All these people are up in arms about the graphics “not being up-to-date”
And I counter, gameplay is just as if not more important than graphics. You want proof? Lets take a look at steam playercounts, shall we?
Age2 DE-23012 players
Not including voobly playercount, I don’t know how to find those.
Steel Division 2-1014
I could go on.
DE beats all of them combined, and HD is only beaten by 3 kingdoms. You know why? Not because of graphics, all of those games according to you graphic glorifiers are very up-to-date in graphics. Because of gameplay. So don’t go throwing around claims that Aoe4 is going to flop just because it doesn’t satisfy your thirst for graphics, wait until we get some actual gameplay. If it sucks, then go ahead, talk all you want about it flopping. But until then, shush!
what about total war games with modern graphics? age2 DE is a remaster of a very well know game it is expected to have high player count, also age2 DE have serious graphics not cartoon or over the top like age IV, DE graphic are very good actually, but I will save this post and after 3 weeks after release I will come again and see the numbers for age IV, I know it is going to fail hard, you said that game play is more important than graphics? but does AGE IV has a nice game play? don’t think so, also you can compare Microsoft as publisher vs those other games that barely can advertise their games.
I love total war but you can’t compare total war and age of empires it’s completely different playstyle, and that’s why i will play AOE4 and total war. These are my two favorite series.
In short, we are not going to start a debate again.
when people say the graphics of aoe4 look bad, it has nothing to do with how modern or advanced the graphics are. it’s that the game looks ugly. aoe 2 is a good looking game, so is baldurs gate, diablo 2, etc. despite being so old.
Graphics and gameplay both are important for a AAA game. We are going to pay at least 60$ and I would expect everything to be good.
Iron Harvest: indie buggy game focused on campaign.
Spellforce 3: it has good gameplay but hard to learn, hard to read for newcommers, also doesn’t have budget like microsoft.
Anno 1800: ubisoft wanted free money
Steel Division 2: developed just in a year, bad game
3 Kingdoms: Total War series has a lot of different games with different timelines. It has historical template with different timelines, and universes like warhammer. So the playerbase is divided for sure. It’s successful and has huge playerbase.
Ancestors Legacy: indie game focused on campaign, it even has campaign dlcs.
I can’t compare those games to AAA RTS.
If Battlefield 6 releases with Fortnite graphics but has great gameplay do you think people would play it? Of course not, they would leave it and stay at any previous title they like.
I can’t say same for AOE4 because it’s been 15 years since latest AoE game. Devs’ aim is making young people to join RTS genre and people who has potato pc also can play the game so playerbase will be huge to revive RTS.
I don’t count AOE Online because it was aiming on microtransactions with cartoony graphics so they could get money from kids. But still I liked graphics and animations when it released anyway.
I know AOE games were always bright and colorful but still my expectation was very different because it’s been long and I was thinking it’s time for a fresh start. What I was imagining before we get trailer for AOE4 was dark age feeling with realistic graphics, day and night cycle, weather conditions, harsh facts, blood and great gameplay with new mechanics.
After I see trailer I was a bit disappointed. But I started to watch trailers over and over, and checked screenshots one by one, I started to like what I see. Hopefully this game will be successful and we will have a lot of fun with a huge community.
Hm, that’s why people compare them to a bunch of games that went for realism when Age has obviously not gone for realism before except for Age3
Let’s look at indie games that succeeded shall we?
They are Billions
Minecraft was an Indie game, look at it now
The list could go on.
Pixel art is a thing. None of them has bad visuals. They are just different genre with their own style. Developing a successful game like minecraft isn’t easy. They created a new genre. It will happen only a couple times and other games will be developed over it. Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see successful and new games as a gamer.
You cannot make such comparison as if graphics is the only difference between these games, or graphics and gameplay are mutually exclusive.
Not to mention AOE2 has a strong nostalgic effect, that most gamers of a particular age range have at least heard of it. If they see the name “AOE2” they already know what to expect and what not to expect.
The only valid comparison is to find some new title released in 2020, which has the same graphics as AOE2 and similar gameplay, and compare it with some new title released in 2020, which has the better graphics and similar gameplay. But we all know those game do not exist.
There were numerous attempts trying to revive some old play styles built upon earlier generation hardwares, with their own design considerations and limitations. But few of them have achieved even 1/10 of the success of the older titles. In the meantime, a simple remake of those old titles would sell much better.
Indie vs AAA has different things to compare. I expect less from indie games compared to AAA. Indie games are fun to play but they have missing features compared to AAA games or they develop easy genres to be successful. RTS is the hardest genre to develop that no indie devs became successful because of the high standards of the genre.
I expect every Starcraft 2 feature from a AAA RTS game like fast bug fix, detailed replay system, good game mechanics, responsive units, co-op missions, skirmish vs ai, custom online games with custom rules, ranked play, map editor, campaign, stable servers, good graphics, tournaments with reasonable prices so it will be challenging and fun to watch.