Yes. For example, not being attracted to slight hints of “devs not doing a perfect job” like flies to lamps, or not pretending you don’t know the real problem.
My preferred outcome is the consensus that “suggestions of additional work that will do no harm” is not an attack on the devs.
No one is suggesting that the developers are being attacked.
I don’t agree with the criticism, I think it lacks attention to detail. There are clear differences between the house and manor (the unique trebuchet has similar trim as well as other, smaller, differences), and having shared assets is consistent with every other building design (outside of landmarks) in the game.
They maintain the same language in design, it is inevitable to have shared details because of this. The manor is a bigger house, so it shares many of the house model’s details.
So what you are suggesting is, if they pick some more slightly different house designs, no one will recognize it as a bigger house. I guess our Brit here can give you a hundred more different designs that could fit in.
I think it’s very obvious making two new parts and putting them together requires more work than taking two existing parts and putting them together. It is also obvious that making a new model requires more work than taking an existing model and tweaking the color of some parts. And when people are charged more, they expect more work.
But you guys come in like you really enjoy debating the exact definition of “new models” and counting the number of houses in a manor.
AOE2 players: the Asian knight is a European knight. So it shares the exact same model.
Well guys i think its enough i just wanted the new unique building look unique not some cheap work.If the english people in the forum ok with this im ok with it too.I just regret the money i paid to this dlc but what can i say i love this game.
By the way when i saw the age of empires facebook page i remembered before age 4 came out i made the suggestion to every units need to look different even if they had the same stat and name.Atleast they listened that time but it was long ago when the age of empires 4 was a rumor.
You first said it’s a perfect design, and then they don’t have time to do better, then it’s a perfect design again.
If someone suggests “they could make the models more unique”, I don’t think anyone would be hurt if they did that. If you are, then I would suspect you know what I want to say here
These guys are clever people who know how to advertise less work as more. I believe they could also make models more visually unique and also fitting into the overall game design.
Reminder that you accused us of wanting to be taken seriously.
I think that is such an obvious thing to do. I believe the old AOE2 devs also wanted to make unit looks as unique as then can, but limited by technology and budget. Not that they think all nations using the exact same model is a perfect design.
But then there are people that will be genuinely offended by the suggestion of “it would be better to have regional unit models”, as if it is an attack on the game, then themselves.
Let me add one more: whoever demanding others to comply with these terms really believe in them and act accordingly, instead of violating in the first place.
For example, you have been picking one sentence from me and avoiding the large parts of my arguments all the time. I didn’t accuse you because that is what I expect from you guys, but you accuse me when you’re doing the same all the time.
I didn’t respond because the first portion of your post was about me diverting the topic (I am not as far as I am aware) that I said it’s a perfect design (I did not, I said it matches with how all other buildings are designed) and that they don’t have time to make something better (which I think is valid critique considering we are 2 weeks from launch)
The next paragraph was commentary on the idea that no one would be hurt if they made the model more unique. Which I don’t disagree with, but I don’t personally view a change as necessary.
The last portion was a statement you made about the clever nature of the developers, that they are more focused/adept at advertising/marketing/selling a product, and that they could apply those same efforts to improving the model of this building.
I didn’t respond to any of that because I don’t have anything to respond to. It was either being told how you see me or a statement about what you would prefer.
I’m trying to avoid a conversation chain which effectively becomes:
Going back to the topic:
AOE2 is going to add unique castle models for every civ and they are all very different. For free.
I think the real reason is that they set the bar of visual uniqueness of AOE4 too high at release. When they want to expand the game, they lack the resource or budget to ensure an equal level of uniqueness for the new civs. That’s why we are seeing the “variants” with more and more reused assets. It’s understandable, but not good. It’s not us who should manage the budget for them.
But it’s also a taboo to suggest the game did not sell that well. So the only excuse left is “it’s a great idea”.
Now a new problem arises:
Would you feel it necessary to spend tremendous efforts arguing against someone else’s suggestion that you feel is just NOT necessary (instead of being bad)?
My guess is that when someone does this, either their claim of “not necessary” or “don’t care” etc. is a fake one, or they come with a different purpose.
Glad you bring this up. This is the exact reason why I have been questioning the real purpose of you guys.
So what about some slight improvements that STILL matches with how all other buildings are designed?
Or a slight improvement on how all other buildings are designed?
This is the singular purpose of the General Discussion forum board we are posting on. To have a discussion over the topics and responses in a thread.
I think it’s a reasonable request, but it’s a request that has been made repeatedly over the last 4 years. Several civs share wall assets. There’s a certain point where something hasn’t been improved on so long it feels more likely the decision was intentional.
The request also lacks detail.
What specifically should be improved?
In what way will it match other buildings without being in conflict with the initial request? (Because the issue stems from it having the same walls, gate, fence, and roof)
And my personal concern with making this change, how does this affect every other building model? This approach of copying assets from other models is the standard, why does this building get special treatment? Why would it not conform to existing standards?
I need you to have some personal responsibility here. Everything I’ve said on topic has been neglected by you. You’ve focused on what you believe my motivations are, you’ve repeatedly accused me of being a shill, telling me I’m acting with a hidden agenda.
I’m asking you respectfully to have responsibility for your behavior.
In other words
When you act in a way that breaches good faith conduct I can’t rely on you having responsibility for your own behavior.
I’m not going to sit on my hands while I wait for you to be reasonable.
So, if you say something to me that is outside of what I consider socially acceptable conduct, I’m more than likely not going to respond directly to it.
You are generalizing my question.
I’m not asking why you would have a discussion about a topic, but why you would spend tremendous efforts, arguing against a topic that you feel unnecessary.
If someone comes in saying he really dislikes more unique models and he thinks it would interfere with his gameplay, I’d still argue against him, but I won’t question his purpose.
Why don’t you read the “discussion” you are having?
And why do you think we players need to come up with detailed solutions for their products? Do you know who paid whom the money?
There are also buildings that don’t share assets with others. What about them?
BTW you first said they are not copying because there are slight variations. Then you say copying is the standard.
A real shill would do a better job. But I do suspect you have a hidden agenda based on your actions. Maybe you have that internal drive yourself.
I think your only motivation is “negating every (current) criticism (or suggestions you sense as criticism) of the game and the business decision of the company”, sometimes you go so desperate that you forget your own consistency. For example, when people criticize copying, you say it’s not 100% copying. Then when I say it’s a low effort, you say copying is standard.
And more importantly, like I said about the old AOE2 devs, I also believe the devs would be willing to do their best but they have to cut corners under the pressure from business greed. Pointing out business greed is not attacking the game or the devs, in case you confuse them. But as you seem to be very reasonable and clear-minded when accusing others, I think you also know the differences.
So I feel you have a strong motivation to defend the business behind the product, paid or not.
I wouldn’t call what I’m doing a tremendous effort. I’m sitting at my desk drinking my morning coffee, responding on a forum for one of my hobbies while work emails come in.
