Posted August 16, 2012
I can't argue with any of that. But there are other things that for me were more important. For one, the strategic possibilities of Total Annihilation meant that you could carry out detailed plans of attack with literally hundreds of units, each performing their own unique role.
Starcraft on the other hand just seemed to have three different flavours of tank rush C&C style gameplay. It was a refinement of what went before, whereas Total Annihilation was - at the time - more like the next evolutionary step of RTS. Although that was never to be, as the only games to really follow its lead were its own spiritual successors.
Ultimately it just boils down to being a case of 'to each their own'. I like C&C style games too. But what I want most from a strategy game is, well, strategy.
Starcraft on the other hand just seemed to have three different flavours of tank rush C&C style gameplay. It was a refinement of what went before, whereas Total Annihilation was - at the time - more like the next evolutionary step of RTS. Although that was never to be, as the only games to really follow its lead were its own spiritual successors.
Ultimately it just boils down to being a case of 'to each their own'. I like C&C style games too. But what I want most from a strategy game is, well, strategy.