Will RTS's ever suceed on Consoles???

2008 and 2009, had a lot of RTS games that were released on Consoles. Command and Conquer RA3. Endwar, and Halo Wars...None of them lived up to their expectations, and weren't "great" games...

When will we see an RTS succeed on a console, or will it just not happen this generation, and will we be waiting at least another five years for it?

Is this generation of consoles, just not equipped to handle RTS games, or will our wait be over, and will we finally see "The" RTS game on the 360/PS3?

Not in the traditional sense, no. The genre has to be completely redefined before a solid console experience can be expected. Whether there's the money or interest for an endeavor like that is a whole different question...

"Not in the traditional sense, no. The genre has to be completely redefined before a solid console experience can be expected. Whether there's the money or interest for an endeavor like that is a whole different question...
"

RTS's were built with the mouse in mind, so only consoles with mouse compatibility will ever have good RTS's (in my opinion).

The Wii has potential for an awesome RTS moreso than other consoles unless they find a way to circumvent the dual joystick problem, because it has never worked well for RTS. It would take a completely new thought process to make it work; assigning the mouse movement to the left joystick is just a terrible idea.

I actually really enjoyed Halo Wars for the game it is, but i digress... I don't think the RTS experience that we all expect will ever be possible on a console without a custom controller. There simply aren't enough buttons for the typical micromanagement of a Starcraft game available on a normal console controller.

Port Homeworld to PSN and lets find out!!! /I want

No.

perhaps the future consoles will have giagntic touch screens

I can never micromanage how I want to on a console.
I can't have enough groups of unit.
I can't split them as easily.
I can't control them as well.
I can't control the map as well to see what I want.

I can though with a keyboard and mouse...

"I can never micromanage how I want to on a console.
I can't have enough groups of unit.
I can't split them as easily.
I can't control them as well.
I can't control the map as well to see what I want.

I can though with a keyboard and mouse...
"

Umm... Halo Wars didn't live up to its expectations?
Uh...what?

It's AA at metacritic

Anyway, I personally think  traditional RTSes are going to die out in general in favor of things more along the lines of Pikman

There are not any good RTS games on the consoles? What? There are not many, but I did love Civilization Revolution. Probably the only RTS game I liked on the consoles, not that big into RTS games, though.

The control situation is really all that's holding them back. Shortcut keys on a keyboard, and a mouse are a necessity if you want to do anything close to what the PC can do for an RTS.  With that being said, you'd think they'd let you connect a keyboard/mouse via USB (maybe even wireless) and play 'em.

"SmugDarkLoser said:  Mark my words, Starcraft II, when it launches, will outsell any console game of the past 10 years."

Endwar was a good first go and i see it being the best way to play a RTS on console.  Thou it is true the Wii has the best controler for a RTS now if someone would only bring one out...  hell why not make remakes with Wii controles they are doing that with everyother game out there.

"

Umm... Halo Wars didn't live up to its expectations?
Uh...what?

It's AA at metacritic

Anyway, I personally think  traditional RTSes are going to die out in general in favor of things more along the lines of Pikman

"

Can RTS games be a success on consoles? Yes if the developer designs the game for the platform, designs the game to make the most of what the platform offers. But if they design it to run on another platform but don't release it on that one, then the game will not be a success.

They can be very successful and some have been, but PCs will always have the upper hand on the RTS genre.

The reason RTSs aren't working on consoles is because most developers are using a PC mindset.

What they need to do is think outside of what the RTS genre has established itself as and rebuild it from the ground up.

Look at Age of Booty and Pikmin. They basically provide the same gameplay as PC RTSs, but they just took out the base building and dedicated the controls solely to controling the units.

That is what needs to happen for console RTS's to work.

They need to become all about about the units. Tower Defense games already have the base building down anyway.

I think a strategy game on a console has to be looked through a different lense. It can't ever be what a RTS is on a PC. Therefore, we have to STOP looking at RTSs on consoles with the same expectations that an RTS on PC would have. Its not the same game, its not the same platform. Because of the major differences in controls, it can't possibly ever be the same. it just can't. So I think until everyone starts looking at the differently, they will always continue to be a dissapointment.

No. Shooters worked because pretty much anyone can just casually hop in, and kill some Natzis. Shooting is relatable, easy, and not quite as involved. RTSes, on the other hand, is much more hardcore and requires a lot more thought. Even if someone could perfectly nail the controls to the point where they're as good as the PC: it will never succeed.

"There are not any good RTS games on the consoles? What? There are not many, but I did love Civilization Revolution. Probably the only RTS game I liked on the consoles, not that big into RTS games, though.
"

It seems people here are just asking if they will ever personally enjoy RTS games on consoles. I'm with you and likely won't either, but to say they're unsucessful is silly. Why would EA bring them to consoles ever since the original Command & Conquer if people don't like/buy them? I'm fairly sure there's an audience for them, I remember people going to console cafes around here and linking up two PlayStations together just to play Red Alert skirmishes and have a lot of fun with it. Yes, they'd be pushed over if a PC gamer could get in on the fun with a mouse & keyboard (and to me that's a downside, showing twitch still wins over strategy in some cases), but when both players work with the same limitations the games still offer a level of strategic depth unseen in other genres. They're just not as "agile" as on PC adjusting the gameplay to that fact.

I agree in that a new wave of simpler, more accessible RTS titles (like pikmin) will also be popular, and perhaps more popular than conventional RTS games as they border on "casual" gaming, but that doesn't suddenly nulify the success of the conventional genre. That type of game also gets on PC to attract this more casual, action seeking audience anyway. See things like World in Conflict and whatever else generally focuses less on micro management and more on basic battle tactics with smaller numbers of units and usually no construction phase.

Going for the more casual audience is just a market reality these days, truly hardcore genres have been dying left and right even on PC for years now, it's hardly something to do with consoles specifically and has more to do with the publishers putting sales goals over pleasing fans of a particular genre, thus simplifying everything. That said, traditional RTS still has a place here, though I can see it dying in a couple of decades, maybe with indie studios taking it over on PC as they have done with other genres the big wigs aren't interested in anymore.

In any case, currently they're just different games with different goals and there's room for both across all platforms.

"SmugDarkLoser said:

"

Umm... Halo Wars didn't live up to its expectations?
Uh...what?

It's AA at metacritic

Anyway, I personally think  traditional RTSes are going to die out in general in favor of things more along the lines of Pikman

"

Oh, and I'm gonna blow that theory out of the water. Dawn of War II, Supreme Commander, Demigod, C&C, Starcraft II, Total War....the list goes on and on and on.  RTS will always be a big seller on the PC.  The platform and the genre are the 'thinking man's video game'.  Mark my words, Starcraft II, when it launches, will outsell any console game of the past 10 years."

They will succeed on consoles if they either stop trying to be PC-like RTS games on consoles, or full keyboard and mouse support is allowed on all consoles. I find it rather funny that most console RTS games come out for the 360 when the PS3 is the system that allows keyboard and mouse support.

Kush, I think that's more or less because the 360 architecture is more similar to a PC than the PS3's. If I recall correctly, the 360 has a slightly downgraded version of DirectX 10 running under the hood, or something similar. I could be wrong, but I would imagine that's more or less the reason why you see that particular trend.

"There are not any good RTS games on the consoles? What? There are not many, but I did love Civilization Revolution. Probably the only RTS game I liked on the consoles, not that big into RTS games, though.
"

RTS games being successful on the PC is not a product of the PC but of keyboard and mouse something that could be used on the consoles if support was added for it.

"Kush, I think that's more or less because the 360 architecture is more similar to a PC than the PS3's. If I recall correctly, the 360 has a slightly downgraded version of DirectX 10 running under the hood, or something similar. I could be wrong, but I would imagine that's more or less the reason why you see that particular trend."

Similar architecture = easier job to port. You tell me which widely-used PC has a processor that's similar to Cell, for example, and then we might see more PC RTS games ported to that particular system. It's naturally not the only factor which stops developers from making games of that genre for the system, but going from x86 processors on PCs to the 360's PowerPC does admittedly simplify matters. And before someone else points it out, PS3's processor is also PowerPC-based, but the underlying design of it all (ie: the processor being essentially split up seven ways by the Synergistic Processing Elements) makes it a dramatically different beast and has a tendency to cause headaches a plenty for developers for numerous reasons.