This list is complete and utter failure. How could you possibly list DoW2 yet leave out the father of real-time strategy: Dune II? Not only that, the paternal unit of the modern RTS formula: Command & Conquer? Do you forget that Warcraft II came before Warcraft III and was unbelievable? Furthermore, you left out the first title to successfully incorporate elements of Civilization into RTS circles: Age of Empires. Company of Heroes and World in Conflict are nice and shiny and make big things go boom, but they hardly innovate the genre. They might be glittering examples of technology or the hottest sellers right now, but they are far from the greatest RTS's ever made. Shame on you.
krazyorange
WWWWOAH
Chill out fellah
Things you got wrong: 1. Old games are fun but it is foolish to suggest that they are actually better than modern games. Of course they laid foundations and such, but by today's standards they are... (flame shield *ON*) obsolete. I played WC2 and had a decent time, but even without playing WC3 I have the wisdom to know it was a better game than its predecessor. More people enjoyed it, it got better reviews, etc. They deserve acknowledgement and praise all the same, but they do not belong in a this race.
2. World In Conflict and Company of Heroes do too innovate the genre. Have you even played them?
A. WiC gets rid of base building and creates a Total War/Battlefield-esque style of gameplay, 100% unique to the genre.
B. CoH is without doubt the best WWII RTS available. It combines good base building elements and excellent combat elements for a great game that emphasizes battlefield tactics over "who's army is bigger", something that I have yet to see in an RTS of that sort.
The reason I still vote for WiC is that it consistently amazes me with it's application of excellent balance to realistic units. I'm a cold war buff, and it is just an instant nerd-gasm for me every time an AH-64 guts a T-80 with a Hellfire.
Log in to comment