Don’t underestimate how long it takes to develop features. Especially in late stages of development, a week of work gains you very little progress. It’s mostly about polishing.
I think people would be pretty disappointed with the amount of progress shared in (bi)weekly updates.
2 Likes
yeah sure. thats what is happening 
They do it ok now so in 10-20 years we will get a DE xD
by what account would you think that?
Because you dislike the “creative direction”, including art and gameplay, you think its “badly misguided”?
Oh I don’t know, maybe because we see the same pattern of poor decisions that happened with DoW3 and now AoE4. It’s not like we can see who was in charge of the creative direction before and after DoW2 and CoH2… Wait, actually yes we can.
2 Likes
then lets try again what are these “poor decisions” you refer to?
because I guarantee you most of these are just a personal view.
When do personal views become general opinions? Because the general opinion on DoW3 is quite clear.
2 Likes
indeed, however I was referring to age 4. there is currently no general consensus on whether the general direction is good or bad.
However most feedback is very specific on one point alone, for example graphics. And there are still many ppl who are ok with the graphics.
I would simply like to know what kind of “poor decisions” you see in age4, that are not a willingly created and for most peaople working solution.
For example the 20€ extra for collectors editions with only cosmetics may have been such decision.
The general graphical style may very well be in your opinion. And in others opinions aswell. but unless its the majority, which it doesnt seem to be, its not a generally bad decision. Going with a more realistic art style for example, against the base formula of age being a bright and colorful display of medieval times, I would argue would be more of a bad decision.
I think I got my point across.
However I dont know much about DoW 3 so you can tell me what the business decisions leading to its demise were and how the same are done in Age 4. If you want of course 
1 Like
This entire beta stage of development is to see if people will enjoy the ontent or not.
Stop targeting individuals that have a differing oppionion to your own.
If someone voices their dislike of the product in hopes that the devs will improve on it then let them do so , and continue on your ‘‘mary’’ way.
1 Like
A working solution is not necessarily a good one. Just a working solution is a lazy solution. It has to offer more than just working. aoe2 does many things that work very well. Why do we want a new game then? I want to see the technological advancement to be reflected in an overall upgraded experience than what I have been witnessing the last 20 years.
3 Likes
what does inferring about a statement, which I would like to get more info on, because I do not get it, have to do with" targeting"?
I just wish to know, what the “issues” mentioned are, or if its “just” the general opinion some in the community share, but not all. I dont see how this is in any way bad.
Especially because the devs, even if they personally read this, will probabl ynot get if someone just says “same mistakes as xy”.
OK, I dont get that at all, but its okay.
So you say a missing of technological advancements (which I personally cant confirm, as there is a LOT of advancements we may not directly see, or we see but dont take it as advancement (lets say automatically and intelligently placed streets)) is all poor decisions there were?
Where are the “poor decisions”?
What are they?
or is it just a missing of technical advancements in your opinion?
I may very well share your opinion, but currently I cant because I do disagree with the technical aspect you seem to see as a problem, and I dont know what else there is thats problematic.
For example if DoW3 had no beta, or it was far too late, I would certainly agree thats a problem repeated then. As said I know nothing of DoW3.
But If your same problems only revolve around things I do see otherwise, which is also fine, then I cant share your assessment of the same mistakes
Take this for example, I 100% agree with Temouloun, but yet because you feel different, you immediately have to jump on him and try to make it personal.
He has a right to dislike the shoddy product and inform the dev therof, and if he does, just leave him be.
I really…REALLY need to learn how some ppl in this forum see something being “personal” as opposed to just a normal argument? getting personal woild be attacking or talking about their person. I simply argue against their standpoint or wish for mor details.
Of course, they may dislike all they want, but making the specific problems clear would be much more helpful.
Creative direction literally is basically anything in the game, as mentioned. And if tehy dislike everything, thats also fine. But I wonder what they expected then from an age game.
Because for example, gameplay wise, the creative direction is based very much on age 2, with assymetry from age 3.
graphicswise, it focuses on the main age pillar, colorful and somewhat happy-ish depiction of medieval times., and cobines that with a somewhat shaded artstyle, making it look like a piating and similar to AoE online, but still a bit more realistic.
As seen, there is a multitude of aspects in creative direction one may dislike, or like. but not liking it as a whole is somewhat un-age-like.
And I see someone disliking it all. Yet “badly misguided” suggests more than dislike. This is quite agressive language which infers that it would be totally wrong. But if it were, we would see vast majorities with the same thinking.
3 Likes
That is exaxctly what we dispise about the ‘‘creative’’ direction.
Look at the detail and beauty of Ancestors Legacy , with the advanced technology of today, that is what we expect to see by now. Not shody mobile game fortnight graphics.
Ofcourse it is more than dislike, it is dissapointment , waiting so long for something thart has immense potential and then getting mobile game graphics…that is the defenition of ‘‘Badly misguided’’.
Please spare us your modern age sencitivities. Someone charging at you with a lance, THAT is agressive language.
Well we are here, that is why we are voicing our concern and not just sitting idly by , hense why we would appreciate you not constantly ‘gracing’ us with your ounter arguments for why you like the game.
3 Likes
well, thats constructive discussion
tbh, I get your disappointment, but there are things a person / fan is able to and unable to change. Afte rthe first teaser the graphical style was clearly set.
And, just to answer to that despise about creative “direction” - its one of the general core principles of the age series. Why should they change it now? why starting to despise it now, after more than 20 years of ppl loving it?
And I am not offended, just saying the language choice is agressive, just as you choosing the word despise.
But that may just be my personal type of thinking. I would never use such words to describe games. because in the end they are games, creations, works of art. And Despise is very hard to say just because I dislike the general idea.
I despise other things. But that would get political
Misguided alone may have been a more fair choice of words. althoug itself it means you think that ppl like me and others, who “guided” the direction by saying they like the happy age style, did make the game worse (for you). And maybe thats the case, but then it seems like the misguiders are the majority
Abd regarding your last side sentece - this thread is about the question of devs giving their best. Of course I would like to get more info on why you think they didnt, or what their issues are/were.
Its a forum, of course i may present a counter opinion to anything I wish to do so, or infer as to more details.
Its not like I am a monk trying to wololo you into liking the game, just trying to understand your point of view and failing to try to understand how you can think you are actually on the right, not misguided path for age
2 Likes
Because the content we have been given for the past 20 years was exatly what we wanted:
Age of Empires 2 has been such a success because the graphics was realistic and good from the get go, it was so good that it remains beautiful, rustic and realistic even to this day. DE just improved on that and in doing so increased the longevity of the games graphics.
It is gritty, dusty, dirty , bloody, gorey and realistic. I love it, Cities in DE2 look like actual medieval cities and I love it! I even created a mod that gave each civ historically accurate unit skins using Civ 3 sprites and it looks amazing!! Even with hundreds of differing units ,with complex historical skins, I have absolutely no problem identifying any unit. Detailed realism is what we crave!
WIth the advanced technology of today , I expect age IV to be breathtaking and realistic.
AoE IV from the get go has a certain style that is not focused on historical realism nor rustic beauty but instead focuses on ease of identification in the hopes that it will make the game easier for mobile game playing 6 year olds to get into and play. 6 year olds whom have wealthy parents love cartoon trash like fortnight , and in attempting to appease that market, the devs hope to cash in and achieve vast amounts of sales to said 6year olds.
I for one despise 
this decision and will not be buying this game.
This is exactly what we are asking, why change the realistic genre of the previous games to mobile game fortnight trash?
1 Like
Okay, I judge only what I have seen though, not what I guess that may exists and I haven’t seen yet. There are sporadic things, not enough to project the feeling of a brand new triple A game. If they actually released proper, lengthy gameplay, we would know for sure but they don’t.
Starting with the graphical detail or lack of and moving onto crude animations and combat that looked dull, lack of physics, units that seem to be moving on railroads, unappealing building proportions, to the lack of engine crews that were asked by many people since ever, lack of eye catching interesting mechanics. Stealth mode is one, mongols relocate their bases, 2, can’t see others, maybe you can help spot some more and tell me.
And then ships. Naval combat, it looked like a reskinned ancient fossil, as if they decided to just throw it there for the public eye. It’s like an ugly old hag from a fairytale that uses witchcraft to look beautiful for a while until you realize it’s still the same ugly old hag underneath.
That would be a place to take advantage of new technologies and try new things. Some people think it would be enough if the game just carried on its course from where it was left. But that’s not enough.
Many years have passed and besides what this franchise has been doing, there also other Rts games around from which we could learn some things. Seeing exclusively what we have been doing without checking the competition is a very shortsighted approach.
2 Likes
the point is, they didnt change it. age 2 was also in the same style or way, more colorful than realistic. Age 3 was comocailly in itself. And age 4 is aswell.
But of course thats my and your opinions, and if you do despice that artstyle and it prevents you from buying a great game gameplaywise - thats entirely fine.
I am wondering why you talk about “we” though in some instances.
thanks, that does make your point far better understandable and more precisely critiquing than jast a general “bad design approach”.
And its fair, we can of course only judge what we see.
While I could also get into further detail regarding animations and combat etc (which were updated and looked much smoother with the most recent update) I will just pick a point I do agree with - units could use some more (graphical) detail. physics btw I think are okay. tbh i didnt like the exaggerated comical cannon balls of age 3 although they loooked funny and are probably somewhat realistic)
regarding mechanics, you took 2 interesting ones from the spot. The rest of course depends on what is deemed interesting and unique - but since you also added the stealth part, I assume you look for uniquie within age?
In that case-
.Walls being mannable seems quite an interesting mechanic for every civ except mongols (who cant build walls, but then again they can use enemies walls)
.Infantry being able to construct siege (which is the next best thing to manned siege - which I do not oppose, but i am also very fine with unmanned siege and do not see a technological reasoning, so that wouldnt show tech advancement to me.)
.Abbasids and their house of wisdom, offering very unique special techs in specific orders
.while you or anyone personally may dislike it, the (re) introduction of fully filmed real life cutscenes for the campaigns may very well count as somewhat unique although not in gameplay
.firing arcs of towers (and ships, see below)
. now we get into terrain of other age games, but I think imprpving upon old should also count - the general age up process, especially with chinese
.new victory mechanics (although we still dont completely get how we win its clearly more focused on destroying important buildings than killing everyone, at least in the standard games
And I guess I could come up with more, but these would be the most prominent I think.
water combat itself looked neat, I must say. Technically speaking. There were seemingly more types of ships, or at least types of attacks, and the firing arcs looked interesting, although somewhat useless due to instant turns.
Graphically yes, tehre is a LOT to be improved. which is surprising me as before we saw a great looking water including a ship breaking the waves. (but it still looked floating). However if it stays that way, I would also be fine with it.
However gameplay wise the whole naval warfare seems new for age in my opinion, but maybe I missed something. ( as you calle dit ancient fossile, it must be an old mechanic?)
I for one am highly in favor of getting water, the game wouldnt be the same without.
Manned ships however wouldsnt be possible, as the scaling wouldnt be able to fit at all. Units shrinking when entering boats sounds weirder to me than me not seeing anyone aboard.
Regarding the last part, that starting from where we left isnt enough - I hear you there. But I also see why MS would do that. They need to check if the game series can still sell, and for that its best NOT to change too much. which they do.
I am sure if age 4 is such a success that age 5 will be designed, they will go through much more changes than age 4. Althought the assymetry alone was a great change already.
Look at the Bohemian Wonder/Castle of DE2
Now compare that with the castle in AoE4.
AoE4 castle
How can a game that is 2 years old look so much better than a game not even relieced yet?
Do you see the lack of detail in AoE4?
That is the new style that sickens me.