In AoE3 every european civ hasnt got every european unit to focus gameplay in different ways. Brits lack halberdiers, Germans and Dutch musketeers, Ottomans no-musketeers units, etc…
2 Likes
Its a unique variation of an existing unit, that no other civ has with these specs. Thats way its unique units.
ANd there wil be more of them in age4, because tehy are more asymmetric. But they dont have to exxagerate. Any unit combined with any special trait is unique.
2 Likes
I dont want to think I was trying to strawman but when you say civs should be ‘wildly different’ I am naturally assuming your leaning to more assymetric factions common in sci fi and fantasy strategy games.
I think AOEO made a lot of changes for the sake of it like giving every spearman slightly different stats and resource costs, I dont think it adds much to the game besides confusing new players. The unit rosters feel odd as well, like Greeks not getting any slingers a very common unit presumably because Egypt has a slinger and they want it to be different. Again I like assymettry but I like fewer more impactful differences over lots of small differences.
The assymetry should make sense for the cultures, English and French are probably not going to be that different but the Japanese and the Scots of course we should expect them to be pretty different.
One of the biggest issues with heavily assymetric civs is how much effort they take. Looking at Relics Dawn of War games both the first and second games only came out with four factions. DOW1 got three expansions and ended with nine factions, DOW2 got two and finished with only six. Not too bad when Warhammer 40k only has something like 9-10 major factions in its setting?
Now do that with human history, what would be the reaction to AOE4 releasing with four or five factions? Even with the eight coming theres been grumblings about the number. By the end of its life cycle what would we be left with? Who would still be missing? Making campaigns would be a nightmare and probably end up with a lot of mirror matches which is what AOEO had to do and that only came out with two factions. AOE4 seems to me to be striking a good balance by giving civs a few larger differences.
3 Likes
One of the biggest complaints and the biggest criticisms of AOE II was its lack of uniqueness in civs. Everyone had the same pikemen, the same champions. Asians civs all looked the same, European civs all looked the same. People are obviously tired of that and continue to ask for more unique civs. But I think APE II is beyond real inning all their civs. Especially since so many modders have and still are working on that. Asymmetry in this day and age will add an impact factor that is actually not so different from its previous games.
AoM had unique civs and unique units for every single civ. Greek, Norse, Egyptian. Even the new Atlantan civ didn’t just rip off the Greek ones, despite it being a carryover from the Greeks. They created a totally new civ for that and it was bloody brilliant! Hence why when AoM gets a DE or maybe a second version, it will be so hype.
AOE III doing that Japanese civ was absolutely gorgeous. It’s like I was actually strolling through Japan. It created so much of an immersive feeling. And then the campaigns where they zoomed up to the characters and you could see the details. I hated AOE III at first but that alone made me want to play it. It actually takes a lot for someone to dump a game at launch but to suck them back in (but I’m still not cool with the card system).
Campaigns are where they need the uniqueness the most. In AOE II when you do the Bikings campaign and find Vinland, the scenery and the unique units all work together. It creates a Viking tone that makes you feel you are part of the Viking age. And then going into the Barbarossa campaign did give a European feel. However, if anything was off putting it was that the castles and walls were EXACTLY the same. All the buildings were the same. Just one had teutons and the other had beserkers. So much potential in campaigns but that’s where the hope for deliverance is in AOE IV.
It’s much needed IN the campaigns. Because they literally went to different countries to capture the scene. So to do all that just for wireframe graphics is so underwhelming. The theatrics need to translate into the story of the game because campaigns are literally their story telling if history. Hence uniqueness is so important. I want to feel like I’m witnessing Chinese history when I play the Chinese campaign.
Yes it’s a lot of effort but you are paying toopdollars for that game. Other games that are equivalent in price are all VR worthy in realism. It’s thievery to let them get away with regurgitating AOE II’s generic civs, but even leas unique with copy and pasting of walls, but charging top dollars for it!
2 Likes
Unique doesn’t mean cannons are unique or horse archers are unique. other civs have those but don’t behave the same. Can’t go for details at the moment.
1 Like
Some people, but AoE2 is currently still the most popular AoE game by a very wide margin. So it seems most people actually aren’t tired of that.
It may be the most popular game in the AOE franchise, which actually revitalised after they enhanced the graphics otherwise people were mostly over the game, especially how many people were disappointed with the lacklustre graphic updates with AOE II HD.
But despite that, for a game it is still barely surviving and sailing on its DE expansion. Hence why people like Viper monopolise the competitive scene
Barely surviving? Is doing better than every single other RTS other than starcraft, having regular tournaments throughout the year, and having regular balance patches and updates barely surviving?
Even before DE there was still a competitive scene on Voobly.
2 Likes
I’m not comparing to other RTS. RTS is a known dying genre for a reason. And it’s not gameplay that’s for sure.
At this particular moment, with no event going on, AoE2 is 75th in viewers on twitch out of several thousand games.
Ha what more do you what? You don’t have to be one of the ten most popular games to not be “barely surviving”.
2 Likes
One very tempting trap for aoe2 fans to fall into is the sense of self grandeur that goes like this: “If aoe2 is the best selling game, then clearly [x feature] from AoE2 must be superior to how it is done in every other age game, because, again, that feature must be why aoe2 is so successful.” be careful with that line of argument because it can really dumb you down and lose grip on the details of designing a game. other games different than aoe2 actually do plenty of things better than aoe2
We all agree that AoE2 is successful. We all agree it is more successful than the others. The real art is knowing why.
7 Likes
I am not trying to make that argument.
Khansa said: “One of the biggest complaints and the biggest criticisms of AOE II was its lack of uniqueness in civs.”
You said: “Some people, but AoE2 is currently still the most popular AoE game by a very wide margin. So it seems most people actually aren’t tired of that.”
Respectfully, it looks like you are using AoE2’s popularity to defend one specific feature of AoE2. Maybe I am missing something?
He made the claim that people are “obviously tired” of aoe2’s level of asymmetry. That does not seem to be the case.
He then made the claim that the game is barely surviving. Which is obviously not true.
If that’s our standard for barely surviving we’re all going to be pretty disappointed that aoe4 is likely “barely surviving” from the beginning, and AoE3 and AoEO must be completely dead (which is obviously not the case).
3 Likes
I see. I agree with you that AoE2 is doing very well. I also agree with him that AoE2’s civ design is very boring and should not be carried over to any future Age game.
2 Likes
And I’m definitely not advocating to make aoe4 less asymmetric. It seems they are going for a middle ground between 2 and 3 for now. I think that’s probably a good decision, but I also think they should branch out a bit more with future civs.
1 Like
That’s a pretty big claim to make to say AOE IV will even be equivalent to AOE II DE. AOE II DE did not have the hurdles like AOE IV has. AOE II DE had a huge fan base but it had become a niche game which was enjoyed in the memory of many modern gamers. AOE II DE evolved into the modern gaming world to get to where it did. Graphics enhancement, fixing concerns of long time players, and especially the introduction to the huge online competitive scene. (I say huge but it’s still only like 1/3 of the people playing AOE II)
AOE IV not only has the hurdle to jump in terms of competing with modern games, but it has to best it’s predecessor or Atleast rival it to be even remotely successful. Which if it makes the same priorities that AOE II DE did, then it will. Which so far we have seen it hasn’t been doing.
Whoever upgraded AOE II DE looked at what modern gamers wanted, and catered accordingly.
AOE IV looks at what RTS players want, and have advertised accordingly.
Until AOE IV rivals AOE II DE, then it will be washed away by AOE II DE and any new games to come.
And the reason I say it is barely surviving is because AOE II DE is still pretty fresh. Many people who are playing it are old players from back then. Thank Microsoft for the intense advertising they did back in the 2000’s. But it has reached its peak.
It can only ride the wave of nostalgia for so long. In order to continue the AOE franchise, AOE IV has high expectations, more than people would like to admit. If AOE IV ends up just being an average game, then AOE and RTS will be just a game for a small pocket of players like me who continue a legacy.
3 Likes
At no point have I made this claim.
Apologies then, I misinterpreted your words. But I do believe AOE IV has the chance to rival its predecessor. It’s Predecessor competes with modern gaming with sprite animation that is outdated. But Relic has all the developmental tools to take graphics and animation to a new level. If they utilise it well, then people will see AOe II DE for what it is. A niche game. And then AOE IV will take off and sustain. But if it doesn’t prioritise modern gaming, and instead gives generic things and simplified graphics with the excuse of catering to its RTS base, then I don’t think it will ever rival AOE II DE. Which means it’s peak will be at launch.
That’s very well said. AoEII’s cookie cutter units and canned civs feel terribly dull and outdated. I believe you’re right that’s likely one of the main reasons that players keep asking for new civs even after… 38-41 (?) not sure, of them. When something is designed in such an unimaginative manner, it doesn’t matter whether you have 8 or 38, you will never be satisfied as everyone feels the same.
It will be a significant step backwards and a downgrade to Age’s formula if AoEIV goes down to a similar path again and ignores what the later Age games managed to do. Hints right now aren’t very promising.
3 Likes