AoE4 vs AoE5, how to make and keep both games valuable ?
Right now the big question is how to make money with the IP.
Sure you could add new mechanics with Scots, Vikings and Aztecs, but what is than left for game 5?
So why not have simply both? For AoE4 they could simply keep making DLCs with civ variants.
And why not in same time have AoE5 with the grafics like they were initially presented,
with all the advanced suggested mechanics? It would still be same engine?
Game 5 they should go for a much more modern setting, beyond that of AOE3,
we dont need another Age 1 or AOE3 thats already done
There is no Age 5. There will be no Age 5.
So far all of the currently supported age titles use the dlc expansion based system. These additions typically include new multiplayer factions, new multiplayer maps, and new single-player content. Unless they make a decision to change that in a future title it would be similar in a theoretical AoE 5.
I dont think AoE formula works with WW1/WW2/WW3
sure it could, just make it required villagers for everything
Mine Iron to build tanks, Food for everyone and infantry, Wood for buildings, there isnt a single age set in Modern Times when they had plan for it before
build all buildings, instead of company of heroes capture the flag BS
age 1 Victorian Era, Imperial Age WW1 with Machineguns
I hope the post survives, it is not comercial, just honest thoughts.
Mostly because there already exists much better game called Cossacks III [remake of 1], and great risk with plesant new things, Cossacks II. Even in the transitional ages, for example American Conquest beets the fun scale compared to AOE. AOE II is fun, because of the units, there is great deal of micro involved. AOE IV is simply not fun. Cossacks engine is great because it is heavy macro oriented.
It would also be interesting to see whaht is the best RTS game made as a poll. For example for me it is Warrior Kings Battles. That game was way ahead of time. I would love if AOE 5 tried the little bit of fantasy settings. The realism is not working since we have not received proper campaign in forever.
The contemporary era will be terrible for the Age of Empires series.
It doesn’t have much purpose, and it will drastically reduce the number of playable civilizations.
They would only include civilizations that have significant influence in warfare, and this would eliminate a lot of content, relying much more on variants with special units to provide content.
The problem is, it won’t feel like you’re playing Age of Empires.
If they’re going to make a game in the contemporary era… Microsoft owns the RISE OF NATIONS series.
Why don’t they make a RISE OF NATIONS 2 and add more civilizations and units and classes that were missing from the old game?
You can even make an atomic bomb there.
Age of Empires 5 should portray the ancient age in a way never seen before… they should be inspired by the units seen in the ROME TOTAL WAR series.
It’s time to introduce:
Well Empire Earth did cover Age of Empires in other timelines and it simply didn’t feel right.
Age of Empires 1 in 3D doesn’t sound like the right direction either. There is kind of already a game for it already.
Time between Napoleon and WW1 would be very odd. WW1 and more modern would be even more counterproductive.
Future maybe? Age of Fantasy? Age of Science Fiction? Sound odd too.
Why not try something outside of the box? Like Age of Empires game, with Company of Heroes squads and cover mechanics? You could even easy balance Gun powder Spain vs stone age Aztec by make AoE4 markets into mercenaries camps and let it possible to buy various mercenaries, you need to fix the gaps.
This is not going to happen pal
Instead they gonna keep miking II DE on perpetuity
This is how was meant to be, but no
Instead they made AoE II remake,
What a disappointment
Well, you know it’s not a remake.
A remake, basically is: A more faithful recreation of the original game, keeping the name of the original game as a reference, however, recreating the models from scratch, using a new engine, to bring graphic and quality of life improvements.
All remakes to date are like this. What isn’t called a remake is because it followed a different path, being called a reboot; a spiritual successor; a remaster; and so on.
Age of Empires IV has nothing to do with a remake of Age of Empires II. The only thing that overlaps is the medieval era (but even that’s different, they depict different centuries). The gameplay was also quite different, with several individual changes for each civilization. The nomenclature used in civilization names is also different, and to make matters worse, even the functions of several units are different (different bonus damage). Look at how light cavalry works in AoE2 and how it works in AoE4, it’s completely different, even the bonus damage.
Basically, Age of Empires 2 is a game more focused on a symmetrical style, while Age of Empires 4 is more focused on an asymmetrical style. (From that alone, you can see that it’s not a remake at all!)
If it were a remake, it would be a 3D Age of Empires II, with a few minor changes for improvement. But it’s far from that.
Stop insisting on something that isn’t real.
If you search, you’ll find an interview from 2021, where the developers themselves see Age of Empires IV as a “spiritual successor” to Age of Empires 2 and not a remake.
This puts an end to the debate about whether it’s a remake or not. Look for the interview.
Regarding Age of Empires V being in the future, this was already answered a long time ago in surveys… most wouldn’t want an Age of Empires in the future.
Regarding more recent time periods, I don’t remember the results, but they were lower than the medieval and ancient periods.
Most players see the Age of Empires series as something more rustic and not technological or very modern.
However, with the arrival of new players, who knows, the First and Second World Wars may one day become a reality… but if the game isn’t well made, it could be a huge failure.
Personally, I’m a huge fan of World War II… but an Age of Empires game that depicts that war would need to surpass many other games in terms of reality, ballistics, and effects to truly succeed. One of its biggest advantages could be the sheer number of possible units, whether on land, air, or sea. But I think that’s very unlikely to happen.
IV Is a remake of II
End of conversation! just kidding
On the other hand, V development is far away from this point
Better need to stuck with II, IV and AoM support
Look, I think after so many disappointments, it was important to make AoE4 the way it is.
I think Age of Empires 5 should stay symmetrical and historically accurate for PvP, but be more wild for Co-op.
Like have England in typical Medieval setting with AoE4 And AoE2 mechanics.
And King Arthur with Wizards and Dragons for Co-op with AoE3 and Age of Mythology mechanics.
AoEV, symmetrical or asymmetrical, for me, it doesn’t matter.
I find both types fun. However, asymmetrical seems to be more eye-catching.
The advantage of symmetrical is that it seems easier to balance and much faster to develop new civilizations and content.
The advantage of asymmetrical designs is that they create more hype, due to the feeling of novelty. More different styles of tactics.
However, I have no idea what most players prefer.
It would be cool to have a survey on this.
That will never happen.
Age of Empires is based on realistic gameplay, with real things that existed.
Regarding having dragons or wizards or other mythical or legendary beings, for that to happen, a new game with a new name would have to be created, which would actually be a new IP. Maybe the name would be “Age of Fantasy” or “Age of Legends” or something like that. But Age of Empires V will certainly not be a fantasy game.
Medieval times again would be very strange.
We already have AoE2, which is the most played and focuses primarily on the Middle Ages.
The latest release is AoE4, which is also medieval.
Now, making AoEV medieval would be a real mistake. It wouldn’t really bring anything new to the table, just better graphics and physics, and nothing more.
We probably have two main options for AoEV. They are:
If you really want something new, then hope for a new game focused on the Contemporary Age.
Although I’m a bit skeptical about the Contemporary age… but, if it’s really well done, it will certainly be a beautiful game.
AOE-1 is an obsolete game. Going back to classical or pre-classical times isn’t a bad idea.
Or maybe not!
Probably V is in the now in the works
This is the job posting on Microsoft Careers!
Principal Unreal Engineer, Gameplay World’s Edge | Microsoft Careers
You see they have done it with II IV and Mobile
we already have ancient age in Age of Empire 1 Definition Edition, and We also have that on Age of mythology which still looks amazing
both player numbers are still horrible, sales wise it wont do well if they do another AOE1 or Ancient times
meanwhile Modern would be new and very interesting, look on Broken Arrow, it was a success for RTS and it made alot of money on WW3
All the ancinet stuff already in AoM, if they did another ancient time its literally copy and paste with much less effort, with many reused assets from AoM
i much rather we get a remake of AOE3 or Modern Setting instead (Victoria - WW1/2), thats completely new
Do we really need 3 Ancient Times games? when we had none for modern, hell if thats the case i rather we get AOE4 Remake or AOE4 Remaster
