Originally Posted by Darth54
It does not say "RTS". Just "strategy". And Fire Emblem is much more of a RPG-strategy hybrid than a real RTS. Civ 4 should have been in that one.
Anyways, it has been an extremely poor year for RTSs; turn-based games (such as Civ 4) should be the contenders. They are basically holding a vote to know which game is the best amongst the worst.
I personally think that the RTS games this year haven't been any better or worse than any other year. I mean really, EaW is a pretty good RTS. You can use any number of tactics in both space and land battles, which is pretty impressive IMO. BFME2 is also a fairly good RTS, though I agree that it does lack the depth that EaW has. Be that as it may, BFME2 is still a fun RTS nonetheless.
As for Civ 4, it's good but I don't get as interested in strategy games that aren't RTS. I played the Civ 4 demo and realized it really just wasn't for me.
One last comment, I'm also not much of an AoE fan. The gameplay is just too slow paced, the buildings sometimes take FOREVER to destroy, and the graphics have never been worth bragging about. I'll take a WarCraft, C&C, EaW, or BFME game any day over the AoE series. IMHO.