The Voices were done for Heroes instead of new Civs.
2 Likes
Im trying to make civ swith fun regional unit crossover. Please work WITH, not AGAINST potentiality
I apologize if I was rude. I just dont want my future a s a civ crafter to fall off because Im not winning everyone over
1 Like
And some people seem to have lived in the illusion of righteousness for so long
âI shielded another billionaire from the mob violence (meaning, a few posts theyâll never read) today so that they donât have to weep at breakfast table. I must be the saviorâ
3 Likes
RoR, BfG and generally Chronicles was made for AOE1 people. They are probably trying to get those people to move to AOE2 because AOE1 did not take off. Itâs a step by step import of AOE1 into AOE2.
TMR: I agree with your comments. It was a mixed bag DLC.
V&V: No you need not. 
3K: I also gave up. 
1 Like
Thereâre 4 Southeast Asian civs and 4 South Asian civs having access to elephants, and there are potential civs from those regions and they will have access to elephants too. The Savar is unique to the Persians due to their history. We donât have to force other civ like the Sogdians that had no usage of those units to have access to them in the game for so-call âpotentialityâ. Thatâs just disrespectful to the peopleâs history. If you want something like that, you canât complain the devs creating those inaccurate designs, like top-class navy but awful cavalry for Armenians, weak infantry for Georgians, useless Battle Elephants for Dravidians, infantry identity for Khitans with fictional Liao Dao, and so on. You will be as same as the devs. The devs may even defense themselves as they thought the 3K are full of âpotentialityâ.
Not sure why you see yourself as particularly exceptional at civ designing, and feel the need to frequently mention about this self-identity. But in another thread, you criticized my civ concepts in a way that came across as dismissive and even rude, especially considering it seemed like you hadnât read them carefully. Iâve let go of that, but I also want to make it clear that your identity as a âciv crafterâ doesnât really matter to me.
I think itâs just that the management is too out of touch and only sees numbers, and the complete lack of a consistent perspective
If they are targeting AOE1 esports players: do they really know why AOE1 esports take off in Vietnam? Because it has been affordable and familiar. And those people wonât migrate to an expensive new game with a different feeling and more demands on the hardware. And why would they move to a second, more expensive game if the first already failed?
If they just want to sell the classical age setting: then why not make AOE1 and then ROR with more up-to-date designs in the first place? Because they were meant for esports? And if that didnât succeed, why not improve the one game and one subgame they already have on that setting but make a third subgame instead?
8 Likes
Honestly, I donât blame FE here at all. (In the end, to me, the people in charge are ALWAYS to blame when failure happens. (Microsoft in this case.) I know this sounds unfair but, in the end, there is usually some truth in it. It usually always is their fault in some aspect. Primarily Money/Greed/Power.)
Now, I know devs could be blamed too but, considering all the stories I have heard about the gaming industry, it sounds true/factual to me. They try to push/blame them with the failure or consumers not buying the game. When in fact, itâs their idiotic ideas on how to make maximum profit vs actually making a fun game/launching in itâs best version.) They never seem to learn from their mistakes. Like, ever⊠(With a few exceptions of course.) Although, in the end, itâs still a âteam effortâ. So, they do deserve some of the backlash too unfortunatelyâŠ
As much as Id like to blame managment, project managers are devs too, and while bad management can end a game, the reason those choices get made is deeper.
The overwhelming majority of game devs (meaning those who are doing the ground game of design, coding, art, so on) are doing it because they love it. Games are like books, art, or music, you do it because itâs creative expression not because itâs a gateway to wealth. You can make money doing those things in the same way that you can write a book that becomes a best seller, but ultimately the real reason is because you want to make something that someone else will enjoy.
HoweverâŠ
The reality, as with all of these creative jobs, is you still need to eat at the end of the day. Even ignoring food, You have costs associated with development. Game design is not free. In a perfect world you make something and people enjoy it and give you money so you can keep making stuff. Project Managers are still an important piece of the puzzle as good managers help balance out the realities of costs with the passion of developers. They can help keep scope, keep deadlines, distribute workloads, so on so forth. This helps keep people within budget so the team doesnât go under from failing to even release a game (we donât hear about all the studios who started a project and failed and went under, we only see the ones that actually get made)
and problems can arrise from these roles. Sometimes you do have someone in the industry whos not actually passionate and just needs the work, sometimes they may be passionate but just not good at the job. People are human, humans make errors and mistakes, that can result in a bad game.
The industry wide issue is the step above project managers. Shareholders. At the end of a day, shareholders do not care about the human element, the passion, the art. They care about one thing only. Profit and share value. Once a company goes public, thats when the problems start.
Because at that point, the goals of development shift from âhow can we make a fun game and make enough money to pay the bills, give some raises, and then make a new game?â to âHow can we minimize costs and maximize profits considering all factors?â. This doesnât nessisarilly mean shoving microtransactions, lootboxes, gambling mechanics, time savers, and battle passes into everything (though these are some obvious and common strategies), but it absolutely means that everything becomes about what will generate the most income short or long term. If something is being done to win over good will with customers, itâs because they think it will make more money. If something is being done despite customers, its because they think it will make them more money. Shareholders only care about the shareprice.
Age of Empires is owned by microsoft, MS is a publically traded company, they have shareholders.
When Age of empires (and indeed, PC gaming as a whole) was seen as unprofitable, MS closed down Ensemble Studios for a tax break because that was, in their mind, better for the shareholders.
When Age of Empires saw a resergence on voobly, and Microsoft had new internal managment (Phil Spencer) pushing new directions to dunk cash into as many IPs as possible to long term gain market dominance, They got FE (and others) to make new age games because it would make them money.
If age games stop being profitable, as was almost certainly the case with AoE3, theyâll either see if itâs feasable to make them profitable again, or cut support.
5 Likes
I donât think AoE 3 was unprofitable given it was the only Age game during ESâs lifetime to get two expansions. Fair enough, the 2nd one wasnât developed by ES as they were busy making Halo Wars at that time.
2 Likes
I was referring to the Definative Edition which was functionally put on life support on Jan 28 2025.
AOE3DE got 4 DLCs and has an estimated 4 million owners per steamDB. It is definitely profitable.
They already have the circular logic:
Not profitable â termination fully justified
Not profitable â but they never tried â because it is not profitable â termination fully justified
Not profitable â but they made DLCs â still not profitable â termination fully justified
(And they tend to ignore all the lying, radio silence and middle fingering before and after the termination)
So it sounds like WE just waned to dump DLCs for this game but never promoted them to make money, like they were doing charity. So we should actually thank them?
5 Likes
Common folks: the driver crashes the car
âImma-professional-driver-myselfâ: itâs not as simple as you think. You know, a car operates through the synchronized interplay of its mechanical and electronic subsystems, leveraging internal combustion or electric propulsion methodologies to generate translational kinetic energy. The propulsion unitâcolloquially referred to as the âengineââinitiates rotational momentum, which is vector-transferred via a dynamic transmission interface to the vehicular drivetrain. This sequence results in torque propagation to the wheels, facilitating terrestrial locomotion. Meanwhile, operational integrity is maintained through a feedback loop of onboard diagnostics, regulated by an ECU (Engine Control Unit), which ensures real-time parameter calibration for optimal performance. Energy input, in the form of fossil fuel or stored electrical charge, undergoes controlled discharge to sustain the systemâs functional autonomy. Driver inputsâsuch as acceleration modulation, steering vectoring, and decelerationâare translated into mechanical outcomes through a combination of hydraulic, electronic, and pneumatic actuation. To summarize, the vehicle functions as an integrated mobility platform, converting input energy into directed motion under the governance of user-mediated control systems and structural chassis dynamics.
Common folks: but the driver drives it into a wall
âImma-professional-driver-myselfâ: Brake system failure constitutes a critical disruption in the vehicleâs deceleration protocol, wherein the standard kinetic-to-thermal energy dissipation pathway is compromised. Under nominal conditions, actuation of the brake interfaceâtypically via a foot pedalâengages a hydraulic or electro-mechanical circuit that transmits force vectors to friction-generating components (discs, pads, or drums), thereby inducing a controlled reduction in vehicular velocity. In the event of a malfunction, this force transmission architecture experiences systemic degradationâbe it due to fluid pressure loss, mechanical disjunction, or electronic signal interruptionâresulting in a non-responsive or significantly underperforming deceleration output. Consequently, the expected feedback loop between user input and frictional resistance is severed, leading to a failure in terminal velocity mitigation. Operationally, this places the vehicle in an unmanaged momentum state, where inertial continuation is dictated primarily by gradient forces, rolling resistance, and residual friction. Drivers typically resort to redundant or secondary deceleration strategiesâsuch as engine braking or terrain-induced dragâbut these are suboptimal in high-velocity or complex traffic matrices. In summary, brake failure constitutes a breakdown of the vehicular velocity management framework, transitioning the system from user-regulated motion to uncontrolled kinetic persistence.
But we donât need you to teach us how the car runs. We want to know why the driver was driving on alcohol
6 Likes
Yeah exacty thats what pushes certain decisions in one way or another, how much money it will make, shareholders dont care about a lot of stuff but profits, and if the game is well received they dont care a lot of public opinion except in how it affects sales, at the end of the day that is what drives the company. If it doesnt sell well they will push certain things or changes, but its the profits. Fifa and Cod has had terrible reviews for a long time, and they still make the same game because it sells well. The same destiny awaits for aom retold.
Having users does not translate to income. The game is free.
How many of those players bought the game vs are playing for free? How many bought each expansion? How much does it cost the studio to maintain and patch the game? How much does it cost to produce an expansion?
Having a bunch of players means nothing to shareholders if those players donât generate revenue in some capacity. Thats why it had 4 expansions, because content sales pay the bills, it sounds like the content sales were either not enough to justify the squeeze or straight up causing loss which is why they stopped making content.
The driver was on alcohol because shareholders keep forcing them to drink it? That was litterally the post.
You sound like the brilliant managers have all the accurate and timely data and always make the precisely right decisions that are always executed perfectly at every level top-down. And everything they ever did was retrospectively âcorrectâ and âjustifiedâ.
Thatâs exactly why none of the gaming companies has ever failed in the entire human history /s.
6 Likes
The funny thing is several self-proclaimed âas-a-dev-myselfâ on this forum should have known better about the bureaucracy of corporates, how tone-deaf their superiors are, and how they are prone to mismanagement and misjudgement, than plebs like us.
Yet they still instinctively defend every decision of every corporate they are not even part of, and frame them as omniscient and infallible.
Maybe because they sensed themselves would also be affected if the consumers stopped believing all the s**t that the gaming industry as a whole has been feeding us for years?
Edit: just look up and check what the screenshot in OP says?
4 Likes
The game is not free. The game has a F2P demo available. The game itself costs $20. Even before the F2P demo launched in 2023, there were 2 million estimated owners. Industry estimates put the base game sales at $17-20 million in revenue.
Easy enough to check. Per steam, 3.7% of players have won a victory as the Mexicans. The Mexican DLC is $6, and sales until recently didnât go below 50%, long after the vast majority of sales occurred. There are 4 million owners just on Steam. Thus ~150k people have played as the Mexican in a SP or MP match. Ergo, the worst case scenario is the single civ pack DLC, one of 3 DLCs released in 2021, brought in a revenue of $500k, realistically probably $1M or more, since most people would have purchased it soon after release, many single player only people bought it just for the one historical battle (Winning the Cry of Dolores does not trigger this achievement), there are people who had no interest in the content but wanted to support the game, there are people who were gifted the DLC but didnât play the civ, and there are people who play the game through the Windows Store.
Virtually nothing. We know that ~3 employees were working on it part-time at FE before WE betrayed the community. Scale that up to 3 people, as Tantalus will have some workers on AOE3 as well, assume a decent $100k salary per each, and factor in the standard 2.5x business cost rule, and we get a yearly cost of ~$750k. Meaning a single one-civ DLC a year can pay for it and have profit.
Thatâs a better question and one that is unknown. But explorer skin packs like the one they did for AOE3 require almost no effort (many of them just repurposed existing skins on game so there is no asset development cost). So such cosmetic packs are effectively free and can generate revenue to support a few devs.
Or, and far more likely, the studio is run by idiots.
Just look at it. V&V. AOE Mobile. 3K. Destroying customer confidence by abandoning AOE3 and the promised DLC. These are not the works of someone with a good plan. These are poorly thought out moves, destroying the future to cash out in the present.
If you have ever worked in a large corporation (I have), you see this behavior all the time. C-suite executives disconnected from reality cancel projects they have no understanding of because they donât comprehend itâs role. Eliminating profitable products that make lots of money as a percentage but have low volume because the numbers donât look big enough.
If companies always behaved as you describe, none of them would ever go bankrupt.
11 Likes
My favorite is when they use âplay this game insteadâ Line.
5 Likes
WE always made the âcorrectâ and ârationalâ decision when they messed up a project.
âImma-dev-myselfâ: that decision was justified because a messed up project does not generate enough profits for the shareholders and blahahblahblahblah
Common folks: why was it messed up in the first place?
3 Likes