viability of an indie RTS
Members - Reputation: 122
Posted 23 July 2005 - 01:20 PM
Moderators - Reputation: 174
Posted 24 July 2005 - 01:34 AM
Indie games are generally smaller because you can get them to market without a large team and in a reasonable time frame. As to why indies go for casual games it is in part because casual games don't need to be technically cutting edge.
Staff Emeritus - Reputation: 1678
Posted 25 July 2005 - 10:44 AM
The "problem" with the idea of an indie RTS is that we assume it to mean a large, expansive game where you are the supreme military commander - and, apparently, chief economic officer - of an entire nation engaged in war against other nation-states. You invest in manpower, then direct that manpower into production, and use the results to power your war machine.
How about a game where you command a small- to medium-sized unit of soldiers - say, infantry - directly? You receive supplies at designated stations based on your performance and the overall war effort's needs, you both direct and lead your men into battle (not necessarily at the very front, since, as commander, your experience is valuable) and you can delegate tasks in a simple hierarchy. This has all the key RTS elements: resource gathering and conversion are abstracted into your supply lines, the command hierarchy is contracted only to your immediate subordinates, and you still have sufficient character interaction and opportunity for narrative.
Best of all, for an indie developer, you can build the game to support additional combat missions/scenarios/theaters, meaning that you can release content packs at full price ($5 to $15) without having to build the entire game from scratch, and it will be justified because of the balance of scope and cost.
I don't know, it's always made sense to me. Maybe I'm wired different, though.
Members - Reputation: 138
Posted 25 July 2005 - 11:00 AM
Saying that though, I recently bought Tribal Trouble as shareware and think its great. It's not as complex as a commerical RTS, but it is fun. I think they used the RTS plugin for the Torque engine on this game, so It might be worth investigating that.
Actually, I just read that they use their own Java engine and not Torque after all. Anyway, Torque may be worth a peek.
Members - Reputation: 789
Posted 28 July 2005 - 12:49 AM
The problem is presumably the AI side of things, which is a bit of a specialist field. And perhaps tuning the game so the sides aren't hopelessly mis-matched, although every game needs tuning.
Crossbones+ - Reputation: 1176
Posted 28 July 2005 - 04:56 AM
I've signed a world wide publishing deal, and am planning to enter it into the 2006 Independent Games Festival.
PC Gamer is running a cover story this month about a "RTS Revolution" and they actually talked about my game in it :-D
I've got a lot of great ideas for the game. You bascily command your gang from up top, trying to take control of a random city, fighting with up to 6 other gangs to reach certain victory conditions. The twist is that at any time you can jump down and take control of one of your gangsters, and the game becomes an action game, ala GTA.
So, yes I think it's quite viable for a single person to make a commercial RTS, given the right amount of detication.
Members - Reputation: 829
Posted 28 July 2005 - 05:03 AM
Original post by Geom
Inhuman Games' "Trash" is the only one I know of.
Check out Darwinia.
There's a lot to learn there on how they used a quirky design to save them money and work. And they get to be called "innovative" for it too, so it's a win win solution.
Posted 05 August 2005 - 02:15 PM
Its a simple but elegant rts completely programmed in flash