I've fond childhood memories of playing this for many hours. Great game!
The Dune II interface was the template for subsequent RTS designs Some key elements that first appeared in Dune II and later appear in many other RTS games include:
A world map from which the next mission is chosen Resource-gathering to fund unit construction Simple base and unit construction Building construction dependencies (technology tree) Mobile units that can be deployed as buildings Different sides/factions (the Houses), each with unique unit-types and super weapons A context-sensitive mouse cursor to issue commands (introduced in the Mega Drive/Genesis version)
> published by Broderbund in 1984. It is generally recognized as one of the first real-time strategy or real-time tactics games.
Bottom line, I'm not really really feeling bad for PUBG at all. It's kind of like feeling bad for Minecraft because a lot of people are playing Fortnite now. Minecraft made most its money on the purchase. There's some loss in future revenue because of the network effect, but they probably made most the money they were going to make from you already (and to bring it back to PUBG, it's not for everyone. I didn't let my currently 10 year old son play it, but I let him play Fortnite, even a year ago when this was a discussion).
Also, I feel that Fortnite's popularity is not just price - a HUGE reason why the game is so popular is that they deliberately went after a broader audience. For example, equal prominence was placed on the female characters (which were deliberately not overly sexualized) and the violence was very much toned down - no blood and guts, no bullet-ridden corpses. These were deliberate design (and marketing) decisions to procure a broader player base and avoid some of the toxicity of the Call of Duty-style games.
I don't play either game (unfortunately my system needs a refresh), but from what I've seen of my son playing Fortnite the fights are like nothing I've seen in an FPS before. There's a mad dash to build fortifications right in front of people as quickly as possible as well as break through and navigate these fortifications while under fire. To outside eyes at least, the experience looks qualitatively different.
> I think it's fair to say Epic Games saw the popularity of the genre, pivoted their lackluster game into the genre, and then undercut PUBG on price to rise in popularity.
To my eyes, Fortnite differs in a few very important ways which makes it much more complex than one company copying another and undercutting them.
- It's targetted at a wider range of ages. e.g. it's much more acceptable for parents to allow a younger set of kids to play.
- It has a building mechanic, which changes both the strategy (pre-battle and route planning) and tactics (on-the-fly shielding during live fire) of a game.
- They are constantly updating it. I'm not sure how many "seasons" they are in now, but not only are the changes they introduce often fairly large, the end of season events are quite the spectacle, from the one or two I've seen after the fact.
If you combine that with the fact that PUBG seems to have made at least a few hundred million dollars on what I expect is a few million (or a couple tens of millions at most) investment, and I'm not really all that sorry for them. They had an idea, they executed on it and made a bundle of money, and then someone else iterated on it and happened to make a whole lot more money. What's the alternative, Epic not change Fortnite and all the people that play for free and all the younger players and all the people that like the building mechanic just lose out? I just don't see a situation where PUBG came out on top where more people are better off, and helping PUBG devs make billions instead of hundreds of millions isn't something I think we need to optimize for as a society, nor really care about.
Yes. Either accidentally or on purpose, the Battle Royale genre is a near perfect game type for streaming, which it evolved along side with.
> If a large map you can find stuff on that eventually shrinks qualifies as something enough to differentiate it, doesn't Fortnite's building mechanic qualify enough to differentiate it?
Yes! I am in no way suggesting that devs of Fortnite didn't innovate on the core concept, or that Epic owe the devs of PUBG anything. You're also correct about the wider age appeal and constant updates, though PUBG also receives updates albeit at a slower pace.
But Epic has far far greater resources, and though I don't think game genre's should necessarily be patentable, I do think Fortnite's Battle Royale would not have existed without the success of PUBG, and the fact that they could work off of a skeleton they knew was already tested and successful, especially with the lucrative streaming community.
I don't know about optimizing for society or whatever, it's just games man. I like that both can exist and be successful, while also feeling some sympathy for what could have been for the PUBG devs. Both can be true.
I accept most of what you said. I'm more just defining why I don't really feel sorry for them at all. If they were the inventors of the idea and they never were able to capitalize on it, sure. But they did capitalize on it, and it looks like extremely lucratively. It feels sort of like lamenting that Ford doesn't own more of the auto market given that they popularized (or invented in the modern era) the assembly line that all major automakers use. Ford's doing just fine, and we're all better off for the idea being spread.
It's okay if you don't agree, I just wanted to make sure I expressed myself accurately. :)
I'm not sure it was days, but the part that's kind of galling is that Fortnite was a wave defense game that had some pretty lackluster reviews, so the developers instead turned it into a battle royale game because of PUBG's unexpected popularity, and it was the battle royale version that made waves.
I didn't bother with RTSs until I tried out "C&C: Generals" and really found out what I was missing. I think I realized then what my friends were trying to get me to see when they hyped Dune II.
I did play it enough that we all get a kick out of saying "No more Ornis? :(" to one another.
The lead designer went on to make SC2 while C&C games kept getting worse and worse until the series reached its nadir with the two we don’t talk about.
Can you recommend a few of your favourites please? :)
Before that, games like Neverwinter Nights.
Before that, Baldur's Gate (available on ios!) is particularly good.
Before that, there were a LOT of decent turn-based games but none really come to mind as being truly exceptional to me. Planescape: Torment is extremely well regarded but I only played that much later in life and found the emulator and 640x480 resolution to get in the way of the experience.
You can also look into a variety of roguelikes like nethack and (older still) "text adventures" like Zork or even Adventure.
"Eye of the Beholder" was not quite turn-based but it seemed like it had a slower pace than newer games do.
Those were all PC titles. But "Phantasy Star II" I played on the Genesis and that was awesome.
I tuned out of most gaming before "X-COM" and "Fallout" showed up but I hear from my friends that they continue a interesting gameplay type similar to Buck Rogers.
https://www.openra.net/ (Free, but a little big buggy)
http://www.warfareincorporated.com/index.html (IOS, Free)
https://play.warfareincorporated.com/ (Web Only)
Command and Conquered Remastered:
Oh sorry, thought you wanted RTS instead of RPG. :)
In particular I remember my units just sitting around allowing themselves to be shot by enemy units that had longer range instead of moving two meters to get in weapons range. I recall it wasn't good at letting you form groups and issue mass commands too.
C&C and especially Warcraft really nailed the UI and gameplay details for the RTS genre a couple of years later.
Warcraft II is still very retro and missing a lot of quality-of-life stuff (especially the original pre-Battle.net edition) but it's at least tolerable. OG Warcraft is nails on chalkboard level bad.
But, i dunno, it was the first rts i'd ever played and the first game i got to go to the computer store and pick out. I spent the whole drive back just reading the book over and over again. It'll always have a small special place.
Dune II does not hold up in the same way (and I love the source material). Not being able to select multiple units at once is alone a game breaker.
Well, it's really not, because the game was fantastic and a lot of people enjoyed playing it. Game breaking would have been if when you played against another player they had multi select and you didn't.
Modern RTS players get very good at issuing actions to many specific units individually at high speed, it's an acknowledged skill today.
If your only strategy is a mass siege tank zerg, then yeah, no multi select is a little bit inconvenient.
I'm a bit surprised there isn't a remake of Dune 2 out there that fixes the UI quibbles and updates the graphics. There was a lot of neat stuff in the game (it was surprisingly feature rich for being basically the first of its genre) but few people these days remember it. Maybe someone will get the rights for a remake when the new movie comes out? Sadly Westwood is buried out back in the EA studio graveyard.
Engine or full reimplementation are common for previously widely popular games, some are even supported by the developers: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2020/05/ea-to-open-source-part...
> It tries to be as similar as possible to the original gameplay but to integrate user interface features most modern realtime-strategy games have like selecting multiple units
On that note, there was an official reboot to C&C released last month.
the soundtrack and the sound effects were particularly amazing to me. i can still remember most of them clearly in my head after all these years... "yes sir, moving on!" "construction complete" "reporting... acknowledged!"
this game inspired command and conquer in my opinion!
tssssh! "reporting!" tssssh! "acknowledged!" is still in my head sometimes.
I love the simplicity of it, too. Newer RTS games seem to pile on the complexity to try to differentiate themselves from the crowd.
I also remember the panic after "warning, wormsign", trying to locate and move my harvesters.
I didn't realize this game was ported to Mega Drive. Must be awkward trying to control the cursor with a gamepad having grown up playing these games using a mouse.