No need to be an asshole.
This:
Is hardly this:
Who said anything about excluding them? What does this statement even have to do with what I said? You seem to be ignoring or missing my point entirely.
1 Like
This is pure rhetorical:
- We are going to include a feature from AOE2
- We are NOT going to include a feature from AOE3 (where he actually said AOEO)
- We are going to add a new feature (from AOE3, but not mentioned), compared to AOE2
What is the message that this combination is conveying?
“This is a game based on AOE2. No need to worry there is not anything from other AOEs”
Or you may read this paragraph to someone who knows nothing about the series, and let them decide whether it means:
- We are adding torch throwing as a new feature
- We are re introducing a recurring feature from other games of the series
1 Like
AOE3 is very different from other AOEs but the publishers are not removing it from the series.
At the time of AOE3’s release if someone said “it is not a game for AOE (meaning 1 and 2)” it is actually justified because it was very different.
But now speaking at the time of AOE4, where AOE3 has already been part of the series with its own playerbase, when one decides “whether AOE4 is designed for Age players”, then AOE3 players should definitely be taken into account.
Now going back to the cited interview, it only mentions features they include that are from AOE2 and features they exclude that are from AOE3 (“AOEO”). So the message is, the game is designed for “AOE 2 players” which does not equal to “Age players”.
Same for any Age game other than AOE2.
Don’t be so sensitive, AoE2 is just the main game of the franchise, by far…
Before AoE4 release, they were around 80% of the whole age of empires playerbase in steam… it makes sense age2 is the standard age expirience
That’s exactly what I mean. This is the message this interview tried to convey and the idea AOE4 is based on.
But some people do not think so (meaning the message of this interview).
BTW if this is the case then I do not see the problem of saying “AOE4 is not designed for Age players (which does not equal to AOE2 players)”.
And it is not even a criticism.
Good point that’s true… at least in that it is different from the other aoe…
True, not that it was so different from its predecessors… that is, it has no deposits of resources, but it has cards…“wow is no longer an aoe”, say many…
Yes,I would have preferred that more things of aoe 3 were kept in aoe 4 (more fauna,biomes and mercenaries for example), and that there were not so many landsmarks, that were half but more different from each other…
AoE3’s features always hit me like they were the products of a team of developers who were extremely comfortable with making Age games and interested in taking some risks. Bruce Shelley later (famously) said they felt they took things a little too far from center. (I’d be happy to post the link to that article if anyone hasnt seen it.)
Given that hindsight and generally acknowledged tinge of regret, I wouldnt have encouraged anyone such as Relic to take things in some of those directions for their first outing. However, the utter lack of a meta game in AoE4 (no capital cities, cards, gear, alliances, clan leaderboards, etc.) certainly makes for a more subdued effort.
I think the preferred amount and type of extra features is an area reasonable minds can disagree. As an AoEO player, I have a high tolerance for all sorts of meta stuff. I think that really helps draw in a playerbase and is much the reason those of us who love AoEO love it so much. It’s just so darn deep. (We often say that once a player reaches the max level 40, which can take the average player weeks for each individual civ (we have 7), the game finally begins.) I dont think AoE4 should have been that deep, but it certainly could have used more than what it has now, which is nothing.
4 Likes
Yes, plus the cards took it out of might and magic 3 which is a game that many in ES were playing at the time… and also the cards have a historical use, since thanks to the experience of your colony, the metropolis sends you “aids” to make it grow…something that happened during the colonial period…
3 Likes
Good point… That’s true…
Of course, it seems as if in 20 years nothing has happened in the RTS genre…and you are also right, Relic played a lot of AoE 2 of young people, but they did not play the successive aoe since then…
1 Like
Just please name it Eastern Roman Empire and not that byzantine nonsense
1 Like
Yes, and I would add Castle Siege and World Domination too, which despite being mobile, count as spinoff…
Yes, there you realize that they did not play aoe 3 in their life…and that they said “ay, we liked aoe 2 at the time, and if we make a remake and call it aoe 4, total who in their right mind plays or cares currently aoe 3 hehe?”…
Yes, whether they want to or not and although it is difficult for them to admit it to their closest fans,aoe 2 did a lot of harm to the saga…left poor aoe 1 in the shadows and did not let its other sequels shine brightly enough…
yup but compare the stats. they are basicallt the same unit just unlocked earlier with different skin. Not a real MU
Yes, so you can see where they leave aoe 3 with respect to the rest of the saga…
Yes, super cynical bad… now they need to add treasures in aoe 4 as a “feature never before seen in the saga” and those who play aoe 3 and aoeo want to hang them from the balls…
1 Like
Yes, I mean, it is intentionally noticed that they appealed to the players of aoe 2, not to mention aoe 3, so as not to alienate them from buying the game…