Oh, speaking of which I think Roman history is cool, especially the walls of Constantinople.
1 Like
dafaq is this
bruh…
2 Likes
-
FoughtBird1976 stated “I want AoE to be based on Hollywood history not actual history, actual history is incredibly boring”
-
You replied, “Then AoE is not the game for you.”
-
FoughtBird1976 then cited an article quoting a co-founder of Ensemble Studios, which is responsible for the Age of Empires franchise, that supported the notion that if certain historical liberties in favor of gameplay worked for Hollywood, it would work Ensemble.
I cannot imagine anyone much better than a co-founder of Ensemble Studios to opine on the general design decisions that fit the Age of Empires brand. Certainly new developers can do anything they want and do not have to follow the design of the earlier titles – Microsoft owns the franchise.
We all agree what present Age of Empires Creative Director Adam Isgreen has said. But we are arguing over what those words exactly mean.
4 Likes
You are still using old quotes about old games
I believe it is important for the new Developers to design AoE4 in a way that adheres to the design principles of the original Developers. Because of that, I give weight to statements like this. But I suppose another plausible philosophy would be to give no weight to the decisions of the original Developers and just accept AoE4 as rightfully part of the franchise no matter how much it resembles or does not resemble the original games.
I dunno though, I am here because I love Age of Empires, which to me is more than just an RTS game set in the world of castles and knights.
4 Likes
Yep, u really love the stones…
1 Like
Hahahha oh my god… many people are bored with history, but is not a point of comparison with geology
Ok, everyone from South East Asia shall be called Indochinese because they are on the Indochinese peninsula
3 Likes
FeelsIndiansMan
At least they’re not called that way in AOE4.
2 Likes
If you need to unite them into one faction, then yes, they will be called so. We have several countries of the same geographic region, it is logical to call the union of these countries by the name of the region.
Well, or we can follow the path of history and call it the Kalmar Union, but this name does not sound very good.
UPD - And yes, the comparison is not entirely correct
Yes, the comparison is.
This is faulty logic, I could say we can call everyone in west Europe West Europeans, because they are in the same geographic region.
1 Like
Still think the best way to introduce Norse, is to just go for Danes, as it would cover the whole period and beyond, while other Norse peoples were only majorly relevant in the world stage either before or after the game’s timeframe.
5 Likes
Well, yes, if all our factions were divided according to regional lines, then the European kingdoms would be called that. In addition, so as not to cause confusion and not call a group of countries the name of one country “Norway”, it is easier to call all this Scandinavians, then a person will understand that this association includes Swedes, Danes, and Norwegians. It’s just simpler and clearer.
Imho vikings is the simplest, most efficient term to describe what we mean. Not everyone in Scandinavia had/has the same culture, so Scandinavian is too broad. Norse covers an even larger area, so that’s even less accurate.
1 Like
Vikings is not a culture name at all. It was an occupation.
1 Like
Why not call them the Norse?
When you do a simple search on the internet, many articles, sources, etc. refer to Viking culture. So it seems that it’s a generally acceptable term. And certainly better than the posted alternatives. The Sami people live in Scandinavia, but have nothing to do with the civs being discussed. The Danes largely did not live in Scandinavia (geographically), yet they’re more representative of the Viking culture we’re discussing in this thread. Norse is just even worse, even Rus’ people were considered Norse, but other than their very initial heritage, not that much viking-like, due to the slavic population majority.
1 Like
“The term ”Viking” that appeared in Northwestern Germanic sources in the Viking Age denoted pirates. According to some researchers, the term back then had no geographic or ethnic connotations that limited it to Scandinavia only. The term was instead used about anyone who to the Norse peoples appeared as a pirate. Therefore, the term had been used about Israelites on the Red Sea; Muslims encountering Scandinavians in the Mediterranean; Caucasian pirates encountering the famous Swedish Ingvar-Expedition, and Estonian pirates on the Baltic Sea. Thus the term “Viking” was supposedly never limited to a single ethnicity as such, but rather an activity."
Even Muslims and Israelites were called “Viking”. It was never a cultural name, that only happened in the Modern Age.
Viking just overrall meant Pirate.
3 Likes
No, it is not, it actually makes it more confusing
I was considering adding the discussion about Estonians 
Since by influence they adopted many of the Viking ways. That is why I think the best definition of what a Viking culture is, is the cultures that took part in the very well known and established viking age raids. It’s way simpler than trying to redefine a bunch of things (and yes, I know that the word originally meant to go on an expedition/raid)