Would guys prefer an AOE 4 like if it was made by our favorite Ensemble Studios or a RTS with “today’s” design philosophy i.e. moba type objectives, multiplayer-centric, competitive, shallow, fast paced, dlc and expansion riddled game?
2 Likes
Hi! (im sorry for my bad english)
I Think that Age Of Empires IV need a Ensemble esence RTS
BUT, for examble… “Age Of Mythology II” could be like “StarCraft II” or something. With 3 civilizations, powers, unique units, great balance, etc.
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?
I also don’t know English that well so please excuse my mistakes. So, to be honest, I don’t want any RTS to be oriented around a/n esports/competitive theme. Because those RTS are likely to get streamlined and have fast-paced objectives (don’t forget the micro transactions in form of dlcs). That affects the single player portion of the game since the game making is already a time crunch job, and pleasing both crowds is hard with one game unless Devs have 5-6 years of development time. And since game making is complex, it is in single player portions of the game where things get tweak so multiplayer portion can be compensated. Often single player portion of the game is dumbed down as a result: single player portion get shallower.
Many RTS have failed when providing a quality single player and multiplayer game.To give few examples, look at how C&C franchise have been evolved to: compare their every game, and you will see every next game to be more streamlined game where base building just gets thinned out more and more. Even Grey Goo, play and feels like a C&C game. Look at 3 games in DOW series, same story, DOW , OK base building, but DOW 2 none at all, and DOW 3, we know its a disaster. Same story with Home world series where Desert of Kharak being the culprit. Halo Wars series, Warcraft series, and don’t forget Relics’ own masterpiece title Company of heroes. Every other iteration in all these series feels little off from their original counterparts.
Now, to answer AOE 2 being competitive…well if you see the making of AOE 2 you will see that studio was focused on Single player campaign giving an entertaining historic campaign, then they added the multiplayer portion just for players to have good casual matches in their spare time. Those players who play it competitively tweak a lot of setting before they jump in a tournament type match. They often tweak location of their civ, resources, population. Frankly they are able to do it because Ensemble Studio’s games were always so open and editable. They provide much options to mess around in multiplayer portion and with in game editor. Furthermore, there aren’t lot of multiplayer-centric maps in AOE 2. Therefore, you will often see that people who play it in a “rush” mode they favor only some type of buildings such as many towers, walls, army barracks, and forts. And if you want a true competitive AOE game then then there is AOE online for you.
RTS these days wannabe a Blizzard title. Blizzard RTSs are so successful because of the marketing. I just don’t understand why other RTS have to leave their core essence and signature which makes them different and stand out to be like a sneaky esport game. Blizzard often makes their with esport in mind and if you have played StarCraft 2 for example, then compare the campaign from 2 to campaign in 1 you will see a drastic difference. One has a slower campaign and other one is more fast paced. Just remember, its Relic we are dealing with, and I don’t know if the design decisions are made by Sega but in Relic’s definition a competitive game is a moba game. I want this new AOE title to be more refined in older games formula. I can bet you right now, if Ensemble (RIP) was around, and they have given an opportunity they would make another superb AOE game.
I believe that if it doesn’t have the Ensemble essence, it just shouldn’t be called Age 4
@Fetandrey said:
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?
Here is your explanation from my long reply: …“Now, to answer AOE 2 being competitive…well if you see the making of AOE 2 you will see that studio was focused on Single player campaign giving an entertaining historic campaign, then they added the multiplayer portion just for players to have good casual matches in their spare time. Those players who play it competitively tweak a lot of setting before they jump in a tournament type match. They often tweak location of their civ, resources, population. Frankly they are able to do it because Ensemble Studio’s games were always so open and editable. They provide much options to mess around in multiplayer portion and with in game editor. Furthermore, there aren’t lot of multiplayer-centric maps in AOE 2. Therefore, you will often see that people who play it in a “rush” mode they favor only some type of buildings such as many towers, walls, army barracks, and forts. And if you want a true competitive AOE game then then there is AOE online for you.”…
**Guys please use ** #makeEnsembleProud for the discussion to remind Relic that they need to cultivate our game.
@Mehkind said:
@Fetandrey said:
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?Here is your explanation from my long reply: …“Now, to answer AOE 2 being competitive…well if you see the making of AOE 2 you will see that studio was focused on Single player campaign giving an entertaining historic campaign, then they added the multiplayer portion just for players to have good casual matches in their spare time. Those players who play it competitively tweak a lot of setting before they jump in a tournament type match. They often tweak location of their civ, resources, population. Frankly they are able to do it because Ensemble Studio’s games were always so open and editable. They provide much options to mess around in multiplayer portion and with in game editor. Furthermore, there aren’t lot of multiplayer-centric maps in AOE 2. Therefore, you will often see that people who play it in a “rush” mode they favor only some type of buildings such as many towers, walls, army barracks, and forts. And if you want a true competitive AOE game then then there is AOE online for you.”…
Of course AoE2 was focused around single player. A lot of people were either not on the internet, or like me had a crappy dial up connection in the late 90’s that wasn’t good at all for online gaming. I only played RTS games then single player really back then and it wasn’t until quite some years later when I had a solid broadband connection that I realized what I was missing out on.
Hopefully AoE4 has solid campaigns and a multiplayer that is good enough to keep me and many other stick around.
Longevity will rely on how good the multiplayer and modding community is. Make it easy for modders to release content and create a matchmaking system. This is the recipe now days for a successful multiplayer game. Include LAN /Custom lobbies as well.
@PunjabiSpartans said:
Longevity will rely on how good the multiplayer and modding community is. Make it easy for modders to release content and create a matchmaking system. This is the recipe for a successful multiplayer game.
Same as it used to be. This is an Ensemble way. AOE 2 has been so successful because of modding and player constantly playing those mods with each other.
In my opinion, AoE4 must have roots of Ensemble studios, but it does not have to be missing today’s RTS elements: I’m better off, I’m against moba elements, fast and casual games, super games. These things do not have to be AoE4!
Instead, I want the game to be thick; Relic boys should not be afraid to discourage newcomers to the AoE series, offering an easy and fast game; they have to think that the AoE community is full of old-fashioned fans, who want a complex game too (complex the right one, not exaggerated!).
But even the output of dlc that can play the game (I do not mean to dlc blood). It does not serve 20 civilizations … just the right ones to highlight each of the strengths and weaknesses.
I expect a good support for multyplayer mode and a robust single player campaign !!
It should feel like an Age of Empires game while remaining competitive.
Age IV could be the Ensemble game we are used to, and Age V a competive one (As was done with Total War Arena).
One thing is sure, they need to get rid of the peer2peer system if they want to be successful
@Fetandrey said:
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?
I completely agree! Why not having an awesome single-player campaign with a modernized MOBA-like multiplayer?
@“Douglas Jr236” said:
@Fetandrey said:
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?I completely agree! Why not having an awesome single-player campaign with a modernized MOBA-like multiplayer?
Please read my earlier response. On top of that look at the Relic’s track record. They have never made a classic rts that is gathering resources with a historic campaign based on archaic and old times. Last time we asked them to give us a cover system from Dow 2 and base building from Dow 1, they gave us a Dota game. We asked same thing during coh 2. They gave us a copy paste game where $60 price tag got you a half game, rest you had to buy with the real money. So, that’s why we can’t have a both. We have to make them focus in one zone. But I have my fingers crossed. Something in me says that they won’t disappoint because of the fan following and expectations from this game is immense.
@“Douglas Jr236” said:
@Fetandrey said:
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?I completely agree! Why not having an awesome single-player campaign with a modernized MOBA-like multiplayer?
I can see the pitchforks and torches now if Relic Moba AoE4. I would be one of the angry mob also. I mean they can do that kind of bullshit to the DoW series, but an epicness like the Age series? No basebuilding? Team orientated multiplayer only? Joan vs Montezuma mid lane? They better not do anything like that!
@“Douglas Jr236” said:
@Fetandrey said:
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?I completely agree! Why not having an awesome single-player campaign with a modernized MOBA-like multiplayer?
Haha, I really hope you are joking
@KrOjah said:
@“Douglas Jr236” said:@Fetandrey said:
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?I completely agree! Why not having an awesome single-player campaign with a modernized MOBA-like multiplayer?
I can see the pitchforks and torches now if Relic Moba AoE4. I would be one of the angry mob also. I mean they can do that kind of bullshit to the DoW series, but an epicness like the Age series? No basebuilding? Team orientated multiplayer only? Joan vs Montezuma mid lane? They better not do anything like that!
I would join the angry mob with you.
@AgeofEmpires4HQ said:
@KrOjah said:
@“Douglas Jr236” said:@Fetandrey said:
Why can’t it be both? Isn’t AoE II competitive as it is?I completely agree! Why not having an awesome single-player campaign with a modernized MOBA-like multiplayer?
I can see the pitchforks and torches now if Relic Moba AoE4. I would be one of the angry mob also. I mean they can do that kind of bullshit to the DoW series, but an epicness like the Age series? No basebuilding? Team orientated multiplayer only? Joan vs Montezuma mid lane? They better not do anything like that!
I would join the angry mob with you.
+1