Ever get the feeling that real-time strategy as a genre is going through a weird transitional phase right now? There are a few exceptions; studios like Blizzard and Gas Powered Games who are staying true to the classic formula by updating outdated ideas without going overboard.
But then there's seemingly everyone else who are all trying to give the genre a radical face-lift by introducing new concepts where they -- more often than not -- aren't needed. Gas Powered Games' Chris Taylor recently expressed similar thoughts in an interview with Eurogamer.
"There's been some desperate moves in the industry to find a new place for RTS ... it's like saying let's add a fifth wheel to a car. But maybe we can actually make the car more comfortable, maybe we can make the drive less noisy or more fuel-efficient."
Innovation for innovation's sake actually takes you backwards," he continues. "There's other places to go than just pure breaking something off or sticking something on to innovate. We're doing a good job of revitalizing RTS but keeping it moving forward in a way that doesn't forget itself."
"I mean, certainly Blizzard is staying on that track, they're not throwing away the old formula."
How do you strategy guys feel about this topic? Are you liking the "less is more" approach to more recent RTSs, or would you prefer developers to go back to more traditional concepts for things like base-building?
Get more destructoid: We're indie-run, blogging for the love of it, and our site will always be free. Optionally, you can support us and get: (1) Faster pages from our cloud server (3) Wide(r)screen (3) No big ads on Dtoid, Japanator, Tomopop, or Flixist (4) Auto contest entries, and (5) Dibs on betas & downloads. Try it out
Unsavory comments? Please report harassment, spam, and hate speech to our moderators, and flag the user (we will ban users dishing bad karma). Can't see comments? Apps like Avast or browser extensions can cause it. You can fix it by adding *.disqus.com to your whitelists.