Without a game a genre cant exist.
The big question is, what was in last 10 years out there, people were supposed to buy?
If you are asked by your friends to buy RTS, it’s obviously going to be something very old.
So far RTS genre does not fail because of bugs, but of a very awful design.
And it’s not like any team is making patches to fix the mess they deliver,
they all are very out of touché with customers.
Just as example, as Relic did announce they are going to launch a game mode, where you have to destroy only 1 object on the map, a lot people did say it does sound lame, still it was the only available game mode at launch of DoW3.
After so many years of disappointments, people do doubt even basic stuff. Sadly we have to. We have seen in last years how completely bad ideas from first concepts, did get pushed to existence till death of franchises and projects.
That’s why I think, such “basic stuff” has to be clarified, before another disaster does happen.
Gameplay might be a subjective thing, but graphics should be obvious.
I just wonder why AoE4 isn’t so good looking like indie RTS Ancestors Legacy. It is technically possible to make it better, Microsoft does have a much bigger experienced team and budget.
AoE4 units from AAA Team on the left do look like cartoony toys, compared to realistic intense unit design some indie game company had made for first time ever on the right.
Realistic smaller scale for weapons, less intense colours,
blood and dirt on units if they fight can not be hard?
By the way there is a demo to try it out on steam.
So I watched some gameplay videos of ancestors legacy and got exactly what I expected. The problem with going for what people think of as “realistic” graphics in a game is that units become completely indistinguishable from one another on the battlefield in a realistic zoom level that you would actually play on, as seen here. The only way this works for them is that they use unit groups with a banner that tells what the unit is, otherwise you would have no idea looking at your screen what’s what. And if you want to enjoy those “better” graphics you have to zoom in right next to the unit to enjoy the pixels at point blank range. The only thing that looks particularly weird to me in the AoE 4 trailer is the walls, which are a bit oddly bulging. Otherwise I don’t think the graphics are particularly more “cartoony” than age 2 or 3 graphics are. And if you try to go for more ultra modern realism there will be a point at which units are unrecognizable on the battlefield, which is a disaster for Age games where you need unit recognition. The only way to have those sorts of graphics work is to have the maximum zoom setting be preposterously small and claustrophobic. Personally, I would rather have a good zoom level for better playability than ultra modern graphics.
Perhaps I’m not the right person to be saying this as someone who immensely enjoyed playing Dominions 3 and 4 despite their graphics, but to me gameplay should always be placed first in game design.
And yes, when I said the RTS genre was stagnant that’s a lot of what I mean. When I told my wife I wanted to play RTS games with her, we looked at everything released remotely recently and ended up with… Age 3 and Zero K. Both fast paced games that are relatively modern by the standards of RTS at this point. Starcraft 2 is pretty much the only other game with a significant following, and supreme commander. That is why if you just have an age 2 clone, it will be ridiculously boring. It needs to add something new to the series. Even if it is just a bigger unit cap for a larger scale of battles, since that’s a fairly small genre of RTS.
I believe that devs are creative enough to make visible and realistic art style. They used current art style because they want to reach a wide audience. AoE2 had blood but AoE4 won’t.
want reach a wide audience …
this usually gives bad results
remember dow3…
or tw three kingdoms,people like it but i think it is no longer a strategy game.it is a simulation game and don’t challenging.because SEGA wanted reach a wide audience.also dow3 published by SEGA
Look at MS.They said we want reach a wide audience 
But MS also took good steps.For example they said “AoE IV won’t have microtransactions” “We will listen community” i want trust them…
Very well observed, but there is one huge issue with Developers these days, they don’t see it.
They don’t see blobbing, bad zoom levels, lack of content, units indistinguishable “no matter if cartoony or realistic”
And that’s a point where even by something very “creative, with unique ideas” like Ancestors Legacy, with good modern graphics, original gameplay and different faction, becomes not relevant.
Sure having a clone does sound lame,
but what if we get again a game that is lamer than the original ?
I have a very bad feeling by " reach a wide audience",
to me this sounds simply as a death sentence for RTS.
watch please those 2 videos.
The RTS core concept is, somebody is going to lose. That’s where you need tools for it and variety how it can be done. If I take the classic approach, you have lots of options, you can fast gain your stuff together and give swift mercy strike. Modern “reach a wide audience” concept is simply annoying and boring. The heavy issue is how they try to do it, by make it more simple, by remove content, by make it repetitive and by remove what does make the series unique.
Since Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight the entire genre is out of season April Fools joke.
It has simply been decades since we had a proper base build RTS.
They think complex game can’t reach wide audience, so has to be simple.
By base build, complexity is the core experience.
As long this basic misunderstanding of the genre it isn’t fixed, we won’t see it back.
I think the final version will look much more detailed. It’s a Pre Alpha and even Age of Empires 2 Definitive Edition with best graphics looks more detailed than your screenshot, so I really really doubt Aoe4 will look like this. Everything else would be disappointing.
If we get more realistic scale for weapons and adjustable colours, dirt etc. - I don’t know, but more details are a must. (I also hope for realistic proportions)
This.
E.g. GTA is brutal in many cases. Not hyperrealistic and with some funny/childisch elements in it, but definitely not produced for kids. Nevertheless GTA is the most successful game in the world.
So I’m not really sure if cartoony games means a wider possible audience. Even if it is, mostly you lose more audience than winning if you make too much graphics experiments.
I think for AoE4 the typical sunny, but still realistic atmosphere is the best. That’d satisfy the realism fans and is also okay for peope who don’t like dark atmosphere.
I didn’t criticize graphics?
I agree with you. The rest of my text are just my thoughts about the graphics.
That is far from truth balance-wise.
Also, AOE3 maps are way smaller and also have way less wood resources than AOE2.
Oh, please.
Just because the Mayan militia looks like Spanish Militia doesn’t mean they are not different.
Downgrading the last ages?
Exactly the greatest problem I have with AOE3’s unique design.
That doesn’t make you a step ahead tho. That is just your liking.
Oh, like the very “historically accurate” campaign of AOE3?
What?
I’m amazed.
Hussar-line look similar to each other in a way.
Ligh Cav looks like an improved Scout
Hussar Looks Like a Light Cav with Wings.
What are you on about?
That is the issue with the game. You cannot have trash wars.
War Chiefs? Asian Dynasties?
Forgotten is a DLC.
+1
Laughs in French Cav.
I think it was a aoe4 topic.now it is aoe2 vs aoe3 topic.go on.
AoE 3 civ design has much more difference between civs. I mean, in age 3 Japanese houses generate resources, you get the shogun/daimyo units that can train other units anywhere, abnormally fast and strong musketeers, unit training factories, a wonder that can give various buffs to all your units, a cheap semi-culverin version of the falconet, and so on and so on. In Age 2, Japanese fish a bit faster, have cheap resource drop off points, and infantry attacks 33% faster. Oh, and the kataporuto tech. I don’t think touchierfiend was wrong there. The balance is still pretty good between nations in Age 3, TWC did give rise to the way too strong Iroquois rush though, really the worst offender.
AoE 3 doesn’t have Black Forest, but I run out of wood way less often in AoE 3 than I did in AoE 2… it’s not like having less wood makes the game automatically bad somehow, I don’t get that. Age 3 is a faster paced game, you pretty much shouldn’t need as much wood to begin with. The maps being smaller is also because it’s a faster paced game… is something objectively wrong with that? Personally I think there’s room to enjoy both games.
You actually can have trash wars in AoE 3, but that’s really an early game thing.
TAD and TWC are expansions from forever ago, not a remake like DE for AoE 2 is.
Just because Spiffing Brit released a youtube video in which he claimed Cuirs are overpowered and then to the AI in his first game while spamming them and their upgrades does not make them actually OP. If Cuirs were op they’d be spammed in every tournament game and French would win a lot more often. Cuirs are only too strong in the super ultra late game environment of treaty 40 where you can instantly spam them. Age 3 could definitely have done a better job of trying to balance for both standard supremacy games and treaty 40 games, but I think they didn’t really consider treaty 40 to be a serious game mode back then.
Huge5000RTSFan - If we get a game worse than the original, we’ll still have the original, good game. I don’t want to see a revolution, just a progression. Let’s not forget Blizzard recently showed us an amazing example of how to screw up remaking literally the same game with WC3 remastered. If we just have something that feels like an Age of Empires game, with some improvements that should be ideal.
AOE3 DE is a thing tho.
Well, I tested Cuirs and they are OP when they can be insta-made. Also, they eat pikes.
That is the issue, AOE2 allows you to have trash wars at the very late-game and they can become very effective.
No, why do you think people hate Cuir spam?
Good point, but it’s not like I was the one starting it…
Well, good point. But French Cav needs a decent eco to reach that point. After that, it is unstoppable.
We are talking about one of the most hated dev groups here, not a group like Relic.
I will be responding in points so every number is coresponding to one of the reply boxes.
1: Thats not what i meant with unique, also dont see how you could get that out of it. With unique i was talking about mechanics, in AoE III you have the dutch with settlers costing coin and having banks, British get free settler from manor houses etc. Thats more unique then AoE II where like i stated it comes down to buffs. Like +10% wood gathering. There are way less unique civ mechanics in AoE II, the only one i can think about is the feitoria and area damage upgrade for cathapract.
2: Downgrading in the sense AoE III had 5 ages wich was an increase from the previous 4 that now again became for so it is a downgrade.
3: The name itself doesnt have the indicator which was the whole point. It was about how AoE III worked with veteran instead of the unique names for every unit.
4: You can have trash battles but its different to AoE II, trash in AoE III comes more down to cheap units instead of no coin cost, but the point was that if you go for cheap units specially late game you will lose to players wo build expensive units, which is more avordable because plantations.
5: No not the point, stop with changing the point. Hd was the same as DE, its a remaster of the original breathing new life into the game, Forgotten was an dlc for HD, you cant play forgotten withouth HD, you dont have hd or de (yet) for AoE III, the war chiefs and asian dynasties were dlc of the original game, not an remaster which hd can be considered.
Well guys I think it’s clear, AoE2 and AoE3 do have different philosophy.
We have to pick there one, combine 2 and 3 might not end good.
I don’t like the idea AoE4 might become something completely different.
We can’t combine everything, it will be than lacklustre.
Age 3 DE is not out yet, so…
BTW I obviously meant spiffing brit lost in his first game to the AI, not sure how I left that out.
A lot of people hate cuir spam, but I think that is mostly treaty 40 players. If you just spam Cuirassiers they will lose vs their counters in equal cost. Muskets beat them pound for pound, and so do dragoons. Pikes are an early game unit that is meant to drop off in effectiveness because historically pikes fell out of favor in the era depicted, and should not be getting used anymore by the time Cuirs are Very Strong (about 30 minutes?). If you are not playing a treaty game and the french player has overpowered you with Cuirassier spam you have made mistakes earlier because the french military is only mediocre until then, it’s like playing vs Japan, China or Dutch, you should be pressuring them early to prevent them from getting to their peak strength too easily and overwhelming you.
Huge5000RTSFan - I wouldn’t say you should necessarily combine everything from 3 into 4 either, just that it’s a worthy consideration to look at the series as a whole, and think about things that worked and didn’t work in each game. I think there are aspects of 3 that they could use or build on in age 4, and it would probably be more fitting to bring back friendly firing AoE into 4, and probably even projectile inaccuracy. Taking good ideas and using them, or improving on them is not a bad thing. As long as it still feels like an Age game at the end of the day, with large armies, counter units, fortifications, and resource acquisition and base building. I want better unit AI and pathfinding too.
HD is by no means a remaster of the game.
HD is merely a port of the game to Steam.
Can we agree with the point that Cuirs are still OP in that situation?
btw @TouchierFiend53 @CastSheet777881 can you guys use the Quote feature? It really sometimes becomes hard for me to keep up with the quote you are responding to.
Thing is, all mechanics of AoE Series aged well,
but are meanwhile very outdated, it has to be polished.
I would say PvP and single Player should be handled separately, there is a clear difference what a person expects in duel, AoE2 does more fit there. For Co-op and single player AoE3 power ups concept might be the right place for it.
I just don’t see how massive disbalances of AoE3 could work out as PvP 2020.
Even complex base build and clear variety strategies of AoE2 need buffs.
There is no massive disbalance in AoE III
