I wonder did they fired the crew who made Sultans Ascend dlc?
1 Like
kinda feels good to be abandoned as an aoe3 fan, at least we’re spared the slop other games are getting
“you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain”
3 Likes
I like the new AOM content. They did a much better job with Chinese this time around than their old Chinese they replaced. AOM is grossly underappreciated. AOE2 Heros yeah that’s not great, but I think they are just running out of ideas for AOE2. AOE1 is such a shame because it’s a great time period with a lot of potential. They should have kept updating AOE1 until it was great instead of abandoning it and then trying to bring it half-baked into AOE2. AOE3 feels the most outdated to me - it’s the one I have the least amount of fun with.
3 Likes
How so? 
What makes it outdated for you?
3 Likes
So much of it’s outdated:
- Home city shipments: AoEIV doesn’t use anything resembling such outdated things at all…
- Influence/aura unit systems: AoEIV doesn’t use anything resembling such outdated things at all…
- (Asian) Wonders to age up: AoEIV doesn’t use anything resembling such outdated things at all…
Also, the proportions! AoE3 is so outdated that the proportions of the units and buildings are almost realistic - how silly!
In all seriousness, outdated seems like the wrong term - I get that gameplay-wise it’s fairly different and probably not your jam, though I’d say that there’s a fair amount in that game that’s forward-thinking enough to be syphoned into other AOEs.
Unit readability, silhouettes, obvious differences? I’d say that’s pretty outdated compared to AOEIV for newer players as it’s not as clear-cut/simple (and I mean that in a good way) to process.
5 Likes
Civilisations II, II, III, IV, V, VI and VII all have their roots in the first Civilisation game, and indeed carry over a number of core principles.
That doesn’t mean people can’t find Civ I (or any other older iteration) outdated by comparison. It’s an opinion. People have them. If I decided to post in the AoE III subforum every time someone mentioned IV in a bad light, I’d never get anything done 
The purpose of my post wasn’t to hate on AOE3 and trigger all the AOE3 fanboys. I actually enjoy all the AOE/AOM games. I’m on a monthly rotation of all 4 games for online play with my friends (AOE2, AOE3, AOE4, AOM). My point on being outdated isn’t so much the mechanics, like you said it has many great ideas that can work in an RTS (home city shipments, influence/aura, etc). My point was the game itself is not as polished/remastered as the others. The interface and graphics feel very early 2000s. The way you matchmake, loading screens, everything - you can tell they just put less effort into modernizing it than the others. Some of this is true for AOE2 and AOM, but it really stands out in AOE3.
2 Likes
mmm no se a que te refieres, al menos yo e jugado el aoe 3 DE y ni de chiste tiene graficos de principios de los 2000, si quiera viste como se veia el aoe 3 original? ahora incluso se les puede ver las siluetas del rostro y bien definidos y parte de que aoe 3 DE aun tenga problemas, se debe principalmente a que loa abandonaron xd
1 Like
At least you can still play the game. I have not been able to since the early Nov update. Like many others I can not play the game due to “stutters” in the menu structures making the game totally unplayable. Their “fix patch” is bullshit, makes no difference and their explanations make no sense, appears to be more politicians employed than coders! There has been zero feedback from the so called support team and I’m pretty pissed off. A shocking service from a company that needs to be better!
1 Like
still amazed that you defended things like the editor and the things thta were broken and still. Also the state of the game is connected with the communitty desire i mean we got a lot of this kind of response like it were a “negation“ back then. I can see you havent changed. expect more responses in the future
I’m an active critic on this forum.
I don’t disagree with the premise of each point. However, the title is simply wrong. The game has objectively been improved by almost every patch and we would’ve been blessed for it to have been launched this way rather the way it was back then. My only massive complaint are variants in regards to content, I would’ve preferred them to find a way to deliver regular civilizations instead.
Either way, the title is just objectively wrong. So much so that I insist you change it or just take down the post. The criticisms are fine, but they do not add up to your conclusion and instead, seem to be ragebaiting people into unproductive discussion.
3 Likes
All I can say on this topic is:
We could have gotten
-Hungary
-Poland
-Spain
-Portugal
-Venice
-Switzerland
-Bohemia
-Denmark (Norway)
-Korea
-Dai Viet
-Siam
-Khmer
-Aztecs, Incas, Mayans (God forgive me)
and other truly unique cultures, but in return we got:
-The Warhammer Order in golden armor
-fantastic monks
-Joan of Arc (no comment)
-an 80-year-old elephant dynasty
-and other fantastic beasts…
Maybe it’s time to put in the effort and stop looking for the easy way out?
2 Likes
Honestly I would add Scotland to the list aswell but yeah, variant civs are lame as much as AoE4 is my least favorite from all the series.
That should be something customizable, not imposed by force. Some things deserve to be standardized, and others don’t.
Thanks for the humble and grounded intro. I thought you were perma banned from the forum . Well, welcome back, looking forward to more of your insightful posts.
plot twist: it never was
I will not hear Tughlaq slander. It is what Delhi should’ve been to begin with.
And why do they take so many ideas for other games from that “outdated game”?
Literally almost every DLC since World Edge was released has ideas taken primarily from AOE-3.
The graphics and interface are more than good. Perhaps it lacks optimization and bug fixes, especially in the artillery, which is very clunky, and the pathfinding system, but not to the point where it feels like Age of Empires 1, where the pathfinding is the worst.
Furthermore, the claim that they put less effort into Age of Empires 3 is untrue. They remastered the cinematics (something they didn’t do with the other games), reworked civilizations, introduced new minor factions, revolutions, mercenaries, etc.
Therefore, when people say we criticize the developers, it’s not true; the mistreatment of the game lies in other aspects.
Well, some things feel modern, even though in theory they should feel outdated. For example, StarCraft 2 feels more modern than many newer RTS games.
Also, what criticisms of Age of Empires 4 do you see in the Age of Empires 3 threads? They’re not very different from the ones this guy is raising here.
1 Like
As far as I know, Delhi was one of the first base civilizations, and in keeping with the trend of presenting “all” the periods of a civilization, the Feudal (II) period was when the Ghaznavid Empire was just establishing itself in Delhi and they didn’t yet have many elephants. That’s why, and for balance, they don’t have elephants in the Feudal period. On the other hand, the Sultan Elephant (IV) is well represented, since in the last dynasty they began to use elephants with hand cannons or arquebuses on their backs.
Tughqlaq is great because it starts with a dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate that already had elephants, and the representation of the forts, with precisely the allied cities that the founding Sultan asked for help before removing the usurper, was quite brilliant.
That’s the thing about variants; they allow you to play with a clear period in mind and have beautiful builds—well, if you create the right variants.
1 Like
Sure, because the AoE2:DE new campaigns ideas with better narrative structure and mechanics are taken from AoE3.
Oh, wait, they’re not. People HATE the early AoE3 campaigns; they even skip them to play multiplayer.
All joking aside, every game has its own unique characteristics, and in some cases, given that many units are based on real historical units, it’s not surprising that they share mechanics or abilities with other units, especially if they’re from the same company.
The idea of landmarks from Asian civilizations in Age of Empires 3 was appreciated; it proved very useful for the landmarks in Age of Empires 4.
I never said they were inspired by the campaigns; if I should have been more specific, I meant the mechanics.
Besides, we know that Age of Empires III doesn’t have campaigns worthy of its time. People wanted Napoleonic Wars or the American Revolution, not a fictional story. However, the level designs and scenarios are great. With the Metropolis system, you unlock benefits as you progress through the campaign, which is fantastic. You have side objectives, naval battles, characters with dialogue and interactions, etc. So in that respect, it has nothing to envy in other games.
It’s not as if we aren’t self-critical. You can go to the Age of Empires III forums and see criticisms such as the lack of campaigns based on real events, the DLCs that haven’t included campaigns, civilizations that break the balance, etc.
Even I myself have criticized the removal of resource depots in AOE-3 as a bad decision. It’s something that should return.