The "real-time vs. turn-based" question ranks right up there with the "less filling vs. tastes great" debate - it's such an emotional issue, you know that there are some people who will stick with their position regardless of how strong the evidence is contradicting their point of view. I used to be that way when it came to using real-time design in strategy games. I felt that there wasn't any logical way to use real-time in a fashion that would allow the element of control needed to properly play the game.
Then came Dune II, from Westwood Studios. By putting you in charge of troops on what basically amounted to a squad or platoon level, the designers came up with a game engine that was quick enough to keep you constantly on your toes, but fell just short of overwhelming you. I understand that platoon level real-time has been done on the PC before - I liked Cannon Fodder as much as the next guy - but Dune II had a resource management element that made it a complete strategy game. Westwood extended the concept with Command & Conquer, while Blizzard Entertainment came up with some innovations of its own in Warcraft: Orcs & Humans and its sequel, Warcraft II.
I've bared my soul over this burning issue because I want everyone out there to understand why I ultimately disliked Warhammer: Shadow of the Horned Rat, from Mindscape. Based on the Warhammer fantasy universe, and designed in conjunction with Games Workshop, Warhammer's creators, Shadow of the Horned Rat brings everything I detest about real-time into one great-looking package.
Your role in Warhammer is that of Morgan Bernhardt, mercenary soldier. It's a good time to be a mercenary, because evil is afoot in the Empire. The Horned Rat is stirring things up, and there are lots of people clamoring for your services. As the game progresses you're drawn deeper and deeper into the conflict, and there will comes a point where you'll actually undertake a mission for the sake of honor without earning a fee.
Regardless of the money involved, your missions involve a battle, and Mindscape's decision to fight those battles in real-time was a mistake. While you'll have control of the occasional individual soldier or wizard, almost all of your troops are regiments (actually, they can be as small as 15-20 men, but Mindscape calls them regiments). Setting up these regiments isn't a problem - the trouble actually begins once you start fighting.
Warhammer's default setup gives you a smaller map window and a larger battle window. I can't recall ever using the map window during a conflict - I would usually either zoom in on the battle map, or take advantage of the wide-screen option which expands the battle map. Regardless of your choice, it's extremely difficult to execute the regimental-level maneuvers necessary to properly play the game.
For instance, if you want to swing your regiment around to face an enemy attack from the rear, you attempt to quickly do the following: select the unit by either clicking on its standard on the battle map (this works most, but not all of the time) or cycling through the regiment selection buttons, click on the move button, click on the wheel button, then return to the battle map and click on it in the direction that you want your unit to face. By the time you've done all this, you're hoping that the enemy is still somewhere in the general neighborhood of where you saw them last.
Once you engage the enemy, you're pretty much reduced to the role of spectator. The only tactical decision you're allowed to make is to declare a rout, which is a short way of saying "run away and regroup." Otherwise, you have no control over your units - that is, unless you decide to use the "hero" button. By clicking on this repeatedly, you supposedly inspire your troops to greater heights of valor. A cynic would say the designers put this in to keep you from becoming too bored during a battle. Call me a cynic.
To be honest, I think Mindscape's biggest mistake with Warhammer was deciding to place it in the real-time strategy market. It feels much more like a wargame while you're playing it, and I think if they had taken it in that direction, and had done some drastic surgery on the cumbersome interface, they might have had a pretty good game on their hands.
We've given short shrift to the other elements of this game, which is probably a little unfair. Most of the graphics look sharp, although the 3D-animated battles were slow and choppy on my P60 with 8 megs of RAM. The music sounds good, and the storyline, which is told through a series of cut scenes between missions, is well-done. And, all of you fans of the Warhammer tabletop hobby games will be happy to heart that they've done a good job of recreating that popular fantasy universe.
Unfortunately, all of these trappings are overshadowed by the fact that Warhammer: Shadow of the Horned Rat is, at best, a mediocre real-time strategy game. Mindscape and Games Workshop are supposedly working on a fantasy-adventure based on Warhammer, which sounds like a great idea. However, if you want to play a well-designed real-time strategy game, forget this and pick up Warcraft II or Command and Conquer. You'll have a lot more fun.
