AOE2 updates are far better than AOE4

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
145

This is just straight up condescending. I’m well read on the subject and it is particularly your ignorance that made me point out the ridiculous perspective that you’re presenting.

I think if anything, this quote demonstrates that you need to hit the books. Because that is just not how one quantifies influence, it seems my efforts to help you realize that are in vain. I have told you multiple examples of how this goes against what anyone would want, such as how it is insulting to represent ones identity with another (Delhi) and how instead we can aim to represent civilizations (Byzantines).

Do you hear yourself? If you don’t think the French occupied large parts of Spain or the far east you really ought to read some history. I’m of course NOT arguing that this matters for those societies, but it seems you’re far too comfortable throwing OTHER cultures under the bus because, I don’t know, they don’t matter or something.

You seem to think that “eh they’re close enough”. Let me put it bluntly; no, it isn’t close enough. Persia has a unique roster of styles, and it is by no means a monolith that simply replicated arabian architecture down to a T. It had its own architecture and was influenced by many other sources prior to the caliphate expansion. Even post-islam, Iranian architecture took a different form than that of mainland Arabia.

The fact that you cant discern the nuances of this is concerning, because you’re making claims that you do not understand.

146

Please man, I want you to engage this thoughtfully here:

How many cultures have been erased already because they are represented solely as Abbasid Dynasty.

1 Like
147

The game is conveying the Abbasid in of itself. It doesn’t try to convey everything under it. That is the point of naming a civilization X and running with it. Again, I gave you examples and you seem to be completely fucking ignoring them.

Byzantines. Byzantines. Byzantines. Can you actually read?

148

Then what does that make of the Ayyubid variant?

149

What is your point? Are you trying to imply that the Ayyubids represent an ethnic identity that has been around for centuries, millennia?

The Ayyubids were a recently formed state by people very much involved in the apparatus of the Abbasids. How is this in any way relatable to Persian identity?

Sidenote: you’d be mistaken to think I’d be OK with variants to begin with. My hostilities with them start from the idea that they’re lazily trying to represent peoples for a quick buck. Not what I wanted out of AoE4.

2 Likes
150

It’s because the Ayyubids are the sultanate that replaced the Fatimid Calpihate, it basically erases the Egyptian people’s history in the way you claim a Safavid dynasty variant under the Abbasid Dynasty (though I understand historically how that doesn’t fit, it’s an example of civ choice that defines them by the end of the time period) would erase Iranian history.

Can you instead list off an example of a dynasty that ruled over Iran that fully captures their history and transition through time circa 700 - 1600 CE? Because that’s what I’m getting at.

What Persia becomes by the Imperial age is Islamic. It is defined by the rule of the Abbasid Caliphate. It is central to their identity going forward through time.

If you want to ask for civs to be added as a base civ they need that level of nuance. From what I can tell, Persia doesn’t have that.

Edit:

I’ll even offer you a gimme here:

The ottoman empire didn’t really exist until the 11th century and the game states that its dark age starts at that point. I’m just asking you to propose some examples of civs rather than going right after my thought that it would likely be represented as a variant. You did say you had a lot of knowledge on the subject…

1 Like
151

You don’t have to. You’re thinking too black and white about this. The game isn’t presenting only pure states that never fell and that existed specifically during the medieval period without ever transitioning into other forms.

No, instead, it does a mixture of what AoE2 does with focus on statehood. Take for instance the Mongols, who were not united at the beginning of the game’s timeperiod and who were again, not united at the end.

So how does the game display them? Does it show an entirely different peoples? How does it quantify the four states that the Mongol Empire split into during the end? As you can imagine, the game manages to still focus on MONGOL identity.

Look at Delhi. Don’t you notice a shift in architecture between Castle and Imperial? Do you not think this is telling you something? Or how Ottoman houses are simply expanded upon already existing stone bases? Or how Malian architecture starts taking an increasingly Arabian style?

Persia as a region went through changes as any region does.

This thinking is too black and white. I did not make the claim that the Abbasids would erase Iranian identity, it seems to be YOU that is doing that. Persian identity CHANGES, but it doesn’t BECOME a 1:1 equal identity to that of the Arabs.

I hate to keep dumbing it down to you, but Islamic Persia is different to Islamic Arabia. And the Abbasid Dynasty in the game currently focuses on the Arabian side of things.

Look, I don’t think you entirely understand what this game is trying to do with identities. There is a reason for instance, why Byzantines is called that, rather than say, the Roman Empire. The developers very deliberately chose to focus on GREEK Identity despite it being the literal Roman Empire. As such, this is reflected in how the villagers dress, what style houses take and many of the landmarks. In fact, you can even tell when what society rules a civilization based on the different architectural styles of economic and production buildings. For Byzantines, production buildings tend to take much more of a Roman style as opposed to the others. You have this effect with many other civilizations too–a tiny example being French production buildings taking a heavy Roman-inspired style, whereas their houses are entirely Frankish in nature. THIS IS DELIBERATE.

It is so far skewed towards Greek identity that they couldn’t simply rename the civilization Roman Empire, because they’ve specifically gone out of their way to portray one side of that story–Much like how they’ve decided to lean towards Arabian culture for the Abbasids.

I don’t think you’ve paid enough attention to the details put into this game and I don’t think you should be lecturing people on the matter.

152

If you’re not planning on actually responding to me then I think we’re done here.

1 Like
153

Unbelievable. You genuinely do not read my points. Get out of here.

154

Lest play with the Jean empire! Ehhhh wait a minute, there is no jean empire! It was a very small part of the french empire !

155

(because it wasn’t, the Eastern Roman Empire was a distinct continuation, but a continuation all the same with its own, literal, name - one that you use!)

(yes, we know they called themselves Roman, but that’s the fun of history and how its represented - we’re representing history, tautologically)

Good thing no Age game has anything called the “Jean Empire”, then.

Heck, let’s remove the English. The English were never actually an empire!

Let’s go even further. How many AoE factions were actually empires?

2 Likes
156

This guy made a video about how much the new civs cost:

3 Likes
157

How it isn’t the literal Roman Empire? It’s literally the same state from Augustus to Trajan to Diocletian to Justinian to Manuel Komnenos. When and why do you arbitrarily separate this empire into too. Can we use the same logic to other states as well? Is 14th Century Portugal a completely different country to 19th Century or modern Portugal?

158

When should we receive the new season 10 patch?

For now i’m a bit delusione cause i was Expecting new graphic improvents and new 4k textures but i see the same things and models.

We’ll see.

1 Like
159

It’s funny, because in 2019 the proportion of buildings and units was good and on top of that at the end of the video there is an explosion (better physics apparently). Something happened from that date and hopefully one day it will be known.

4 Likes
160

I understand your point, but I think there’s some confusion here. The Eastern Roman Empire, or Byzantine Empire, wasn’t just culturally “Greek” in any superficial sense. By the time the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD, the Eastern Roman Empire had already long been a distinctly Greek civilization, in terms of both language and culture.

The Byzantines spoke Greek, not Latin, which became the official language after Emperor Heraclius in the 7th century. Over time, Greek became so central to their identity that it was essentially the defining feature of the Empire. The Empire’s capital, Constantinople, was Greek in its daily life, even though it held on to many Roman administrative structures.

Culturally, the Byzantines identified with their Roman heritage, but they were overwhelmingly Greek in their way of life, art, religion, and governance. The Roman identity was mostly symbolic, tied to their claim as the continuation of the Roman Empire, but their society was built on Greek intellectual traditions. They even referred to themselves as “Romans” (Ῥωμαῖοι, Romaioi), but Greek identity was inescapably dominant.

Also, don’t let the name “Roman” confuse you—it means different things in different time periods. In the earlier days, “Roman” referred specifically to the people of the Roman Republic and later the Roman Empire, who were Latin-speaking and had a shared Roman identity. However, by the time of the Byzantine Empire, “Roman” had become more of a legacy term. The people of the Byzantine Empire didn’t see themselves as Romans in the same way the people of the earlier empire did. Instead, their Roman identity was tied to the continuation of Roman rule, even though their cultural, linguistic, and societal traits had become overwhelmingly Greek.

So, while the game may have chosen to emphasize certain Greek aspects, the Byzantine Empire was indeed overwhelmingly Greek by the time it reached its most significant periods, especially after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The cultural shift was natural given the Greek-speaking nature of the Eastern Roman Empire and its isolation from Latin-speaking Rome.

2 Likes
161

I suppose a downgrade and something Is changed After the First closed beta. For what i can remember during the First closed beta (maybe April/May 2020) you were able to zoom in like AOE3de and AOMDE but there were many critics about low textures on models and maybe developers blocked the zoom option to the actual level we seen in the game. Yes , there’s a “free camera mod” but It’s a totally mess.
But i Remember the same plastic weapons and armours and the same statica chickens.

1 Like
162

Static chickens and horses. Small detail, but it shows their level of dedication.

163

Because the Western one existed as well, even though they were effectively one and the same until the collapse of the West.

What the Eastern one became by the Byzantines was different. Which is why we have different names for them even though at the time change for the common folk was probably pretty slowly-paced.

And yes, in terms of an AoE game, the different Portugese Empires are actually distinct, because the time period a faction is set in is relevant to which Age game it’s best-suited for.

And yet we have it. Why include it if they don’t want people zooming in?

I’d imagine they failed to hit the big “animate meshes in buildings button”. Can’t have been any more complicated than that.

1 Like
164

In a thousand years a society can change a lot. Much like the early Roman city-state, the Republic in the Punic Wars and the Empire under Augusts and under Constantine were completely different societies, but they’re all considered Roman. To exclude the so-called “Byzantine empire” is arbitrary at best.

Yes,but they’re both Portuguese, right? They’re not Lisboans or whatever made up term we can come up with.