|
this is kind of interesting. Halo War 2 Invitational https://www.twitch.tv/xbox
i suspect IGN will put together a nice softball intro to the game https://www.twitch.tv/ign
thx to IGN for being honest.
-BUG on PC: 2 out of 10 times when u click on the mini-map it does not respond. -BUG : summoned units in Blitz mode get stuck and become useless. -BAD MENU PROBLEMS: outlined in a TB video posted earlier in this thread. - you can't know new upgraded Stats of units upgraded via new cards you collect.
so umm yea. i was gonna buy this game when it was $20. Unless bugs like this are fixed i'm not buying it regardless of price.
off topic RTS talk + Show Spoiler +On February 22 2017 05:23 The_Red_Viper wrote: How do you spend money on BW? You mean buying the game? These days it's all about micro transactions with f2p games. It's all about blizzard's name anyway, give any other studio starcraft2 and it wouldn't have sold nearly as well. All i am saying is that there is a potential market for rts, not that it's easy to make the right product for it. Just like there was a market for games like dark souls. Is it easier to make money doing something else? Sure Prior to 2010? buy the full price game. Attend Blizzcon. Buy SC1 licensed crap Blizzard and its publisher make. The BlizzCon prior to SC2 that i attended had very few RTS fans. half or more of the copies of SC1 sold occurred when the game was $20 for SC1/BW in 1 box.
|
On February 22 2017 05:23 The_Red_Viper wrote: How do you spend money on BW? You mean buying the game? These days it's all about micro transactions with f2p games. It's all about blizzard's name anyway, give any other studio starcraft2 and it wouldn't have sold nearly as well. All i am saying is that there is a potential market for rts, not that it's easy to make the right product for it. Just like there was a market for games like dark souls. Is it easier to make money doing something else? Sure ...I think that proves there's a market for Blizzard games, and not RTS games and looking at copies sold of the RTS genre outside of the Blizzard RTSes, thats probably true.
If not that, but RTS is in the same boat as say MMOs, where its by far the most difficult genre to create a game for, especially if you're not getting console sales.
|
On February 22 2017 07:04 lestye wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2017 05:23 The_Red_Viper wrote: How do you spend money on BW? You mean buying the game? These days it's all about micro transactions with f2p games. It's all about blizzard's name anyway, give any other studio starcraft2 and it wouldn't have sold nearly as well. All i am saying is that there is a potential market for rts, not that it's easy to make the right product for it. Just like there was a market for games like dark souls. Is it easier to make money doing something else? Sure ...I think that proves there's a market for Blizzard games, and not RTS games and looking at copies sold of the RTS genre outside of the Blizzard RTSes, thats probably true. If not that, but RTS is in the same boat as say MMOs, where its by far the most difficult genre to create a game for, especially if you're not getting console sales. How many copies of Moba games are sold? These competitive titles these days are mostly free to play with microtransactions as business model. I really would like to see if someone can make that work for rts as well. But sure, rts seems like a difficult genre to get right and it's probably easier to make money with other games. Doesn't really prove that there is absolutely no market for rts games though. The genre imo just needs to evolve. No idea if i personally would enjoy the end result of such a project (i think it would have almost no traditional macro mechanics) but that's beside the point.
|
On February 22 2017 15:50 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2017 07:04 lestye wrote:On February 22 2017 05:23 The_Red_Viper wrote: How do you spend money on BW? You mean buying the game? These days it's all about micro transactions with f2p games. It's all about blizzard's name anyway, give any other studio starcraft2 and it wouldn't have sold nearly as well. All i am saying is that there is a potential market for rts, not that it's easy to make the right product for it. Just like there was a market for games like dark souls. Is it easier to make money doing something else? Sure ...I think that proves there's a market for Blizzard games, and not RTS games and looking at copies sold of the RTS genre outside of the Blizzard RTSes, thats probably true. If not that, but RTS is in the same boat as say MMOs, where its by far the most difficult genre to create a game for, especially if you're not getting console sales. How many copies of Moba games are sold? These competitive titles these days are mostly free to play with microtransactions as business model. I really would like to see if someone can make that work for rts as well. But sure, rts seems like a difficult genre to get right and it's probably easier to make money with other games. Doesn't really prove that there is absolutely no market for rts games though. The genre imo just needs to evolve. No idea if i personally would enjoy the end result of such a project (i think it would have almost no traditional macro mechanics) but that's beside the point.
rts with no macro sounds an awful lot like the path that leads to moba
|
On February 22 2017 15:53 aRyuujin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2017 15:50 The_Red_Viper wrote:On February 22 2017 07:04 lestye wrote:On February 22 2017 05:23 The_Red_Viper wrote: How do you spend money on BW? You mean buying the game? These days it's all about micro transactions with f2p games. It's all about blizzard's name anyway, give any other studio starcraft2 and it wouldn't have sold nearly as well. All i am saying is that there is a potential market for rts, not that it's easy to make the right product for it. Just like there was a market for games like dark souls. Is it easier to make money doing something else? Sure ...I think that proves there's a market for Blizzard games, and not RTS games and looking at copies sold of the RTS genre outside of the Blizzard RTSes, thats probably true. If not that, but RTS is in the same boat as say MMOs, where its by far the most difficult genre to create a game for, especially if you're not getting console sales. How many copies of Moba games are sold? These competitive titles these days are mostly free to play with microtransactions as business model. I really would like to see if someone can make that work for rts as well. But sure, rts seems like a difficult genre to get right and it's probably easier to make money with other games. Doesn't really prove that there is absolutely no market for rts games though. The genre imo just needs to evolve. No idea if i personally would enjoy the end result of such a project (i think it would have almost no traditional macro mechanics) but that's beside the point. rts with no macro sounds an awful lot like the path that leads to moba Well the moba approach is the most drastic way i guess. (no real macro, no multitasking, extreme defenders advantage, etc) But yeah i think a potential successful rts has to go that direction at least to some extent.
|
1. Zero RTS games with F2P model have been viable in the 35 year history of the genre. None. 2. Blizzard likes to use the Box Price as a deterrent to hackers.
As long as ATVI generates 100X more than any other publisher of RTS games everyone is going to follow their lead. Halo Wars 2 is a standard full box price game.
Lots-a-Luck trying to raise $30+ million dollars when you tell the investors its a F2P RTS game.
|
On February 22 2017 15:50 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2017 07:04 lestye wrote:On February 22 2017 05:23 The_Red_Viper wrote: How do you spend money on BW? You mean buying the game? These days it's all about micro transactions with f2p games. It's all about blizzard's name anyway, give any other studio starcraft2 and it wouldn't have sold nearly as well. All i am saying is that there is a potential market for rts, not that it's easy to make the right product for it. Just like there was a market for games like dark souls. Is it easier to make money doing something else? Sure ...I think that proves there's a market for Blizzard games, and not RTS games and looking at copies sold of the RTS genre outside of the Blizzard RTSes, thats probably true. If not that, but RTS is in the same boat as say MMOs, where its by far the most difficult genre to create a game for, especially if you're not getting console sales. How many copies of Moba games are sold? These competitive titles these days are mostly free to play with microtransactions as business model. I really would like to see if someone can make that work for rts as well. But sure, rts seems like a difficult genre to get right and it's probably easier to make money with other games. Doesn't really prove that there is absolutely no market for rts games though. The genre imo just needs to evolve. No idea if i personally would enjoy the end result of such a project (i think it would have almost no traditional macro mechanics) but that's beside the point.
There are plenty of competitive titles that do just fine. How many copies does fighting, fps, racing etc titles sell? I can't think of another genre that suffers through the same problem.
I'm very doubtful of what you're saying. There's been PLENTY of time to prove there's a market. I think it's been 20 years since another company outside of Blizzard that has made an rts that sells more than 3m units. Something is inherently fucked up with the market. Either the market is barely there or literally only Blizzard had the talent to make such games successful.
Even if you argue that the only reason why there are no really successful rts is because most of them suck, I still think that's a bad sign because it means there is absolute no room for imperfect rtses, which is a daunting burden for a studio. Every other genre of game on the market, even if you put our something less than perfect, you're not going to starve when you've invested 3 to 5 years on a project.
|
How many attempts were there? How many of these were decent games? I am willing to assume that it's close to zero for the second part. Saying "it didn't happen yet => it's not possible" is the easy way, but it doesn't prove anything really. Before lol people probably wouldn't have believed that free to play (while remaining competitive) is that viable to begin with.
On February 22 2017 16:55 lestye wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2017 15:50 The_Red_Viper wrote:On February 22 2017 07:04 lestye wrote:On February 22 2017 05:23 The_Red_Viper wrote: How do you spend money on BW? You mean buying the game? These days it's all about micro transactions with f2p games. It's all about blizzard's name anyway, give any other studio starcraft2 and it wouldn't have sold nearly as well. All i am saying is that there is a potential market for rts, not that it's easy to make the right product for it. Just like there was a market for games like dark souls. Is it easier to make money doing something else? Sure ...I think that proves there's a market for Blizzard games, and not RTS games and looking at copies sold of the RTS genre outside of the Blizzard RTSes, thats probably true. If not that, but RTS is in the same boat as say MMOs, where its by far the most difficult genre to create a game for, especially if you're not getting console sales. How many copies of Moba games are sold? These competitive titles these days are mostly free to play with microtransactions as business model. I really would like to see if someone can make that work for rts as well. But sure, rts seems like a difficult genre to get right and it's probably easier to make money with other games. Doesn't really prove that there is absolutely no market for rts games though. The genre imo just needs to evolve. No idea if i personally would enjoy the end result of such a project (i think it would have almost no traditional macro mechanics) but that's beside the point. There are plenty of competitive titles that do just fine. How many copies does fighting, fps, racing etc titles sell? I can't think of another genre that suffers through the same problem. I'm very doubtful of what you're saying. There's been PLENTY of time to prove there's a market. I think it's been 20 years since another company outside of Blizzard that has made an rts that sells more than 3m units. Something is inherently fucked up with the market. Either the market is barely there or literally only Blizzard had the talent to make such games successful. Even if you argue that the only reason why there are no really successful rts is because most of them suck, I still think that's a bad sign because it means there is absolute no room for imperfect rtses, which is a daunting burden for a studio. Every other genre of game on the market, even if you put our something less than perfect, you're not going to starve when you've invested 3 to 5 years on a project.
How many of these competitive titles are sold on PC/console? You are right though, it seems like to make a "good" rts you need more effort than for a lot of other genres. At the same time i keep scratching my head when i see the Xth rts title with sluggish unit control, bad/dull art design, etc trying to sell copies. I mean we are in the thread of halo wars 2 and that also has horrific unit control from what i can tell. You might say that is the design goal they had, sure. But in what world does that make any sense? Movement is one of the most important things in any genre, it has to be fun to control whatever you play with. At least Halo Wars has decent art, coming from the halo franchise.
On February 22 2017 17:00 JimmyJRaynor wrote: EA/Victory Games gave it a 4 year try with C&C. AoE Online was attempted.
So the #2 and #3 RTS franchises of all time attempted it .. with all that brand strength behind them .. and failed.
in order to try it your 1st move is raising money to begin the venture. you can start now. make 300 phone calls and report back to us how that goes. I have no idea if these games were any good so i cannot comment on that. I already told you that i don't think it's as easy to make it work as for other genres, i still don't think it's impossible at all. I absolutely think that if the design is good enough you can make it work with any kind of genre, the game just has to be fun (enough).
|
EA/Victory Games gave it a 4 year try with C&C. AoE Online was attempted.
So the #2 and #3 RTS franchises of all time attempted it .. with all that brand strength behind them .. and failed.
in order to try it your 1st move is raising money to begin the venture. you can start now. make 300 phone calls and report back to us how that goes.
|
I think the sluggish units are a design decision. One thing I've noticed in like r/Games threads, there's a sizeable casual crowd that dislike blizzard rts because they are "click fests", don't want interactive units, they just want epic battles where they set and forget it. I know people point to MOBAs at the death of rts but people have gone for 4X games to scratch that itch too.
|
here is a pretty good list of the problems on Halo Wars 2 for PC.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HaloWars/comments/5vqimu/issues_with_halo_wars_2_pc/
On February 22 2017 18:18 lestye wrote: I think the sluggish units are a design decision. One thing I've noticed in like r/Games threads, there's a sizeable casual crowd that dislike blizzard rts because they are "click fests", don't want interactive units, they just want epic battles where they set and forget it. I know people point to MOBAs at the death of rts but people have gone for 4X games to scratch that itch too.
the itch for "giant army battles" is also satisfied via games like Clash of Clans and Mobile Strike on Tablets and/or Smartphones.
|
These are just bugs, they don't even go into design decisions, bad UI or funny balance.
|
On February 22 2017 17:00 JimmyJRaynor wrote: EA/Victory Games gave it a 4 year try with C&C. AoE Online was attempted.
So the #2 and #3 RTS franchises of all time attempted it .. with all that brand strength behind them .. and failed.
in order to try it your 1st move is raising money to begin the venture. you can start now. make 300 phone calls and report back to us how that goes. It was more like a 3 year try with C&C, and the first 2 years of development were for the standard boxed model before they tried F2P in the last year. We all know it didn't even make it out of the closed alpha.
|
its great you are telling me what "we all know". there are people on TL who think a WC4 accouncement is imminent.
On February 24 2017 18:11 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2017 17:00 JimmyJRaynor wrote: EA/Victory Games gave it a 4 year try with C&C. AoE Online was attempted.
So the #2 and #3 RTS franchises of all time attempted it .. with all that brand strength behind them .. and failed.
in order to try it your 1st move is raising money to begin the venture. you can start now. make 300 phone calls and report back to us how that goes. It was more like a 3 year try with C&C, and the first 2 years of development were for the standard boxed model before they tried F2P in the last year. We all know it didn't even make it out of the closed alpha. ummm , no. Never did JVC ever say it would be a standard boxed game. Late 2009 to Late 2013. 4 years.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/26182/Interview_Van_Caneghem_Talks_EALAs_Vision_Command__Conquer.php
JVC started yapping about a non-boxed game model in 2009 when he started at EA and formed VG. Victory Games was shut down in October 2013.
"It allows you to do everything you would have expected from a boxed game, but it adds a lot more to it... being connected and connected with players, and persistence, the social elements of playing against each other with other friends."
The guy who runs GR.Org was 100% blindsided by the layoff and claimed everyone else working at VG was blindsided as well because of how hard everyone worked the week before.
|
On February 25 2017 03:18 JimmyJRaynor wrote:its great you are telling me what "we all know". there are people on TL who think a WC4 accouncement is imminent. Show nested quote +On February 24 2017 18:11 eviltomahawk wrote:On February 22 2017 17:00 JimmyJRaynor wrote: EA/Victory Games gave it a 4 year try with C&C. AoE Online was attempted.
So the #2 and #3 RTS franchises of all time attempted it .. with all that brand strength behind them .. and failed.
in order to try it your 1st move is raising money to begin the venture. you can start now. make 300 phone calls and report back to us how that goes. It was more like a 3 year try with C&C, and the first 2 years of development were for the standard boxed model before they tried F2P in the last year. We all know it didn't even make it out of the closed alpha. ummm , no. Never did JVC ever say it would be a standard boxed game. Late 2009 to Late 2013. 4 years. http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/26182/Interview_Van_Caneghem_Talks_EALAs_Vision_Command__Conquer.phpJVC started yapping about a non-boxed game model in 2009 when he started at EA and formed VG. Victory Games was shut down in October 2013. "It allows you to do everything you would have expected from a boxed game, but it adds a lot more to it... being connected and connected with players, and persistence, the social elements of playing against each other with other friends." The guy who runs GR.Org was 100% blindsided by the layoff and claimed everyone else working at VG was blindsided as well because of how hard everyone worked the week before. Oh that's interesting. I hadn't been aware that the shift in development philosophy had happened even before C&C4's release. I assumed that Generals 2 would be a standard AAA release because it appeared to be a traditional sequel with a single-player campaign and all. I also assumed that the bulk of development had happened after C&C4.
|
In order to play Halo Wars 2 you must be running Windows 10. based on the extremely small activity levels of Halo Wars 2 it is now clear Halo Wars 2 was sacrificed at the Altar of Windows 10 adoption.
Halo Wars 2 ... just another victim.
On February 25 2017 03:55 eviltomahawk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2017 03:18 JimmyJRaynor wrote:its great you are telling me what "we all know". there are people on TL who think a WC4 accouncement is imminent. On February 24 2017 18:11 eviltomahawk wrote:On February 22 2017 17:00 JimmyJRaynor wrote: EA/Victory Games gave it a 4 year try with C&C. AoE Online was attempted.
So the #2 and #3 RTS franchises of all time attempted it .. with all that brand strength behind them .. and failed.
in order to try it your 1st move is raising money to begin the venture. you can start now. make 300 phone calls and report back to us how that goes. It was more like a 3 year try with C&C, and the first 2 years of development were for the standard boxed model before they tried F2P in the last year. We all know it didn't even make it out of the closed alpha. ummm , no. Never did JVC ever say it would be a standard boxed game. Late 2009 to Late 2013. 4 years. http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/26182/Interview_Van_Caneghem_Talks_EALAs_Vision_Command__Conquer.phpJVC started yapping about a non-boxed game model in 2009 when he started at EA and formed VG. Victory Games was shut down in October 2013. "It allows you to do everything you would have expected from a boxed game, but it adds a lot more to it... being connected and connected with players, and persistence, the social elements of playing against each other with other friends." The guy who runs GR.Org was 100% blindsided by the layoff and claimed everyone else working at VG was blindsided as well because of how hard everyone worked the week before. Oh that's interesting. I hadn't been aware that the shift in development philosophy had happened even before C&C4's release. I assumed that Generals 2 would be a standard AAA release because it appeared to be a traditional sequel with a single-player campaign and all. I also assumed that the bulk of development had happened after C&C4. i've watched other Project Managers constantly shift the goal posts around to buy themselves time before they must produce something that works. Pretty sure that is what JVC was doing. He bought himself 4 years... the guy is a good corporate politician. He has designed zero RTS games.
its funny/strange how guys like David Kim and Dustin Browder receive all this hate and they actually make something real. JVC disappeared from the online world after his 4 year C&C project got cancelled.
|
On August 18 2016 21:43 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2016 21:05 Endymion wrote: halo wars 1 was actually pretty good given it was a 360 RTS... as far as rts goes it was of course shit, but it was pretty cool as far as a spectacle goes! this one looks much less spectacular.. everything moves very much like an RTS unit would, in a straight line... in the original halo wars warthogs would like spin out like they did in the actual game, banshees would veer around, etc.. maybe they'll add it all in post dev? anyways, i doubt it will stand the scruitiny of the pc's rts market Agreed. As a RTS that was chained to a console, it was pretty good. Not great, but good enough to be fun to fuck around with friends. Plus it had that All Units button that said “ALL UNITS” every time you pressed it. All units. All units. All units. All units.
Yeah, that was good fun.
It was a shallow pool of a game, but it was enjoyable, especially if you have friends that aren't generally RTS players. Which is why I will buy this.
|
Is there a way to get this game outside the Microsoft store? Does the XBOX One version come with a cdkey i can use to play the PC version? Wal-Mart is selling this game for 37 dollars, but I don't see anyone selling the PC version.
|
On April 30 2017 15:40 lestye wrote: Is there a way to get this game outside the Microsoft store? Does the XBOX One version come with a cdkey i can use to play the PC version? Wal-Mart is selling this game for 37 dollars, but I don't see anyone selling the PC version. https://support.xbox.com/en-GB/games/game-titles/how-to-install-halo-wars-2-from-windows-10-disc
Seems to say there is a disc. BUT you need to register in the store as part of the install process, so might as well get it there.
|
|
|
|
|