this is the reason why me-too titles abound and companies like Looking Glass and Bungie either go out of business or sell to larger companies.
Ah well. Gaming will be around for a long time... I just hope that as this industry "matures", its creative spirit will continue to prevail and provide interesting products for we bleeding-edgers.
- Rob Swenson, aka "Noctavis"
opinionated.bastage@noctavis.com
As well meaning and lucid as your reply is, I had to elide the reference to a warez site.
If you have a problem with me editing your posting, let me know, and I'll delete it in its entirety.
_/ C
It says in the title 1989-1998, so no, nothing from last year.
If they ever do 1998-present, they should (but won't) mention Allegiance. It is, in my opinion, one of the "best games
no one played." Unfortunately, since it was multiplayer, the fact that no one else played it (or even know much about it) means it wasn't much fun for those of us that did. Still, a *great* concept, and I hope other companies don't shy away from trying this approach again because of this game's failure.
-Cauldyth
[quote]
As well meaning and lucid as your reply is, I had to elide the
reference to a warez site.
If you have a problem with me editing your posting, let me know,
and I'll delete it in its entirety.
_/ C
[/quote]
Sure... fine. Your site. Your decision. I'm okay with you making that limited alteration, but would normally prefer that you contact me within a reasonable period, and generally before doing such a thing.
--- (Here's where I debate the issue, since I'm a forum nut ;-) ---
I mean, I can understand what direction you're coming from, but the severity of response? A simple link to another website?
I've been aware of various cases involving linking between websites. Websites that don't want to be linked to. Entities that don't want websites to link to certain other websites, yadda yadda. I'm also aware of the Digital Millenium Rape Act... do YOU agree with it?
I did identify the game as "abandonware"... it is both nearly impossible to obtain and quite old. I say "nearly impossible", because the main chances one would have for gaining one's own copy are either a) through an auction site such as E-bay, and/or by simply downloading it from an abandonware source. I have never seen it in a bargain bin, and I shop quite frequently. There is no denial of revenue to the former publishers or developers of the title, since they are no longer publishing it and have not been doing so for some time!
I'm curious... do you delete any reference that anyone makes on these forums to various items such as MP3 and other file-sharing clients? What about links to hotline servers and/or the client software which is used to access various warez servers? Is encouraging the use and/or simply informing individuals of the existence of such things more or less threatening to intellectual property rights? Realistically.
Something to chaw for a few minutes.
- Noctavis the forumite
[url=http://lineagerofl.tripod.com/members/virgilante.htm]My alter ego in Lineage: The Blood Pledge[/url]
[img]http://lineagerofl.tripod.com/members/images/me_coworkers.jpg[/img]
Our site policy for removing references to certain material is not grounded in some moral stance. You will probably find the spectrum of opinion within #CP# on such topics. Rather, it was set by me and helps ensure the existance of the site based on where and how it is currently hosted. Carch made the particular call here and I'll trust his judgement.