Aoe3 needs to continue, aoe2 is running out of ideas

Age of Empires III: DE III - Discussion
67

Are you talking about the AoE2 dlc Three-Kingdom recent “Hot-sales” in the middle of the online complaints? about my comment? or the general post comments? Because your commentary is very ambiguous.

Until I know, many factors came together to make people complain so much about the 3 kingdoms, but more than poorly done, it’s actually the opposite; it’s because it’s “well done”:

  • Hypers.- They thought there would be a Tibetan civ, but since they weren’t right, they went against the civs they didn’t get right, those of the 3 Kingdoms.

  • Ranked players.- They think the heroes of the 3 kingdoms would be very broken and very unfair to other civs.This was before it was revealed that heroes could only be used in the Imperial Age. Now, in fact, there’s a debate about whether they’re too weak or too strong.

  • Single-player “Races-lovers.”- Since I love AoE 4, I love the style of civs that are based on Empires or Historical Military armies, instead of an ambiguous ethnic group. But apparently, those who stayed with AoE 2 stuck with the idea that all civs should be “Races” instead of empires. So, since the Chinese already exist, they don’t want to accept the three kingdoms, because… they’re “Kingdoms” instead of “Races”. It seems silly to me, and I prefer the AoE IV system, but these people don’t. I respect their tastes, but I don’t share it.

  • Single-Player "Mod-RomeAdBellum lovers.- I liked the Greek expansion so much that I practically wanted 3 Kingdoms to be another part of RomeAdBellum. Well, in theory I wanted it too, but I think 3 Kingdoms actually works better for the base game, at least temporarily. AoE2 also covers the fall of Rome and the final period of Rome from Constantine (270-470), and close to that, in China, the 3 Kingdoms thing happened.

In my opinion, the most they’ll do is balance the AoE2 heroes, because the civs aren’t going away. And the campaigns have been very loved by the community, especially the Chinese community.

However, it has become clear to me that AoE2 will never evolve beyond its established limits, because when it does or tries new things, its community, which likes that “all the civs are almost the same but with subtle differences”, doesn’t want the balance of its game to be upset.

Same reason as the beginning of the thread says:

  • It would be better to make more DLC for AoE3 or AoE4, where there’s more acceptance to the novelty mechanics and new civs.
68

Bien vendu ne rime pas forcément avec aimé, sur steam 53% des gens ont apprécié sur steam et ça ne compte pas aussi les refunds, sans vouloir vous vexer

69

“There’s a rule in STEAM that people who like something generally won’t comment on it; they’ll keep playing the game. But if they don’t like something, they’ll quickly criticize it after they stop playing.”

I’d say a large part of the fandom liked it, but of course, the negative criticism is also understandable. Many of them revolve around the Three Kingdoms DLC controversy before it came out:

  • That three civs aren’t races, but civs (it’s worth noting that the game is called Age of Empires, not Age of Races).
  • That they wanted Tibetans.
  • That the heroes are too new and upset the balance that all civs should be “the same” and have no appreciable differences.

Considering the high sales, even knowing what was coming:
I think most of the people who bought the DLC didn’t realize that the Rework changes WERE FREE for everyone, from the new units for China and Korea to the Elite Unique Unit Skins. Only the new campaign and civs were optional.

The other reasons I see for mass purchases are impulse buying, to support the franchise, or to try out some of the new civs (Khitans, Jurchens) or the extra elements in the Editor.

About new ideas or mechanics for Age of Empire franchise games:
Anyway, with all these problems, for a product that in theory “offered a lot” and delivered, but was still rejected, the same reason for which it repeated:

  • AoE3, AoM:Re, and AoE4 are better options to be more innovative, at least by the community.

  • That said, be careful with “Historicity”; it’s what’s most requested, because any error stands out even more in ultra-HD 3D designs. We’re still asking for Tanegashima Matchlock in AoE4.

70

Are you implying AoE4 is ultra-HD? :joy:

You also fail to mention the controversial AoE2 civs existed for only a few decades and are all just Chinese despite them promising no Chinese split.

1 Like
71

Ne dite pas cela à un joueur amateur de la licence Dragon Age à propos de Veilguard, beaucoup d’exemplaire ont été achetés et au tout début c’était en “plutôt positive” pour finir dans “moyenne” sans compter le nombre de personnes déçus qui ont demandé le remboursement.

72

What I was referring to in my comment is that "if there is an element, even minimal, that is very bad perceived by part the community, true or not, it will always stand out in the negative comments on Steam."

  • In the Case of AoEIV Sultans Ascend it was the first 4 variants, which were seen as cheap copies with little historicity.
  • In the Case of AoEIV Cross and Ross it is the price considering the reduction of Civs ( +6 → +2).

Review things is good and confirms part of the fanbase’s thinking, but it’s also debatable, especially if it don´t affects the players number or the sales of the game itself.

For example, regarding the price of Cross and Ross, I don’t agree that it’s expensive; in fact, it’s fine.

Beasty already explained it, they sold us Sultan Ascend very cheap. On top of that, it turns out that for the last 30 years, the video game industry has NEVER raised the price of video games, even though their manufacturing costs have “increased” every year. It’s a sneaky way of increasing the base price, but if it allows the franchise to continue existing, then I have to accept it.

Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, at the same time, have increased the price of consoles and new video games, and it’s precisely for that reason; they were selling them very cheaply, considering what “cost/production” amounts to.

In any case, the AoE IV player base has only grown with the DLC, so the criticism “has been constructive”. The same doesn’t apply to Veilguard, which I’ll discuss next.

About Veilguard

Veilguard is a sad and special case. Because there, “the negative reviews had a significant impact in the playerbase and were even reflected in the drop in player count”.

I’m also a fan of the Dragon Age franchise, but I didn’t buy the 4th installment (Veilguard) because I already had a feeling something bad was going to happen, especially given the director’s statements.

And indeed, it happened:

  • Due to the hype surrounding the 4th installment to continue the story, many bought the game, even with the warnings.
  • They didn’t like it and stopped playing it halfway through, or once completed, they never returned to it.
  • Worse, refunds were requested and the criticism was massive, to the point that the game suffered a massive drop in player count after its release.

This was a AAA game, it took a significant amount of investment to produce, so by not reaching the expected sales figures, they lost a lot of money.

Veilguard Steamchart
Veilguard Steamchart838×519 60.8 KB

The line drop-down very quickly

Personally, I think they ruined several plot lines of the series to introduce forced inclusive political elements, the gameplay changed too much for a 4th installment of a game formula that was supposed to work, and several dialogues are quite painful for characters who are supposed to be serious in the face of the impending apocalypse.

73

What about next time? *they sold us Rose and Cross very cheap ?

Like they didn’t benefit from the price and did it for charity
Or they really lost money by setting it too cheap, so that they had to make the next DLC (1/3 of it) comparatively much more expensive——isn’t it still their problem?

Edit: I would be willing to pay any content creator who relied on the company to criticize their core business at all or discourage people from consoooming.

2 Likes