Stupid sites.

Sorry, what?

 

RAM does have something to do with how well an RTS will play. If your RAM is low,for instance, under 1GB, you will have a problem running it without lag when there are hundreds of units on screen. Imagine those units attacking each other with lasers, explosions, etc.
To add, those units are from different types. Their death animation is different from one another and different depending on what kill them.
Even a high end PC has a problem running game like Supreme Commander 2 if there are hundreds or high poly units in screen.
RTS relies on RAM and CPU more than any other genres.
For example, Starcraft 2 takes more CPU power than Crysis even though Crysis requires more powerful video card.

 

And?
This has anything to do with your previous arguement against super mario galaxy?
RTS can work on a console, they just dont cause its easyier to play and do on a pc, every game works on a console, so your arguement is invalid.

 

It works but not satisfying extent. RTS requires multitasking which means mouse and hotkeys are an integral part.
Invalid. No, yours is invalid here. RTS has never been successful on consoles.
Halo Wars is the decent one but even that is terrible by the overall RTS standard.
Platformer has not work well on PC.

 

This thread keeps changing, I don't even know what its about anymore.

 

I did that to replay to your "RTS has nothing to do with RAM" argument.

 

Work on your grammer, so its somewhat easier to read.
I never said RTS's were succesful on consoles, I just said They can do it, they dont because its..yadayada
I dont see why you think that platformers dont work on pc, many I have played worked wonderfully.
I know RTS's should just stick to pc.

Inorite?

 

They don't do it because they can't so far. Unless the next gen consoles do something.

 

Or they don't do It cause' theres not much money in it?

 

So are you saying they cant do RTS?
Or are you saying its because the controls don't work?

 

Again, it's the controls that are the problem. Marketing RTSs for consoles and platformers for PC is usually unsucessful because the default controls for these platforms aren't best suited for these genres; so developers tend not to bother (although, there is the fact that gamers that game only on PCs/consoles may be conditioned to the genres of games most widely available for their platform; rejecting genres that aren't typical for it).
Anyway, you can get gamepads for PC that you may map mouse-movement/buttons and keys to; it's just that most PC gamers prefer a mouse and keyboard for games, or just don't own a gamepad (likewise for keyboards and mice available for consoles).

 

Im pretty sure you can get a plug in keyboard for a ps3, right?

 

Google tells me you can use a mouse on xbox 360

 

MSG-it's the RAM as well. Do you think 512 MB and 256 MB can run a modern RTS at its full potential without toning the unit counts and unit polygons? Or gamespeed?

 

I bet a ps3 can run a modern RTS

 

Well, it can but cannot on highest speed (like on PC) and highest visual rendering.
The more units are on screen, the slower the framerate and more RAM and processing power are required to handle all those explosion,unit stats and various other informations.
Let say you have a 2GB RAM PC. You might run a lot of action games on medium setting but will probably only able to run a modern RTS at low. (by turning off fancy physics)

 

They would tone it down, duhhh.

 

But not everyone has a great spec PC, ps3's are as they are out the box.

 

They will still tone it down. FPS on high PC might not be that much of a difference to its console counterpart but an RTS is.
If you turn off or tone down certain aspect of an FPS, the difference might not be that noticeable unless you go from Ultra to Medium but in an RTS, the difference is huge.

 

The PS3 is essentially a super computer; it's far more powerful than the average consumer PC.