Play station

Who says it should be as good as pc thts the competitions of pc nd ps happens separately

okay. IF they would make a console port, it would 100% be current gen only. so You HAVE to either get an XBox, PSV or PC- Therefore you would need to spend the money anyways.
Which also means it wont broaden the playerbase by much. (If MS had stats showing otherwise, I am sure they would make an XBox Port :wink: )

also age 2 on PS2 released in 2001, it realeased in 1999 on PC (so PC is first there) - and as you said, some games are better played on PC. Original Age 2 is one of the, The PS2 Version qass very modified.

Yes, you CAN play with a controller, but its less intuitive and user friendly

I don’t understand y r u opposing it if u don’t wanna play on ps or any other console fine then don’t do it stick to pc nd i don’t used to think tht great pf ps4 either but when i played god of war 4 i am pretty sure it can take on aoe 4.

Look in india we have a paper called upsc, which is world’s 2nd most difficult paper. Nd every kid in his life for once thinks to crack it nd u know wht is the first rule of tht paper? The first rule is to follow positive approach

U know when u said tht we won’t be able to do formation and all at tht very moment i started figuring out the controls nd it was pretty easy

Nd it would be less intuitive in compare of pc but when to player for same consol are competing they both will be having same lvl of difficulties nd challenges

Dude, what is wrong with you? AoE4 will NOT be on Play Station, end of story.

I m not saying tht it should be pn ps but atleast on xbox

OK, just try to calm down, and not write post after post for no reason. Try to fit all your ideas into one single post. This is not a chat platform, it’s a forum.

And idk y most people coming here and saying no it should not happen like even if it did it won’t be affecting ur game or ur pc. I honestly thinking to stop putting topics like a new multiplayer mode i was thinking but i know many people will gonna come nd crash upon me with big NOs i mean if u don’t wanna play it then don’t no one is forcing.
Come here give suggestions it could be done nd give positive points nd all instead of pointing out faults nd reasons y it shouldn’t happen

You’re just going to have to accept the fact that it’s a PC exclusive title.

Rdr was also a ps exclusive game later on they launched it on everywhere cuz i don’t think u really wht gaming means it brkngs people together clearly a person who i don’t think went through any chat above calling me some kind of jealous guy, u should leave gaming bro if u can’t see the meaning of any game in this world wether it is electronic or virtual gaming or sports or games with toys. Just stop playing games start feeling them

1 Like

Lol PS4 sucks they got no games

Y r u here if only this is ur opinion

1 Like

Blockquote As I stated, it is possible to get the Age experience on consoles, but it wont be god as a simple port, and with any needed adjustmens for console play, it would be much work.

Yes, a port would take work. But it can also yield great reward. Potentially for the studio themselves and for the community.
But let me say this: If they didn’t start development with consoles in mind, then I also think they shouldn’t port it. Maybe after AoE IV had some success.
But if they did have it in mind, then I’d be sure they’d make it work. Even with limitations to microing or general speed of interaction with the game. In consequence, macroing would be more important on console. That would be rather intriguing I personally find.

Blockquote So, while i couldnt care less if the game comes toconsole aswell, I simply state that its highly unlikely.

You seem to care quite a lot about it, actually, and that’s fine. It keeps the discussion alive.

1 Like

to be clear, I am not opposing the idea itself. I simply state why MS propably wont release it on PS (mostly because its not an XBox) or Consoles in General (because they need game adjustments which do cost quite some budget)

I can see them porting it if its a success, but as they fist have to make the game a general success in “hard” times for RTS (Although you can see many indies with RTS haing a LOT of success- for MS, most of these numbers would probably not be a success. The game is a very costly production, you can see that for example in the campaign cutscenes which are now basically movies for example). Which is why I am arguing against a console port- from MS perspective as good as I can imagine.

as @FoolForALife stated correctly, it is very possible a Console Version (NOT a port!) would be done IF they had that in mind from the beginning (or, as written above, the game will be a success), but I also do not believe thats the way it was done.
I care about the discussion, yes. But I am taking the stance of what MS probably sees, a factual side of the Porting argument, or at least I am trying. But that is not because I care about there not being a console version, as I said I couldnt care less, as I do have a PC. Its because I am trying to make you aware of the possible reasons why a PS4 version seemes impossible, A PSV Version highly unlikely and and XBox version unlikely.
Actually I would be happy if MS does do a console version and it sells well, I wouldnt buy it, and also because of the arguments I mentioned, I doubt they will do.
Maybe thats because I studied game design and work in the industry (as QA for browser games though) so I try to elaborate companies development thoughts here :slight_smile:

@ShivPutra regarding the positive thinking and this book you talk about - tbh, I am probably the most positive thinking person around my friends at least, here in Germany. Because I really do see the positive in anything that happens, or at least try to be positive about that. However I would say I still have a realistic stance. I dont think they exclude each other. To explain how I think:
If MS would announce a console port/version, I would be happy as more players would be able to play the game. If they didnt, I would also be happy as they focused on The PC experience which will therefore probably be better (at least better testedm see what happened to cyberpunk). However since the current factual state is no console version is announced, I weigh the arguments of both sides and it seems that MS either wants to surprise console users soon, or they think that the development cost of a console port would not be worth enough.
I personally think they will focus on getting a good RTS in 2021 which will be sold well on PC.

I m sry if my words hurt u in any way but i wanna make clear tht

I said positive approach, look brother there is difference between positive approach nd positive thinking, here i am the most negative guy u might have ever seen i have seen so many things in my life i don’t have any hopes, but whatever i do i go in with a positive approach. What i wanna say is that positive approach is more like a thing where we stuck with the motive tht this thing should happen but in wht ways it could be even better. Nd that’s wht i expected from this discussion.

Somewhere u did sound like u were opposing as when u talked abt age2 in ps nd from the beginning u were constantly giving reasons y it can’t happen as i said ways how it can be done could be more helpful nd appreciated. Nd when u said tht one gonna need to buy either ps5 or xbox or pc it was clearly a reason good enough to show tht Somewhere u were opposing

U r saying it would be more costly for ms but trust me they can get more profit through consoles than pc. Reason behind in consoles we have to definitely buy a game no if nd buts but whereas in pcs i nvr bought a single game

no no, I am not hurt at all :slight_smile:
I dont quite see the difference between positive approach and thinking tbh. (removed this part of the text since it didnt seem apropriate for the age forum)So even in the worst situation, I try to see the good outcomes/possiblities. Is this now a positive approach or positive thinking?

Or do you by approach simply mean I could have tried to argue how a PS version WOULD be cool? In that case, I surely didnt have a positive, but realistic approach. Because with that, you dont get disappointed.
Sorry if I dont quite understand the difference

2 I am sorry if I did sound opposing by trying to phrase the reasons behind why it probably wouldnt happen. Maybe thats because I personally would not play any RTS on console. But the main concern of playability (which is my main reason for personally not seeing a console RTS) is still a given fact, it needs to be changed to be well playable.

I dont see how me stating the fact that a current gen game would only arrive on current gen consoles (which you do have to buy) or a PC would be seen as opposing. Its a plain fact. You generally do not produce new games for old hardware if its new hardware you want to sell. So I may have taken the other side of the argument, but didnt oppose the idea of a console port. Only that it would be on a PS4. That I do oppose from a general standpoint, as industry knowledge teaches me it would not be done. (there is different architechture there aswell, so it would need further work for example).

I can be stating that something is not likely without opposing the idea. For example I would love to see every country live in peace - but the facts do show that its not possible at this point of time. So I dont oppose the idea of world peace, I simplay do not propagate it since it wont work.

3 I dont believe that ppl pirating games on PC (or using gamepass etc to get freebies) are considered in revenue plans of companies.
I think if the console port was a) not more costly for MS than what they think they could sell and b) MS did think a console port woult NOT lower the value of the age of empires IP, MS would create the console port. They are a company and would take the opportunity, IF (and thats my point) the company thinks its worth the effort.

So I would think a console version would be nice, but unless MS announces it, it seems to me that it wouldnt be profitable enough according to MS standpoint

My brother look here is the difference between positive approach nd thinking

In india we have a adhaar card tht have all pvt information of an indian civilian. It is clearly not fair tht we were made to link adhaar card to every app nd no. Cuz then the govt. Could easily excess our phn gallery account nd all.

Look there was a question regarding this

Clearly we all can see it is not good nd fair cuz we were forced for this. So few students clearly denied it means it shouldn’t happen.

Now positive thinking, it will help to track down any criminal plus easy to identify terrorists.

And positive approach is, tht they should force Indians to issue aadhaar card but shouldn’t excess so deeply into our pvt data.

Positive thinking is more of u can say thinks abt effects right and positive approach is like before even implementing it or more like how we can make it better

Got it brother nd m really grateful to share this knowledge here

1 Like

Trust me my friend me and non of my gaming buddy ever bought any gane in pc :sweat_smile::sweat_smile::sweat_smile: as i said due to poor leadership on higher lvl our economy isn’t well rn most people are suffering economically so no one wastes money on pc games​:rofl::rofl:

I see, got it :smiley:

thanks for the explanation. dunno if a postivie approach is the way foe me and my particular worls view, maybe it is, maybe it isnt, but maybe I will try :smiley:

I dont get your point regarding pc games though, maybe due to cultural difference. You say ppl who own a pc tend to hack their games, ppl who own consoles dont? why would that be? PCs are equally as expensive as consoles, yet PC games are cheaper. So why buy console games but hack PC ones? (COnsoles are also hackable)