A History of Real-Time Strategy Games
Pavel Borodin
http://www.zdnet.com/gamespot/features/all/real_time/index.html
¥ €€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ χΣΤΑΧΛΑ: Windows Clipboard
GameSpot Presents: A History of Real-Time Strategy Games
By: Bruce Geryk Designed
By: Katie Bush
Introduction
Trying to imagine a time without real-time strategy games is perhaps a bit
like trying to imagine a time before the World Wide Web: We all know it
existed, but as gamers, we can't quite understand how we got along back then.
Today, real-time strategy is a staple of many people's gaming diets, and
publishers regularly turn to real-time strategy as a primary vehicle for
development ideas. Quite an achievement for a genre that didn't even exist
for the first 15 or so years of computer gaming. Early computer strategy
games adhered firmly to the turn-based concepts of their board game
ancestors, where--by necessity--players had time to plan their turns before
their opponents had a chance to move. Real-time strategy changed all of that
so that games would begin to more closely resemble reality: Time was limited,
and if you wasted yours, your opponents would probably be taking advantage of
theirs.
While it's generally understood what constitutes a certain type of real-time
strategy game, it's worth defining the genre to avoid confusion. Although
games such as Populous and SimCity are certainly played in real time, these
give rise to the "god game" genre, which includes such titles as the
city-builder series from Impressions, Will Wright's innovative designs, and
much of Peter Molyneux's work, including the upcoming Black & White. Games in
this genre tend to appeal to their own fans, and while there definitely is an
overlap between these two genres, gamers generally see them as distinct from
one another. For the purposes of this history, our focus will be on the games
that are generally understood to be in the "harvest, build, destroy" mode
that we've come to know and love. This excludes games like BattleZone, which
fits more into the first-person genre.
Westwood's chief creative officer and cofounder, Brett Sperry, is one of the
pioneers of the real-time strategy genre. He offers some insight into its
christening: "A lesser-known fact was the official genre naming that was
going to be used to explain the game to the press and players. It wasn't
until some time after the game was in development that I decided to call it
'real-time strategy'--it seems obvious now, but there was a lot of back and
forth between calling it a 'real-time war game,' 'real-time war,' 'wargame,'
or 'strategy game.' I was deeply concerned that words like 'strategy' and
'wargame' would keep many players from even trying this completely new game
dynamic. Before 1992, wargames and strategy games were very much niche
markets--with the exception of Sid Meier's work--so my fears were justified.
But in the end, it was best to call it an 'RTS' because that is exactly what
it was."
What follows is the first part of a retrospective look at how this
spectacularly popular genre got its start and developed into a major force in
gaming today.
The Genesis of Real-Time Strategy
*Herzog Zwei*
Publisher: Sega Enterprises Ltd.
Developer: TechnoSoft
Release Date: 1989
It may seem odd to start a history of a genre of PC games with a console
title, but the first instance of real-time strategy was almost certainly on
the Sega Genesis back in 1989. Herzog Zwei is a two-player game in which the
object is to destroy the enemy's base. Each player has a main base, several
smaller bases under his control, and some neutral bases unclaimed by either
side. The only unit you control directly (with the gamepad) is your fighter,
which can change from an aircraft into a land unit. In keeping with the
console gaming spirit of the times, Herzog Zwei focused on your commander
unit, and everything else was supporting cast.
Herzog Zwei is perhaps a hybrid action/strategy game, but the idea of
commanding individual units in real time by giving them orders and then
letting them go is one that hadn't been seen on this scale before. A big part
of the game involves your own unit, which uses much more fuel in its fighter
form but is also far more powerful in this mode. Troops and vehicles cost
money, and managing fuel and monetary concerns is the forerunner of RTS
resource management. Herzog Zwei involves many of the elements found in
modern real-time strategy games, like the battle for bases, although these
bases are fixed in place and can't be built by either player. Troops can
infiltrate another base and capture it, but in the end, the objective is the
destruction of the enemy's main base. Unlike in modern RTS games, damage to
one's base can't be repaired. It's a simple concept with a fascinating number
of strategies. There is even a split-screen mode so that you can see what
your opponent (human or computer) is doing.
Herzog Zwei preceded the first PC real-time strategy game, Westwood's Dune
II, by almost three years. Sperry remembers Herzog Zwei, which to him was a
pioneering console title. "I played Herzog Zwei and enjoyed it," he said.
"Some of my peers thought Herzog Zwei was an influence on Dune II. That's a
compliment; however, the games that helped trigger the genesis of my RTS
concept were Eye of the Beholder [a role-playing game that Sperry designed]
and its forefather, Dungeon Master by FTL."
Herzog Zwei may not have directly influenced the development of Dune II, but
it showed that developers were toying with the idea of strategy in real-time
gaming. The next game in our history is generally acknowledged as the first
RTS computer game. While it was a sequel, it had nothing to do with its
predecessor's style of play. Instead, it created an entirely new genre.
*Dune II*
Publisher: Virgin Interactive
Developer: Westwood
Release Date: 1992
For a game that is largely credited with revolutionizing the strategy genre,
Dune II begins with a very simple premise. Brett Sperry, the visionary behind
Dune II, recalls his thinking at the time of the game's creation.
"What became Dune II started out as a challenge I made for myself.
The challenge was that strategy games would be out-of-control fun if the
real-time aspect of Eye of the Beholder could be combined with resource
management and a dynamic, flat interface. Just one mode of play and no
additional screens. But how? Long before I decided to experiment with
actually building this new game in a Dune setting, I kept toying with the
answer."
These thoughts apparently percolated for a long time. "The thought process
began around 1989 during Eye [of the Beholder]'s development," remembers
Sperry. "This is how many of my 'visions' for a new game start. It's always
'What if you add this and that?' or 'Wouldn't it be hellaciously cool if...?'
Then I kick it around for a few years, make random notes, and then maybe we
build it. I remember we built several prototypes to see and feel the dynamics
I had been pondering for so long. And the first three instances (at least)
were crap. So we kept working on it again and again. The vision was powerful,
but the details eluded us for a good year."
Dune II is based on the familiar terrain of the famous novel by Frank
Herbert, and it contains many of its elements, like the infamous Sandworms.
Three royal houses battle for control of spice, the only resource. The game
is an improvement upon Herzog Zwei in several respects that would seem
trivial nine years later, but the improvement essentially established the
conventions of the real-time strategy genre. First of all, you can build
bases anywhere in Dune II--they aren't placed for you ahead of time, and you
can do it in any order you choose. Also, the game introduces structure
dependencies. To produce harvesters and tanks, you have to build a heavy
factory. But to build the heavy factory, you first need a light factory. And
so on.
Dune II also introduces the idea that different sides can have different
units and weapons. Whereas the two sides in Herzog Zwei have access to
exactly the same units, the House Atreides, House Ordos, and House Harkonnen
of Dune II all have their own special "house weapons" in addition to the
standard ones. Not all the units can be ordered directly: Ornithopters just
attack the enemy base automatically, and carryalls pick up units according to
the computer's preferences. Furthermore, there is a 25-unit build limit,
after which point you can buy units only from a spaceport. This made Dune II
a compact game compared with some of the massive battles that would be found
in later RTS games. But with the hardware of the time, this wasn't
surprising. Even in somewhat miniature form, the characteristic features of
an embryonic genre are all there.
The First Wave
*Warcraft: Orcs & Humans*
Developer: Blizzard
Release Date: 1994
After the release of Dune II, no new real-time strategy games were released
for the better part of two years. As Blizzard's Bill Roper told Computer
Games Magazine, "We couldn't believe that no one else, including Westwood,
had ever done a game that had this real-time strategy element." So Blizzard
itself decided to do it. In late 1994, the developer released Warcraft, which
took the real-time strategy game out of science fiction and into the realm of
fantasy. The stage was set for the next round of RTS battles: Westwood's
modern weapons against Blizzard's magic.
By eschewing the futuristic vehicles of Dune II and changing the setting
completely, Warcraft opts for a more personal combat motif: hand-to-hand
fighting. This is something that had not been seen previously in a real-time
strategy game. The most powerful units are still ranged attackers, though.
Effective play in the single-player campaign usually consists of building
enough hand-to-hand units to defend the ranged attackers, who can stand off
and inflict serious damage. There are two resources to be harvested--wood and
gold--and most builds require a combination of the two. The simple "harvest,
build, conquer" model is still the same, but the genre has been slowly
evolving.
The units on both sides are very similar: For example, they fall into
identical categories (worker, foot soldier, mounted soldier, magic user, and
so on), and the structures used to produce them have different names and
artwork but have similar build dependencies. This was a formula that Blizzard
would adhere to until it spectacularly broke this mold with Starcraft. But
for the next several years, it was Westwood that implemented a noticeably
different composition to the two sides in its games, whereas Blizzard did
not.
The AI in Warcraft leaves a lot to be desired. It blindly attacks whatever it
can find, and thus it's easy to distract and lead astray with decoy units.
Furthermore, unit pathfinding is just as bad. Once an experienced player
understands how the AI works, beating the game in single-player mode is quite
easy. However, Warcraft does provide multiplayer capability, even if it's
just via serial connection or direct modem link. Warcraft thus became the
first multiplayer RTS game for the computer. There is also a random map
generator, which was also a first for real-time strategy. As such, the
groundwork for what would become a major element of RTS gaming, multiplayer
skirmish play, was laid very early on in the genre's history.
Warcraft wasn't a blockbuster hit, but it did sell well, and indeed, it did
well enough to convince Blizzard's then-owners, Davidson & Associates, to
authorize the development of a sequel, which would end up being one of the
biggest successes the RTS genre has ever seen. However, Command & Conquer
came first.
*Command & Conquer*
Publisher: Virgin Interactive
Developer: Westwood Studios
Release Date: 1995
The fall of 1995 was the culmination of work at Westwood--work that had been
in progress for several years. According to Sperry, "The ideas for Command &
Conquer were developing even as we were finishing Dune II. We learned a lot
while we were making Dune II, just as it is with every game. You always get
to the end of a project and think, 'Next time, we'd love to do this and this
and this.' Command & Conquer was the net result of the Dune II wish list."
Now that the name is nearly synonymous with RTS gaming, it's interesting that
Command & Conquer could have been called something else. According to Sperry,
"With Dune II, a commercial and critical success, it was time to build the
ultimate RTS without the 'leg up' from a license like Dune, and thus Command
& Conquer was born. I was fanatical about calling the game 'Command &
Conquer'--exactly like that--because to me, it perfectly expressed what you
did in the game, although, for a while during development, marketing and
others wanted to change the name for fears of allusions to bondage/porn.
Bah!"
It's hard to describe C[C] fever as it existed back in 1995. Some gamers
might remember an SVGA version of the game for Windows 95, but this was
actually the "Gold" version released a year later; the original Command &
Conquer was a DOS game. While it didn't have the SVGA splendor of Warcraft
II, it did have decent graphics and gripping action. It was the latter that
made it a true descendant of Dune II, along with the futuristic weaponry in
each player's arsenal.
Command & Conquer tells the story of the battle between the Global Defense
Initiative (GDI) and the Brotherhood of Nod. The presentation is simply
fantastic, with slick video cutscenes narrating a classic battle between good
and evil. Unlike the Warcraft series, each side has distinct units with
varying capabilities. GDI has the more conventional force, while Nod relies
more on speed than striking power. There are no naval units, but otherwise
the force mix is deep and provides for a lot of strategy.
The success of the Command & Conquer franchise was so complete that Westwood
even developed an online-only spin-off called Sole Survivor, in which you
play a single unit and fight other players in a deathmatch-style competition.
You can find power-ups such as health, invisibility, armor, and the like.
There are additional play modes (like capture-the-flag and football) that are
slightly more interesting, but the basic idea of playing a single unit from
the game's armory never really caught on. Westwood ended up releasing a host
of successful expansion packs for Command & Conquer and its sequel, Red
Alert. Of them, Sole Survivor is perhaps the best example of how hot Command
& Conquer fever got several years ago.
The Sequels
*Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness*
Publisher: Blizzard
Developer: Blizzard
Release Date: 1995
The sequel to Warcraft was released in December 1995, and it immediately
became Command & Conquer's bitter rival. The Warcraft II/Command & Conquer
argument presaged the Total Annihilation/Starcraft battle, which would be
fought almost three years later. Warcraft II is a vast improvement upon
Warcraft, if for no other reason than its very sharp SVGA graphics. The
outdated VGA visuals of the original Warcraft are nothing compared to the
sequel's superb artwork. The new graphics are complemented by excellent
voiceovers for the various units, some of which can be quite amusing. The AI
was an improvement upon the abysmal version found in the original game, and
unit settings that allow for things like patrol routes mean that Warcraft II
is both a more challenging and more sophisticated game than its predecessor.
One innovation found in Warcraft II is the fog of war. Instead of the
"shroud" that initially hides terrain in other games but which is permanently
removed once it's explored, Warcraft II adds a persistent fog of war that
lets your units see enemy units only within a certain range. Thus, your
exploration might reveal a valley between two mountains--but unless you keep
watch over it with your units, you won't know if the enemy is massing in the
valley for a sneak attack. The fact that this is now an almost universal
feature in current RTS games might make people forget that it wasn't always
this way. Warcraft II was the first game to have naval units, and it added a
third resource--oil--to the mix, which could be collected only by ships.
Unlike Command & Conquer, the two sides (orcs and humans) in Warcraft II are
fundamentally the same, with most units having similar capabilities and
different names (like the death knight and paladin, for example). However,
after the v1.2 patch (which includes optimization for network play), Warcraft
showed that it had the ability to be a superb multiplayer game that allowed
for surprisingly lag-free gaming, even on slow connections. The reason is
that the v1.2 patch was introduced around the time that an IPX emulator,
Kali, was becoming very popular. Warcraft II is not playable via TCP/IP (the
Internet protocol) but is playable over a local area network using IPX. Kali
is a shareware program that lets games be played over the Internet using the
IPX protocol. Blizzard released a special executable called War2kali.exe to
facilitate multiplayer Warcraft II over this network. Because of this,
Warcraft II developed a fanatical online community and spawned several
competitive leagues.
Warcraft II gave rise to an expansion pack, Beyond the Dark Portal. There was
even an adventure game based on the Warcraft universe--it went pretty far
into development under the name Warcraft Adventures. Work on this project
stopped, however, when Blizzard felt that the game had fallen behind the
state-of-the-art in adventure games, so the title was eventually canceled.
But Warcraft II had proven itself to have incredible longevity. In 1999,
Blizzard released Warcraft II: Battle.net Edition, which includes Windows
95/98 support as well as support for the company's Battle.net service.
*Command & Conquer: Red Alert*
Publisher: Westwood
Developer: Westwood
Release Date: 1996
For many real-time strategy gamers, 1996 will be remembered as the year of
Red Alert. While the intervening months between the release of the Command &
Conquer Gold edition and Red Alert had seen several new RTS titles, including
the Bitmap Brothers' excellent Z, nothing could quite match the sequel to
Command & Conquer for style, polish, and action.
When asked just what it was that the design team was most proud of achieving
with Red Alert, Sperry commented, "In a lot of ways, Red Alert was a
refinement of what Command & Conquer did. The interface became more friendly.
The two sides featured completely different units and favored completely
different tactics, yet they were well balanced. Overall, the pace of the game
quickened but still had strategic depth. On the overall tone and feel, Red
Alert moved the genre into a new space. It had a unique charm and humor,
thanks to all the cultural and historical references. Elements like Stalin,
guard dogs, tesla coils, and spies, for example, made that possible. So it
was many different things in combination that made Red Alert a hit and a riot
to play, especially in games with others."
A refinement it was, in both large and small ways. Red Alert was clearly an
extension of Command & Conquer, but the improvements were meaningful. They
ranged from things like the ability to load multiple units into an APC
without having to select each unit individually to the introduction of naval
units. Engineers were toned down a bit so that they could capture a building
only after it had taken severe damage (and would damage only buildings they
couldn't capture), but they gained the ability to repair structures as well.
Furthermore, Westwood introduced a host of special unit types specific to
each side. The Allies got medics (to heal wounded units), fake structures (a
cheap way to build decoy bases), and gap generators (essentially unit
teleporters) as part of their arsenal. The Soviets got attack dogs,
paratroopers, and a variety of other units. Not all of these were equally
useful, and some people debated whether or not the sides were really
balanced, but no one could deny that the game had advanced the gameplay
standard from Command & Conquer.
Like Command & Conquer's story, Red Alert's is very well produced. Thanks to
some time travel and a bit of messing with history, Hitler is destroyed
before he takes power, and Nazi Germany never becomes a threat. Instead, the
Soviet Union grows, unchecked, into a superpower that threatens the globe.
The two sides, Allies and Soviets, continue the Westwood tradition of unit
differentiation. The Allies have a powerful naval presence, while Soviet
strength rests in air power. Multiplayer Red Alert has been popular, although
it has been susceptible to certain stock tactics, like the Soviet tank rush.
Red Alert spawned a number of expansion packs, such as Counterstrike and
Aftermath. After its release in late 1996, Red Alert essentially set the
standard for real-time strategy games for the next year. While the market saw
a host of clones seeking to cash in on the wildly popular genre, none could
touch Red Alert until late 1997, when real-time gaming took another great
leap forward.
The Second Generation
*Total Annihilation*
Publisher: Activision
Developer: Cavedog
Release Date: 1997
At first glance, Cavedog's landmark 1997 RTS game seems like nothing more
than a Command & Conquer clone, albeit with very pretty graphics. Total
Annihilation was one of the first games to have 3D terrain and units. Once
you got into the game, though, Total Annihilation was nothing less than a
revelation. And a revolution. What designer Chris Taylor and his team did was
to take the real-time strategy game and improve it so that players could
actually command their units with the level control they might have in a
turn-based strategy game.
Several innovations center on the interface. Total Annihilation solves the
problem of needing to constantly return to your units to give them new orders
by allowing for order queues: Units can be given multiple orders, and they
will perform them in sequence. You can also give units a variety of AI
stances so that they don't chase and attack an enemy who is trying to draw
them off. Structures can also be given default build orders, so once they
fulfill whatever construction task you give them, they will go back to
building automatically. Using Total Annihilation's advanced interface, it's
possible to construct elaborate plans that aren't hampered by the old
limitations of the RTS interface.
Total Annihilation also personalizes the game with the introduction of a
"commander" unit, the loss of which costs the owning player the game. While
plenty of prior games include units on whose survival a scenario depends,
Total Annihilation incorporates the commander unit into its delicate unit
balance structure. This balance was preserved even though Cavedog made
completely new units available for download from its Web site on a weekly
basis.
The remarkable thing about Total Annihilation's success is that it has
completely eschewed one of the main factors that has made the Command &
Conquer series so popular: story. Total Annihilation has no real story to
speak of, and instead of elaborate cutscenes, there are only some spoken
intros to the various missions. The two sides, the Arm and the Core, are very
similar, and the campaigns don't have much plot to them. But the missions
themselves showcase a new breed of RTS game that emphasizes the "strategy"
part at least as much as the "real time."
What Total Annihilation conclusively demonstrates is that strategy gamers
will enthusiastically respond to a game that makes it easier for them to
actually implement their strategies. Whereas earlier games have been limited
by the overriding need for speed with the mouse, Total Annihilation goes to
great lengths to redress this balance. Total Annihilation was followed by an
excellent expansion pack (The Core Contingency) and a scenario add-on pack
(Battle Tactics). Unfortunately, Cavedog was not able to continue its
success, and the company eventually closed down. However, more than three
years after its release, Total Annihilation stands as a game that remains
attractive to real-time strategy gamers today.
*Dark Reign*
Publisher: Activision
Developer: Auran
Release Date: 1997
In addition to Total Annihilation, the year 1997 produced another standout
RTS which, had its timing been better, might have made more of a splash. As
it was, there was a serious debate about whether Total Annihilation was
really the best RTS of the year or whether that honor belonged to Dark Reign.
Dark Reign also had line of sight, 3D terrain, elevation effects, and build
queues. It also focused on fixing many of the problems that plagued the first
generation of RTS games and included a very sophisticated waypoint system, as
well as individual unit AI settings. Unfortunately, the game didn't catch on
like it could have, probably because Total Annihilation looked better and had
many of the same features. Still, it acquired a following, and both of these
major RTS games in 1997 were superior on many technical levels to the last
game in this part of our history. You all know which one.
*Starcraft*
Publisher: Blizzard
Developer: Blizzard
Release Date: 1998
If Total Annihilation set the standard for technical achievement in a
real-time strategy game, it took the hands of the old masters at Blizzard to
create the artistic equivalent. Starcraft hit the shelves in the spring of
1998, and the world of real-time strategy hasn't been the same since.
The storyline in Starcraft is more than just a series of scenarios moved
along by cutscenes; it permeates every part of the game. The game portrays
the characters as units, and they not only increase in power but also develop
as characters. Your mission objectives can change in the middle of a scenario
in concert with the changing storyline, and the atmosphere is greatly
enhanced by the unit voiceovers and animations. Even Command & Conquer and
Red Alert's story, slickly presented as it is through cutscenes, seems
somewhat divorced from the actual goings-on in the game. In Starcraft, the
game always feels like an organic whole and makes you feel far more involved
in the story than any other pure strategy game has in the past.
Starcraft also has three completely separate and ostensibly balanced races.
These three (the Terrans, Zerg, and Protoss) differ from one another far more
than any set of races in any previous RTS game. The differences extend beyond
mere units to method of play and even base-building. (Zerg buildings are
restricted to placement on an expanding biomass called The Creep.) Starcraft
reinforces these differences through the single-player campaign, which
develops the story over three connected campaigns, with one per race. There
are some questionable design decisions, like the inability to select more
than 12 units at a time (presumably to combat the "rush" tactic), but in
terms of presentation, the game has no equal.
Soon after had Starcraft been released, wave upon wave of polemic hit the
Web, arguing for the superiority of either Total Annihilation or Starcraft as
the best real-time strategy game ever released. This debate even continues
today, and it's a testament to how differently the two games approached the
genre. Martin Cirulis of Gamecenter wrote an amusing, tongue-in-cheek article
comparing the two games by way of a fictional prizefight. He chose Starcraft
as the victor, and many people disagreed with him. Also, in terms of
technical achievement in areas such as the interface and unit control, both
Total Annihilation and Dark Reign were undoubtedly superior. Starcraft,
though, had the inimitable Blizzard style and panache in abundance.
While Starcraft took the United States by storm, its sales in South Korea
were truly astounding. In a nation with a population of 40 million people,
the game sold almost 1 million copies in 1999 alone. This means that it
actually outsold the top-selling game in the United States, Rollercoaster
Tycoon, by roughly 300,000 copies. Starcraft is played competitively in the
more than 10,000 Korean gaming rooms nationwide and is the preferred game for
Korean professional gamers (who are far more established in this line of work
than their US counterparts).
In the end, Starcraft is going to be remembered as the most successful of
early real-time strategy games, and it provides a bridge to the current
generation of games. Each of the titles in this article made significant
contributions to the development of the genre.
The Early Fruits of RTS Evolution
As the genre was developing, ideas from real-time strategy started trickling
out into other types of strategy games. One of the most significant was the
use of real time in 1995's Close Combat, which was developed by Atomic Games
and published by Microsoft. Close Combat introduced the frantic action of
real-time gaming to the realistic weapon modeling of wargames. In addition,
the game was based on the simulation of unit morale, which had been, up until
then, very much the case. The Close Combat series made it through five
iterations, several of which sold quite well.
While RTS games were traditionally built on the idea of "harvest, build,
destroy," Bungie released Myth (in 1997), which left out all the resource
management and concentrated on simple unit tactics. It was a huge success,
partially because of its gorgeous 3D graphics, but also because of how well
it maintained the strategy and excitement of real-time combat in the absence
of buildings or structures. The focus on unit tactics required some
improvements to the standard interface of the time and the ability to manage
formations (with unit placement being of the utmost importance). Myth also
introduced some interesting multiplayer games, like Last Man on the Hill.
With its outstanding graphics, smooth multiplayer, and tactical gameplay,
Myth and its sequel, Myth II, carved out a niche in the real-time market for
those more interested in combat than in resource gathering.
One of the most significant developments of the RTS revolution appeared in
Bioware's blockbuster role-playing hit, Baldur's Gate. While games like Eye
of the Beholder had introduced real-time play to RPGs many years prior,
Baldur's Gate was the first to take the lasso-your-units-and-click paradigm
that is the very essence of real-time strategy and apply it to an RPG in the
style of an RTS. Combat in Baldur's Gate was very much like a miniature
version of a real-time strategy game, right down to giving orders to units
while the game was paused. All you need to do is take a look at recent RPG
offerings to see just how thoroughly the idea of real-time combat has
pervaded the genre.
With Starcraft on the shelves, real-time strategy in 1998 belonged to
Blizzard. It's interesting to note that since 1995, each successive year has
had megahits in real-time strategy. 1995 was the year of both Warcraft II and
Command & Conquer, 1996 was the year for Red Alert, 1997 will be remembered
for Total Annihilation (with its Dark Reign footnote), and, of course, there
was 1998. The second half of our history will cover 1999-2001, and the fact
that there will be as many true standout games in the next two years as there
are in the whole history of real-time strategy up to that point is a sign of
how much the genre has matured. One game we didn't mention (because of its
essentially flawed nature) was Microsoft's Age of Empires (released in 1997).
It's worth noting here because it has the distinction of being the
predecessor of a game that will figure heavily in our next segment. We'll
also take a look at some of the big RTS games currently under development, as
well as how the genre has continued to evolve and influence other types of
games.
« €€€€€ λΟΞΕΓ ΧΣΤΑΧΛΙ: Windows Clipboard
σ yΧΑΦΕΞΙΕΝ, πΑΧΕΜ.