In some cases I agree, the footage is mostly just a cinematic impression. In case of AoE 4 however, I disagree.
And even if you are right, you’d have to have taken the seen footage with a grain of salt to begin with. You have only yourself to blame, because you chose to take the footage as actual gameplay apparently.
It clearly says “Pre-alpha gameplay”. (tbf not so clearly :P)
AKA earlier build. You’d be surprised by how cinematic a dev cam can be.
7 Likes
They even said that everything shown back then was in the game, that they are not like other games that make things up just for hype and so on, so they were marketing as gameplay footage.
Seems they werent that honest after all judging by what we’ve got now. That was partly fake for sure.
7 Likes
Not fake at all, they just kept working on the title. What did you expect? Seeing a finished product 2019 for 2021 release? How does that make sense?
I would encourage you to watch the Developer Q&A released like 6 days ago, it clears up some of your misconception. They also explain how they worked on the title and what they changed according to community feedback.
3 Likes
They showed some pretty axemen as an English unit there that I was really looking forward to.
They are nowhere to be found now.
2 Likes
I think they changed the scale of buildings afterwards? Otherwise it looks about the same to me.
3 Likes
-
Horrid animations.
-
Unpleasant and form over function nature of the UI.
-
Going back on many of the improvements in older games (story campaign, asymmetry in cultures).
-
Lack of attention to small details.
-
False claims of historical accuracy (shame, misguiding young people with an interest in history).
The campaign can still turn out better than I’m currently worried it will be. A tutorial with missions out of Dune 2, and concise version of Wikipedia articles on various historical events instead of a proper story or recreation of history. But the rest is there basically set in stone until AoE5 or AoM2. Which is a fairly big shame.
7 Likes
So they kept working on title and now it looks way worse?
5 Likes
Yes, when it comes to scale, they made the buildings smaller. Question is, why??
2 Likes
Matter of taste. My point being that they didn’t intend to deceive the community. Which is what you were saying, that they faked gameplay footage.
1 Like
There are a thousand reasons they may have chosen to make the changes they did.
Some people are even saying they removed special buildings and mechanics as well.
We aren’t on the dev team so we won’t know.
We see the khan standing next to a horse swordsman and a scout.
We never hear about that horse swordsman again so we might have to assume he got replaced by the generic “lancer” type.
6 Likes
This doesnt mean I have to sit here and accept game looks unimpressive because they had their reasons. It’s just poor design at the end of the day.
7 Likes
You don’t have to accept it.
However you must also understand that you are making a subjective opinion.
Im simply explaining why things change from earlier builds to others.
Personally, I like some things from the x019 trailer but I feel the colour grading is too extreme. Its like its all under a sepia tint filter.
I think the source of the complaint here mainly arises from the fact that they explicitly said everything in the trailer was part of the game.
As far as I remember it was also brought up in an interview as the reason that took so long to showcase something as they were constantly going back and forth on features and wanted to make sure that everything we were to see would be in.
3 Likes
Yeah it must’ve been in the game at some point then. But for whatever reason down the line they changed things?
I am talking about the images in the OP.
Of all the cons that the game has, which one bothers you the most?
Archers shooting homing missiles.
I don’t care about anything else. fix that and the game is fine.
4 Likes
THE BIGGEST cons, in my analysis:
1- Lack of operators in artillery weapons (immersion break);
2- Poor physics (even more compared to the previous title, AOE III);
3- Mediocre key mapping;
4- Extremely close zoom.
That’s it. I found civilizations very asymmetrical, I don’t understand your complaint. Maybe it’s because I played the closed beta and had access to other civilizations.
7 Likes
Bad physics, some robotic-looking animations, disappointing designs (They work and are ok but at the same time they are kinda meh. Since months ago they’ve been pushing this “historically accurate and innovative” premise, and now we have civ designed based on pop-culture fantasy and stereotypes, with nothing really innovative. They are fun but I expected something better. Emphasis on I because this may be just my perception; I understand others can be satisfied with the current civ designs. Heck, I expected bonuses actually h. accurate and innovative at least. I thought the civs would be carefully tailored to show their history. I know buildings and units diametrically opposed or different take a lot of time and effort to design, but I hoped at least their bonuses would exhibit history. Even if they had to be exaggerated. The mechanics aren’t bad but some things are just lazy. For example, the English, the Chinese or the HRE. Even the Rus getting gold bounties. They deserved better. What a let down).
But let’s look at the bright side.
The game feels more relaxed, casual and slow-paced. That’s great for having fun with friends.
4 Likes
All I wanted was fully customizable hotkeys (legacy), in the beta they were very restricted, all other things are secondary to me.
3 Likes