The Imperial Realm :: Miranda
MMORTS.COM Logo
NEWS REVIEWS GAMES FORUMS

News: Penny Arcade talks about the MMORTS

By Admin on 2011-10-02 11:34:41
Homepage: www.mmorts.com email:admin at mmorts dot com

Check out their opinions. I haven't disagreed with so many points in a single seven minute period in ages.

By Lord Nyson on 2011-10-04 05:58:51
Homepage: email:graymond2007 at gmail dot com
I was wondering if you could highlight some points about what you consider to be essential elements of an MMORTS, I have to admit before seeing this extra credits I had only had brief interaction with games such as this. However, as an avid MMO and RTS fan + game programmer, I wanted another point of view on what elements make this genre enthralling to you.
By Ragnar on 2011-10-05 11:38:55
Homepage: email:
"I haven't disagreed with so many points in a single seven minute period in ages"

Please elaborate, or at least enumerate. The only thing I really disagreed with was the doing away with in-game resource collection. The rest seemed like it might work.
By Admin on 2011-10-07 10:00:14
Homepage: www.mmorts.com email:admin at mmorts dot com
  • "There is little going on in the RTS world." There is lots going on in the RTS world. Starcraft, Age of Empires Online, Dawn of Fantasy, End of Nations, lots more.
  • "Balance, balance balance." I don't think an RTS needs to be balanced for n vs n play - for 1 vs 1 yes. I think you need to design gameplay where perfect balance is not necessary for fun.
  • With players who play a lot and have a million units, the best strategy is "always prey on the weak". Sure, but that's not the only strategy. The trick here is to keep those players apart, or find a way to match them up evenly for example by limiting force size or using their points system.
  • You build a huge army, but can't get anywhere because you're surrounded by newbs. Just walk through em. Pathing isn't so hard. Give the players unit teleportation like Red Alert.
  • He thinks small, he thinks MMORTS should have matches and instanced battles. I want to see 1000 players on the same map. If you want matches, play Command and Conquer or Starcraft, or Age of Empires.
  • Who wants a meta game that is simply stats on a map. Boring. The metagame should be part of the play. Conquer the world doesn't have to be the only metagame for an RTS.


I can see where he's coming from, thinking along the lines of the traditional RTS, but I think we need to dream bigger.

The DVD Rewinder did make me laugh.
By Admin on 2011-10-07 10:02:44
Homepage: www.mmorts.com email:admin at mmorts dot com
Oh, and I like in-game resource collection.
By Ragnar on 2011-10-08 10:59:41
Homepage: email:
Ok, fair points, mostly. And in-game resource collection is what makes the S in RTS, imo. I wasn't saying they were right, I was just curious as to your reasoning and why you'd even bother to disagree with so many points. A few will do:

I think the main point where their reasoning goes wrong is the assumption that MMO implies player progression over time. That's certainly true for MMORPGs, but youd have to be someone that has never played any type of RPG to draw that assumption. So scratch that. Im perfectly happy to clobber my way into the world anew every time. Just keeping score is enough meta game info for most people anyway, just look at the direction most FPS games are taking.

Point two where they go wrong is assuming that power difference is a problem. It's not. RTS is perhaps the only type of game where, at least in team play, it's not a huge problem if you have far less resources than others. Yes, you're just a small fry, but I've found that getting my base wiped out, retreating and rebuilding while my team does most of the legwork can still lead to a very rewarding experience.

They got one thing right though: I've been anxiously awaiting the chance to play an MMORTS for years and not much has happened so far. I want my 1000 player map as well!
By Admin on 2011-10-08 14:26:23
Homepage: www.mmorts.com email:admin at mmorts dot com
I've found that getting my base wiped out, retreating and rebuilding while my team does most of the legwork can still lead to a very rewarding experience.


Going in as a point-of-the-spear suicide attacker is hilarious. Sure you get wiped out, but the mess you make of the other guys forces is awesome.

I think some sort of player progression is needed if you want to keep players playing over a long period. Without progression, eventually you're going to get bored of a tech tree of 20 or so standard units.

(I've got to add an easier system for quoting.)
By BillyDoyle on 2011-11-16 10:26:39
Homepage: email:kpocon at gmail dot com
He fellas. First time long time. I was wondering what you guys have heard about End of Nations? I know it's set to release sometime in 2012. Are you guys optimistic about it? Have you heard it's addressed your concerns about the MMORTS? What do you see as possible problems it might have?
By Admin on 2011-11-17 01:54:52
Homepage: www.mmorts.com email:admin at mmorts dot com
I think End of Nations looks pretty, but I'm disappointed the multiplayer isn't so massive. 50 people in a game doesn't impress.

Add New Comment to this Topic

Submit News Story

Admin Log In