Yeah this, doing a poll on specific games reddit looking for first time players will be quite useless. Most players in general are very casual gamers and those that are new are very rarely going to be active on the subreddit of a game they just started playing, even less so on forums like these.
2 Likes
You’re doing that, even if that’s not your conscious (primary) intent.
Not sure what kind of revelations you’ve stumbled upon- will AoE2 eventually be abandoned by developers-IP holders and the majority of the community that will die off, move on etc.? Well of course, eventually. Will it be because of IV’s supremacy? Doubtful, at least for now and in nearest future. Personally, I’m convinced these games are different enough that there’s no ground, point or logic in trying to tie them too closely together as if there are yearly iterations of the multiplayer Call of Duty formula.
These are vastly different games on many levels, despite initial similarities that mostly end up being on a thematic, visual and mechanically shallow level that can be applied to every AoE game ever made, including mobile titles.
I’m sorry but what you’re writing is ignorant and detached from measurable reality.
What younger people? Do you have some poll? Are you talking about children? This game is not aimed at them, never was and never will be. They can play it even if below the required age 12 (I did when AoK came out, I was 9), but that’s not the core of the audience, nor appealing to them is required on any level for the game to maintain popularity.
RTS is a niche genre these days, and when young players want to play a ‘strategy’ game- they are exposed to some mobas and mobiles games first, than AoE or any other classic RTS.
How does AoE IV look ‘100x better’? Are you trolling? I ain’t gonna even touch the nature of comparing 20yo 2D game to a brand new 3D one, but on its own- how it’s 100x better and how the hell you’re stating it as some kind of widely acknowledged reality?
I’ve played an untold number of strategies since ~'93-'94 and I can’t think of a 2D RTS that is even close to looking as good as 2DE. Even when you go out of your way to make it look uglier, by disabling all effects, lowering textures, changing trees to small etc. it still is a great-looking game, even if you don’t like the setting the cohesion and quality of assets is world-class.
100x times better? On what planet do you live? AoE IV does have some nice picturesque landscapes and you can make some settlement that appears cozy and atmospheric, but that’s wildly different aesthetics that’s not even in the same category as ‘every sprite a painting’, historical, grounded approach of Age of Kings.
And all that is nothing compared to the notion of visuals, both in terms of quality and originality of art style AND technical capabilities, being a major, deciding factor that ‘masses’ care about. Most popular games are at least in some part online-based, and that is reflected in quite simplistic visual layer and net-optimized engines that produce very mediocre results when compared with ‘what we can do these days’.
Most people on the planet have mediocre or weak machines (or play on handhelds, mobile phones etc) at that’s the main focal point of many game designers, including creators of IV. If Age of Kings was released today, its creators would most likely aim for something on a minimal level of games like Frostpunk, Anno 1800 etc, not for a streamlined, more caricatural, plain look that is designed primarily with competitive multiplayer in mind.
When they got a hold on some real tech (as quirky as it was back in the early 2000s) they created a visually stunning game in the form of AoE III, that still holds up and 3DE is one of the most beautiful strategies, not only RTS, ever made. That’s the level Age of Kings was aiming at. But that’s a distant world, and putting II and IV in one line is laughably inappropriate and in the end- it puts IV in a very bad light.
AoE II is not ‘out dated’. It’s actually the opposite- it’s timeless and it most likely be released for the 4th time, while I doubt IV will get even one treatment of this kind.
Being a younger player is a brief period in life. People grow up and out of many things, and what II is offering is appealing in a way that IV might not be past a certain age.
In the end- it doesn’t matter. If we’re talking about the value of the game for customers- AoE 2DE is offering a mindblowing amount of single player content that dwarfs not only IV, but all other AoE games combined.
And the majority of players are interested only in SP, and that’s the main reason it will never be overtaken and forgotten because being ‘stuck in outdated 2D’ allows it to offer a massive RPG-like amount of singleplayer fun for a laughably low price.
Age of Kings is a masterwork in game design, and its support then and now is stellar and it will be ‘in the conversation’ even after the release of Age of Empires V.
The graveyard of this industry is littered with games that looked good when they came out. It doesn’t matter, certainly in a mechanics-based genre like RTS, especially these days where technical advancements and minor compared to what was going on 15-20 years ago, and even more so in the context of AoE IV, that looks solid, pleasant but is completely unimpressive when viewing from most angles.
10 Likes
If the RTS is a niche, it is because the veteran fans will always obstruct any change, because according to them the complexity of the game is their passion. They will simply tell you this is not the right game for you. end of story.
1 Like
I have no idea how AOE4 being at a mid-point between an 2000 RTS and an 2005 RTS in its design could be more attractive to the “new generation” who never experienced RTS before. The way it is designed and advertised cries so hard to attract “veteran fans”.
8 Likes
No, RTS is more of a niche because ‘classic’ RTS such as AoE or CnC aren’t just that popular anymore. People are more into MOBAs like LoL or Dota which had its origin as a Warcraft 3 mod. And that’s not a new phenomenom…
By the time AoE 3 was released in 2005, the game received very good reviews, it even received the “Best Graphics” award from GameSpy, yet it wasn’t as much played as the other Age games simply because it was released during a time when classic RTS were already declining on top of its high system requirements for that time.
8 Likes
aoe3 back in 2005 was basically what crysis was in 2007 graphically
5 Likes
well, i think you have this bit of logic backwards, you are among new faces that came with aoe4, glad you like it, but don’t teach people that played these games for years and years, well before aoe4’s idea came to be, how they should be playing because you don’t know or want to know where they draw their conclusions from
for instance, i never take an issue with game exploring new grounds, but aoe4 didn’t do that did it, its a surface level copy paste of aoe2 with few minimal changes to separate it from it and few aoe3 additions, like landmarks, thing is, there’s nothing actually new in aoe4, other than noticably worse response times or, at least this is mostly patched now, really poor controls at launch
(before anyone brings up documentaries, i’m strictly referring to gameplay additions here)
3 Likes
I have read a lot of ideas, from new people like capturing buildings, or that the towers have a limited range where they can be built, destroy the walls in several sections etc. I simply debate pros and cons, not like some: "this is my house, I’ve been used to it for years and this is not the ideal game for you"
If Eric Wrobel had depended on aoe2’s preferences, we would still have to wait to kill the last villager to end the game, let alone victory by landmarks, or the landmarks themselves
2 Likes
a fair way to put it
there’s truth here as well, but on landmark victories i’m personally a bit more mixed, on one end it solves the vill in the corner of the map problem, but it introduces the sniping cheese problem
on game pace i’m still thinking aoe4 is fast enough at the start, way too slow in the mid game and at first really slow for late game until its time to finish the opponent off, then it picks up again
1 Like
They are very different games for very different audiences. I enjoy both games, also enjoy aoe3.
Aoe2 de is for older players that played original aoe, same with aoe3 de. They’ve increased the player base by bringing back people that played them years ago. Aoe4 has no player base to bring back so it was aiming at fans of the series and people new to the series or new to rts games.
Well most gamers are younger than me but I guess I’m referring to teenagers, once they’ve moved on from games targetted at very young ages, they start to discover new games.
Considering that aoe4 took the number 1 spot for sales on steam at release I don’t think rts is as niche as you suggest, though there are plenty of more obscure rts games.
I’d find it hard to argue that aoe2 looks better than 4, it’s 20 years old and no one would expect them to have similar level of graphics even with DE giving the game a fresh coat of paint.
People get used to the next generation of graphics. I remember oblivion as being the best game ever but if I go back to it after skyrim it now looks shit in comparison but for it’s time it was good.
Aoe2 de looks like a mobile game in my opinion, very clunky and poor visuals.
I agree, it’s a great game with a lot of content for a very affordable price.
I play all aoe games though not much of the original and I don’t hate aoe2. I just think it’s a really big stretch to compare it’s graphics to aoe4, even original aoe3 has far superior graphics.
My point in this topic was that as time goes on I expect aoe4 to continue to grow, people getting started into gaming or into rts games will almost certainly choose aoe4 over aoe2 or aoe3 because it’s the latest release and it looks the best, it’s also got good reviews and is reasonably priced. It’s also set in the medieval era which remains incredibly popular.
Aoe2 will maintain it’s player base of older, veteran players. I’d imagine it will slowly decay over time, I don’t see much growth for aoe2 or aoe3 but aoe4 has potential.
2 Likes
… which still is a rare case as most people resign earlier + you can play with similar settings to AoE 4.
The average gamer is btw 35 years old:
This also fits with the Age series as the average Age gamer is somewhere between 25 and 35 and obviously previously had contact with RTS.
But there are also people that prioritize Gameplay over Graphics, especially in the Indie market which is not an insignificant one.
Imo it just looks like a nice 2d game and 2d as an artstyle ages a lot better than 3d which you basically confirm with your Oblivion vs Skyrim comparison.
I mean, look at the first Empire Earth from 2001 - great game but visual-wise it aged horrible. There are however some examples of 3d games that age well - XIII (a FPS from 2003) is one of those, thanks to its art style.
I can only repeat myself here: AoE 4 won’t replace AoE 2. No Age game ever replaced the other.
Edit: just to be clear:
Some of these comments are anything but okay. (Dis-)agreeing is fine and nice as that’s normal on a forum, but personal attacks are the worst.
Yeah that’s younger than me lol.
Indeed there are, I still regularly play rise of legends which imo is a great rts game although it’s pretty much unavailable to even get these days by traditional means.
I don’t think aoe4 has bad gameplay though, it’s a really enjoyable game that was somewhat ignored by many people myself included due to it’s terrible state at release but they have since fixed a lot of the issues that there were at release. It’s also a trade off, perhaps someone likes the gameplay of aoe2 a little more than aoe4 but they prefer the look of aoe4 by a mile so choose that.
I guess it is true that 2d games do age better, but just in a straight comparison I really like the style of aoe4 over aoe2.
I don’t think it will ever replace it completely because as has been said by myself and others here they have a different player base. People that have been playing aoe2 for 20 years are unlikely to jump ship now and move over to aoe2 and there is a huge demographic that simply can’t even play aoe4 even if they want to.
That being said I still think aoe4 has the potential to grow a lot more and attract a lot of new players to the aoe series, I don’t think that’s true of aoe2.
2 Likes
I doubt AOE-4 will replace AOE-2. If they continue to this day in AOE-2 it’s because they didn’t like the game.
2 Likes
Oh man, I wish Microsoft would do proper DEs for RoN and RoL…
I don’t think so as well, it wasn’t my intention to imply that. I think 4’s gameplay is good and enjoyable but my personal enjoyment with AoE 4 is somewhat dampened by a combination of things. I do however keep on following the game’s development and check it out once in a while. 
I guess working on 4’s companion book slightly spoiled me a bit in that regard.
Yup, 4’s reputation is still mostly negatively affected by the launch phase, pretty much like AoE 3 nowadays has the reputation to be the black sheep of the AoE family.
Personally, in the long term, I want to see AoE 4 improve and be on par player-wise with AoE 2 (which is something I hope for AoE 3 as well as that game is sadly underrated as hell). So tl;dr - as a Age fan, I want to see all games going strong and I can’t wait to see where the journey’s going once AoM: Retold is out.
9 Likes
They have to change a lot of things and make some things optional for those who prefer the current AOE4.
That way AOE4 will extend its player base.
Interesting thing about AoE2 is that, by modern standards, it’s a stupidly unintuitive game and leads to horrendous new player experience.
For example: You can’t gather boar if it’s killed by TC. What??? Archer line beats militia line. But not unique unique militia like Huskarl. Spears should counter cataphracts, right? Think again. Again, aoe2 has a lot of stupid game design choices that leads to bad new player experience.
Aoe4 in this regard is so much better. It doesn’t matter if you don’t know the civ you’re playing against and the unique unit. You know intuitively what will beat it.
Just as ita playerbase is unwilling to jump ship, it will not have new players. Parts of the world that don’t have good pcs will keep playimg aoe2
3 Likes
################## post:82, topic:228942"]
Aoe4 in this regard is so much better. It doesn’t matter if you don’t know the civ you’re playing against and the unique unit. You know intuitively what will beat it.
[/quote]
That is exactly why AOE4 is boring and gets boring real fast.
You just said it, AOE4 all units are the same.
When everything is the same, the game gets boring.
AOE2 is where players can explore, and AOE4 is where players are forced to play one way as everything is the same. Spears are spears, archers are archers…
5 Likes
and the worse part are that most players on nowadays aoe4 playerbase calls it assymetric and different from aoe 2 which is very ironic
6 Likes
Games may be infinitely unintuitive if the gameplay is there.
AoE4 being a product of recent times built in a newish 3D engine has a lot of advantages that way.
However, much of that doesn’t matter if the gameplay isn’t there to support it. The reality is, games don’t have to be extremely complex or extremely complicated to be fun. We’ve been playing games for thousands of years.
Many popular games today have centuries long histories. Video games are the newest entry in this long line of history, and a lot of games in the current industry depend on technology to boost their sales. Surely you can see how many games for instance mostly expect their realistic graphics to carry them?
People are starting to see through that particular selling point. Everythings become more realistic. But, there are a lot of things like that. 3D movement used to be exciting ten years ago. Now adays, its to be expected. But, this electronic QoL isn’t gameplay. It is just convenient and makes the experience smoother.
AoE4 may have all the QoL features in the world. But, it has taken explicit steps to distance itself away from AoE2. Now, I’m not here to tell others that AoE4 should be like AoE2. But, this is still Age of Empires. As such, you should be able to use past entries as a point of comparison for field research.
We can look at features that are both gone in AoE4, but also features that have been added. And if you ask me, overall, AoE4’s added features do not outweight the features found in past iterations. Remember, this is all a matter of design. It isn’t like a TV package where you either get all 23 bullshit channels or nothing. Design is a thing that can be explored and thought about, argued for or against. If there are features people miss from the past, that can be discussed–and it doesn’t mean you want all the awful features from the past games either.
The intention is to develop something good. An evolution of sorts. AoE4 has not been shy in being rather conservative in its approach, so despite how much you’re trashing AoE2, it has taken a lot more inspiration than you probably want to admit. The question is always how to make the experience better, and again, shutting out AoE2, the game many people here are coming from, and the game that AoE4 heavily is inspired by, is ridiculous.
2 Likes