yep, I assume (as with old age 2) we will get a dlc with mezo expansion civs.
Also, lets just say if I were you I would not get my hopes up to have inca in the full release, or any meso civ. See my resoning above (and info on civs elsewehre 
)
Brah.
Western games aren’t made just for western audiences anymore, their market is international. Hell, no game is made for one market anymore, modern games are global, look at Resident Evil, a Japanese franchise, or Witcher, a Polish franchise.
1 Like
I do care, especially with so few civs, they should be around the world, not just all in one place.
2 Likes
We will surely get more civs with upcoming dlcs. For now it makes more sense to have civs that are connected due to the campaigns. Although I’m really looking forward to civs from Africa as well as South America.
3 Likes
yeah, but…to put it bluntly, very few in the western audience care about that.
What makes you think westerners are the only audience, or that they only care about European history? I agree that American civs are more likely to come out as DLC but your reasoning doesn’t make sense for AOE games, which have always been quite diverse with their civilisation choices.
1 Like
have they?
age 2 had pretty much the campaigns we will have now, at least from the confirmed civs. because they were the most popular/important civs to include, and the ones whose history is far well known (therefore the “caring”.
which movies in recent times in the middle ages depicted mezo cultures? which did at all? They focus on the more “interesting” topics for broader audiences.
Age 2 Did, Movies did and do, and age 4 will too, of course.
I only wrote western audience because I do not know about the rest, but it seems to me still, that middle ages are mostly about crusades and european castles (plus Mongol raids). Which might be due to me being western, but thats why I wrote western audience.
2 Likes
I was simply referring to western audience as I do know our spectrum of history teachings best.
We never even heard about any mezo american wars here.
Also I know western movies, of which I know a LOT in the middle ages (or fantasy middle ages) but none about mezo civs.
I know games cshould be international nowadays.
sure. but they are creating the campaigns and will pick those with the stories they deem more interesting for a realease.
I just wanted to friendly remind you, to NOT expect such civs with the release (due to reasons which cant be discussed here), but strongly suggest it will be a DLC.
I also see no reason to add a Meso-civ now - it will be geopolitically isolated. Just add Meso-civs with Spain in a DLC and here you go, a lot more sense.
1 Like
And. these are at least 2 extra civs - dor “internal” conflicts, so to say.
You know, the Meso civs fought against each other for most of the time frame AOE4 and AOE2 depicts. No need to add Spain for that.
I always wanted a pure American campaign. Pachacutec in AOE2:DE was nice on that regard.
1 Like
It’d be very disappointing to not launch the game with a civilization from the Americas. Age games are imaginary. Geopolitical isolation hasn’t been a problem before and shouldn’t be a problem now.
Otherwise, to force that, then you are essentially requiring that the historical relevance of two entire continents of empires be dependent on whenever the Europeans arrived. That’s nuts and terrible history.
6 Likes
You know that Spirit of the Law touched that very subject in one of his videos on YouTube? One of his arguments about Age 2 being more loved that Age 3 was exactly that taking time to create a nice and powerful town makes you really want to defend it - and rebuild it when (partially) destroyed.
I even humilate the enemy building a town center right where he had the center of his town once and never fail to construct a market and a church and a couple of houses or whatever next to it, just to get that feeling of “town” there! It’s something natural, I think.
2 Likes
Oh, thank you very much for that answer!!
Agree with you there, although that’s a North American point of view of things. In South America, the Incas are way more relevant.
I can tell you that because I live in Mexico, but I’m from South America. So, it’s relative.
2 Likes
Does Spirit of the Law have much experience with games other than AoE2? In my travels, I have not found people who only play AoE2 and don’t really understand any other Age games have a particularly informative opinion about what makes AoE2 great.
I’ve watched that video and it felt to me a bit like a victory lap than a deep dive. I’d be more curious to hear from AoE2 players about what parts of the less commercially successful Age games they think are better than AoE2.
3 Likes
completely agree bro
2 Likes
Its hard to tell may things age 3 does better than 2. it does make a lot of things differntly, and this is why many ppl didnt like it as much as age 2, but aalso why some ppl did (using mmany and some to represen the sales)-
The pacing clearly is one of them. the players who love age 3s fast paced gameplay will not really feel at home builing bases forever (seemingly). The other way around, age 2 players who love dbuilding citys never really got into age 3 because the city building there is mainly practical, and fast (therefore also rebuild faster).
That combinded with on resource gathering leads to a much different, faster playstyle for age 3.
Since more players played 2 than 3 its safe to assume players liked th eslow approach more. maybe not specifically the town building, bu it was probably part of it.
but this cut in the base gameplay from 2/3 lead to a problem on age 4, which is where the community questions from MS came in. (I dont knwo how and who they asked, but according to the devs they did, and the results were partly that ppl liked building their citys)
I just took this one example to clarify that while SoTLs video may seem like a victory lap, it shows well the difference in game design between 2 and 3, and the fact that 3 wasnt as successful shows that at least some of his points are indeed viable.
The difference in gameplay also makes it hard for age 2 players to point out positive traits of less commercial age games.
For example, age 3s card sytsem/home city may very well be a great feature and Idea. But If I love age 2 for its gameplay, this new feature would not fit in there, so I wouldnt consider it a positive trait.
Therefore there really are VERY few positive traits age 2 players could get from age 3. something like
- neutral markets (trade posts)
- more important hero units (thats debatable though)
- asymetric civs
- destruction physics
- physics in general (loke physical cannon balls)
Regarding your other comment- its not about geopolitical isolation anymore i think. Its mostly about sales.
The first 8 nations need to SELL the game to most ppl possible. A future DLC civ “simply” needs to offer an incentive to buy ath in addition, like a new civ with new major gameplay.
Therefore the nation schosen will be ones whose history is recognized and known in the world already, offering 4 good campaigns about building empires. because well known is what mostly sells to a broad audience.
After the game is a commercial success, lesser known civs may very well be implemented, because its also an incentive to buy dlc to findout about this lesser known empire and how its created.
Also IF anyone really would only buy age 4 if a american civ were there, these ppl would then buy the game if the dlc arrives.
It is a self-fulfilling circle for Age of Empires to make only the civs it thinks that players expect. Age of Empires has earned the ability to tell its players what civilizations are worth knowing about. It is cowardly to hide behind the defense that they have to make only the civs players expect to see.
4 Likes
Because the Western audience is the ONLY ONE that still buys and plays RTS games, in any significant number. Aside from Starcraft, no RTS game ever really got big in Asia, and Africa does not care much for RTS also.
RTS sells best in Europe and the Americas, by a WIDE margin.
And yes, the 90s and early 2Ks had MULTIPLE Asian setting RTS games, to try to sell the genre to the mythical Asian RTS audience, and they all just ended up being mostly played by Westerners. Westerners are the most interested in Strategy games in general, and Real Time Strategy games specifically.
Only Starcraft did really well abroad from the West.
5 Likes