Starcraft II
Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty, and its following expansions Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void mark the long awaited continuation of Blizzard Entertainment’s landmark RTS title Starcraft, one of the most popular and successful real-time strategy games of all time. Starcraft II follows directly on the heels of the narrative setup by the original game with numerous characters returning to fill greatly expanded roles. Mechanically the sequel builds heavily off its predecessor, continuing and expanding on many classic mechanics and strategies.
When taken all together, Starcraft II’s campaign, formed of three individual campaigns each released with the base game or one of the expansions, is perhaps the greatest single RTS production element in the second decade of the 2nd millennium. Each campaign focuses on one of the game’s three main races, and follows iconic characters that were the movers and shakers from the previous game as they continue to chart their own paths, and those of their respective races, through the deepening conflicts in their home system. The various campaign sections feature new units, mechanics, and abilities beyond Starcraft II’s standard multiplayer fare; these variations not only keep the very large string of missions exciting and engaging, they also perfectly showcase how effectively the game’s design tools were implemented and thus the great level of customization available to modders. This is all in addition to watching a very colorful cast of characters interact between missions inside the “command ship”, a semi-interactive debriefing and prepping area that serves as the “lobby” for the campaign missions and the workshop were the player upgrades and customizes their units and abilities.
The downtime between missions is another great addition from Blizzard. Pacing is balanced between diverse and sometimes rather hectic missions and the controlled, casual environment of the command ship, without ever bringing the player out of the overall campaign experience. Aside from a slightly distorted sense of time, primarily due to “time-sensitive” missions being optional due to multiple choice selections, the game world and its nuances are continually in the fore of the player’s space. The interaction between the different points of the command ship, and the characters within, also serve as the perfect vehicles to establish plot points and the campaign’s narrative in an environment where the player would not be easily distracted and can engage or skip them at leisure.
Pacing is most certainly an element that Starcraft is known for, at least as far as action economy is concerned. The first Starcraft was famous of high-speed, knife-edge missions and matches where players had to be continually focused on balancing long-term goals while addressing short term needs. Starcraft II maintains this trend most obviously in its multiplayer, and in its campaigns to a lesser extent. Blizzard was very careful to preserve the design elements and mechanics that make this level of action possible, including a proliferation of hot-keyed commands and abilities. The campaign missions are for the most part a more casual sampling, which is entirely appropriate considering the highly detailed levels, colorful faction designs, and intricate plots. Of course varying levels of difficulty are still including to satiate more experienced players and some of the higher level missions include their own parameters for increased challenges such as time-limits and resource limitation.
Starcraft II’s developers were also able to take advantage of its famed multiplayer and stellar single player to introduce an element that was still in its infancy at the time. Cooperative play, in which two or more players join together through LAN or internet play to complete a single mission, was introduced in the form of a specific multiplayer option where players could each take control of a commander, represented by one of the notable characters from the campaign, and lead their specific roster of units alongside their ally against singular pre-built missions. With each completed mission, the particular commander that was used gained experience, unlocking new units and abilities, up to a final level of 15. Over the years Blizzard released more coop commanders, gradually increasing not only the unit options but also the very mechanics of gameplay for each commander. Players can not only use familiar units from the campaign and multiplayer lineups, but also experience completely new rosters and mechanics developed specifically for cooperative play.
All of this variety comes in a refreshingly concise and smooth package. Starcraft II demands its share of memory space, but can operate on most internet connections and high graphics settings are manageable on just about any gaming computer currently on the market. It also launches quickly, has very well developed tools to maintain internet play, and practically seamless party chat and matchmaking tools. Its graphics levels have also aged well, and while not up to the standards of modern FPS titles it can still provide enough grand explosions and minute, interactive details to more than satisfy any level of RTS gamer.
It’s always difficult to confidently say that a particular title is the greatest genre champion of its generations, but as one of the few RTS franchises still viable and active, Starcraft II most certainly deserves accolades as a game worthy of its fanbase and the legendary popularity it has boasted over the years. It is still supported by Blizzard and continues to receive new content. The base game is also free to play and its other assets are available at reasonable prices through Battle.net. The RTS genre may have faded, but Starcraft II should still hold a place among anyone’s game library as an enjoyable single player experience and a fun multiplayer excursion.
Cossacks: European Wars
With the 500th Anniversary of the Protestant Reformation’s commencement fast approaching, it seemed appropriate to reminisce on the Renaissance period with a game that covers a large portion of that period. Cossacks: European Wars was developed by GSC Gameworld and published CDV Software Entertainment in 2000. Two expansions, The Art of War and Back to War, appeared in 2002 expanding game content with new nations, units, and missions.
European Wars is the first title in the Cossacks series and, like many of its contemporaries, features many of the standard mechanics and conventions that defined RTS titles of the era. Factions appear as different historical nations from the 17th and 18th centuries and each brings a few unique units and/or buildings to differentiate their approaches to the battlefield. Base building and resource collection are accomplished by peasant worker units that are trained from the central town hall.
Supreme Commander 2
At its core Supreme Commander held true to the overall conventions and mechanics of its series. A centrally important command unit begins the construction of a base with static resource-generating
Supreme Commander 2, which was developed by Gas Powered Games and released in 2010 by Square Enix, follows in the footsteps of the highly successful real-time strategy game Supreme Commander as a spiritual sequel to the combined arms, free-range style of combat pioneered by Total Annihilation. The single player campaign continues the story of the three competing human factions, the UEF, Aeon, and Cybrans, and is set several years after the events of Supreme Commander. Unlike the first game, Supreme Commander 2 did not receive a full fledged expansion, but a large DLC featuring many new units titled the Infinite War Battle Pack was released later in 2010.
structures and unit-producing factories. Naval, air, and land units could be produced and conduct operations in their respective terrain types across the battle map. The super-powered experimental units return from the first game with a greatly expanded role and are now divided into two tiers based on their level of power and the effect they could have on the overall battle. These experimental units are produced from dedicated factories instead of engineers in the field.
Axis & Allies
Axis & Allies is a video game adaption of Milton Bradley’s Axis & Allies strategy board game of the same name. Both games simulate the broad strategic situation of World War II at the beginning of 1942. Players take on the role of one of the five great powers: Germany, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The original board game focused on the strategic aspects of gameplay, while Axis & Allies the video game emphasizes real time strategy combat.
Axis & Allies features three single player modes. These include the campaign, in which the player takes the role of various Allied or Axis factions in key battles throughout WWII, with fictional “what-fi” scenarios serving as the majority of the Axis missions. Skirmish mode is a one-off match between the player and up to seven AIs played out on of the maps featured in the campaign or in WWII mode. Since there is no resource harvesting in Axis & Allies the size of the map is the only limiting factor for the number of players.
Command & Conquer Online: Westwood Classics
This December marks the 25th anniversary of the release of the landmark Real-Time Strategy game Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty by Westwood Studios. Dune II was not the first RTS game to be developed but its release marked the beginning of RTS as a major genre in PC, and to a lesser degree console, gaming. It introduced the mechanics and style that would be utilized in RTS games for the next decade, only being superseded by Blizzard’s variation of the genre after the release of Command & Conquer: Generals in 2003.
Since Dune II’s release Westwood Studios developed several RTS titles, with accompanying sequels, before its closure by Electronic Arts in early 2003. These included the seminal Command & Conquer and its associate spinoff Command & Conquer: Red Alert, as well as a remake of Dune II titled Dune 2000 which featured enhanced graphics and improved gameplay taken from the development of Red Alert. All of these titles stayed true to their original RTS format and nourished a thriving RTS community.
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II, developed by Relic Entertainment and published by THQ in 2009 is the spiritual successor to Relic’s initial adaptation of Games Workshop’s dystopian sci-fi tabletop game, Warhammer 40,000. Dawn of War II has enough relation to previous titles in the series, namely in the its single player narrative, to warrant its claims as a sequel, but fans of the series will quickly recognize the numerous differences that make this follow-on radically different from its forebears.
Dawn of War II takes much of the inspiration for its gameplay mechanics from Relic’s other successful series: Company of Heroes. Combat consists of controlling a single, iconic commander unit and small squads (three to four soldiers) of specialized units. Cover is scattered around the map and divided into light and heavy cover which are identified by yellow and green movement markers respectively. Larger units and some special abilities demolish cover, exposing any troops that were sheltering behind it.
Each unit available to the player fulfills a particular role and is rarely, if ever, made obsolete by advances in production tiers. The standard format for each faction’s army consists of light scouts, adaptable main infantry, fire support and anti-armor infantry, super-heavy infantry, and light and heavy vehicles. The average combat force generally consists of six to eight infantry and one to two vehicles, in the campaign missions the force is limited to four units and the commander.
This style of gameplay actually hearkens more to the tabletop game’s most common format than it does to the original Dawn of War. The Warhammer 40k universe is well suited to this style and it allows the campaign missions to come off as flavorful, immersive, and dynamic. The characters take on more importance to the mission and to the player when each individual unit counts for something when the lead starts flying.
Yet this small squad format departs heavily from Dawn of War II’s predecessors. Large scale combat between armies was far more frequent in previous games and hero units, while still strong, served more as unique tactical assets rather than linchpins around which to form a strike team. In emphasizing small unit tactics Dawn of War II removed the galactic scale and sense of endless war from Warhammer 40k. Missions are engaging, but the player rarely gets a sense of how great an impact the victories are having on the conflict as a whole. Enemy forces, while always numerically superior and still dangerous, seem passive and underwhelming.
Dawn of War II’s campaign follows loosely after the events of the previous Dawn of War series and continues to follow the series’ protagonist faction, the Blood Ravens space marines. Several characters from previous campaigns appear as AI controlled allies or in cutscenes. The player controls a Force Commander that serves as his/her avatar and can be named by the player. Several squads of space marines, each representing a different combat type, serve as the force under the player’s command and are each led by a character that provides flavor and narrative throughout the campaign.
The campaign is played out over three planets. More missions with varying objectives, including side missions that provide benefits but do not advance the main story, become available as the campaign progresses. Strategic play is measured in days, with players allowed one deployment per day, although they can gain additional deployments by achieving a high score in missions or completing certain objectives. Most missions consist of the Force Commander, and whatever squads the player chose before launching the mission, landing planet-side on a tactical map representing desert, jungle, or urban terrain. The player’s forces progress across the map taking tactically important locations before progressing towards a final objective like a powerful enemy that needs to be eliminated or a strategic location in need of defense.
Dawn of War II’s single player experience is nothing if not character driven. The slinking and slug fests of the missions would seem meaningless and wearisome where it not for the thematic import that the characters’ perspectives and personalities applied to it. Cutscenes and in-game commentary bring the dark universe of Warhammer 40k to life, give meaning to the objectives, and explain the motivations and behaviors of the various antagonists.
These squads are also heavily customizable, gaining experience for levels with each mission allowing players to increase their squads combat and support abilities and even defining if the squad is optimized for melee or ranged combat. Armor and weapons, in the form of Wargear, is randomly dropped by enemies or acquired as a reward for completing missions. Wargear can be equipped to a squad during the strategic phase of the campaign and each piece of Wargear lists which squads it is suited for.
Skirmish mode lacks this character-driven narrative and noticeably suffers for it. Skirmish battles are wearisome tug-of-war matches over resource production nodes until the player has built up a strong enough army to actually destroy the enemy’s command center. In fact the command center, while poorly defended, has so much health and armor that a match’s finale usually consists of one to two minutes of units shooting at a building. All races and units are available in Skirmish mode thus maintaining some interest for players willing to put up with the repetition for a chance to try out new units and abilities. However these flashy toys are wasted on a predictable and repetitive AI.
Multiplayer serves as a balance between the two, with the presence and challenge of human opponents compensating for the simple objectives and generic maps. Dawn of War II is well supported for online play and its integration with Steam’s network makes matchmaking and setup a simple process. Players are likely to get the most enjoyment out of head to head matches, as opposed to team games against the AI, but this certainly decreases appeal among casual gamers.
Dawn of War II’s close-in, tactical focus demands high performance from graphic and audio processors. Modern machines are sufficient to run the game smoothly, but any models introduced before Dawn of War II’s release will struggle at higher performance settings.
The shift in mechanical style the Dawn of War II introduces ultimately produces a dichotomy in the game’s appeal to fanbases. Players that enjoyed Company of Heroes will likely enjoy Dawn of War II’s single player experience if they choose to enjoy Warhammer 40k’s narrative. Fans of previous Dawn of War titles can still get a thoroughly satisfying experience out of the bloody, lore-heavy storyline but will find skirmish and multiplayer to be lackluster, repetitive, and restrictive.
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2 was developed by Westwood Studios, officially re titled Westwood Pacific, and published by Electronic Arts in 2000. The fourth Real-Time Strategy title in the Command & Conquer franchise; Red Alert 2 was the direct sequel to Red Alert and followed its predecessor thematically and mechanically. It would be followed in 2001 by an expansion pack, Command & Conquer: Yuri’s Revenge, which added a third faction as well as additional units and fourteen new single player missions split up into two campaigns.
Red Alert 2 was also the first title to be finalized after Westwood and Electronic Arts had completed their merger and did not suffer the development problems that had plagued the previous title in the series: Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun. It also reflects some of the design changes that EA would begin to implement in the series, such as an increased focus on setting-based tropes (in this case Golden Age America and the Cold War) as well as a gradual lessening of the dichotomy that factions had displayed in previous games. Yet EA wisely chose to keep the story premise largely intact and to build closely off of developments that had occurred in Red Alert.
Red Alert 2 picks up where its predecessor left off. The Allies defeated the aggressive Soviet Union and established a puppet government to oversee reconstruction. Thus the Allies, including the newly arrived United States, were caught completely off guard when the Soviets began a secret re-militarization and launched a surprise attack on the United States from three directions. Initially the other Allied nations are not involved, but gradually join the war effort as Soviet aggression continues.
The player takes the role of a specially appointed American commander in the Allied campaign, or an up-and-coming Soviet commander in the Soviet campaign. Most of the missions take place in the United States and its territories, with Europe and Russia itself also featuring a number of locales in various missions. The missions, and the regions they take place in, are heavily thematic and geared towards making the game’s challenge, and Cold War feel, the centerpieces of design.
The Command & Conquer series always did a masterful job keeping the player at the center of the campaign’s narrative. The most important battles of the conflict serve as the missions of each campaign, with the commander taking a pivotal role in either stopping the Red Menace for good or completing the final conquest of the various Allied nations. The cutscenes and in-game cinematics are campy and perfectly reflect Golden Age Cinema techniques; they also don’t distract the commander from the RTS experience, keeping such elements as moral choice and NPC involvement to a minimum.
The portrayal of in-game units in the cinematics, as well as the perception that the commander is one of the first officers to gain access to new technology when it becomes available, keeps the immersion throughout cutscenes and missions. Some missions contain segments where particular units are required, but for the most part the player may choose whatever strategy that their current unit roster will facilitate. More advanced units and buildings are unlocked as the player progresses through the campaign; in multiplayer each faction’s roster is completely available for use.
Westwood RTS products have always been a little finicky when it comes to multiplayer games, but Red Alert 2 had a strong online following in its heyday, although it was admitted that the vanilla game was unbalanced in several aspects. Connection issues once a match has begun are rare and often more indicative of localized malfunctions instead of issues with the game itself. In the present day no public servers exist for online matches, but community run servers are still available for games between friends.
Red Alert 2’s AI does what it can given the conventions of RTS design at the time. In the campaign the AI can prove to be a very enjoyable opponent given its terrain advantages and often superior positioning. Most campaign missions are also of a substantial duration and can be accomplished through multiple strategies and tricks, warranting each faction’s campaign at least two-playthroughs. The Skirmish AI suffers without its campaign bonuses, as it follows predictable patterns and often fails to keep consistent pressure on the player. There are even cases where the AI will stop trying after a suffering a certain degree of setbacks. Yet for all its weaknesses, Skirmish mode does allow players to explore the game’s nuances at their leisure and test the capabilities of units in a more relaxed environment.
Red Alert 2 is widely considered to be one the of best Command & Conquer titles of all time. Its combination of fast-paced dynamic combat, traditional mechanics, and campy fun appealed to a wide range of gamers and also made it easy to learn and enjoyable to explore. Ironically the expansion pack Yuri’s Revenge upset that balance in the online arena, but self-imposed moderation in the online community as well as a host of balancing mods have kept the core game’s online experience intact. Red Alert 2 marks the high point of RTS gaming in the industry’s history and rightly remains one of the most beloved RTS titles of the first decade.
Red Alert 3
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 is a real-time strategy game developed and produced by Electronic Arts, released in late 2008. EA had finally gone back to a longtime staple of the RTS genre, eight years after the release of the previous title in the series, Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2, and five years after closing down Westwood Studios, the original developer of the Command & Conquer franchise. EA had already released Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars in 2007 to great success and was wisely pursuing its foray into RTS with a revival of the other half of Westwood’s RTS legacy.
Red Alert 3 follows roughly the same formula of its predecessors. Players construct their chosen faction’s base around a central building alongside such requirements as power and proximity between structures, as well as requirements for unlocking higher level structures and units. Units are produced from their respective production facilities and Red Alert 3 features land, air, and naval combat, with many units capable of transitioning between these battle spaces. Resources take the form of ore, which in previous Red Alert titles was represented by fields of golden nuggets, but in Red Alert 3 has been boiled down to a neutral mine structure, reminiscent of Warcraft style gold mines, that harvesters automatically collect from.
Three factions are playable in Red Alert 3. The Allies and Soviets return with many familiar units as well as completely new developments, and the Japanese Empire of the Rising Sun is introduced combining tactical and strategic elements of both sides. The Soviet faction focuses on overwhelming numbers and powerful tanks and warships. The Allied faction features more heavy combat units than in previous Red Alert titles but still emphasizes defense and long ranged, powerful attacks. The Empire of the Rising Sun strikes a balance between the two with large numbers of adaptable, hard hitting units.
Three story campaigns allows players to fully utilize each faction as they play through the faction’s path to eventual victory in the three-way war that dominates the main plot. Here is where Red Alert 3’s innovative failures start to show. Instead of picking up where the series last left off, the current story begins by erasing everything that occurred in the previous games. The campaigns commence with a three-way brawl that plays out as a series of loosely connected missions chosen more for their memorable locales than for their relevance in the strategy of global war.
Red Alert 3 is the first Command & Conquer title to introduce campaign co-operative play, allowing two players to proceed through the missions against the AI. In single player mode a friendly AI represented by one of the faction’s characters takes the place of the second human player. This marks one of the first RTS titles to take the step into co-operative story modes and the missions are well balanced around them.
Unfortunately they are a bit too well balanced and suffer when a co-op player is not present. The AI replacement for a second player tends to lack the strategic finesse and resilience of a human player. While the player is still fully capable of handling the mission alone the imbalance of proficiency makes many of the challenges, especially timed missions, frustrating and stressful. Additionally the co-op feature was hosted through GamepSpy servers which were shutdown in 2013, rending the feature useless without a third party server hosting.
EA didn’t spare any expense when adding its own innovations to the Command & Conquer formula. The shift to mine based resource harvesting, the addition of unique abilities and modes for each unit, and the emphasis on rapid, high cost battles are all new to Command & Conquer’s style of play; and they don’t necessarily mix well. Strategic management and defensive tactics take a backseat to rapid key-binding skills and fast paced reactions. Units are, on average, lightly armored and heavily armed making battles costly and quick. The one-dimensional resource system also prevents the player from increasing or otherwise modifying their income without simply capturing more mines, a situation compounded by the fact that the limited income is rarely able to supply enough forces to hold off enemy attacks and secure a new location simultaneously.
Red Alert 3’s graphics introduce another of EA’s innovations, the Sage 2.0 graphics engine. The engine provides bright and somewhat cartoonish effects, which given the game’s camp portrayal is actually appropriate. The graphics moved easily even on modern machines of the time and most devices should have no trouble operating it. Sadly multiplayer for Red Alert 3 is officially non-existent, although third party servers provided by C&C Online support multiplayer and co-op.
As far as strategy games go Red Alert 3 is a fair presentation. One of EA’s traditional failings is to take familiar titles and re-brand them with what it believes to be market selling points, usually patterned off of Blizzard games. This is effectively what has been done here and many Starcraft players would recognize familiar traits and tropes in Red Alert 3’s gaming style. The game itself is entertaining although the story-line sacrifices immersion for comedic presentation. Yet as it is Red Alert 3 falls from a continuation of a legendary RTS series to just one more title among many in the strategy gaming market.
Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds Saga
Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds Saga is a real-time strategy game derived from the blending of the Star Wars hype produced by the prequel trilogy, and the golden age of real-time strategy games. The RTS game Age of Empires II was released in that sweet spot of game development at the turn of the millennium when creative development had caught up to and in some cases outpaced graphic design. Games in this period were a perfect blend of simple user-interface and complex tactical mechanics that made micromanagement fun but easy to grasp. It’s no surprise that Age of Empires II, and games like it, manage to stand the test of time and continue to benefit from a dedicated fan base. Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds is a prime example of this legacy.
Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds, released by Ensemble Studios and Lucas Arts in 2001, and its expansion pack the Clone Campaigns, released in 2002 and followed by the Saga boxed set, takes all of its design cues from Age of Empires II and its Genie graphics engine. Players familiar with the medieval strategy game will recognize most of Galactic Battlegrounds’ conventions and mechanics. Worker units construct civilian and military buildings and gather the game’s four resources: food, carbon, nova crystals, and ore. Buildings produce military units of their respective types or conduct research upgrading unit combat abilities, building defense, and resource extraction speed and efficiency.
Ground units are divided into three broad groups: infantry, mechs, and heavy weapons. Infantry units, which consist of basic infantry and specialized units for combating buildings, aircraft, and mechs, form the workhorses for most of battles as they are cheap, easy to acquire and upgrade, and most factions get the technologies to upgrade them fully. These are the grunts from Star Wars; the battle droids, stormtroopers, and Naboo security forces.
Mechs are the quintessential armored and/or walker units of the Star Wars universe; AT-ATs, Trade Federation droid tanks, Gungan beasts, and the like serve as the armor and cavalry of the various factions. Mechs come in three designs capable of effectively combating infantry, other mechs, or most units respectively. The heavy Assault Mechs can also carry infantry and in some cases have a long enough range to destroy fortifications with impunity. Heavy Weapons fill the Age of Empires niche of siege weapons and include Assault Cannons, the battering ram-like Pummels, anti-air units, and siege cannons which can out-range any defensive structure.
Air units are also included in the form of multi-purpose fighter units which get bonuses for attacking other aircraft, and ground attack bombers with combat bonuses against buildings. Technologies can be researched to greatly improve these aircraft including the ability to better target moving units as well as gain personal shields. The Clone Campaigns adds the Assault Cruiser, a large shielded aircraft with a slow and powerful long range attack. Aircraft bring their own dimension of combat as they can only be targeted by other aircraft, anti-air units, and anti-air buildings.
In Age of Empires II all factions shared the same building and unit trees, what made them unique were the technologies, buildings, and units that they missed, their faction bonuses, and the unique units constructed at the castle. In Galactic Battlegrounds this formula is continued but given a Star Wars flare that keeps the franchise themes among the eight playable factions. Each faction has its own bonuses and unique units and misses some technologies while specializing in others.
Yet the units and buildings of every faction feature their own uniforms, architecture, and vehicle designs. The Rebel Alliance fighter units are X-Wings which face off against Imperial fighters in the form of TIE Fighters. Faction bonuses even correspond with their faction’s theme; for example certain Gungan buildings can be constructed underwater and the Trade Federation’s droid armies do not require housing.
Perhaps the least unique but most telling differences among faction units are the Jedi and Sith temples. In terms of units, technologies, and mechanics the Jedi and Sith are functionally the same. Jedi/Sith take the place of the monks from Age of Empires II, they convert enemy units and grab holocrons to bring back to their temples for additional resource income. Unlike the passive monks, Jedi and Sith also have melee attacks in the form of their lightsabers and are very resistant to damage.
The five good-aligned factions construct the Jedi Temple and train Jedi Padawan, Knights, and Masters while the three evil-aligned factions train Sith Apprentices, Knights, and Masters from a Sith Temple. Thematic flavor abounds: Jedi use blue lightsaber blades and the Sith use red; the Sith Master shoots lightning from his fingers as his attack. Most Jedi factions also can be considered the most proficient in this aspect of the game, with only the Galactic Empire faction possessing reasonable competence in Sith technologies and units.
The translation of a well-known medieval strategy game into a sci-fi strategy game is actually quite smooth mechanically as well as thematically. Understandably most combat is done at range instead of melee but distinctions of infantry, cavalry, and siege weapons remain in their strategic forms. Mechs for example are superior to infantry in every way, but many have a minimum weapon range and are vulnerable to specialized units. Walls and defensive towers still abound and are resistant to most attacks but vulnerable to the siege attacks of the cumbersome Heavy Weapons. Shields are also introduced in the form of Shield Generator buildings and the Gungan unique mobile shield generator. Shields basically act as secondary hit points for all buildings and units in their radius, healing over time and absorbing damage until depleted by enemy fire or deprived of a nearby power source.
The Galactic Battlegrounds Saga includes one tutorial campaign and seven primary campaigns. Each faction except the Naboo get a campaign of six to eight missions inspired by the movies or the expanded universe. Each campaign features at least one bonus mission relating to great battles from the Star Wars prequel or primary trilogies such as the Battle of Hoth or the Battle of Endor. The Trade Federation and Galactic Empire bonus missions feature what-if scenarios from the Battle of Naboo and Battle of Endor where the Dark Side has the chance to prevail.
Skirmish battles against the AI and multiplayer random maps are also included. The game takes its cues directly from Age of Empires II in this format, featuring standard map (including some parodies that AoE fans will recognize like Fortress and Highlands), Death Match, King of the Hill, and Nomad options. Up to eight players can join one game and the population cap, starting resources, and starting age of technology can all be preset.
Hero units are also included, usually in the form of infantry or Jedi but occasionally as vehicles like the Millennium Falcon, and appear in most campaign missions. Each hero has their own vocal script and features the special abilities of their unit type. They are also available in the scenario editor, an in-game tool players can use to make their own maps and scenarios using every unit, tile, and trigger built into the game.
The original Star Wars saga has its share of epic battles and grand scenes but it is an adventure at its heart. It’s no surprise that few strategy games have been produced around the Star Wars universe. As such it might seem that saying Galactic Battlegrounds is one of the greatest Star Wars RTS games is superfluous. Yet it truly is one of the best strategy experiences that gamers can find for the Star Wars universe. It features the perfect blend of flavor and accessible mechanics that make it appealing to Star Wars fans, casual gamers, and hardcore strategy gamers.
The fact that it was developed on the foundation of one of the most endearing RTS games of all time only adds to its appeal and staying power. If there was a flaw in this formula, it would only be that Galactic Battlegrounds strays too close to Age of Empires II’s general style while failing to equal or surpass it. Yet obviously that was never what Galactic Battlegrounds was meant to accomplish.
While Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds Saga is without a doubt a Star Wars game and deserves its place in the universe it is important to remember that this game is first and foremost a terrestrial RTS. Cloud and space tiles, which can only be crossed by flying units, can create the impression of space battles but the great Imperial Star Destroyers do not make an appearance; missions and scenarios take place planetside. Jedi are powerful and unique but cannot deflect blaster bolts or force choke enemies (except in cutscenes). Anyone looking to enjoy some classic RTS action Star Wars style will love Galactic Battlegrounds. Age of Empires fans will have to unlearn a few habits but otherwise should feel right at home. Those looking for the grand experience of the Star Wars space epic might find the Galactic Battlegrounds Saga’s generic RTS mechanics restrictive and should engage the game mindful of the older RTS legacy it is based off of.
Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight
After Electronic Arts successfully continued the Command & Conquer saga with its releases of Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars and it’s expansion Kane’s Wrath in 2007 and 2008 respectively there was a great deal of hype and excitement when EA announced the fourth and final title of the current Tiberium saga: Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight. EA added to the hype by promising that Tiberian Twilight would introduce new mechanics and concepts never before tried in a Real-Time Strategy game. These would of course be appearing alongside such iconic C&C staples as live action movies, familiar faction units, and the desolate landscape of a tiberium-scarred earth.
One of the most important aspects about Tiberian Twilight is that it is a server based game requiring an active online connection to update the player’s profile. EA utilizes what they called an RPG style approach toward player profiles. As the player completed missions and won skirmish and multiplayer battles their profile gained experience which unlocked units and technologies of the faction that they played as. Once their profile reached enough experience for each faction they would be able to utilize all of the units, buildings, and technologies of those factions in any single player or multiplayer game. Each faction levels up separately, although the player need not create a different profile to play both factions. The game can be played without an internet connection and single player games are not interrupted if the connection is somehow lost, but the player’s profile will not gain experience in offline mode.
Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight does away with the old C&C convention of a single unit providing a central building from which a static base grows to provide the player with a fully advanced and capable army. Instead at the start of a game the player receives the option to choose from three different crawler units. Each crawler represents offensive, defensive, and support classes and the player will have access to different types of units and abilities depending on which class is chosen. The chosen crawler appears in a deployment zone and serves as both a unit and factory for all of the player’s units.
Crawlers are heavily armored and as the player unlocks more technologies the crawlers gain weapons, armor, and other defensive abilities. Like their MCV predecessors from previous C&C games crawlers must deploy to produce units which are produced almost instantly. The support class emphasizes air units and their crawler appropriately is an air unit, but it must still deploy to produce or call down other aircraft. If a player’s crawler is destroyed, or if the player wants to switch classes, a new crawler can be chosen and will appear in the same manner as the first one.
Each map in single player or multiplayer has several small landing pads on which green and blue tiberium crystals will routinely spawn. These crystals can be collected by ground units and carried back to the player’s deployment zone to unlock technologies and are an important point of contention for players as the player who gathers more crystals more quickly will have the better army in the early game. Once a player unlocks all of their units and technologies, the crystals provide small boosts to their victory point track.
Single player missions still feature traditional objectives and follow the game’s storyline in terms of the enemies and maps encountered. In skirmish and multiplayer modes victory is determined by a point track. The principle way to gain points is to control a majority of tiberium nodes around the map. Nodes are structures that can be captured by stationing more units than an opponent near the node for a certain amount of time. Battles over these nodes take place on arena style maps with AI controlled structures defending each faction’s deployment zones while the nods themselves are situated in the map’s central no-man’s land.
EA finalizes its changes to the C&C formula by introducing rock-paper-scissors style interaction between units based on their type and weapon. For example, machine guns are effective against infantry and light vehicles while laser weapons are effective against heavy vehicles and structures. A heavy unit with machine guns will be effective against infantry, but vulnerable to lasers, and vice versa. Some units deal enough raw damage to be somewhat effective against any threat, but the formula holds true for the arsenals of each class and faction.
The many changes to the RTS and C&C formulas that appear in Tiberian Twilight practically make it its own game with unique style and strategies. Sadly, this is perhaps the single greatest failure of the game and EA. If Tiberian Twilight had been produced as its own game, distinct from the style associated with its predecessors, it may have been far more successful and well received. Unfortunately it turns out to be another attempt by EA to project their own creative designs onto a classical franchise in an attempt to sell their own ideas on the shoulders of someone else’s giant.
The profile leveling system ensures that players cannot experience the full game until they’ve played dozens of hours of meaningless grinding. The fact that profiles can’t be leveled in offline mode slaves the players to a continual internet connection and makes offline mode a pointless option. Poor or even moderate latency will result in continual disconnects forcing players to reload games to continue gaining experience. The single player missions do not restrict a player’s units and buildings and are thus not balanced for any level of technology, which can confuse and frustrate new players.
The crawler based combat is hectic and clumsy at best. Units are thrown into a mosh-pit style battles with little chance for strategic planning and no possibility for territory control. The rock-paper-scissors dynamic to weapons is also a disappointment. Units have been marginalized from their distinctive roles in previous C&C titles into generic types that have little use if their intended opponent type is not present. Combat also devolves into players trading unit types as endless counters are swapped. Units die quickly to their hard-counters but practically ignore attacks from any other weapon type. This leaves players who maxed out their limited population cap with the wrong types completely out of luck until they suffer enough casualties to allow rebuilding.
The faction’s distinctive styles have also disappeared. The fast and stealthy Nod no longer clashes with the slow and steady GDI; now each faction is essentially a mirror match. Resources are no longer present so the only limitation on a player’s production is the population cap. This cap is far too small to control a significant portion of the map and players can find themselves kitted around by small groups of fast units stealing tiberium nodes while avoiding direct conflict.
Finally the game itself, for all its nostalgic units and references to previous C&C titles, lacks theme and flair. It is a boring slug-fest where units without identity or history clash on generic and alien battlefields for objectives with no tangible accomplishments or definable impact on their opponents. There is no sense of accomplishment or ownership for the player profile, only a grind to unlock units, which should rightly be available from the start, until the full tech tree is unlocked. The fact that players have to work to experience and enjoy a game they paid for in full is itself an unforgivable sin.
Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight had a lot of ideas that, taken by themselves, could have been very successful. Mashed together they ensure that yet another attempt by EA to match the MOBA and Starcraft environments has only succeeded in ruining another beloved gaming franchise. If Tiberian Twilight had at least been marketed as a different game instead of trying to usurp the C&C series it might have stood a chance; but many fans were left feeling cheated and frustrated by the alien style and disorienting focus of gameplay.
Fans who want to see the Tiberium saga played out need only invest about a dozen hours into completing the campaigns and will find that purchasing the game on sale is about equal to the value; but they should avoid buying the game at EA’s full retail price. Any other gamer hoping for a fulfilling RTS experience, or gaming experience in general, should not waste the money and time on Tiberian Twilight; a sad end that such a storied franchise did not deserve.