But see FPS' always have the potential for better graphics, new styles of gameplay, and ultimately, what makes them more favorable, the fact that it ties in with real life very easily, by allowing you to change how you play at any point you like. FPS' are like games of soccer or football, yes some basic rules are recycled over and over, but you're never bound to the different boundaries of RTS. You always have a different game, you can do what you want, with less limits.
While in RTS, when you play the game, you have to build, make an army, and then go and attack. And then when you do attack, more than usual, the enemies will use a common strategy for their civ, putting a bore on your face, you counter with your own common strategy to that. Your brain can anticipate too much, and it knocks the fun out of the game.
In FPS a team can change their strategy in one split second, and you're faced with a new challenge. The style of games may not always be new, but the games you play are always a fresh new challenge. Such is not a common case with RTS, and which only goes to kill the genre.
AoM has new elements to the RTS world, like picking gods in the middle of the game, this is no different than having classes (which decide your weapons, speed, etc. for the game), but still, the basic -one-common-strategy-for-one-common-civ remains, even though it helps to a small degree to diversify gameplay, it still isn't as big as a change of having your live enemy just change his whole strategy...and that puts RTS behind.
The Genetically Enhanced Cauliflower
Do you know the difference between education and experience? Education is when you read the fine print; experience is what you get when you don't.
Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window.
Click Here to visit my website.
[This message has been edited by BlumenKohl (edited 12-14-2002 @ 11:40 AM).]