I assume so too.
But that doesn’t mean they could not use the same assets do add a crossplay mode to the AoE2 dataset.
Would it? Is it hardcoded that a a villager, TC, house etc. does have to have a certain ID?
In the worst case the crossplay AoE1 civs could have the same TC, house, villager, barracks, etc. just with modifiers that give them AoE1 stats (like 4 population instead of 5).
In the worst case the drop of buildings can’t work the AoE1 way.
Just make all the military units different IDs.
Then you would basically have a regional unit only civilisation.
The crossplay mode would not have the AoE1 civs play the same way they do in the real AoE1 mode.
The maps are different too anyway, so the resource balance is different too.
But then you have to include the whole RoR dataset into the AoE2 dataset which would be horrible to maintain and also everyone is forced to use this dataset even if they don’t want to. From a developer’s perspective, it makes no sense to implement this. Separating the game modes is significantly cleaner, more maintainable, and more extensible than mixing everything together.
The AoE1 mode should have completely different dataset.
But there would be a crossplay mode that would use the AoE2 dataset with some units added on top.
AoE1 does not have that many units. Some could also just be copies of AoE2 ones.
That would add a maximum of 50 new units to AoE2.
I don’t think that would harm AoE2 in any way if you don’t use those additional units.
There are a lot more heroes and campaign only units in the game already and they cause no issue to normal ranked matches, right?
I’m against this. I think dev time is better spent on improving/balancing RoR, adding new civs and campaigns to it etc. than adding potentially lots of bugs for such a niche game mode.
Up to you, if you don’t like the mode.
It’s not like it would take a lot of development effort and it would make many people happy.
We will see a wave of people that will keep requesting this mode after the DLC releases.
It’ll probably be like the requests to add an Xbox version. People will keep asking for it.
But unlike the Xbox version this is a lot easier to implement.
Adding from the others, from the little I know from Genie Engine, I doubt that it could handle different villagers, trade units, etc. with different ID and so on.
On the military side, doubling the code for different army compositions I think it could be doable
I mean, as soon as there’s a crossplay mode, people will ask for it to be balanced. Not necessarily those who pushed for crossplay in the first place, but possibly an entirely new crowd.
If they would updated aoe1 they could add a dlc in aoe1 DE with aoe2 mechanics in speratae client. They want add in aoe2, so in that case its better in my opinion to have a crossplay.
Is that nonsense ? Not that much to have castle in this game for american civs ? seeing Huns vs portuguese or see yamato against shang or babylonians in aoe1. I don’t speak about civilization bonnus cause I don’t understand why japanese have a good fleet in aoe2 cause in history, sengoku bune and japanese ships totally useless when amiral Perry, European and Jesuites come in Japan. Some bonnus in this game is totally fiction.
You can ask why Huns have Trebuchet, why Goths have galeons canons and more things.
You can ask why japanese have knight, why saracens and turks have knight units too ? Is it realist ?
So have aoe1 in aoe2 just need some good update, removed some units (no galeons canon but ships with catapults things as aoe1 etc).
Its age of empire not Medieval total war or Rome total War, they can have some liberty. And this doesn’t affect the campaign and historical contents. Its affect only the multiplayer and the possibility to have scenario as far is possible. I don’t see any problem of that.
Purist people just play the campaign, don’t play in multiplayer or they will see aztecs fight Koreans… nonsense, but its already possible.
Same nonsense in aoe1 when you have Romans vs Assyrians…
The feudal start in Europe when it wasnt in other country of the world too. We can’t compared all things.
Yamato exist at the same time of Tang dynasty and the end of the roman empire, and the Byzantin era…
They just can consider it. And they have already the technology to put aoe1 in aoe2, half work already done.
Let’s be bolder. If RoR mode works, I think it is even possible to make an official “total conversion mod” set in early modern period.
Does not need a lot of novel designs. Just reskin the units, techs, civ names and re-assign some civ bonuses. You can even directly convert AOE3 models to sprites. Start with 10-20 civs and 2-3 campaigns.
People have been worried about core AOE2 being too saturated. But if they feel they could still sell AOE2 contents, this might be a solution (just like the “sub-game” DLCs for total war games).
Well I think so as long as they have the original 3D models.
But AOE3 styled civs are expected to be far more complex, so it’s a lot of efforts.
Also the core game of AOE3 (also AOE4) still has a lot of new content potentials itself, so if they wish to update it, a sub-game from a different setting may not be the first priority.
AOE2 is different. You can justifiably make “simpler” civs, and its main medieval theme is already very saturated. So I think making a “sub-game” is an easier thing to do and makes more sense.
Just food for thought though. Almost every time there is an aoe2 patch with simple changes, sometimes breaks the game and has to be hot fixed, what are the chances of something worse happening with a whole new dataset?
Plus Devs have been around long enough for us to know they are afraid of making crazy changes.
Personally I agree that some kind of crossplay would be fun for a awhile for the sake of trying a new thing, but I’m inclined to believe it would become very niche in the long term for the amount of work needed.
This would be something more interesting for an independent modder to implement later.
If you’re going to want crossplay between AOE1 & AOE2 on the AOE2 client, some genius is going to want crossplay with AOE3 as well… Then it just becomes a Civ/RoN/EE/Humankind game over the entire course of human history?
thats why we need to have aoe vs aoe2 civs. it’ll be good for custom lobbies or mods.
they can want it, engine just isn’t capable and there isn’t enough of a player base to warrant them to spend the money. there are actually several reasons to do this for AOE DE and not AOE3, biggest reason being money and hoping vietnamese players would all move to aoe2.
The ideal me want to have something like that in AOE3 or 4’s engine. The different eras do not necessarily need to be connected (which leads to either a lot of inconsistencies, or really streamlined designs, when I try to imagine how to do it). It could be two or three sub-games like some total war ##############. Crossplay is allowed but not as a competitive mode.
The realistic me thinks they haven’t figured out AOE4 base game yet so there probably are very few resources available for that.
Edit: they censored the abbreviation of “downloadable contents”?