I think they’re harder to compare than people think, for two core reasons (that probably won’t be new to anyone).
One, that CoH 3 is purely an in-house Relic effort, while Age IV is a shared venture between Relic and World’s Edge. And the second is that CoH 3 has not only had more time to develop (and benefit from the hindsight of any choices made in Age IV’s development process), but it was also pushed back from its initial release window (and even then, had a remarkable amount of issues despite the work put in late in development to improve the aesthetics and other problem areas).
This is before we get onto design differences, such as the unit cap being far (far) higher in Age IV than it is in any CoH game (as they’re the more “tactical” RTS that Relic is better-known for, that have always had a smaller army scale than something you’d expect from Age or even a Blizzard RTS).
Maybe it was something as simple as CoH 3 having double the budget. I doubt it, but I’m never gonna know. I hope Age IV specifically continues to evolve and improve - this is where I’m focusing my attention and feedback (vs. CoH 3). I hope they continue to roll out updates that reassure people about the direction of the game, instead of worrying them (which is why I’ve been talking a lot of late about the need for them to focus on PvE and mod tool improvements).
The cynic in me thinks it’s even more sinister than lack of budget or interest.
Have you seen how car manufacturers remove some features in their latest model only to re-add them in their facelifts later on? BMW and Toyota are notorious for this (LED tail lights, HID low beams). That way they can sell those features again as new stuff.
Will we see siege destruction animations with a paid DLC or a Definitive Edition down the road? I really hope not. Better leave it like this if that’s the case. There’s sort of a precedent with AoE 2 not having detailed building, ship and siege death animations until DE. Although that was excused at the time by hardware limitations. There’d be no excuse now.
nobody can’t answer but final products of it does. bang along those years of multiples aoe games always were functional. even the glitchiest ones worked well. with the recently aoe 3 de engine which gives a better final product. it may be more expensive as you said compared to aoe 4 engine development because the lack of resources but as you can see aoe 4 final product is poor and its giving more trouble to develop as is more complex as you confirm and the player with the bug and editor complexiity.
ok tell us the details because right now we got am engine that requires lot of resources for a game that looks worse than aoe 3 and despite that it seem to do better with some corrections and lighting ajustmnet but they sastill hide it which lead to 2 thing or the engine consume to much resouses that becomes inneficient compared to older engines or dev are too lazy or ms time spent is too short to make up those changes and by now is almost impossible to do something about it because the patch/road map schedule
AoE4 is not a game for lovers of the AoE franchise. It’s a game for newcomers who don’t know what AoE means.
Frankly, it’s annoying to see an AoE game that is trying to draw in players by introducing fantasy elements such as silver Harry Potter Patronuses and enchanted forests. It tells you they are not aiming for the old audience - not the history lovers or AoE veterans, but rather the new audiences of the current generation.
But,I would still be okay with these new fantasy elements if they had better UI and graphics in other areas. And didn’t have other oversimplifications such as the removal of archers having a melee attack etc.
I hope that “kids these days” who start out with AoE4 also play the previous games and realize the franchise is more than AoE4. Sigh.
The thread is about creative choices. I really don’t care how you think the game looks, because I know that already. I don’t agree with your technical appraisal of the game, and I know that one already as well.
Here’s the thing about choices. They’re choices. Not immutable forces of nature. There are many possible choices any developer can make.
It’s obvious you disagree with a bunch of them in Age IV. I can’t make you like them. This might surprise you, but I don’t want to. You don’t like them, and that’s fine.
But what answers are you looking for?
By all means, insult franchise fans of the game. It’s a strong argument that makes it look like you’re here to debate constructively and in good faith.
Ah, you edited your post.
Yeah, Age of Mythology is famously unpopular and drew no fans from inside the franchise. I can’t imagine what the devs were thinking, making a time-limited optional biome with very slight fantastical elements that you don’t even have to use it you don’t want to.
But when I say “newcomers” who do not know what AoE means, I am basically saying what Andy said above in the thread. About this game being made for people who only know that AoE exists (mostly AoE2) and nothing more. I just put it more crassly that is all.
Yep. Instead of adding something relevant to AoE4 with their budget, they used it to make an optional fanstasy biome the fantasy crowd will use. What a joke indeed.
(My point being: they are not making AoE4 for the previous fans of AoE.)
And don’t call this sad excuse (I mean this biome) an AoM reference please. AoE4 is not in the same league.
Catering to AoE II is the definition of trying to make an Age game. So would catering to AoE III. Or heaven forbid, Online.
That’s the problem with a franchise with multiple entries that all try to go in moderately (or excessively) different ways. There’s not an easy answer. It might look that way to the folks who preferred III more (or the folks who prefer Online), but the challenge is real.
Ah, I see. Your argument is no longer “it’s annoying to see them use fantasy”, it’s “the resources were wasted”.
Gotcha. Just one thing.
You do realise that’s a completely different argument, right?
I never said it was an AoM reference.
All I did was argue against your (silly) claim that using fantasy is some kind of a bad move. They made an entire game out of the general concept.
FYI, the concept is more reminiscent of something like the fae, or even Arthurian legend, than it is “Harry Potter”. But I guess that’s the level of comparison “kids” have these days
(to be clear, I don’t judge on age. But the irony of you only being able to come up with Harry Potter after referencing “the kids” is pretty hilarious)
I am plenty aware that a silver stag exists as a mythological reference that goes beyond Harry Potter. If you enjoy picking on my wording, keep doing so, but I only mention Harry Potter to express my disappointment that fantasy elements are being introduced in a historical RTS to make revenue.
I am also plenty entitled to that criticism.
I wonder what nitpicking you’ll do on my responses now. And why you have no respect for both your time, or mine.
Please be advised that my criticism is an opinion and it is mine. It is not ‘silly’, and is just as valid as anyone’s enjoyment of the enchanted biome. So just because I say something that you don’t like reading, doesn’t allow you to call any criticism silly. Criticism of criticism is censorship.
I’m not the one who wandered in here to be “crass” at the expense of people who like the game.
By all means, dislike the game. But that wasn’t your argument, was it? You had to get a bit in about the people who like Age IV.
Anyhow, if you’re aware of how stags and woodland are often connected in myth, and you know AoM exists, it kinda feels like you’re just nitpicking Age IV for the sake of it. Fantasy has priors. The timing came around the news of AoM: Retold. It’s good marketing. The point of a game is to be played. Bug fixes aren’t marketable. Trust me on that.
If you go on about on about how much you think the game sucks, don’t let me stop you. I only replied in the first place because of the obvious dig at people who enjoy the game.
An opinion can be both a valid opinion, and someone else can think it silly.
Criticism of criticism is criticism. It’s all allowed. It’s all opinion. Most importantly, it’s all speech. Calling it “censorship” just because you don’t like it is a dangerous path to walk!
This, after you calling a counterargument “censorship”
Good luck with suggesting that I’m “insecure” or the like. Similar to what I said in my first reply to you, it really shows you’re here to debate constructively and in good faith.
I’m not here to debate anything, which you are correct about. I am here to criticize. I’m not here to get convinced that this game is worth playing anymore (I have 200 hours on it and I also played the beta after which I gave much constructive feedback, most of which was not considered). And I am not here to convince people to stop playing it.
OP suggests that this game gets rid of “fun mechanics” that make games memorable. I add that this game is not for those who are looking for an AoE experience (I define AoE here as any AoE1,2,3,O). I add my criticism of enchanted forests too, which is something I think is a misfit in this game (my opinion).
I do not need your censorship here regarding what is or is not intelligent criticism. It’s my preference. And I did not barge into a discussion after feeling triggered. I responded to OP’s post, posing an agreement with OP. And here you are, as always, trying to shut down people from voicing agreement with any form of criticism.
I am not here to debate anything. My mind is made up about this game. For good. I am just here to agree with OP. And express an opinion about who I think the target audience of AoE4 is.
You are a massive waste of time for everyone on this forum. And it’s not healthy at all. If you construed who I think this game is for as an attack on yourself, then I’m sorry to say it’s on you.
the ones you said about engine choices? stop word picking as other anon replied to you.I only want you to realise that everything you’re in favor most of them are against of what most players that already left wanted for aoe 4.
Honestly, I wish they continued that in the subsequent games. It made the world feel more alive. They could have even had the wolves and other predators attack your livestock in AoE2 so that you would need to protect them more.
It’s not correct here: AOM Is a Spin-off not a “regular” sequel of the franchise. Developers can try to do something different with those type of games and the same thing could be apllied to AOEO.
But Aoe4 Is the true along awaited title for 15 years. This Is the reason why a big part of people are not so Happy.
Yes, but what do you want to talk about? I’ve already answered what I can about the engine choice.
If you want to keep repeating “Age IV has a bad engine”, that’s fine, but I don’t agree and there’s no point discussing it. Specifically, what do you want to discuss? Key word: discuss.
AoM is a spin-off, you’re absolutely right.
But it still drew Age players, and a big part of that was the fantasy-related setting.
Age IV is a mainline Age of Empires game. The Enchanted Grove is a tiny, tiny part of that game that doesn’t even change buildings, units, game balance, etc. It’s a purely cosmetic addition with some neat little challenges for those who enjoy them. The rest of the game is still Age of Empires.
For reference, let me list all the things from Season Four that weren’t the new biome:
In terms of “creative choices”, improving the game itself still seems to be the developer’s main focus.
