1. #1

    ruse remade??

    i feel whole heartily that ubi should team back up with eugen studios to publish a new ruse game either remake remaster (its sorta different if i remember) or possibly a sequal. the detail and just how fresh of a rts it was was amazing for the time and i feel that a new reiteration of the game made for today's gaming atmosphere from a triple a developer like ubi could really bring a good new experience to the world. and with the love and care of eugen systems puts in. it would be a modern master piece for sure. what do you guys think?
    Share this post

  2. #2
    I honestly agree with you wholeheartedly that this would be great, but Ubisoft probably isn't going to bite. RUSE was for all intents and purposes, kind of a failure if you compare it to the plethora of games that fill the Ubisoft library. Due to lack of good marketing and seeming lack of interest from the PC community, the game didn't start strong, and it could only go down from there. RUSE 2/REMASTERED is a genuine dream of mine, but Ubi can't be expected to pander to every loyal fan's wishes when we aren't a majority. RUSE 2 (as I'll call it) could be successful in my eyes, if done right. I just recently put another 10 hours into the game and I'm hooked again, hooked on that simple but addicting counter focused style of RTS that the game is. The gameplay's focus on you hard countering an enemy's attack/defense adds a level of depth and accomplishment to the rather straightforward and simplistic rock paper scissors units, especially with each unit's added intricacies of course, like range, frequency of attack, and what it can attack, as a few examples. There are essentially 5 things that in my eyes, could make RUSE 2 a hit, namely, more factions, RUSE overhaul, naval warfare, gameplay modes, and better advertising. When it comes to factions, I'm not too pickey about, for i quite enjoy the lineup we already have, but that little extra spice to the learning curve would be interesting. Learning new factions, how they work, what their counters and strengths are on the field, especially during which era, would be fun, especially for veterans of the previous game. For my second point, I feel like a few extra RUSEs, especially ones that felt missing, could be implemented to add even more depth. For one, why have BLITZ, but not have a RUSE that could slow down enemy moment, maybe call it BOG? It's only counter could be if you BLITZ on top of it, showing your units to move at normal speed. This would also create a bit more balance in the scarcity of RUSEs, making them more valuable. I notice that my RUSE count (and my enemy's) begins to pile up near the end, so we can spam them, but if we were to constantly be BOG/BLITZing each other to get an edge on an offensive or defensive movement, wouldn't that encourage less static unit placement, as well as would make us value our few RUSEs we have left, enough to use them more sparingly? And some completely new RUSEs could be tied into my third point, however the Devs would so choose, is naval warfare. As shown in the infamous trailer for RUSE, we see what we would only get 2/3 of on release, air, land, and sea. Naval warfare could add a level of depth and more micromanagement to really test the player. Ships could essentially act as heavy artillery, or troop transports, or even like RUSEs, a ship that acts as a constant SPY RUSE, etc. This would make you or the other player really have to stretch your forces thin, or allow a possible disadvantage. "I don't have any ships at the moment, and I only have 3 torpedo bombers. I can't buy more right now, and one will probably be killed by a ship, but what do I go for? That recon ship is allowing their army to see everything that's going on in my neighboring city, but that battleship is shelling my AA emplacements where they keep trying to send heavy bombers, do I let the bombers in, or do I let them have an edge in an assault on my last good land unit defensive line? Having naval warfare like this, which could give one player an advantage over the other based on map layout, is what pulls me into point four, modes. Ever felt like there was some kind of multiplayer Grand operation missing? That's what I feel like naval leads towards. One team invades from the sea, the other, builds defensive emplacements on land in preparation for the assault. This kind of mode could offer varied ways of income in the beginning and how units are first deployed by the offensive team, as well as have a realistic map design that wouldn't follow lanes like the rest of the core multiplayer maps, requiring more map specific thinking, less systematic thinking. The defending team has a heavy defense, but how exactly should the attacking team proceed to break through? No defense in invulnerable. This invasion style mode could bring the game to a lot more theaters of war, especially the Pacific, which would broaden the game's map count. A heavily defended Normandy invasion, or a chain of islands in the Pacific, each defender spawning on and defending his own from multidirectional naval assault, trying to coordinate units between each other. Not to mention, this could be developed into a multi match campaign map style mode, like Starwars Battlefront 2's Galactic Conquest, as possibly solo, coop, or pure multiplayer, if you have friends dedicated enough to sit down with you a few hours (which trust me, you won't notice the time while playing RUSE), but I'm getting ahead of myself. To break from this point a bit, RUSE's core gameplay should still be laned, deathmatch focused maps, as the game excels at it's competitive RTS inspired layouts, but that variety in gameplay and scope would bring much more replayability, and a bigger audience, since I know quite a few RTS players who are less Company of Heroes and more Total War. The biggest and most important point, advertising. RUSE just wasn't really a name when it came out. It wasn't really out there, or huge, it was kind of a slow burner, from start to finish. RUSE 2 needs to be shown to the world. And the thing is, let the game advertise itself. All these new things I mentioned, these ideas, whatever RUSE 2 could really have to offer to the players, show them that, and show them what all they can do, not just a sneak peak, like with the original. RTS games, above many games out there, can keep the longest running, loyal fanbases after the first few years that the playerbase begins to decline. When you give RTS gamers a product that is not just balanced, but has real, varied content, they have so little reason to leave. With a game as dynamic as RUSE was, with how a game can be so simple yet fast paced and complex, if the old RUSE I know and love played the same, and looked the same (besides new overall textures and lighting, I know things need to look nicer now), but had these things I mentioned, why would I ever want to play anything else? I wouldn't, believe me. I know the RUSE community is niche, but instead of asking us to create demand for another, Ubi, please, use your skills and funding to make it not niche. Bring an RTS to the world that is competitively demanding and rewarding, yet simple enough that new players to the genre as a whole won't be turned away. Give a wider audience a taste of that RUSE charm, with a nice big twist for return players, and a breath of fresh air for RTS veterans, and newcomers to this interesting, interesting genre of strategy game. Thank you Ubi for all that you do, I know this comment turned from a response into a sales pitch, but I just hope someone reads this and at least enjoys the passion.
    Share this post

  3. #3
    Couldn’t agree more. What a game it was. Some amazing ideas for RUSE 2. I wonder how many people it would take to convince them to make a new one.
    Share this post