Is 1 game mode for RTS = financial suicide?

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
1

Is 1 game mode for RTS = financial suicide ?

RTS games do have quite a dilemma what kind of game mode they should do.

Somehow recent developers had funds only for 1 game mode.
Problem is, what if you simply don’t like it?
What if it’s too fast, too slow, too simple, too complicated ?

If we look at the last successful RTS it was quite long ago
and they had lots of game modes or adjustments.

In Supreme Commander you could adjust Tech Access, like no tier 3,
no Nukes, no Air Units, no Water Units or no Titan Units.
In Age of Empires you could always adjust the games speed and starting Age.

+Honestly, I have my doubts if would it be enough today.
Starcraft2 does set the standards pretty high with all the tower defence, Warcraft 3, RPG,
and plenty other game modes you can play there.

My concern is:
Launch something new and original? people might hate it for to be not what they wanted.
Launch something old and classic? people might hate it for to be lame and repetitive.
Making several game modes? might end up in all of them be bad and lame.

So the question is, with how many game modes should Age of Empires 4 launch
and how different should they be?

2

hmm… interesting observation.

3

@Huge5000RTSFan Your final concerns, while not invalid, are a little close to overthinking. Regardless of how much content there is in a game, there is always the chance that people wont like it, and you’ve basically covered every and all possibility they could go for there. AOE in general isn’t for everyone, and it’s certainly always been aimed at a different group than what StarCraft/ WarCraft are (which is why I’m always puzzled by people bringing up those Blizzard games here…). To me, equating AOE 4 with a Blizzard RTS is like putting Rainbow Six in the same section as Call of Duty. (EDIT: Classic Rainbow Six, I’ve not played Siege but I know that is leaning a bit more in the E-sports arena than the older ones).

I do agree about the game modes part though. AOE has historically had a lot to offer right out the gate, and one of my issues with AOE 3 was the reduced amount of options in setting up a game (can’t add more than one civ of a particular type in AI matches, seemingly fewer set up options). Personally, I’m not so much in the camp of “I WANT ALL MODES” (because annihilation is really my bread and butter), but I like having tweak options for the match.

4

More choices= always a good thing.
Less choices= bad thing.

Here are some game modes that could be added:
-Supremacy (no treaty) (maybe including building a wonder,trade monopoly or having all relics etc)
-Treaty 10-60mins
-Deathmatch
-Nomad (start with villagers spread out over the map)
-Regicide (defend the king)
-King of the hill (conquer a spot on the map and defend it long enough)
-Custom made scenario’s by the use of the mapeditor
-Tower defence comparable with league of legends: you are under attack by the ai. which comes in stronger and stronger waves of troups. Defend your base against those waves longer then your enemy.
-Historical battle mode: pre set landscape and starting units. No villagers but army vs army fight according to a historical battle that took place.
-“Argon mode” 2 players playing one ingame color.

Adjustments:
-Starting resources
-starting amount of villagers
-Starting age/tech level
-Tech level restriction max age 2,3,4,
-Player handicap
-Starting with towers
-Starting with small army

  • More expensive artillery/ships
  • No artillery
  • Slow, normal, fast, extra fast gamespeeds
  • Slow, normal fast villager gathering rates
  • Recorded game (y/n)
    -Gear/ no gear
    -Deck of cards/ no deck of cards
    -FFA, 2v2v2v2,1v1,2v2,3v3, 4v4, 1v2,1v3,1v4, 2v3,2v4, 3v4,3v5
    -Observer mode

More choices for everyone means a bigger chance of meeting the demands of players.
Thusfar i don’t see any downside to launching the game with a lot of possibilities. When it comes to rated games those should be having standard settings for supremacy, treaty or deathmatch.

5

@Eininfar said:
@Huge5000RTSFan Your final concerns, while not invalid, are a little close to overthinking.

Well big problem is Microsoft does under-fund games and Relic are not good at negotiate content.
Both did by last games make pretty bad design choices.

@Eininfar said:
Regardless of how much content there is in a game, there is always the chance that people wont like it

Indeed Age of Empires Online and Dawn of War 3 are horrible games.
And more content might not have saved them,
simply because the art style “AoE-Online” or gameplay design “DoW3” were bad to the core.

-First of the game has to look good, but Age of Empires Online art style looks like Bob the builder.

-the gameplay itself has to be strategical. And here is a point why I do think Relic will massively struggle as developer. Since 2006 Company of Heroes they were making tactical games where it’s important to place the units right, or DoW3 is a game about smashing buttons on the key board and moving fast units.

@Eininfar said:
AOE in general isn’t for everyone, and it’s certainly always been aimed at a different group than what StarCraft/ WarCraft are (which is why I’m always puzzled by people bringing up those Blizzard games here…)

StarCraft 2 is the game any RTS has to compete with and make game for everyone should be the priority.
I think the big mistake the gaming market does do here, is to copy StarCraft 2.

What is absolutely wrong, but they all don’t understand it. Like we did see by recent DoW3.
If first reaction is to go back to the old game or to Starcraft 2,
than the job was really badly done, but they did’t understand it.

@Eininfar said:
I do agree about the game modes part though. AOE has historically had a lot to offer right out the gate, and one of my issues with AOE 3 was the reduced amount of options in setting up a game (can’t add more than one civ of a particular type in AI matches, seemingly fewer set up options). Personally, I’m not so much in the camp of “I WANT ALL MODES” (because annihilation is really my bread and butter), but I like having tweak options for the match.

Just tweak might be not up to date.
In Starcraft2 you have for example a lot of total conversations mods.

So what ever they come up with for AoE4
-new game mode ?
-Classic game mode is a must have. Should be years later achievable to play AoE2 on AoE4 Graphics.

-a pretty famous game mode is Desert Strike in SC2, where you simply send waves out units.

-Tower defence/survival game mode like They Are Billions sounds reasonable to implement,
you start in middle of the map and do fight waves of attackers

But would be 4 game modes at launch enough ?

6

Maybe.

7

They should introduce battle royale mode. O wait 8 player FFA was allready a thing :).

8

Example
The mods do turn the games into something completely different.
Like from Sci-fi into fantasy scenario or from modern war into alternative history scenario.

Here a video of a StarCraft II - (Warcraft III Mod)

Here a video of Generals Red Alert mod.

I think that’s why those games are even today still so popular,
modern day developer can merely provide the tools,
real RTS players just do have a “handling and know-how” paid people can’t do.

Problem is gaming market doesn’t understand,
that RTS genre did develop beyond their comprehension.

That Starcraft2, StarWars Empire at War and Generals did push with modding tools the bar too high.
That’s where I do see the biggest issue of Age of Empires 4 to have just 1 game mode.