yea but did anyone actually ask for this to be made into a dlc? I am genuinely curious because I couldn’t find anything related to it.
The way it looks to me right now is that they disregarded their current playerbase and try to get their hand on that almighty Chinese dollar because 3K is kinda mainstream relevant right now.
But then again there’s virtually zero advertisement as it pertains to the 3k part of the dlc, and both the English and Chinese speaking communities aredisappointed by it. So how are they expecting this to do well?
You get what I’m trying to say? It just makes no sense to me
And we both know that it’s gonna get review bombed the moment they open up
2 Likes
Oh lets get a Last Neanderthal DLC next then
Or a new DLC with three Tamerlane campaigns
Now you’re talking! World’s Edge… make it so!
But not that DLC. I wanted a Neanderthal age for AoE2 even before I knew about Filthydelphia’s The Last Neanderthal campaign. I actually don’t think I played that yet.
Like a 5th age… an age before the Dark Age. But an entire DLC instead could be cool, focusing on wayyyy back timelines… probably under Chronicles
You can just leave a bad review in the base game. Even if you don’t buy the dlc, they are still going to force us to interact with 3K civs, so it’s just correct to review bomb the base game as well.
4 Likes
Oh, already done that.
1 Like
The burden of proof of what you claimed.
You claimed that the Filthydelphia level was proof that people wanted 3K in AoE2. But there are too many variables involved. It’s up to you to prove it without a shadow of a doubt.
Well given this is the worst backlash to any add-on that AoE2 has had, I would say that is already proved.
9 Likes
Ok so I started thinking about what a “civilization” is, in the context of the game, and why Wei, Wu and Shu don’t fit the mold, and thus shouldn’t have been added to the game. There are two basic premises:
1- Civs are based on people groups: every civilization is named after an ethnic or cultural group, and things have been this way ever since release, up until Three Kingdoms. Some are very specific, like Portuguese, others way more broad like Celts, and some are deemed so broad in span that it deserves to be split into multiple civilizations, like the Slavs. But what every civ has in common, is that they’re people groups. This is not the case with Wei, Shu and Wu. There is no such thing as Wei and Shu ethnicities. The only fringe exception could be the Wu, but these are clearly not the Wuyue people, but rather this “civ” depicts only the Kingdom of Wu, nothing more. Not an ethnic group, which had only one kingdom in it’s history, and that it was called Wu. Nope, merely a State called Wu. This is a very clear departure from the norm.
2- The game spans from Late Antiquity, up to the early Renaissance. That’s why we have Alaric and Attila campaigns on one end, and Babur and Moctezuma campaigns on the other. However, it’s mostly focused on the Medieval era, with it’s aesthetics inspired by that period, and that’s why it’s generally viewed as a medieval game. Wei, Wu and Shu are not “medieval”. Technically, neither are Romans and Huns, but they still existed in some form after 476 AD, they didn’t vanish overnight. However, like we’ve seen before, Wei, Wu and Shu are not ethnic groups, but rather States, and thus these “civs” would cease to exist completely after their State collapsed. By this metric, they are not medieval, nor are they even part of Late Antiquity. The Three Kingdoms period ended in 280 AD, thus they don’t fit the time scope of the game. This is a second, very big departure from the norm.
So they’re not people groups, like every single other civilization, nor do they fit the time frame unlike every single other civilization, and yet they’re being included. Thus I conclude, they do not belong in the game. Thematically, this is a disaster, but it seems some players not only do not care about the game’s theme or about history, but are also completely fine with the thematics being destroyed in this manner.
In the current state, players that like history are mad, and those that couldn’t care less if the devs added Orcs and Napoleonic France, are happy because content is content, and more always means good. The latter do not care about the former’s opinion, not understanding it and brushing it off as whiny and nonsensical.
However, if this DLC added medieval civilizations and not the Three Kingdoms, both groups would be happy, and this would be healthier for the game. History fans get Tanguts, Jurchens, Khitans etc, and gameplay-focused players still get 5 new civs, their real-life inspiration still doesn’t matter anyway. If we got Tibetans instead of Wei, they wouldn’t care either Wei (hehe).
Now if we compare both outcomes, where half the community is pissed, and the other where everyone’s happy, it’s evidently clear the second option is superior by far. And what has caused this uproar? The Three Kingdoms.
To me at least, the logical conclusion of this analysis is that these civs don’t fit in the game and shouldn’t be added, and that the DLC would be better if they didn’t exist. But if you disagree about them belonging or not, at least you can agree that keeping fans content is better than pissing them off.
15 Likes
They will be the same people who buy every new Pokémon game that comes out because “Pokémon is Pokémon!”.
5 Likes
I ask you where you draw the line of “people want 3K civs?” with little to no information.
It needs more concrete proof. You don’t just pick a small thing and say “Eureka”. The proof is not what you lied, but you sure added new conclusions that does not being supported by high rating of the scenario.
Again I urge you to realize your survivorship bias. You drawn a vague conclusion based on vibe.
4 Likes
The proof is nearly 80k subscribers within the community atm, with a near 5* rating. That’s a fact. 80 thousand people looked for a Chinese campaign, found his take on 3K, and decided it was worth keeping in their game as a mod.
And if you think the developers should be creating new content as charity, well you’re free to write a tractate on the importance of wasting your life raging about videogame dlcs you don’t like. I’m sure Confucius himself would applaud you on this noble cause of yours.
But you don’t have the reason why people like it. Which is possibly the reason we have this dumb DLC in the first place.
Nice conclusion jump, two in a row there.
Also we have new content that was added for free.
4 Likes
Sure, let’s throw a year’s worth of AoE2 work in the trash :-/
If nothing else, couldn’t they just put the work in Chronicles and not in Ranked? I think that was proposed as an idea before
I care about the former’s opinion and try to understand it. Disagreeing with it is just disagreeing with it. I think it’s clear a lot of History professors and enthusiasts here don’t care too much about the other opinions, though. Case in point:
I think it would be helpful for devs to more publicly pick a side, though, given the controversy that arose. Either they plan to update the DLC to appease the die-hard historians and anti-Hero unit crowd, or they don’t. If they plan to launch, it would be great to hear more of their reasoning for why the DLC is how it is, to help support the rationale in a better way than most DLC buyers could ever craft or surmise
May 6th is just a week away. It would be nice to know if people who pre-purchased it or plan to purchase it can look forward to playing it… or will it get delayed for months or fully canceled so I can get my money back and spend it elsewhere sooner rather than later if that’s the case.
In my opinion, the viewpoints of those who play this game with absolutely no interest in history should be disregarded. This is a historical game, and history should be second only to balance. Those who want content for content’s sake without caring about historical relevance or importance are hurting the integrity of the game, and their opinions should be offered no credibility or weight.
4 Likes
Realistically, nothing is going to change. I don’t see them doing anything really. But in hindsight, it’d have been much, much better to not add 3K in the first place.
Many don’t however and will not engage in any discussion whatsoever lol.
When it comes to opinions on the historical aspect, then yeah, because they don’t care what happens. But not disregard everything they say, you can’t expect people to learn about the lore of every game they play, and who knows they might just like AoE for the gameplay and nothing else. What matters in the end is the dev’s additions, and if they damage the game’s thematics, then it’s right to point it out.
5 Likes
If you mean the latest patch 141935
The one that includes all 3K visuals, units and 5 new civs
You wouldn’t have these without the 3K DLC you complain about
1 Like
Not sure if World’s Edge cares about base game’s rating at this point. I would rather thumb down the DLC itself because that’s the root of evil. It deserves a rating worse than V&V.
1 Like
I thought y’alls plan was to collectively not buy because that is ‘how to make your statement’. (The angry collective: “That’s how to make them listen.”) Now y’all gotta review bomb, too?
I meannn… do you see how some might think that? See above. Being able to ‘have an actual discussion’ is a two-way street, too
1 Like
Yes, as a unofficial mod that has nothing to do with the official game lore/setting.
But it doesn’t prove they also think it should be official contents + as sperated new civs + available in ranked. That’s a lot of step jumping.
Let’s imagine there is a popular custom scenario about Cobra Car racing, should the devs add other modern cars + New civs that have cars + Available in ranked? I don’t think so.
3 Likes
Yes. Because it works at communicating a complaint.
5 Likes
It proves that out of every other chinese theme setting, that one’s the most popular among the community.
Especially in regards to the other chinese scenario of him,
Journey to the west.
With 32k subscribers (2/3 less)
I think both these scenarios of him are very good btw.