This probably will be nevered by the devs. But I’m gonna ask it anyways.
We have civs named as Holy Roman Empire and the Delhi Sultanate. While other civs are named just as English and Chinesse.
I want them for consistency to rename:
English to Kingdom of England
French to Kingdom of France
Rus to Grand Duchy of Muscovy
Chinese to Chinese Empire
Mongols to Mongol Empire
Abbasid Dynasty to Abbasid Caliphate
Following this convention In the future we may also add the Kingdom of Castile, Kingdom of Aragon, Kingdom of Poland, Kingdom of Hungary, Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Scotland, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the Mamluk Sultanate, the Ethiopian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Timurid Empire, the Aztec Empire, the Inca Empire and the Most Serene Republic of Venice.
I agree with this. Just “French” sounds so wrong compared to the Delhi Sultanate or The Holy Roman Empire. I suppose a quick mod can fix this post-launch as well.
Good! I was already thinking about creating a thread about it.
Some names seem so wrong to me.
Starting with the Abbasid Dynasty, which should actually be called the Abbasid Caliphate.
After the term “dark ages” is outdated and prejudiced, it’s better to change it to low middle age or late old age (I’m not native English so I don’t know if that’s the translation, but I definitely don’t accept the term dark age).
About exchanging other civilizations for “realms” I have my doubts. For the kingdom of England was shaped throughout the Middle Ages, the same goes for France and Russia.
while the dark ages as a concept is very Eurocentric and probably outdated even in that context I think it makes sense in age of empires games as you are starting your civ in a dark age, aka a period of reduced economic, scientific, and cultural activity instead of the dark age, an outdated term for the 6th - 10th century in Europe.
Still though I can understand not using it and trying to find a better term. it’s generally called the early middle ages or early medieval period in English I think.
The naming conventions in AoE4 are internally inconsistent (some civs are identified by the general civilization (English, French) others by the nation state (Delhi Sultanate) and another by the actual ruling family (Abbasid Dynasty) rather than by the nation state (Abbasid Caliphate) or the people (Abbasids). The names are also externally inconsistent with the other games in the franchise, which heretofore have always been by general civilization.
I was just about to write ‘it’s one big mess and a downgrade compared to the previous installments’.
Pretty much almost every aspect of this game took a hit when it comes to the subject of history. Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised that along with the removal of unique, civ GUIs also simple, small things like the very names of civs are all messed up and designed a bit to carelessly.
It feels like an intentional detachment from history. Without a specific, accurate name of the political entity, it’s hard to held devs and content accountable when comparing it with the real stuff. Is this designed intentionally? I hope not, but I have bad feeling about this.
Take note that we still know pretty much nothing about the approach to campaigns, storytelling, narratives, and narration itself. These are extremely important elements that even in Age of Kings were handled in a way that is impressive to this day and somewhat a benchmark for the entire genre.
I’m very worried.
There is not a lot of historical RTS games, and certainly not of this type. I don’t expect AoE IV to be a learning tool, but so far I have no proofs that it’s handled with care by people adequately passionate about history
I don’t know why the game needs a mod to fix this. This fix takes a programmer like what, an hour? Maybe it might take just a few minutes if a change in some central file automatically applies to everyplace the name occurs, idk.
Point is, I’d be disappointed if basic things like this need modders to change. It’s $60.
Honestly, yeah - this bothers me too. It’s as if the English, Chinese and French are the “normal” ones and the others are oddballs who need further explanation. When, in fact, we know it’s not quite the case.
Problem is: all marketing material, including hardcover books and all other print, is already set in stone. I don’t see them changing this anytime soon.
It’s the inexplicable departures from a zillion franchise details that keep bringing me back to AoE4 being The Last Jedi of the AoE franchise. It’s like change purely for the sake of change. They apparently want to subvert our expectations. Or something. I don’t really understand why they’d do so much of this stuff.
In this example, the Age of Empires franchise has gone 24 years with a perfectly functional naming convention. What’s the point in messing with it, especially when they mess with only random names and leave others untouched.
It’s not about the time taken. I’m just thinking pragmatically - I don’t think the devs will change the names of the Civs lol. I’m just saying that thankfully it’s a quick fix with a mod post launch I do agree that the names ideally should be sorted out by launch.
I don’t think this makes much sense for multiplayer.
History is constantly shifting with nations constantly changing names. Its just easier to have one identifier rather than getting bogged down with the details.
For example. Persians.
Are we supposed to call them Sassanids? Seljuk Turks? Khwarazmians? Perhaps in the single player campaign we can have the proper historical name but for multiplayer? Unnecessary imo.
Maybe… but there is no historical name basis for such a faction name and Persians was just an example.
There are the vikings who are made of a multitude of Scandinavian nations.
I think you should view the names as a hint of future updates. Because the Abassids could have been the “Arabs” but clearly Relic wants several arab factions hence why they get split to Abassids, Saracens and maybe even Moors.
So factions with just “English” probably means we will only get one english faction.
But I agree with you… it is somewhat inconsistent.
If I would rename Dehli Sultanate to the Dhelians or some such similar sounding name.
We still can rename the Abbasid Dynasty to Abbasid Caliphate and still have multiple Arab factions in the future. They can add Fatimid Caliphate, Ayyubid Sultanate, Mamluk Sultanate, Emirate of Cordoba, Almohad Caliphate, Almoravid Empire etc.
No, thats bad, also how would you rename Holy Roman Empire then?
Dehlavi and Teutons, as the Kingdom of Germans back then which formed the heart of the Empire as the King of Germany also had claim to the title of the Holy roman empire, was called Regnum Teutonicum.
I do agree that the names ideally should be sorted out by launch.