Why cant aoe3 have better numbers than aoe2? being a far more superior game (superior graphics, superior physics, superior asymetry, superior depth, superior audio/music, superior inmerssion and the list goes on and on)
Aoe2 already stablished quite well a comunity of both competitive and casual players, meanwhile aoe3 can only mantain a casual one and aoe4 is in constant trouble choosing wether its supposed to be a competitive game (mp updates, etc) or a casual game (monster stuff and events)
Its because of that, not because its inferior. You only say that to try to stablish a point that in fact varies from other aspects.
Its very and quite probable aoe as a franchise wont even be at gamescom , the game list of microsoft gamescom was already revealed and it wasnt there, it can be a surprise tho but dont be very hyped about it.
But it has nothing to do with the point does it? The fact is that even if we are conservative, when something is better we often as a human race opt to use it isnt that right?
Thats why we switched to democracy, thats why we started to use the trains and railroads right?
so yeah, the reason on why aoe3 failed to mantain a higher player base is simply and because aoe2 gathers a larguer audience beign competitive, casuals and being almost flawless (not better than aoe3 tho)
not quite. many better things are extremely niche simply the fact that people are lazy. if people are willing to spend the time to learn why they are better, know they are better then itāll become like you said.
theres a reason why mainstream stuff makes the most money yet are far from being better.
What does that have to do with aoe3 having less players than aoe2?
Its not that people are lazy, we at least all here played aoe3 once and im sure about that, maybe even as a joke just to try it out and now with even more reason since its free, so thats not an excuse
aoe3 still has 20k players even beign free, soā¦ yeahā¦
If AoE4 is not at gamescom, I will probably be done with this game to be honest.
Two years, and the game is still nothing like what it should have been. I donāt care if more content will come later this year, it is very fucking clear that they have their priorities completely off balance.
As you can see the world politics now, people hate Western nations for colonizing them.
The colonial era is great for Western Audiences, but horrible for other nations. Mostly African, Indian, Chinese, and Japanese etc people donāt like the setting.
The medieval era is much better, as most civs were at least not slaved but fought and died or were on its golden age.
This is why colonial-era games donāt do well in some mentioned countries and others too.
Plus what is happening in Niger + Decolonization from western nations is at its peak now.
Developers need to focus all over the globe to attract more people, not just Western Audiences.
That is how big money is made.
Aoe, the franchise as a whole wont probably be at gamescom, it has confirmed that aom:re wont be at gamescom, and World Edge is not on the list of teams that will asist on Microsoft games studio so chances are near 0 , but not 0.
Medieval ages were horrible for many nations as well, europeans for example , sure we developed but we suffered and a lot and we are here not cry babying that and instead embracing our history.
-Visigoth (early spain) was subjugated by the muslims
-France was subjugated most of the time by norman kingdoms and mostly anglosaxons
-Im just going to say vikings (hope its enough to get the point)
i pretty much dissagree , asia for example was not affected that much by colonization, then why dont we have aoe3 comunities in asia? yep even if they showcase japan, china etcā¦
There is more to embrace in Medieval era for many regions,
But in Colonial Era, there is nothing to embrace for many regions.
It kept those regions poor for more than 400 years etc.
Many didnāt last as long as the Western colonization.
Huh? Really?
The English started the Copium war with China and made them addicted to drugs.
Looted India to its knees, $ 44 trillion worth of wealth was stolen.
Americans ended Samurai or whatever it was called.
And made it a puppet country.
Asiaās 3 most powerful countries lost in colonisation and it took too long to catch up and it is finally resisting it now.
You just answered your own question by this āAsia for example was not affected that much by colonizationā which is false and this is why they donāt play it.
Asians prefer the Medieval and Ancient eras.
They love the greeks, the Mongols are proud of Chinggis Khan, the Chinese are proud of their civilization and innovation, etc.
But when it comes to colonization, they all lost a lot, and gained nothing.
So the preference is little to these regions.
And Asia makes up half of the worldās population.
With the largest middle income household
Aoe1 also has a very competitive scene in vietnam. Idk if it has a casual scene as well but might be the case considering the size of its competitive scene. Both Aoe1 and Aoe2 have got lots of micro management which opens plenty of space for improvement and skill ceiling. Aoe1 even has a higher pace which again benefits skill ceiling. I have played quite some Aoe4 and only a handfull games of Aoe3 and Aom each. However, all three games seem to have a low pace with less micro management than Aoe1 and 2.
When it comes to Aoe4 Iād say that it is very very unattractive for competitive players. Unit responsiveness is slow and thereās not enough things to do which can make a difference at any stage of the game. Players talking extensively about the correct building placements like the barbican says alot. I mean Iāve tried to get my former clan mates to play Aoe4 and all quit after a few days or weeks or didnāt even try it out because it seemed too slow and macro focused. One of them is a top300 aoe2 player, another one used to be a SC2 pro that finished on spot 14 in european ladder right behind beastyqt in 2011. In my opinion Aoe4ās game design is very casual but devs somehow mainly try to please the competitive scene which simply does not match.
Iām talking about changing terminology that made the game more general and less specific, such as renaming Colonial Age to Commerce Age as only a small part of the civs in AoE 3 had something like a Colonial Age or the game now featuring maps in Europe with the KotM DLC.
The game itself obviously still takes place during the colonial era as thatās something that happened from the late 15th centuary onwards but it isnāt strictly about this topic anymore.
AOE 3 is using a time period that not many people like, aoe2 uses medieval which many people like (me included) I like AOE 3 but the time period is not my favorite that is something well established, it also happened with total wars, people prefer medieval and Rome instead of Napoleonā¦