You can use mortars to destroy your buildings, and press slowly…I for example won a game using only native Aztec allies and some falconets and mortars…
It is the individual consumer’s choice as to whether this game is overpriced or not. Any game costing 60$ would be half of someone’s salary somewhere in the world. (correct me if im wrong but most steam games including this one have regional price differences https://steamdb.info/app/1466860/ )It’s not like they’ve bottled up a natural spring and are now denying people basic needs. But will the price affect purchases negatively? Who knows. We may find out in 2 months.
I don’t think people should be pre-ordering before there are proper reviews and the game has been fully released. Then again it’s people’s money so they can do what they want no matter how misjudged it may feel. A closed Beta with NDA is fairly standard honestly. By its definition it isn’t meant to be a fully accessible build of the game.
I don’t quite get all the complaining over the NDA, it was blatantly clear as an agreement when you signed up for the beta. And it was a very accessible piece of info you could find all over the forums. This isn’t some scheme they hastily pulled to silence detractors. Read agreements before you sign/give your consent.
If the final product doesn’t match up to your expectations DON’T BUY THE GAME.
this game is going to be glorious, the aoe 2 dies in two months it is time for renewal changes and aoe4 comes to mark a before and after in the rts
2 Likes
Is that the main point is that, that many triple A games being sold virtually, have high prices.
Microsoft might try to settle for covering expenses in low-wage countries, but who am I to say how they should sell their game, right?
1 Like
My point is that the prices for the game don’t seem to be ignoring regional differences.
If I one-to-one converted £49.99 to ₱3428.61 it would be unfair.
But from the prices I see listed it costs ₱1219.95 in Philippines.
https://steamdb.info/app/1466860/
How are they exploiting low-wage countries?
This isn’t some human right they are locking behind a paywall. Its a game. You don’t have to buy something that is too expensive for you.
Is this a complaint you pass on every new high priced steam release?
There are various reasons why DoW3 failed,
but it can be all boiled down to the simple recognition it wasn’t what people wanted.
There it moves automatically to the question,
does what Microsoft did make by AoE4 represent what people want?
Only sales figures and the actual release can tell honestly. Any other prediction is nothing more than conjecture. None of us have actual stats on people’s opinions of the game rn.
The problem with NDA is that they are often used in the wrong way. If you have a beta 9 months before release having a NDA makes sense. The developers have plenty of times correcting serious problems so that the final product will be much better than the beta.
The problems occurs in situations where you have a beta very close to release. Say 2-3 months. If the game has serious problems, at the level where you suspect you are playing an alpha build, not a beta build, the developers do not have enough time to correct serious design flaws.
Then you have situation where the game is in an awful state, the developers have too little time to correct serious gameplay issues that goes far beyond graphics, and the beta testers can not speak out and warn the public about what is happening.
5 Likes
But none of these things matter. Or in other words- there are not ties with each other in any real way, certainly not a legal one. The way we value an judge these things is based on life experience, market observations and analysis etc.
Saying price forces quality doesn’t make any real sense - especially in these days. I see AA/AAA-quality games sold for 1-2$ during special promo sale events, or with base price of <20$. I see neat but shallow indie games priced like 1/2 - 3/4 of an AAA game. It doesn’t matter.
They set that price because that’s their policy. It’s on you to associate any quality or amount of bang for buck you’re getting on that number alone. Our right is to judge it and make decision based of our needs and financial well-being. If I don’t want or can’t buy a certain game for asked price- I simply wait for a sale.
We have a lot of rights and freedoms when it comes to how, when, where and why we buy. But demanding changes of price tag around official release might not be it.
It’s fine to discuss it and let MS and Devs know that it might potentially hurt well-being of multiplayer community at launch etc. but eventually they made that decision a long time ago, based on many factors including (well paid for!) market analysis.
I can’t see how in a world with GamePasses, -66%, -75% discount this game could be like 30-40$ day1. It just doesn’t add up. It’s not 2004 anymore. Digital is king. Every minute there’s a sale for Steam game codes in any given 150 online shop 
I’ll skip middle part because I’m heading out and have no time now
a) I bought AoE1De like 2 months after the premiere
b) I wrote that in regard to comments about ‘good price’ MS was demanding from players, that comes off as a criticism of too high price point. For people that never bought these games- I don’t think price is wrong for given amount of content and game modes AND post-release support
c) have you played IV to say it’s overpriced?!
Even devs can’t probably judge that at this point, maybe after the second beta when they will settle on all changes and post-release commitments.
You know prices are set in Microsoft office room years before, during meetings with lead designers, CFOs and investors, right? It can change, be altered, but too many people read that as some decision made on the developer side, lol.
We can talk about capitalism all day. Why would I complain about too pricy games at release? It’s a golden age for players. I can buy AAA titles dirt cheap, just with a bit of patience. There is no week without few giveaways, at least 3-4 free week(ends), bundles when I get xx games for 8-10$, and xxxx numbers of free/F2P games etc.
20 years ago compared to now was a nightmare.
Nobody is forcing anyone to buy games on release. It’s the WORST point to do that.
AoEs are not battle royale games, nor MMOs. It doesn’t matter. Everyone has huge backlog.
- Wait a bit for game to be polished and enchanced with new content and discounted.
- Buy it and enjoy.
For Fallout 4 alone I’ve downloaded like 150gb of new content that I haven’t touched yet. I have new maps waiting to be reviewed for Battle For Middle Earth II. I’ve got new campaigns for Brutal Doom waiting to be completed. Price of games on release is FAR on my worries list
Exactly,there are 35 missions divided into 4 campaigns divided chronologically:
-
The Norman Conquest (1066-1100) (with William the Conqueror and his heirs)
-
The Mongol Empire (1206-1291) (with Genghis Khan and his heirs)
-
Joan of Arc and the Hundred Years War (1427-1453)
-
The Rise of Moscow (1462-1533) (Ivan III of Russia and his son Basil III)
2 Likes
I don’t think they could be used incorrectly so long as the terms were properly communicated to us (which they were). It was on us to decide whether to consent or not. Most beta testers should have been well aware of the NDA before they even installed the game.
It’s not really a beta tester’s job to warn the public about a game before its release. If the game turns out bad it will reasonably be destroyed at the steam market. And subsequently, reviewers and other youtube creators waiting for the game will reveal it to the public. This is why I generally don’t support pre-orders before proper reviews and gameplay come out.
1 Like
And it’s exactly what happened already by DoW3. The beta started too late and was too short, like 1 week prior to release, so there was simply no time to make it into a decent game.
If I compare it to Spellforce 3 and Starcraft2 open beta, they had at least 6 months.
I did not liked bitter stalemates where the conclusion was more likely to happen due to one of the players getting tired of the back and forth of both sides replacing their losses fast enough that it turns into a zero sum game unless one of them is much better
Well,in fact that was the combat of the time,great battles of attrition with troops from around the world,in which he ended up winning the economic or military superiority of one of the two contenders,as for example happened in the Seven Years’ War…
Even so, something more elaborate would not be bad.
I think you understimate how many people out there are NOT as deep into this (arguably shitshow) of game news/reviews/discussions/beta testing, as we are. There will always be the poor bloke walking into the store (now digital) that will read baseless crap like OP wrote, and will buy a bad product (same surely goes for the opposite case: baseless hate preventing him from buying).
Just because we have the possibility to circumvent the price politics by waiting for sales or buying keys somewhere does not make the release price any less insulting to the average consumer that just wants to buy the fresh new thing.
Marketing today clearly suggest that buying early is the way to go. You get your extra goodies, early access, exclusive content. Multiplayer games especially come with the added pressure of all the friends (or in this case an existing franchise’s community) wanting to play day one. Or your favourite twitch streamer or youtuber… This is not the form of entertainment that you mainly consume in isolation (like a good book).
Again, knowing that this stuff is all bs because we are informed, does not mean everybody has that insight. Even the dumbest advertisement is made to reach someone.
I’m not stupid. Sure this is out of the dev’s hands. But without any kind of backlash, M$ will make a stamp of success underneath this project’s price+information politics and will repeat the pattern.
Do you listen to yourself? Post-Launch commitments in a sold-as-is product? This is not a game-as-a-service but you guys keep treating it as one. It’s just perplexing how sheepish people have become. Don’t put this trust into a company that ultimately only wants your money… not without a positive track record.
1 Like
The same way I can reply to you ‘you’d be surprised how many people look at a price tag as a reflection and measurement of quality and whether or not a certain title is ‘big’ enough’ to be looked into and bought’.
Price is also element of status for a game as a product and property in someone’s catalogue.
You can have expensive AAA juggernauts, or expensive, artsy, ‘gourmet’, indie experimental games on the same shelf. Content is not the only, nor deciding factor.
That is their job. Their job is to sell whatever, whenever, for whatever reason to bump bottom numbers for people that charter jets to quarterly meetings about company well-doing.
It’s not a argument one way or the other.
You can have broken, borderline criminal, barely playable unfinished mess like Cyberpunk 2077 for PS4 and marketing people will say till day1 that you should preorder it and it’s a hit. We have brains to use them.
If you buy game and it turns out crap- it’s your fault for not reading reviews etc.
BTW I didn’t preorder any DEs and was in ALL betas. Same with IV. Trends with super exclusive content ended some years ago, it’s hard to find too many games permanently gate locking stuff. I just hlanced at my Steam library, and I remember shotgun preorder bonus for PREY2017. Later on it was possible to buy it normally, it was even sold en masse on 3rd party sites for like ~0.25$. It doesn’t matter.
Having golden pikes for prorder people is EA-type of thing, not MS 
Yes I do.
And yes that is just the truth and reality for many, many people. Doesn’t matter what type of game we’re talking about. And I’m not talking about seasons perspective for some battle royale game.
Concept of having a ‘finished’ game is GONE, has been for years. Times when Half-Life got one patch, like 1.0.0.11 are LONG gone. Games were always in a philosophical sense ‘unfinished’ and a result of crunch and compromises to meet finish line, but now when everyone is hooked up to broadband- you get patches day0, day1, data 5, day 300. Doesn’t matter if it’s indie bullet hell pixel crap, or Sony’s singleplayer juggernauts.
It’s normal to have extended support not only inf form of polish and patches but also content updates, for EVERYTHING. Early access 1.0? Doesnt matter, most likely it will be worked on long after v1.0 premiere.
Whole maps, characters, music, weapons… even modes! I have installed METRO games and you can remember EE editions, Ranger mode updates etc.
Nobody is installing games from CD on a remote island Again- release means nothing, compared to 2010, much less than put against 2000 or 1990 releases.
ProGamer moves:
- Wait for release
- Check reviews, gameplays, forums.
- Buy, or wait and play something else, if you don’t judge what’s provided for asking price attractive for you.
There are even reason why they CAN’T change the price, especially now so close to release, and you should know them.
It’s a computer game ffs, not medicine somebody is dependant on. Let’s chill out and have some distance.
It’s a luxury hobby. They ask 250$? Good for them! Life is too short to worry about stupid people making bad purchase decisions. People waste thousands of 
on FIFA cards etc. Who cares these days.
Trilogy of DE versions is more than I would dream of looking at the industry as a whole. If IV is not halt-bad it’s already a added value to the general IP.
its confirmed by steam that dying light 2 is the most wanted game on steam. so rip ur post xD
uh aoe 4 is at #14 with 70 000 in the wish list meanwhile dying light 2 with 220 000. aoe 4 is not even close for getting the best seller…
Except that pre-ordering Age IV doesn’t really benefit people that much.
You can get an already cheap DLC for a game: Aoe2 (you have to already own it for it to matter).
And then if you buy the larger pack you get like the soundtrack and art pack?
IMO none of these other “bonuses” even matter to most people.
The only people who got to try the game early were the beta testers (next batch probably coming soon) and that was literally for free.
This isn’t the dev’s problem. This is a social problem. If you’re tight on money maybe preordering a game shouldn’t be what you’re doing. Ideally preorders wouldn’t exist honestly but thats something we should argue to the governments to regulate. For-profit companies won’t just change their practices without being forced to.
If you are arguing for a world without predatory advertisements I’m all for it. But we can’t topple down a for-profit system by blaming Relic. This is a political/economic issue.
Ideally we could save everyone from a bad purchase/deal, but that’s unreasonable. The best we can do is encourage sceptical purchasing practices.
Exactly, and I can’t state this enough. Do not pre-order or purchase a game unless you are 100% sure you are getting what you want.
Yeah their marketing was honestly pretty bad. They supposedly have a story and everything and didn’t try to capitalize on that. Meanwhile Humankind is releasing fun trailers like this:
2 Likes