yea so i have to do a persuasive essay in my english class and mine is that rts games r better than fps games and i just wanted to know some other people's opinions are and why they think that

thank you in advance

Hmm, it's really hard to say which is better. Personally, I enjoy both and this predicament only reminds me of Pure Pwnage (the series with fps_doug and "Boom! Headshot!")

I can give you arguments supporting either though, if you'd like.

Pro RTS: Real Time Strategy requires many micro-management skills that you cannot utilize to the fullest effects in FPS. What I mean is, you need to create armies, collect resources, expand bases, attack enemies, defend teammates and yourselves, coordinate attacks, man different squadrons, etc. What do you do in FPS? Load up and shoot down the enemy. RTS tends to have much better back-story and such when compared to MULTIPLAYER FPS, as all of the single player elements are present. For example, you can play as certain important units/races/maps with other humans, whereas you will never see a Gordon Freeman vs. alien horde in Half-Life Deathmatch with players or Counter-Strike. In FPS, you basically know most of the guns and vehicles after playing for a long time. There is really no more discussion than as to "Oh, this gun is 3 hits to kill. This gun is 2 hits." For RTS you must remember unit costs, unit strength, unit types, damage types, which unit is good against which, which unit goes with which best, etc. As well as numerous hotkeys throughout the keyboard compared to FPS's minimalistic hotkeys (usually some buttons for guns, and moving, and going prone/crawl/crouch, etc.) RTS can have many, MANY hotkeys.

Pro FPS: FPS are far more widespread in general than RTS. There are really only a few good RTS; namely, Command and Conquer, Starcraft, and Warcraft. However, there are tons and tons of FPS. There's also much more variety. For example, all RTS games are limited to three types: Fantasy army, historical army, or sci-fi army. FPS can have anything, from zombies, to gothic, to futuristic, to tactical, etc. FPS skills are far more responsive than RTS. Sure, you want to build and command at lightning speed, but it is much more impressive to whip your gun around 180 degrees while being fired upon and fragging the entire enemy team. Similarly, if one is a true pro of FPS there is much more bragging rights than a pro of RTS; this is evidenced by the mass amounts of scripts and hacks which are meant to replace player skill in FPS. All RTS has is maphack, and a RTS player can simply scout constantly to achieve similar effects. Can a FPS noob ever have the same play experience as a pro FPS player? No.

Well, this is all my opinion, and I know the pro-FPS section won't help you much, but try to think of arguments that refute what I said there. Like for example, it is much easier to hack and make others think you're good on FPS, whereas most pro RTS people are truly skilled, even maphack doesn't give that much of an advantage in terms of micro and resource/teching management.

Like I said in FPS section, there are many FPS. This shows how hard it is to make a good, balanced RTS game. Difficulty and rarety in quality does not mean an inferior category, but quite the opposite. Quite like fine art.

Lastly, RTS AI is much better suited for single player, and campaigns are also fun. FPS single player is usually very lame or else it is overly difficult. Hope that helps.

imo i have more fun in fps
but they both have their pros and cons in terms of challenge....
but hey i have my biased oppinions as anybody else =3
( F.E.A.R. pwns xD .. best fps game )

Ha ha, "BOOM HEADSHOT!" Nice, eA-Zaku. I remember those videos... I once spent most of a day sneaking around corners and screaming "BOOM HEADSHOT!" It was an excellent day.

lol that show is jokes
i remember i had a macro of boomhead shot in some other game....
anyways.. best phrase from it has to be " you remind me of gay ... "
xD

I'm not the biggest fan of RTS' to begin with, but I guess it's all on personal preference. While some prefer to strategize, some like to run in and blast everything around them. x3

I'm not a fan of either, I'm a boring chick. xDD

I switch between them.

Tking is more fun in RTS games though

I would prefer RTS over FPS anyday. With FPS its basicly aim, shoot, run, hide, die, repeat. gets kinda repetative after a while for me. With RTS though you have to build, plan, move, strategize, counter attack, and so fourth especially when playing agaisnt other people. Since your opponent can be a complete newbie or a pro with a new account. What counts is the experiance you have in it.

I love RTS games since I like the feeling of commanding entire armies. Right now I'm obsessed with Dawn of War and Age of Mythology. There's nothing quite like the feeling of overrunning an enemy base with 100 guys and watching the destruction.

I don't play FPS games very much since many of them make me dizzy but multiplayer ones like Halo are ok.

I dunno. You can't really say one is better than the other.

I'd say I like RTS more, but they can get pretty boring pretty fast, unless your playing multiplayer. I guess the same could be said fr some FPSes also.

It depends on the game itself rather than the genra to me.

I find both genre's are great. However, here a my opinion on both.

FPS: Games of this genre teaches you how to hone reflex skills and also helps you to truly feel that you are actually there holding a gun, waiting to frag some squibb. Take games like FEAR, for example. The game's environment really makes use of your sense like at times the game will try to frighten you with soft subtle sounds. The games' physics engine is very advanced and it helps u feel the realism like you are actually there, as explained above.

RTS : Games that generally fall in this genre helps hone your micromanagement skills. When playing against other human players, this type of games requires you think about the steps to take and also manage your army.

Personally I cant say one is better than the other just that both have their strengths and weaknesses.

-Both genres have their pros & cons but some of the bigger points that have to be emphasized:

RTS:
-Micro & Macromanagement. Sure you can micro your units around ("dance") but can you micro your units, build new buildings/train new units, call in reinforcements, signal your allies, research/build to the correct counter units, etc across multiple locations across the map?. You have to think a lot more about he macromanagement. Different games will emphasize either micro or macro more but having the skills to multitask, ability to memorize all the data (counters, costs, locations/maps, etc.) is critical. Ex: Macro- Total War Games (Shogun, Medieval, Rome); Micro - Warcraft III
A stereotypical example can be found by downloading some RTS game videos of some Korean players and watch how their mice and camera view, blitzes across the screen/map constantly.
-Takes some time to play a good game that's enjoyable on both sides (rush games can be good but hated by the rushed party), and those battlefilled games take time (30-45+ mins)

FPS:
-Heavily dependent upon your ping to the game server (some games are more sensitive than others). And the mystical "twitch factor" - the ability to suddenly swing your crosshairs from one area directly to an opponent's head.
-A lot easier to teach/learn since the simple run around, point/click, shoot formula is universal. And a lot faster to get a game going with lots of frags going around, and if it lasts more than 30 mins than it tends to drag down & bore a lot of people. However, since it is so easy to learn it attracts the less "internet mature" (which is sadly representative true of many idiotic CS players whose vocabulary composes of n3wb, wallhaxx0r, etc.).

Quote by eA-ZakuPro FPS: FPS are far more widespread in general than RTS. There are really only a few good RTS; namely, Command and Conquer, Starcraft, and Warcraft. However, there are tons and tons of FPS. There's also much more variety. For example, all RTS games are limited to three types: Fantasy army, historical army, or sci-fi army. FPS can have anything, from zombies, to gothic, to futuristic, to tactical, etc.

Your point is invalid as your categories are just the same genres for both RTS & FPS but under different names.
-Zombies & Gothic is Fantasy.
-Futuristic is sci-fi
-Tactical fits under war/historical games

RTS and FPS arent even similar. Its like asking which is better between RPGs or action games.

Fact is, good RTS games are much harder to find - the real old Starcraft still is the most balanced RTS game created - even Warcraft 3 doesnt have that balance, and this is one reason for 90% of war 3 players are on DotA map.

I play both genres. I'm horrible on both, btw.

RTS and FPS shouldn't really be compared because, like GuardianHalberd stated, its like comparing rpgs and action games. There will be things in one of the genres have over the other and vice-versa and can't really compare...

Anywho, RTS games require some thinking, tactics, micromanagement, and so forth. It basically uses the gamer's brain to think of multiple ways to try and achieve the goal of the mission or what not. I preffer to play RTS because of this fact.

FPS are fun to play but really dont require as much thinking as you would do in a RTS game. I guess that's y ppl like to play FPS games a lot. All you do for those is go around a shoot things up. Maybe some puzzles here and there, but the main point is to shoot everything up pretty much. I don't mind playing FPS if i'm in the mood for them.

I like the 3D overall-view which you get with RTS, although the personal-level view of FPS has its merits. Currently I am playing Warhammer 40k; Dawn of War and found the ability to command many units to shoot-up my enemy's base of operations to be more satisfying than having to do it all by myself. I guess this means I like to think in an overall "Big Picture" way than in a smaller first-person way and that I have the patience to manage time & resources towards the goal of ultimate victory. Games like Halo don't allow for this kind of advanced thinking, which makes me wonder if FPS fans are somehow held back by a lack of patience & emotional maturity.

Can't really beat the original Quake.