How to move on from V&V

I’m not talking about this dlc since 3 comments ago, you’re not even trying to follow the point, anyway it doesn’t matter. You’re totally missing the point of my argument because probably (and rightly so) you feel betrayed by this dlc, but that’s not what I’m discussing. Maybe you’re just blinded by that right now, once you calm down you can realise what I’m saying and ponder on it.
I’m sure when the first writers or artists appeared the majority of people were close minded like you saying they don’t deserve anything for the effort they put out there for anyone to enjoy and they should get a job (in a world where people make money out of farts lol).
Thank you daddy for the free lessons!

First artists and musicians sold their works.

Modders can also sell their works if they want to. Nobody is forcing them to do anything. They can choose to pay or not. These are all fair.

My point is: if you think you are not getting enough to make a living from your hobby (this premise is very important but you ignored it) then you should either find a job or quit your hobby.

You haven’t revoked the statement of “this dlc is the only way Filly can make a living” so I assume you still hold the opinion when talking about how modders can make a living,

And my point is this is NOT one of the options.
The right way to do this is the company hire modders and release quality contents that justify the price. Like how they turned FE from a mod into a dlc.

1 Like

I actually think they are legally not allowed to.

I mean opening a paetron or join the development team.

Good point. That would be an unfortunate difference/loss. Pros/cons to everything… and campaigns typically do have those cool cutscenes

I don’t think my words or the dictionary quote said or implied “arbitrary sequence of actions” (which implies no focus or goal or objective in mind), but I see what you’re asking. To which I answer, “Yes.” And that scenario would be able to sit under the “Campaigns” button and be referred to as campaign content… because it has, well, campaigns in it :slight_smile:

I don’t claim to be a military expert, but I’m pretty sure there can also be multiple campaigns contributing to an overall, over-arching campaign, too. If Filthy’s scenarios ever sometimes do that, is that problematic to say, I wonder?

I mean, I know that’s problematic to you, so it’s slightly rhetorical, I guess – even though I don’t mean it to be. I know we disagree with how the definition is getting used for V&V content, so I’d understand if you think my words don’t make much logical sense, or if you feel they run against the grain of what the AoE has done or should do.

(Ahh, more info forthcoming in my next quote reply)

Is the scenario about Ghengis Khan defeating them to complete an over-arching objective, goal, mission, scenario to become the ultimate winner or survivor of the map so you can at least exit the map and go back to the main menu knowing you 100% completed Filthy’s scenario? Then it’s a campaign. An over-arching campaign. And I, personally, have no issue with saying that over-arching campaign is completed by successfully completing multiple sub-campaigns. In game, I wouldn’t tend to call them sub-campaigns, personally – more like ‘objectives’ or whatever the game calls them – but to answer your question, I don’t think it’d be technically inaccurate to describe them that way if someone really wanted to.

I didn’t really grasp the flat-earther analogy earlier, and kind of still don’t, I’m afraid. If my clarifying words in my post here and everything I’ve said before somehow makes it sound like I’m an AoE version of a flat-earther to you, then I guess I just have to accept that :earth_americas: :earth_africa: :earth_asia: :globe_with_meridians: = :stop_button:

I’m not a Lawyer, English major, or doctorate in Military History. If the definition or understanding for campaign I’ve learned and formed for years is inaccurate, or if they don’t align with your definitions or desired usages, then I’m okay with that. I can’t know everything, and everyone has opinions. I will try to sit back and learn more.

I already had an open mind to accept and adopt Filthy’s usage for his content, so I can sit back and absorb other thoughts, too. (His words aligned with my real world understanding of what campaigns are, so it worked for me. I just had to expand my thinking… went from “in game campaigns” definition to “real world campaigns” definition. Again, though, I know that may not make any sense to you, thus I’m relegated to :stop_button: )

:slight_smile:

They did tell me differently, with relation to AoE. It was a new usage that I hadn’t seen before in the context of the AoE game. However, their usage of the term made sense to me with how it works in the real world, so I had no problem applying it to the AoE game/menu/scenario world.

That’s probably the issue. In game, the word is famous for being used a certain way. But in the real world, I see the word used in ways that I can apply to Filthy’s scenarios.

Yes, my usage of the term campaign inside AoE was narrow before, now it is more broad. It was narrow before because I had tunnel vision born from only trying Joan of Arc and William Wallace type campaigns in past years. I was trained by those experiences on what the game wants me to think a campaign is. (Granted, I never tried Historical Battles and I don’t even know that I know those existed before. Had I tried those, then my in-game definition wouldn’t have been as narrow, and probably wouldn’t have second-guessed why I couldn’t go to the next scenario after completing one of Filthy’s scenarios)

A campaign in the real world is more than an AoE button or menu screen. It’s more than a Joan of Arc campaign comprised of six scenarios on a menu screen. Its real world meaning allows it to apply to Filthy’s in-game usage of the term, imo. If one of his scenarios has multiple objectives to reach the end/goal, then I struggle with ‘not’ allowing it to be defined as a campaign, due to my real world definition/usage of campaign. I’m pretty sure most or all of his scenarios have objectives to meet end goals (to get 100% completion), otherwise they’d just be sandboxes with no purpose… so, into the campaign realm his scenarios go as far as I’m concerned.

But, like I said, I’m okay with a new Scenarios button if desired to better fit the in-game usage of the word :heavy_check_mark: And/or sitting back and seeing if I need to re-configure my real world understanding of the term in case I’ve had a misunderstanding of its definition for years.

In the end, perhaps I also just need to allow tunnel vision to kick back in… and pretend Historical Battles and Filthy’s scenarios aren’t campaigns in the real world sense of the term… and accept that AoE is famous for campaigns in the ‘Joan of Arc’ sense of the word… and never accept scenarios being called campaigns in AoE again. (Insert my new Scenarios button here.)

1 Like

@Darkness01101

So………….I’m going to be honest. I still 100% hold onto my convictions, but I think this topic is well beyond the point of fruitful discussion.

You and I have had comparatively fruitful exchanges and we’ve only needed numerous paragraphs to make any ground on the most peripheral of issues.

Personally I’m ready to agree to disagree.

4 Likes

For sure! Me, too. Thanks for the discussion

2 Likes

Yes, I agree; I think that at least a Barbarian Invasion dlc like above with Vandals could go well and you give Gaiseric’s campaign to them and Aetius to the Romans… it could be a dlc with Celts and Goths in RoR too, then you have 2 Barbaric campaigns in RoR and 2 in AoE 2 and everyone is happy and content…

Yes, that is also what the AoE wikia considers it; both heroes campaigns per se and all historical battles from TC to VaV are considered campaigns…

Yes, but hey, what’s done is done…

Of course, you are all right…

1 Like

I don’t think such a negative reception is an aim for the devs. Except if they want to step down towards Paradox DLC levels where every single one feels half-baked rethreading the same ideas/regions over and over again. I wouldn’t support this.

2 Likes

What I mean is, if the decision makers interpret the bad reception of this “very low effort sp content” as a proof (or excuse) of “sp content in general do not sell”, it would be really bad…

5 Likes

I 100% agree, and this is what I fear will happen. A similar situation is happening with the Total War series, if you are familiar with it.

Yes I fear they have entered the vicious cycle of “lowering the investments on historical games” and “historical games do not sell”…

1 Like

I would rather them stop updating aoe2 then. Don’t ruin this franchise please.

3 Likes

Yes, I’m also afraid that they will copy the tricks of Paradox or Total War of releasing games and dlcs through a tube regardless of quality or historicity… I would add to the Civilization saga too…

Late…5 years late, we have already opened Pandora’s box…they are going to fill us with dlcs throughout the saga until they finally add a battle pass and there yes, goodbye forever to the saga that we knew…

Then maybe try to support better content other than the official one? Or does economy works only your way?

New maps, new animals, new plants, new architecture/unit skins. “SP” DLCs which I’d support.

Those were part of former DLCs with civs.

SP DLCs are not the problem, cheapened DLCs are. I really feel they cheapened the DLCs since LotW while increasing the prize. Even DOI which is my fav DLC because it is the one the most effort went into it could have benefitted from new South Asian Sail models and Kings. Not to mention the unoriginal civ jingles feel really like a cheap move.

3 Likes

I hope not. It would be incredibly stupid from their part. The “2 civs + 3 campaigns” template is tried and true, so there is no realistic reason to do something else. Hell I’d prefer 5 civs + 4 campaigns like before DE, but alas it seems we’re only getting smaller and smaller DLC. Worst part is the fanboys are very vocal, and will accept literally anything no matter it’s quality, just because it’s AoE2.

Tbh this has been the trend since Knights of the Mediterranean, where the Maltese have a ton of recycled content from the scenario editor. Then we got Return of Rome, with barely any new assets, the Centurion and Legionary were also upcycled from the scenario editor.

Later, the Mountain Royals with less content than DoI but more expensive, then Sultans Ascend came with “variant civs” , reusing assets in order to churn out more playable civs, and finally we have Victors and Vanquished, which was quite the big leap downwards…

5 Likes

Perhaps I should expedite my self-training of game development so I can make my historically accurate medieval RTS or my sci-fi RPG set in various historical eras and regions of Georgia.

Yes, that’s true… there are red flags that must not be allowed to pass or else the game (and the saga) will crash… remember how the dlcs began, as a joke armor for TES IV: Oblivion that came out 2 USD and now in the games they give you monthly battle passes that cost more than 100 USD…

Well KotM had a pass because it had 30 multiplayer maps (more than double that of TAD and more than triple that of TWC), 8 historical maps (in the absence of European campaigns), Tycoon mode and the return of diplomacy… then Malta was a nod to the Blood campaign, that’s why reused a lot of scenario content from there… for me “they crashed the Ferrari” in this dlc, because TMR is the typical regional dlc… we have to see if they raise it in the next dlc or They no longer know what to do with AoE 2…

Well, AoE 4 is another story because it is developed by Relic and also brought its 2 civs, which were also the most requested like the Byzantines and the Japanese… I would have preferred 2 more campaigns (since it was about sultans, they were from Delhi and Ottomans, so you could also include the Byzantines in the Ottoman campaign) and then add the variants as updates within the same base civs…

Yes of course, KotM and Sultans Ascend have a lot of good things about them, and bring lots of new content. But what I’m trying to point out is this “downwards trend”, where they are recycling more and more content.

First, it’s a few units for a civ, as a nod to the campaign (KotM).Then, all the units in a new civ are recycled (RoR). Later, entire civs are recycled (TSA). And finally we reach V&V levels, where they upcycle mods and scenarios.