AOE4 is undeniable a new game and there is no argument against that.
Even if people want to, it still will not in reality.
I already relaxed the scope to “returning AOE series players”. Someone who tried a game 17 years ago and did not enjoy it, is not likely to suddenly fall in love with it 17 years later with a remake that plays exactly the same.
The big difference is whoever that is likely to try a remake of a 17-year-old game already have some solid and cemented idea about what that game is like, which is very unlikely to change. That title is already associated with some well-established personal opinions. Especially for RTS as a niche genre.
AOE4 is a new game. Nobody has 17 years to know what it is like before trying it. There is no “remake” or “definitive edition” on its title that implies it is almost the same as some old game. The advertising investment was much higher. People were talking about “a new RTS” “a new AOE” not the remake of an old game.
I believe being entirely new or not has a huge impact on consumer psychology.
The only “new” people to enter a remake are those who quitted because of hardware limitations back then but now have better hardwares.
Well, you’ll have to watch the interview with Bruce Shelley again in 2011, where he admits what many of us know and many others still refuse to acknowledge.
If AoE3 and its expansions had had half the numbers of AoE2, perhaps AoE4 wouldn’t have been released in 2021.
Or I can be more specific: remakes rely their profit mostly on returning players.
If there are new players which of course there are, that’s additional profit.
If a remake aims at mainly attracting a lot of new players, it means a lot of changes and overhauls, and it might fail attracting both.
So a safer choice is that remakes would not change the core gameplay, and as a result they effectivelymostly attract returning players.
Yeah, I know the interview you’re talking about and I know the excerpt that is constantly taken out of context as well. Bruce Shelley was trying to explain why he thought that AoE3 wasn’t as popular as AoE2, not that it was a failure or the cause that led to ES’s demise, which is what you were arguing.
It does seem strange when you compare them to a civ like the HRE who have barely anything unique, even a few extra units for some civs would brighten them up a bit in comparison.
Yes, the Malians feel like the African civs of aoe 3 but the Ottomans feel like a mix or copy and paste between the Turks of aoe 2 and the Ottomans of aoe 3…
That’s true, we’re not in 1999 anymore, we’re in 2022…
Yes, they could have given him siege units like the desert raider, rather than siege units proper…
Quiet man…it’s not so… the Ottomans have a normal early game and already, they are just strong in the late game and the Malians have cheap unique units, but they are very weak and with archers you can easily defeat them…there’s nothing that can’t be balanced later…
Yes, but they did it that way for reasons of balance just …
Yes, and I love that, as it was what I was asking for… and they are not ceremonies per se, but rather similar to the festivals of the African civs of aoe 3, but it does have more or less the same function as the Native American ceremonies…
There you nailed it to the angle…
Yes, you are right is as it is… the vizier points are achieved in the same way as the shipments of aoe 3, but without reaching the complexity that the decks of aoe 3 have…
No, in fact it has many unique units and is played very different from the other civs…
In fact AoE never tried to be so faithful historically speaking… or I have to remind you Sumerians vs Romans in AoE 1, meso civs with siege units in AoE 2, Spanish rodeleros against American gatlings and longbow archers in the industrial era in AoE 3 and a long etcetera…
Yes, they could have given him siege units like the desert raider, rather than siege units proper…
That’s true, it was strange to me that AoE 3 had received two expansions but nobody talked about it until after getting into facebook pages I saw because AoE 2 was like more massive than AoE 3…
Yes,the same the colonial period has its own and feels fresher than the Middle Ages or the Second World War, so overexploited in the RTS genre…
Yes, the most likely thing is that they reach a middle ground or that they make a mix of civs of aoe 2 with mechanics of aoe 3 and vice versa and maybe even put unique mechanics that do not appear in those games and that are unique of aoe 4,for example the mobile buildings of the Mongols (or at least until they put that same mechanic in the last lakota patch of aoe 3)…
Yes, that’s true… the issue of unlocking cards was time-consuming so the most pro players were unfairly stronger than the newer low civ level players…
I find that win rate table very strange, considering that the French and the Japanese are the most played and strong civs of the game…about the Russians, yes they are good for the boom of strelets, but the hauds so high? I don’t know anyone remotely who uses that civ in competitive, not even in casual games, in fact I used them only when the haud event came out a month ago and no more…
Yes, I wouldn’t have said it better… and I congratulate you that you did not give up with the game…it is there, when you strive to learn it, there you just grab the turn and learn to enjoy it…
Yes, I wouldn’t have said it better…
I suppose because, like the Indians, they respect cows; the Ottomans for example cannot meat wild boars, but it is because they do not eat pork, considering it impure…
Yes, that’s true… in fact the campaigns of aoe 3 are limited to being 1vs1, as it happens with aoe 4…
Yes, I’m already watching to play CoH 3 and Tempest Rising (since I like the CnC a lot), HW3 it’s okay I guess, but it reminds me a lot to Stellaris…
Claro,siento lo mismo…
AoEO did not hook me in 2011 at first since it was cartoon and required a lot of effort to play it, in fact I made my Xbox account (Centeredbaton5) for it, I could never play it until 2017, I played it a little and left it and now in 2022 I resumed it when I finished the campaigns of aoe 4 and until now I continue to play it almost every day, waiting for the civ of the Indians while I am recommending it to the people xd…
Of course, I would also add the Hausa for the theme of the cows and for the sofa knight that would be similar to the lifidi knight…
Yes, it is that they launch it sometime xd…
Yes, and still after that we had AoEO in 2011 until 2014 (three years of support like AoE 3)…
I was not about to give Mali a chance, since I preferred the Ottomans for their resemblance to their peers of aoe 3, but after I saw a gameplay yesterday I liked them a lot and I was curious to try them (that is, you take food and gold but without villagers as if they were aoe 3 factories xd)…
That is true, I think that if AoE 3 had triumphed and could have attracted the players of AoE 2, I think that AoE 4 would have been released in 2011, but maybe it would not be medieval but of the ancient age as AoEO or modern type CoH 2/CnC Generals 2 and then in 2017 they would launch AoE 5 that would be futuristic type Halo Wars 1-2 or its prequel xd…and in 2023 they would launch a reboot of the saga, again in antiquity or maybe it would be AoM 2…
Yes, it was because they went from very revolutionary never better said xd…
Yes, that’s what I’m saying…I don’t close the win rates table…
Yes, I think that the Teutonic Knight in feudal age,replacing the Man at Arms,the Landsknecht in the castle age and the Reiter/Ruyter in the imperial age for the HRE would not be bad at all…
You’re only going to keep frustrating yourself thinking like this.
Like living day today hoping you win the lottery.
Devs clearly designed the civs to have easier and more complex civs. Franks and English have less diversity than HRE, regardless of what your favouritism might make you think.
HRE were intentionally designed to be easier to play than civs like Malians, so the comparison is moot.
Prelates add a whole level of uniqueness you’re obviously ignoring. Their MAA are unique, they could slap a new name on them like “Teutonic knight” and people would swallow that placebo. The land shark is most definitely unique. Being able to choose which unit gets a 15% dmg buff is unique. All of this is more unique than a load of LMs that are near copies of existing buildings, and a UU that is just a buffed archer.
Of course it would be cool to add more UUs but that makes the civ more complex which likely goes against the design.
