Despite Blizzard, the tournament scene isn’t bad.
And perhaps more should be done to reduce the learning curve a bit so that casuals are more encouraged in the competitive scene.
People base their expectations of Age IV on what was present in Age III (2005) and Age II (even older). I don’t think “the same generation” is a convincing argument.
The reality is RTS is a niche market, but in it has some very well-recognised franchises that each approach the way they deliver content differently. Folks are going to have different favourites.
For example, Warcraft was a lot more SP-focused with things like that “DLC” Beastmaster campaign, compared to Starcraft 1, which had a viable MP scene from the early days. This isn’t to say Warcraft had no competitive MP (far from it), but the two franchises developed in different ways. Warcraft built on its SP roots by building an MMO (in a way - PvE is a big focus of WoW even with its PvP elements), whereas Starcraft 2 (when it finally came out) build on SC’s MP reputation.
And then you have things like Total (and Supreme) Commander, as well as Command and Conquer and even Homeworld. Homeworld was renowned for its SP missions. Command and Conquer was an interesting blend of both, but I think everyone remembers the campaign video clips more than any competitive scene.
It’s complicated. For such a small genre (compared to say, FPS or ARPG), it has such a breadth of design packed into it. It’s part of what I’ve always liked about RTS games. And for better or worse, depending on the franchise, competitive aspirations are baked into the playerbase. There was significant outcry at Age IV not having a ladder on release, for example. We shouldn’t ignore that, just as we shouldn’t ignore people that want more campaign content and / or more civilisations.
2 Likes
You replied to the wrong person. The reason why I bring up “generation” is because @Adribird90 says AOE2 is not the same generation while SC2 is the same generation.
Now it’s you guys’ turn to settle this disagreement.
You are talking as if it is easy to cater to both but it is not.
Some competitive players even use small tree or cube tree mod. Catering to esports means removing randomness, reducing asymmetry, and not adding to the pool of strategies constantly. None of them agrees with single player or casual needs.
However there were (before DE) AOE2 matches on Arabia solely. There were and are still AOE1 matches with only chariots. If you first have a big and stable player base then esports will always find its way. Then you start to optimize it for esports. Not the other way round.
BTW playing on ladder does not equal to esports.
1 Like
I am talking about the generation of new potential players, not about people over 30 years old.
New potential players have LOL.
I kinda get your point. You think in the current era RTS should lower its barrier for young esports players.
But the fact is, the skill barrier of RTS is already so high. The need for micro and macro managing several screens and several units/resources/buildings is already scaring away most of the “potential young (esports) players”. That is the exact reason why MOBA emerged from RTS and quickly dominated the esports scene.
If AOE4 could become the next SC2 I think it is only possible after it has a fair amount of sp contents and user-made custom maps or modes. Do not forget SC2 had a very good campaign (gameplay-wise) and very smooth control at the very beginning.
1 Like
I think what he’s saying is that AoE II played catchup with supporting competitive play, whereas SC2 was of a different generation of game (that I also highlighted a bit) in that it went in on the competitive MP support (however well Blizzard did at that is a whole other topic) as well as providing additional SP content over time. I could be wrong though.
Oh, it’s absolutely not easy. But I tend to avoid mentioning that because people don’t really care how difficult it is for the developers to do something. This isn’t a dig at you, I’m saying this generally. People don’t. And that’s fair. Everybody wants what’s important to them.
I want more campaign content and more modding capabilities, personally. Those are my top two choices. Both are the “SP” type of content, vs. MP. But I appreciate that a self-sustaining competitive scene also helps a game survive, because SP content isn’t generally repeatable (unless specifically designed to be, often by borrowing RPG elements).
3 Likes
That’s fine with me…
Yes,a good berserker as a standard unit…
Like not?..Minimum Aztecs and Incas have to be…
Arrows and no armor units vs medieval armors… ohh no please not again
You would be surprised to read what the Spanish themselves said of Aztec weapons and armor
2 Likes
People forgets once even AoE2 was a new game
Multiplayer online games in 1999 was not a common thing, and the game only had 4 campaigns and a tutorial campaign.
These are a few that I remember AoK lacked and we take for granted in DE
- You could not queue units while research a tech, imagine you cannot queue a vill while aging up, and back then you only could see the progress of the age up by clicking in the TC, there was no red bar in the screen UI,
- You could no re seed a farm, of course thats not a big problem for a pro, but imagine a normal guy playing a campaign and having +40 farms and you have to manually reseed them one by one
- When you made a eco building such as the mining camp, vills didn’t go for the resource automatically, if you didn’t send them to a resource they will just stand there after they build the camp
- IIRC, you couldn’t train units from multiple building at once, you had to select each archery range one by one
- And you didn’t had halbs, so good luck stoping french paladins with pikemen
IMO, and feel free to disagree, it was “the conquerors” expansion what made AoE2 a great game, adding new civs, lots of content and making the game experience more friendly and fluid
7 Likes
Yes, right…I remember it was a berserk type unit no?..
They can always take examples of the civs de aoe 3, that in the absence of cavalry, the meso civs have shock infantry that fulfill the same function as the cavalry…
I’ve heard this claim before, but it is only from one source and it is rather loosely interpreted after that, I’ve seen sources debate the opposite as well. Also someone stated that a macuahuitl could cut a horse head off, which it possibly could but that isn’t armor. Obsidian is incredibly brittle which steel has above it, it is a lot more durable.
But AoE4 is a game and any mesoamerican civ is welcome in my opinion, to brighten up the game with their aesthetics.
3 Likes
Of course, I wouldn’t have said it better…an expansion for aoe 2 DE, for aoe 3 DE and for aoe 4 and also AoM DE…
I don’t think so…unless keyboard and mouse support is allowed…
Most likely,AoM DE will look like AoE 3 DE…
It was a stronger MAA with an Axe. It had a different name but I forgot.
Probably a more expensive unit unlike the Place Guard that has the same costs.
It looked like a 11th century Danish infantry unit. So no Dark Age Viking.
Also what do you mean with Berserker type? AoE2 Berserker? Historic Berserker?
Berserker were champions that wear bear skin. You can tell by the name. Not regular soldiers of an army. Many lords only had one. Rare to have more then a hand full of them. Their job was it to fight in duels because that’s how legal disputes were often solved back then.
1 Like