I quite like RTS games. Command and Conquer, Age of Empires, Age of Mythology, Total Annihilation, Warcraft, Starcraft, Homeworld, Dawn of War, Company of Heroes, Supreme Commander and Rise of Nations are just some of the series I've enjoyed. They all kept my attention right from the get-go because there was at least one thing from each series that was done exceptionally well, such as the amount of strategic or tactical depth that was offered, the story or the multiplayer experience. The problem is that Tooth and Tail doesn't seem to have anything special going for it

Firstly, the gameplay isn't enough to keep me interested because I don't get to have the level of control or number of options that I'm accustomed to in other games. I think that the lead designer went too far in simplifying the RTS experience. Why did they decide to go down this route?

The store page says that Tooth and Tail is 'Pick-up-and-Play', which is a term that annoys me wherever I see it, by the way. It goes on to say, 'With matches lasting from 5-12 minutes, controls designed specifically for the gamepad, and split-screen couch play, Tooth and Tail is a popcorn RTS for veterans and newcomers alike.' Is that so? They say 'veterans' and 'newcomers', but I say that with the way this game is designed, neither group is likely to get much lasting appeal from it.

The thing is, newcomers already have it pretty good when it comes to being introduced to the RTS genre. Even many of the older games provide pretty decent tutorials. Homeworld and Age of Empires II comes to mind. If a newcomer grasps the basics from an in-game tutorial and plays through the campaign of any of the games that I mentioned, the RTS world is pretty much their oyster. Unfortunately, I can't really say the same about Tooth and Tail, although it's probably difficult to judge that from the perspective of a so-called 'veteran' or 'enthusiast', as I'd prefer to be called. The only true veterans out there are the ones who actually served their countries.

So, why do I think that Tooth and Tail is a bad way to introduce someone to the RTS genre? My view of it is mainly based on the way units are controlled in this game, or should I say, unit. Unlike the games that I mentioned, you have no direct control over the units that actually do the fighting. It's just WASD-based movement with your commander and mouse buttons for telling your other units to follow you or stop. There is also a command to order troops to focus-fire on specific enemy units, but it doesn't seem to work very well.

I was constantly thinking about the things that I am able to do in other RTS games, such as switching between control groups and clicking on the minimap if I wanted specific units to focus on specific tasks. If you're new and don't understand what that means, just ask yourself the following questions:

'Can I click and drag?'
'Can I hold CTRL and press a number key?'
'Can I click on the little square or circle in the corner of the screen?'

If you said yes to even one of those, I think it is safe to say that even you will probably find the functionality available in Tooth and Tail to be very limiting and you will soon desire greater control over what's going on in the game. I believe that it won't prepare a newcomer well for other RTS games because they are controlled very differently.

Hopefully, you can see where I'm going here. Despite what the store page claims, this isn't about introducing newcomers to a genre. It's about catering to controller users. I like controllers, by the way. I find them to be quite good for platformers and third-person action games. However, there are times when you have to recognise the best tool for the job. For RTS, it's the mouse and keyboard. There's no argument against it. Why anyone would want to use anything else, I will never understand, unless a player has some sort of crippling disability.

With all of that said though, there is an RTS game that comes to mind which was designed for controller use and I did enjoy it somewhat: Halo Wars. Although the gameplay was simplified compared to PC RTS games, I do recall that Halo Wars for the Xbox 360 allowed for better control than Tooth and Tail (and exceeding it in other areas as well of course). Did the developers take any notes from that?

So, what about those '5-12 minutes' matches? I'll say this: short matches are good for certain genres such as fighting games where it's about muscle memory, reflexes and yomi (look it up). Why design an RTS for short skirmishes though? A large part of the appeal of RTS games is the tug-of-war aspect and countering your opponent's forces with some higher tech unit that they weren't prepared for. There's tactics for the short-term and strategy for the long-term. I don't really see how any of this can play out in the span of 5-12 minutes. After watching some tournament replays, I can't say that I'm interested enough to dig deeper and find out. Maybe this is for people who are really that pressed for time? Suffice to say, the multiplayer scene is quite dead. With an average player count of about 25 for the past 12 months or so, you may even risk spending more time finding a match than actually playing one, depending on your timezone.

All that is left to examine is the story mode. Actually, it's not very interesting either. The writer was trying to make a funny story inspired by real-life examples of revolution and class struggle, but it's all communicated with rather poorly-written text and Russian-esque voiceovers. By about the eighth mission, I had stopped caring. Sometimes the gameplay has something of a halo effect on me and I end up being drawn in to the story, but again, the gameplay just wasn't that good. The music and character portraits are alright, but that's just not enough.

Pocketwatch Games markets Tooth and Tail as "Real-Time Strategy Distilled". A better way to describe it is 'diluted'. Whether you're new or experienced, this is not worth the time, even if you only have '5-12 minutes'. There are many better options out there.

I quite like RTS games. Command and Conquer, Age of Empires, Age of Mythology, Total Annihilation, Warcraft, Starcraft, Homeworld, Dawn of War, Company of Heroes, Supreme Commander and Rise of Nations are just some of the series I've enjoyed. They all kept my attention right from the get-go because there was at least one thing from each series that was done exceptionally well, such as the amount of strategic or tactical depth that was offered, the story or the multiplayer experience. The problem is that Tooth and Tail doesn't seem to have anything special going for it Firstly, the gameplay isn't enough to keep me interested because I don't get to have the level of control or number of options that I'm accustomed to in other games. I think that the lead designer went too far in simplifying the RTS experience. Why did they decide to go down this route? The store page says that Tooth and Tail is 'Pick-up-and-Play', which is a term that annoys me wherever I see it, by the way. It goes on to say, 'With matches lasting from 5-12 minutes, controls designed specifically for the gamepad, and split-screen couch play, Tooth and Tail is a popcorn RTS for veterans and newcomers alike.' Is that so? They say 'veterans' and 'newcomers', but I say that with the way this game is designed, neither group is likely to get much lasting appeal from it. The thing is, newcomers already have it pretty good when it comes to being introduced to the RTS genre. Even many of the older games provide pretty decent tutorials. Homeworld and Age of Empires II comes to mind. If a newcomer grasps the basics from an in-game tutorial and plays through the campaign of any of the games that I mentioned, the RTS world is pretty much their oyster. Unfortunately, I can't really say the same about Tooth and Tail, although it's probably difficult to judge that from the perspective of a so-called 'veteran' or 'enthusiast', as I'd prefer to be called. The only true veterans out there are the ones who actually served their countries. So, why do I think that Tooth and Tail is a bad way to introduce someone to the RTS genre? My view of it is mainly based on the way units are controlled in this game, or should I say, unit. Unlike the games that I mentioned, you have no direct control over the units that actually do the fighting. It's just WASD-based movement with your commander and mouse buttons for telling your other units to follow you or stop. There is also a command to order troops to focus-fire on specific enemy units, but it doesn't seem to work very well. I was constantly thinking about the things that I am able to do in other RTS games, such as switching between control groups and clicking on the minimap if I wanted specific units to focus on specific tasks. If you're new and don't understand what that means, just ask yourself the following questions: 'Can I click and drag?' 'Can I hold CTRL and press a number key?' 'Can I click on the little square or circle in the corner of the screen?' If you said yes to even one of those, I think it is safe to say that even you will probably find the functionality available in Tooth and Tail to be very limiting and you will soon desire greater control over what's going on in the game. I believe that it won't prepare a newcomer well for other RTS games because they are controlled very differently. Hopefully, you can see where I'm going here. Despite what the store page claims, this isn't about introducing newcomers to a genre. It's about catering to controller users. I like controllers, by the way. I find them to be quite good for platformers and third-person action games. However, there are times when you have to recognise the best tool for the job. For RTS, it's the mouse and keyboard. There's no argument against it. Why anyone would want to use anything else, I will never understand, unless a player has some sort of crippling disability. With all of that said though, there is an RTS game that comes to mind which was designed for controller use and I did enjoy it somewhat: Halo Wars. Although the gameplay was simplified compared to PC RTS games, I do recall that Halo Wars for the Xbox 360 allowed for better control than Tooth and Tail (and exceeding it in other areas as well of course). Did the developers take any notes from that? So, what about those '5-12 minutes' matches? I'll say this: short matches are good for certain genres such as fighting games where it's about muscle memory, reflexes and yomi (look it up). Why design an RTS for short skirmishes though? A large part of the appeal of RTS games is the tug-of-war aspect and countering your opponent's forces with some higher tech unit that they weren't prepared for. There's tactics for the short-term and strategy for the long-term. I don't really see how any of this can play out in the span of 5-12 minutes. After watching some tournament replays, I can't say that I'm interested enough to dig deeper and find out. Maybe this is for people who are really that pressed for time? Suffice to say, the multiplayer scene is quite dead. With an average player count of about 25 for the past 12 months or so, you may even risk spending more time finding a match than actually playing one, depending on your timezone. All that is left to examine is the story mode. Actually, it's not very interesting either. The writer was trying to make a funny story inspired by real-life examples of revolution and class struggle, but it's all communicated with rather poorly-written text and Russian-esque voiceovers. By about the eighth mission, I had stopped caring. Sometimes the gameplay has something of a halo effect on me and I end up being drawn in to the story, but again, the gameplay just wasn't that good. The music and character portraits are alright, but that's just not enough. Pocketwatch Games markets Tooth and Tail as "Real-Time Strategy Distilled". A better way to describe it is 'diluted'. Whether you're new or experienced, this is not worth the time, even if you only have '5-12 minutes'. There are many better options out there.