by giving them your money the only message you’ll be sending is that it’s opke for them to keep on making bad products and they’ll keep pushing the boundaries on what they can get away with more and more.
By not giving them money they’ll be forced to rethink their approach and adjust the content to better suit the playerbase.
Not only does money talk, but it’s the sole influence/power you have over the developers.
While I understand your point here, it really is a stupid argument. It’s a very stupid one. If you don’t like the product they put out then don’t pay for it.
Like I don’t mean to attack you with this reply, man. But hoping that they’ll eventually adjust the product back to what we like is just wishful thinking.
At the end of the day EVERYTHING we say on here will be ignored. They don’t care about us and the only thing we can hold over their heads is OUR money. So don’t go spending it on subpar crap. You’re just sending them the wrong message with this.
Who said I don’t like the product they put out here? And, yeah, if you don’t like it, then don’t go paying for it
True. Auto-scout, small trees, tower range indicators, OP battering rams, weak towers, weak walls, weak castles, lame font and font size, non-user friendly red buttons everywhere, and mirror-world contrived maps are still in the game which I don’t like, and they won’t be taken back to the olden days
Subjective. Like I said, don’t buy then. I doubt my one pre-purchase is going to do much to ruin the impact your tsunami of hatred toward the DLC is expected to have. Some of us recognize this is a video game and not a history simulator or college level history course.
What if they were to rename the DLC to Three States and rename the civs and units to fictional names, would that be okay since this is a video game fantasy world and not a history book in the reference section of a library? Seems like that would be a good compromise and would give the devs freedoms when adding more civs in the future, too
I will buy AoE2 DLCs again on the day we get regional unit skins and more architecture sets. I don’t know why this became so important to me but without that the game looks off nowadays with so many factions from each corner of the world all fighting with european soldiers and harvesting with european villagers and with up to ten civs building the exact same buildings (except castles and wonders of course). I don’t feel that ‘‘all looks the same but with different name because +2 for archers etc.’’ anymore.
I don’t notice that so much, as it seems like there is a lot of new architecture these days compared to before… even several new castles now… and I’m zoomed way out on a 1440p monitor so don’t see too much detail with units. (Which is fine for me, I don’t want devs to prevent zoom-outs. It is how I want to play.)
I can relate, though, as I felt like for a long time new civs in HD and DE just seemed like more of the same
However, after watching some tournaments, I noticed the differences between civs more. Different metas or styles. Now I try various civs, and enjoy that. Each seems pretty unique to me now, but for a long while I felt each new civ was just ‘more of the same’. So in that way, I feel I can relate.
New civs could use even more new techs, buildings, and tech branches, imo, to keep things interesting, but yeah… I hear you
my bad I thought you implied that.
I think that if you don’t like a product then you should not buy it. And if you do like the product then more power to you.
I can’t speak for others but for me it’s not hatred. It’s just pure disappointment. I look at what they could have given us and look at what they’re actually going to give us and feel nothing but disappointment. I don’t care much for history simulators but I can see that the three kingdoms do not fit into the current game and never will.
The current playerbase is slowly being pushed away and the game is being made into a generic slop, all for that almighty dollar. And there is enough generic slop out there to play as is. The way I see it is that this game will die in a couple of years if they keep going down this route, the same way warcraft did.
It’s just sad that so many people refuse to see the writing on the wall and just keep on supporting this course of developement.
Are you really saying this and asking this question seriously? Because if so, I think you have totally misunderstood people’s objections to the new DLC.
Oh, true… but also remove hero units, shift the civs’ timelines to later and lengthen their time in power, change the DLC name to something completely different, and tweak or make different architecture and units to not so closely align with real history. Seems like un-binding the DLC from historical reality so it’s not as disappointing could be a compromise, no? A fair portion of discontent is due to actual history and 3K incongruence with AoE2’s timeline/civ parameters. There are several examples of fictitious units and such in AoE2 to make a funner video game, as it isn’t a history simulator. A future DLC can do all the things everyone asks for to do things correctly, maybe
Can’t do anything about the sentiment regarding devs apparently lying, though, no matter what concessions are made to the civs.
We can refer to this post for some perspective on the issues, which got 14 likes, showing a fair amount of the issues are due to being tied to historical context:
No, I don’t see how. I’ve never seen anyone say they don’t like the DLC because of the “way it is bound to historical reality”, including in the thread you linked. Your “compromise” sounds like something that the people complaining would want even less, and that no one (as far as I’m aware) would want.
As I said before, I really think you’ve misunderstood people’s objections to the DLC.
I will buy if the product is on par with standards like good rating DLCs back then.
Right now this DLC is full of details that announces “rushed” project. They took the risk, and I won’t support it.
If they want my money they should do better. If they don’t fix the mess after they release then no, I don’t think I ever buy.
all I hear them say is:
- we are haters
- we are entitled
- we want historical simulators
- we are like children and everything has to go the way we want
It makes having an actual discussion very defficult. They’re just contributing to the mess. I can’t believe there’re people bending backwards to this extent just to defend the devs and MS. They don’t give a F about anyone other than their financial gain (as it should be imo). The people from this side seem to be misunderstanding the type of relationship we have with the devs/MS.
I’m not targeting anyone specific in here. It’s just the general impression I’ve been getting from the people who’ve been arguing against us.
Ok here’s an objective argument for you:
Three Kingdoms Cao Caos Ambition
Subscribers 83204
4.5/5 ratings
If the most popular Chinese campaign from the custom mod section is about the 3 kingdoms… then maybe that’s what the community wants to play?
I advise looking up survivorship bias. It suits well for most of what you have been obsessed over many threads.
You have fabricated many things to suit your biased narrative. Perhaps it’s time to take a break and see the world is grey instead of black and white.
I didn’t fabricate jack
Prove there’s a more popular chinese setting among the community. To let you know, much of the content that is now canon started as popular fanmods, like the forgotten dlc
Where does this prove anything that people wanted 3K civs?
All this shows is Filthydelphia made a good level. And perhaps people would like a campaign set there. Which could easily be achieved with the Chinese civilisation, which he did here.
I’m not arguing against 3K being p a popular setting. It’s big mainstream. But the way the devs have gone about implementing the 3K into the game makes no sense and no one asked for it.
This dlc would not have even gotteen a fraction of the backlash it’s getting rn if they had put it into Chronicles and outside of main aoe2.
A mod doing well does not translate into the whole community wanting it as a main feature in the game. If that had been the case then V&V would not have bombed the way it did (oc there were also other issues at play apart from this). Most of us like playing the mods as a side thing when we get bored of replaying the main campaigns or PvP. I can appreciate there being well put together and creative mods by fellow community members, but I don’t want every mod be put into the main game.
Have you been keeping up with how the Chinese playerbase feels btw? They’re more pissed about this than us.
People have been asking for well fleshed out medieval east asian civs and campaigns literally for years now. Pretty much everyone was blindsided by what they actually went with.
I keep hearing about how 5 civs are good value for the money we’re spending. But all I’m seeing is what they could have given us. They could have gives us 5 actually fitting civs and great campaigns but instead will be getting this rushed abomination.
aoe3 dlc was cancelled, too and the aoe4 dlc was also very disappointing. Not to forget the expensive aom dlc with its medioce campaign. Someone’s messing around with the whole franchise on their side. That much is obvious atp.
Honestly, how long until they start opening up microtransactions store for unique hero unit skins? That’ll probably be the next step.
In that case let’s make Gwyndlegard civs because it used to be one of the most popular mods back in AoK Heaven. If Filthydelphia can sell his own campaigns, then Basse can too.
Where does this prove anything that people wanted 3K civs?
Where does it disprove it?
I agree with buying. I will also buy it, leave a negative review, then refund. Possibly on multiple accounts.
That’s not how the burden of proof works.
Same. I just want to be 100% sure I can do so with a DLC first.
The burden of proof of what?
If people within the community think that 3K shouldn’t be in the game, it’s upon them to prove so.
Otherwise the paying client is always correct.
That’s how supply and demand works