This is not a preference. Is something that is wrong. The thing is that you personally care or not about this defect, but the defect exist.
6 Likes
You’re complaining about a lack of realism. That’s a design choice. It’s not a design rule.
No, there is not a desing choice. If devs had designed barracks to have this size from the begginin, they would have another aspect.
The objetive defect appears when you desing one building to have one aspect (as big as an urban center):
…and then you change its size. Is then when the objetive visual deffect apears.
1 Like
Like anyone comes to this forum to be taught “you think sth is bad because you think it’s bad. It happens because someone made a decision. Someone made a decision because there is a reason” over and over again.
2 Likes
And you come here to write long journal articles to teach people about this?
Biggest joke of the year: this comes from you.
4 Likes
My problem with the production buildings is that they are so absolutely unproportionate that they seen like this:
And this isnt a desing choice, It’s a last-minute size change without adapt the proportions.
2 Likes
I love disagreement. Wouldn’t be much of a discussion without it.
You wanting an echo chamber for your personal problems with the game isn’t my problem, and hasn’t been for a long while. Happy New Year 
Which is what I said when I talked about realism. You want proportions that are more realistic, no?
But a lack of realism isn’t necessarily a defect; it’s can be a choice in design.
I think it’s intentional here.
Yes, but more specifically I want to fix some buildings that are not proportionate even with themselves. For example see this stable. The horse of the barnyard would not fit its own stable. Is this a desing choice?
1 Like
But that’s a unit, right?
I get what you’re saying, and if it was literally in the courtyard; if it was a part of the building art, I’d agree.
But units don’t match with buildings. I’m fine with that personally. I appreciate you’re not, but I don’t think it’s a defect.
This immediately overthrows the previous one for being the biggest joke of the year.
I post even more on other subforums here criticizing certain designs and aesthetics and representations and gameplay of other AOEs (surprise: because I like those games). There are people who agree or disagree with me. There are people who agree or disagree with each other.
But NEVER in other subforums did someone like you suddenly jump out with looooong nonsense such as “it’s a preference. There is a reason. They make a choice.”
Like who needs to be taught about these? Yes they made a choice. Yes there is a reason for that choice. And I do not like it. I’m just writing my responses and it’s up to the developers to decide whether and how to change it.
For example, you say you “dOn’T cArE” about the ratios. So does it hurt you if they change it? If not what are you writing about in this thread?
Admit it. You are just here to contaminate every criticism post with trivial and iterative arguments so that people get frustrated about this subject. Then you can claim victory and pretend the problem does not exist. And now you are bringing up the word “echo chamber”.
I post my criticisms because I believe the developers are fully capable of their jobs. They know better about the game and market than I do. So they can make their own judgement of whether it is a good idea.
But you seem not because you are fending off any criticism that might “hurt” the developers like parents keeping “harmful contents” on the internet from their six year olds.
4 Likes
see the horse that is part of the building. The own horse that is part of the building would not fit their own stable
1 Like
@GorbMort see this building too. The dolls would not fit through the door of the building itself. Is by this that there is a objetive visual problem
So when someone says that they are not fine with something (which you are fine with), do you really have to come over to say "Hey I’m fine with it, it’s okay if you’re not. There are reasons for everything. "?
It’s fine if you do that once. But extremely annoying if you do that all the time.
I guess the most mature thing for the rest of us is to just ignore what you say because frankly, you’re not really contributing to a discussion if all you say is “There is a reason it’s like this.”
1 Like
GorbMort has actively acted as a contrarian, derailing the conversation away from the topic at hand. Just ignore their endless deflection and inability to address the issue at hand with actual solutions.
The reason building scaling keeps being brought up on the forums is because there is evidence for an adjustment shortly before release, one that forsakes the original artist’s vision of the units that they designed–the solution to simply scale down buildings without taking proportions into mind is STILL jarring a year after release and thus is why this topic is being brought up once again.
For something that was done brashly before release yet after reveal, for the sake of a minority that no one cares about, is what stings and is why we keep putting pressure on the studio overseeing the project. They need to address this as it goes against the spirit of AoE4, like many other things in this game.
I think it is important for them to realize that NO, this is not the type of thing that can be ignored–and that if they think this is outside their vision of the game, that they need to reconsider and revisit the issue, properly and not at the whim of people whose job it is to chase the biggest prize from competitions.
5 Likes
It’s intentional, to make every criticism post frustrating.
Once in a discussion about adjusting zoom levels I wrote something like “you sound as if they cannot adjust the zoom of their own game without crashing it”. And he went on with a million posts debating what is the meaning of “can”.
To complete the joke, the developers did offer more zoom options soon afterwards.
1 Like
At least I don’t want to fight Relic. Yes, they were supposed to make last-minute changes and the game today doesn’t look good. Ok, I get it. Now I just want them to fix the visual problem, I don’t make a destructive criticism.
Because we’re discussing changes to a game I enjoy? You keep trying to say I shouldn’t be allowed to disagree and it’s pretty funny.
The “original artist’s vision” is that of the developers. Them changing it is also their vision. The only difference is that you’ve convinced yourself that they listened to some people who aren’t you, and you’re upset they’re not listening to you.
You want something changed I don’t want changed. And because I don’t fit in your little box of “competitive players are a minority” (not being a competitive player), you’re trying really hard to find another way to ignore my opinion.
I’m not being contrarian. I play the game. Which is more than I can say for some posters (none that I’m replying to here). I have opinions on it. These include, among other things, “i don’t like realistic unit-to-building proportions”. Never have.
@GorbMort there is no “a vision” where each building would have its own proportion. Or where buildings are not proportionate even with themselves. Develeopers had to make changes quickly and some visual mistakes were made.
So, in summary, according to you, even if they only changed the model proportion not the grid size (eg make the doors or windows or horses bigger), you’re not going to enjoy the game anymore?
Are you implying the developers CANNOT change the model ratios without ruining the gameplay? Man you are indeed better at insulting the developers more than anyone else has even tried.
Maybe it’s the same case with zoom and color selection huh? You were actively defending against these the change to the game you enjoyed before but they still got changed. Are you still enjoying the game now?
1 Like
I do not speak for Relic and am nothing more than a fan. I think you’ve been perfectly constructive.
We just disagree on how we want the game to look.