Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Real-Time Strategy Games - Too Many Clicks?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the clicky-click dept.

simoniker writes "A new Gamasutra article asks provocatively in its synopsis: 'Could games like Civilization benefit from putting their interfaces on a diet? Can a player control too many objects at once in a strategy game?' Are RTS titles too UI-intensive? The author notes: 'Even for a Civ addict like me, the game isn't much fun after about 1800. Too many clicks. I counted the clicks, mouse movements, and keystrokes that it took me to get through one move of Civilization III in the year 1848. Many hours later, when that turn was done, I'd counted 422 mouse clicks, 352 mouse movements, 290 key presses, 23 wheel scrolls, and 18 screen pans to scroll the screen.'"

8 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. Automation by Iamthefallen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From TFA:
    I was attempting to construct a railway line connecting the north end to the south end of my civilization.
    [Snip] ...
    I needed to assign about a hundred workers to building the railway line in order to get it built before being overrun. For each worker, I had to click on it once to bring it into focus; then type 'g' to begin a movement, scroll to its starting point on the railway line, and click again. Later, when it reached that point, I would have to type "ctrl-r" to build a railroad, scroll to the end of that unit's portion of the railway, and click again. That's three mouse movements, three keystrokes, and three mouse clicks per unit. I tried to keep the workers in groups of three, although this was possible only about half the time. So it probably took me 600 clicks, keystrokes, and scrolls to build that railway.

    Imagine if I'd been able to say that I wanted to build a railroad, click on its start, and click on its end. The computer would then have directed workers, as they became available, to work on sections of the railway. The entire railroad could have been constructed with the same amount of supervision that it took me to direct one worker.

    Yeah, imagine that, it's called Civ4. You can direct one worker to build it, you can direct a dozen.

    But again we go to TFA:
    You may wonder why I'm talking about Civ III, when Civ IV has been out for months. I never bought Civ IV. I'd been waiting and hoping for a more playable Civ. What finally arrived was a Civ that takes just as many clicks, but with a new animated 3D UI.

    Yeah...

    In CIv4 you can automate most actions and take a hands-off approach and focus on the general direction of your empire. More and more I play my games by automating construction in my non-critical cities, I let workers build improvements automatically, I make choices as to what crucial structures will be built where, but the mundane, repetitive clicking can be mostly done away with.

    Point is, the choice to make detail decisions is entirely yours. I don't think it's a UI problem when you choose to build dozens of cities, hundereds of units, and then micro-manage them all. Especially when the UI of the game in question (CIV III) is several years old. Imagine that, UIs evolve!

    What's next, a 6 page article on powertoys for Windows 95 and why they don't increase productivity?

    --
    Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
  2. Let's get something straight. by Digitus1337 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Civilization is not a Real Time Strategy game, it is a 4X (eXplore, eXpand, eXploit and eXterminate) Turn Based Strategy game. Turn Based games like Civ do tend to have a lot more micro-management than RTS titles, but either does require quite a bit of mouse work. That said, is there any viable alternative?

    1. Re:Let's get something straight. by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 5, Funny

      >> Civilization... is a 4X (eXplore, eXpand, eXploit and eXterminate) Turn Based Strategy game

      Actually, I think it's an eX-employee, eX-girlfriend, eX-hausted from no sleep, and eX-iled to the basement until you take a bath, Turn Based Strategy game.

    2. Re:Let's get something straight. by badasscat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Turn Based games like Civ do tend to have a lot more micro-management than RTS titles, but either does require quite a bit of mouse work. That said, is there any viable alternative?

      I don't think it's about alternatives, and I don't think there's anything wrong with Civ's interface.

      I think the point is RTS games and turn-based games are fundamentally different. It's a pretty egregious mistake to call Civ an RTS and to say it has too many clicks on that basis, IMO, which makes the whole story here (or at least the headline and summary) basically moot.

      Some RTS games may very well require too many clicks. The whole point is the action is happening in real-time, so you want to minimize your work load as much as possible. The interface needs to be streamlined so that you can get done what you need to do quickly.

      Turn-based games, though, are under no such constraints, and in fact part of the reason people still play them is because you don't need to be in such a hurry and can play completely at your own pace.

      The bottom line is they are two different genres that are often chosen by gamers for completely opposite reasons. Those who want action-oriented strategy buy RTS games; those who want more depth and planning buy turn-based games. It is a huge mistake to suggest that turn-based games need to be more like real-time games, which is in effect what's being suggested by lumping both genres in together. Both genres in fact exist to counterbalance each other.

      I do remember playing the original Myth and feeling like I literally just didn't have enough time to deal with the interface before my guys got slaughtered. So this is a big concern in real RTS games. But using Civilization as an example of what's wrong with the RTS genre is just incorrect on many different levels.

  3. I'll just give up RTS games and go play Diablo! by KatchooNJ · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ya know something... this article opened my eyes. Before I get carpal tunnel, I'm going to uninstall my RTS games and load back on Diablo! Weee!!

    Click... click... click... click... click... click... click... click... click... click...

    --
    "Never give up, for that is just the time and place when the tide will change." -Harriet Beecher Stowe ^_^
  4. Eating steak, too much chewing? by cowscows · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uhhh...are people buying the game and having fun? If so, then I think it's safe to say that the number of clicks is just fine.

    If it's too many clicks for you personally, then maybe you should go play a different game. I know it's hard to believe, but you as an individual are not the intended market for every developer out there.

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  5. no wii for you by dolson · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you get exhausted just from moving your fingers to click and push buttons, then I think you aren't going to be too happy when you hear about the Nintendo Wii's control scheme. What America really needs is a gaming console that lets you control your games simply by chewing food and drinking soda.

  6. How Not to Write a Thesis by LargeWu · · Score: 4, Funny

    Pick one data point. Make sure it's outdated and unrepresentative. Base it on subjective criteria.

    Seriously the article could have been summarized like this:
    "There's this one real-time strategy game, except it's a turn based game, and it requires too many clicks per turn once the game is sufficiently advanced. Except this problem was mitigated in the next version. Therefore, RTS games require too many clicks."