he was obviously joking, he was making joke of thread that was called “game is a desaster, admit it please”.
Isn’t that literally what I said in the next sentence?
Oh yeah, I wasn’t disagreeing. I just remembered that other “desaster” thread. Sorry, that joke flew right over my head
No, if you read all my posts i Always said that this game would had have good reviews. It’s Always Aoe. The Legacy Is a thing.
Windows Central giving a 100 to a Microsoft game. Heh, of course.
I’m pretty much sticking to the PCGamer review, tho. It basically develops on several things that have largely been discussed in this forums and that generally I agree a lot with (textures and animations, polite battles, population limit…). Also GameStar review points to most of the same things.
And they are even too light with some criticism I would have developed more… but overall that’s it, the amount of elements that would have brought AoE IV from a “really good” re-entry to the franchise to a “true new RTS king”. Those two reviews also highlight correctly what makes AoE IV worth to play, too, so definitely worth reading.
I cant wait for thursday! I am so ready to play this! I want to build my empire and learn new build orders
Rock Paper Shotgun seems to be pretty happy with it:
“I don’t feel very strongly about Age Of Empires. That might sound damning, but I’m someone with no particular stake in the series, perhaps even slightly biased against it.”
Doesn’t seem that helpful of a review… Honestly all gaming publications are garbage, in my opinion, so I’ll wait for sales numbers and user and youtuber reviews.
I would be surprised if many people who have gotten to the point they are typing in an AoE forum would be relying on a professional journalist to form an opinion of whether an AoE game brings them joy.
Reviews are great to read, but I don’t know that we are their audience.
Anyone can pick apart any review, because they’re ultimately subjective takes on a game (educated perhaps, written by people with experience perhaps, etc, et al). All I’m doing is providing it for people to read, nothing more, nothing less.
From video game journalists? The majority barely know how to play games. And while there can be plenty of subjective points to a game, the best reviews always have a core of objectivity to them.
I’m not here to convince you that you should like the review I posted. I don’t know what you want me to say
Do you see me knocking the kinds of reviews you favour? Don’t be silly. The more reviews the game has, the better. The more there are, the wider the variety of opinions presented, and the more information any kind of potential buyer has to inform their possible purchase. It’s as simple as that.
I am disappointed they never added option to pick colour.
Very true my friend, very true.
The IGN review is funny in that the guy pisses on the game for the whole review, only to give it an 8/10 at the end.
He gets the Mongols right imo. They are a flash of brilliance (not a perfect civ mind you, but the heavens opened up for a sec there for sure).
Yeah, honestly that was surprising because it shows that the reviewer actually played the game for quite a bit. Normally IGN reviewers don’t hide the fact that they know nothing about the game or worse, didn’t play it at all.
His whole review echoes my sentiments exactly. A same-ish, play-it-safe RTS but not a bad game. I’d have given it a 6 since this was supposed to reinvigorate the RTS genre and it’s just… there.
Some people will be happy paying $60 for an incomplete game because its fun. Wondering why studios nowdays launch incomplete games…
“ On the other hand, reverence to the past can be restricting, and I can’t help but feel that Age of Empires 4 could have been something more . While I respect Relic’s decision to play things fairly safe, that should result in making what’s already there really shine; polish those mosque minarets and Moscavian onion domes, pump up those population limits, let bodies fly with physics-y abandon upon impact from cannonballs and elephant heads.
Instead, there’s a staid utilitarianism throughout much of Age of Empires 4—everything in it works much as it ever did, but without the flair that could have made it a grand celebration of that timeless AoE formula.”
This is exactly taken from my mind without playing campaigns.
Ah man, campaigns were what I was looking forward to the most. Seeing the way all these people describe the campaigns killed any hype I have for this game.
Same. I was hoping all the mediocrity of the game was being offset by the best campaigns ever included in an AoE game, with deep historical research and somehow different playstyle. In my head, I was really still excusing the game with "perhaps they didn’t have time to polish skirmish and overall graphics because the campaigns are mindblowing"