Traymen

Certainly, it is a astonishing comeback

You know, if - for example - C&C: Generals would run flawlessly w/o Gentool and some properties adjusting in executables I would say it is still compatible. Just look at the C&C: Generals topic "How to Play Generals / Zero Hour In Windows 7 x64". It has 6 pages and some people from time to time asks for help there having problem with some errors occurring here and there. This reminds me the AmigaOS developers. They sweat over very restricted source code to deliver things as basic as TCP/IP protocol. They could write something visually similar to AmigaOS and compatible with modern hardware but they crossed a point of no return so long ago, that abandoning that much work after so many years of development would be more devastating than maintaining of AmigaOS. The SAGE is same thing. Nowadays, you can write much more flexible and lightweight game engine offering same capabilities to SAGE. Moreover, you could monetize it if game demo would be eye-catching or deliver it as open source and gaining attention of other developers trying to create something together. This is why it's called nostalgia. Majority don't care about things that passionate minority.

Still, I don't understand the SAGE fascination. Back in the days when it was fully compatible with hardware and software it was a pain in the less noble part of back to play longer games. RTS w/o unit limit cap is pretty crappy when it comes to 30 minutes (and longer) skirmishes because It can't sustain framerate so the longer game gets the slower it is. It can be a good start point for game developer journey but if I had some time and better than basic knowledge in programming I would just learn how to make better game engine than W3D/SAGE. IMHO it's like playing with microcomputers from 80's. You can add Internet browser, drivers for modern printers etc., but in reality solving the problems which apply to less than 1% of human population is art for art's sake. Admirable but nostalgia finally ends and developer ends with huge expertise in things no one cares about.

There are few game engines worth rewriting from scratch and SAGE isn't one of them. While it can be a good practice to understand how to write own game engine I wouldn't focus too much in developing SAGE's clone. I have very little understanding in programming and my opinion isn't based on any kind of experience but from what i understand game engine written in C++ is very "homogeneous" in comparison to Java. While application written in Java can be run on any kind of device with JRE, C++ need to be written for each Windows, Mac OS X and Linux separately. Aside from that, I understand the urge of some people to challenge themselves working over obsolete engine and I honestly encourage them to study even more about game design but once they gain expertise in game's engine field they should move on with this nice chart in their CV's.

Back to Starcraft: Remastered. Unfortunetly, Blizzard raised the system requirements and game runs not as smoothly as it was on my Asus K50IJ back in the days with 1.16 patch.

Its seems it is easier to play it now on Linux. Just run Wine under Windows 98 and play it without issues.

IMHO this video is just wrong. There is something called unit composition and micromanagement and these are the factors player should focus on. For example, back in the days I was playing TS daily and had some achievements but I've never Point & Click on Strong / Weak units. Thing is the winner is always a player who have more units and better micro them. Better if You can do several things at the same time but choosing Strong / Weak unit? Sorry, no... If the opponent has just several tanks You always win with anti-armour units. If GDI is advancing with Titans (as they always do because this unit is OP) the best counter is to spam Rocket Infantry because You can make them more and faster. It's not a rocket science - just common sense. If someone gives a time to the opponent to build a Mammoth Tank he simply is a bad player. But let's focus on this scenario. Best way to fight with mech player is to flood him with anti-armour units. Like every other game, TW has a rock-paper-scissors mechanics. Yes, you can build tanks to counter his tanks but in that case, the winner is with more tanks. However, the better counter is to make units less vulnerable to armour attacks and higher damage against them. Depends on how good Your economy is. Sometimes You might want to gain some time by gathering more and better units to counter opponents Harvester harass. Sometimes You have to defend Harvester at all cost. All it depends on how much Tiberium You've collected and how many units You can build in no time. Thing is C&C is a very specific game due to no unit cap and lack of toolbar to manage units in groups. I remember a game in TW where I was spamming Disc Throwers in APC's and the opponent gone wild with Juggernauts. The game was at some point unwinnable for both of us simply because the minor battle began looking like Western Front during WWI - both sides fighting along frontline and couldn't breach the enemy lines.

This is The Wall of Democracy!

Since Empire at War, I didn't touch any of their titles. I've heard that some former Westwood employees were among their staff, but I guess it's no longer true or at least their numbers decreased... Anyway, I don't think that association with Westwood Studios is relevant any longer. For some older gamers, it's still a thing but there is whole, an entire generation of new gamers who don't even know this brand. It's more like a ball and chain for them right now. They need a new audience but associating with Team17 (also dinosaur gaming era) won't help.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, ok. Lately I've spent plenty of time on BotW or Game Dev Tycoon. Although Zelda is one of best open world game i've ever played, the GDT has something unique i like to come back from time to time. Even though it gets repetetive once you unlock all available genres, I like this feeling that I've 'developed' a game. Same here. Back in the day i loved Tiberian Sun. But for some time I can't stand the graphics, gameplay and story and prefer Generals for it's simplicity and not so dull visuals.

Prove it? I have nothing against raising the argument about who's got a name after whom / what, but I'd like to see proof.

I don't know how it would work but

Funny thing is You get no information regarding game's gameplay from the last review, lol.

There's nothing else to say - great job!

It just came to me, like some revelation, that some people like base building and some don't, but none of the RTS games allows player to pass the base building to AI. Let's say you want to focus on micromanagement and leave macromanagement to AI. Choose on what AI should be focused (defence, resources, offence) and play how you want to. The only thing is, how AI would recognise the need of building defences or expansions in the late game.