First off, AoE2: DE without skins is not the same as AoK or HD, so directing people to those versions is a weak argument. DE comes with modern QoL improvements, performance enhancements, and an active player base—things that HD and AoK simply can’t offer anymore. The idea that someone who prefers the base aesthetics should just “go back” to older versions ignores the fact that they want to enjoy DE without unnecessary changes, not abandon it entirely.
Second, adding an on/off toggle is not the same as trying to “force DE to regress.” It’s actually the opposite—it’s about giving players more choice without taking anything away from others. If anything, the absence of a toggle is more restrictive, since it forces people into a new aesthetic without an option to revert. Wouldn’t the more player-friendly solution be one that accommodates different preferences rather than dismissing them outright?
Third, you say this is a “semi-live service game,” and while that may be true from a business standpoint, that doesn’t mean every single change should be forced onto the player base without consideration. The best live-service games thrive not just on constant updates, but on player goodwill. If a sizable part of the community is asking for a simple toggle—one that doesn’t hurt the game’s monetization or disrupt the DLC model—why shut that down?
Finally, saying that people who dislike forced changes “have nothing to offer” is just wrong. Long-term player retention is just as valuable as immediate sales. Catering exclusively to new buyers while alienating veteran players is a short-sighted strategy. A company that respects its fanbase builds loyalty, which in turn leads to higher engagement and more future purchases. Dismissing a portion of the community as irrelevant is not a sustainable mindset, even from a business perspective.
At the end of the day, it’s not about stopping DLCs or “regressing” the game—it’s about ensuring that new content is handled in a way that respects all players.
It’s one thing to disagree on the necessity of a toggle, but the way you’re framing this discussion is pretty petty. Instead of engaging with the actual argument, you’re trying to dismiss people entirely—suggesting they should just “go play another version” instead of having any say in DE. That’s not a real counterpoint, that’s just gatekeeping.
The irony is that you keep defending the game as a “live service,” yet you’re acting as if only a certain type of player—the ones who agree with you—deserve to have input on how it evolves. If the game is truly live-service, shouldn’t all players’ voices matter? Or does “live-service” only count when it supports changes you personally approve of?
You also talk about how the devs will do whatever makes them the most money, but let’s be real—companies don’t exist in a vacuum. Player feedback matters, and ignoring part of the community because you personally think they “have nothing to offer” is a bad take. The fact that this conversation is even happening proves that people care, and that alone makes their opinions relevant.
At the end of the day, your argument isn’t really about business models or game design—it’s about shutting down people you don’t like. Instead of actually explaining why a toggle would be harmful (hint: it wouldn’t be), you’re just hand-waving complaints away and hoping nobody notices. But people do notice. And if anything, this kind of massive d**k attitude only fuels the desire for better player choice.
