The problems I’ve summarized since World’s Edge took over Age of Empires IV.

Haven’t I made it clear enough?

Most people (that is my opinion. But I believe it was true) would expect campaigns or sp scenarios as sp contents for a major expansion. At least they should come with one or two. Not ONLY one “new” mode that requires little extra work sold in full prices.

It is not SP and not content.

I already said it. WE had been intentionally sitting on the borderline of the expectations to sell vague and questionable stuff.

Campaign pack inspired and polished from community made maps with voice acting? Read copy-pasting with the same bugs and placeholder civs (long after the fitting civs were added) with the most bare-bone voice acting possible and reused everything including cutscenes.
Promised? Yes. One change is “inspire” not copy-paste. One bug fixing is polish. One voice line is voice acting. They delivered exactly as they promised
Shit? Yes. Unfortunately AOE2 players had more spines and gave it a solid mostly negative.

To the benefit of common customers, better directly tell the laypeople it is NOT-campaign copy-pasted with minimal work than “yeah but they still vaguely count as campaigns”.

I have to say this about objectivity: it is achievable to some extent. Everyone’s words and expressions carry their own biases, and this is something we need to be aware of. For example, my current bias is that I dislike World’s Edge. Based on my personal observations and experiences, I believe that many issues in Age of Empires IV—most importantly, the AI logic, which has never been properly improved, and the limited extent of mod support—stem primarily from the limitations of the Relic engine itself and the development process. Just as Relic restricted broader modding starting from Company of Heroes 2, AoE IV’s engine is also a Relic engine, and they similarly developed Company of Heroes 3. Even after the game was handed over to World’s Edge, handling mod support and engine optimization would remain a major challenge.

However, this does not mean that World’s Edge has been particularly attentive or helpful to the modding community. On the contrary, because the studio lacks sufficient creativity, vision, and strategic thinking to support the overall development and operation of AoE IV, they have repeatedly prioritized the input of competitive esports players in balance updates while neglecting the broader non-competitive player base. For me, this is completely unacceptable. The one positive is that, like you, I don’t like esports—my reasoning is straightforward.

If a game is not inherently designed to be purely competitive, ensuring a satisfying experience for non-competitive players requires adding more details, interactions, deeper tactical mechanics, map intricacies, and diverse gameplay elements. These enrich single-player experience, which can then be leveraged for PVP, letting PVP benefit from a pre-established, well-rounded single-player framework. In contrast, an esports-focused approach overemphasizes competition, often removing non-competitive details and creative gameplay elements to simplify the experience for the sake of competitive balance. For me personally, an esports-oriented RTS is just a waste of time—electronic junk that offers no deep thinking or meaningful interaction. It only pressures players into focusing on isolated conflicts. Hence, esports focus is unnecessary, but PVP is essential. These are fundamentally different things—this is my bias.

While AoE IV’s sales are indeed strong, I believe this mostly stems from the IP’s reputation and the fact that it is a fully reimagined, ground-up game inspired by AoE II. It potentially includes the same volume of post-launch content, maps, and unit models with a distinct new visual style. The game should have offered more tactical and terrain interactions, more robust skirmish customization options, and a fully flexible play experience for different types of players. Unfortunately, over five years, I have seen no indication that World’s Edge has taken any of this seriously. If one were to excuse them, the engine might be a partial reason. As far as I can tell, AoE IV’s remaining player base is becoming increasingly homogenous rather than diverse, making future content sales more difficult. If World’s Edge continues on its current path, I fear the outcome.

World’s Edge also tends to remove details for no clear reason. For example, in the initial release, Byzantine watchtowers had a working catapult model and full animation. They removed it even though it did not impact gameplay. I cannot understand the rationale. In terms of balance, their approach is inconsistent, seemingly ignoring AoE IV’s core gameplay and design principles. They appear intent on overturning them. Compared to AoE II, AoE IV was originally designed to be relatively streamlined and faster-paced, but that does not mean unit differentiation was absent. On release, each military unit had clear roles and functions. After World’s Edge took over and repeatedly meddled, those roles have become blurred, with functions even being altered for balance. I do not understand their fixation on esports; perhaps they believe the game’s success depends on it. I wish them luck.

Finally, my personal bias is that I really don’t like Microsoft. To me, their project management and game divisions seem chaotic, and the survival pressure on such a large company is relatively low. According to reports, Spencer conducted layoffs, yet the gaming divisions remained bloated, with many employees collecting paychecks without contributing. Therefore, I think the AoE team is inevitably affected, especially a studio like World’s Edge. I don’t know the exact internal workings, but I suspect the studio is caught between two situations: they cannot go all out, yet due to limited ability and short-sightedness, they cannot adequately address the game’s needs. This leads to problems accumulating over time. In my view, AoE IV’s issues cannot be fixed with minor adjustments. World’s Edge has clearly lost its direction. They have never truly understood AoE IV. To me, all their updates so far reflect an ongoing attempt to impose what they believe is the “correct” thinking on AoE IV’s core gameplay, including balance decisions. One possible explanation is that they simply do not play the game, and because they do not understand it, they lack any clear operational vision or framework.

2 Likes

Could you give a reference to this? I haven’t observed nor heard about it.

1 Like

I think we should separate World’s Edge from the development teams and actual developers

The developers can be hard-working and doing their best, but their capacity is confined by WE’s budget and orders. If WE asked them to roll out a quick “campaign” pack with zero budget, they had to make V&V. If WE asked them to populate a DLC with civs very quickly, they had to make variants.

And WE’s muted communication, false advertising, slow response, bad pricing, and unclear directions had all bled into the final products.

I understand someone somewhere did their best. But my money doesn’t grow on trees. I’m not going to buy low effort and overpriced products, especially when it rewards the corporate more than the developers. If the developers are also bothered they should speak up and do their parts fixing this abysmal business model. I feel sorry for them. But I am selfish.

1 Like

While I think your arguments here are very plausible and coherent, I don’t see it necessarily all the same way.

I think a focus on a competitive scene (even with the occasional prizes invested, etc) is probably lower cost than focusing more on single-player (or heaven forbid, co-operative) players. The amount of things we get in seasonal updates has been decreasing over time, and that reflects on nothing but the budget invested in the first place.

You can, for the same budget, get a lot more out of balance changes, than changes that require art or audio.

So I think the direction of the game plays to that. And I personally think the devs do a very good job with the tools they have. I just suspect they’re not given the money for a lot of tools. Or resources to use those tools on, might be a better analogy.

I do believe better balance lifts the gameplay up for all players (the water rework, for example, was necessary in my opinion given how unpopular water gameplay was across the playerbase. The siege rework also, even with mixed results).

Everything simply screams (to me) that regardless of WE’s involvement (and maybe like you say, even compounded by it), the main issue seems to be the fact that this franchise simply doesn’t get a lot of continued investment from MS. It’s not like AoE IV is the only one to suffer. I don’t know why seems to be the case. And I don’t know why communication is so uneven. Again, the lack of impact from players suggests either World’s Edge doesn’t care (which based on my own anecdotal experience I don’t believe), or there’s corporate red tape getting in the way. I default to the latter, which furthers my annoyance at how Microsoft seems to be handling one of their oldest gaming franchises.

2 Likes

This isn’t Reddit. As long as you don’t write a post calling for a boycott of the game or spam threads, any constructive criticism is acceptable.

Just a word of advice: if you’re going to present a theory, don’t start by saying that everyone who contradicts it is a “Fanboy Loyalist.” Otherwise, your argument will fall apart from the start, and people won’t even read it or will get bitter.

It’s also not good to assume that anyone who doesn’t accept you is a fanatic; that’s an insult both in everyday life and on the forums. And don’t justify it. The worst thing you can do when someone is offended is to keep justifying it. Just don’t do it again, or apologize in due time.

I also have my own theories about why there are only variants in this DLC, but I’ll explain them in due time. Right now, things are very hectic, and it’s best to me to wait until the end of Gamescon.

2 Likes

The fact is, I can’t, because I don’t have access to screenshots from Byzantium’s initial release. All I can tell you is that I really like Byzantium, so I’ve paid attention to its details.

Personally, I believe that trying to push modern RTS games toward an esports-focused direction is unfeasible. I don’t want to say it, but the reality is that so many RTS titles have sprung up like mushrooms after the rain, an astonishing number—but when it comes down to it, including Age of Empires IV, Age of Empires II is likely still the ultimate winner. Since AoE II has updated the appearances of its unique units, I believe they will also adjust and modify the appearances of generic units based on the continent, it’s just a matter of time. If AoE II truly does this, then comparatively, AoE IV’s advantages become even smaller.

In fact, the reason I think AoE IV shouldn’t focus solely on esports is that, judging from both the development-period promotional direction and the actual final product, the game already encompasses both single-player and multiplayer competitive elements. This entire structure is the foundation that the studio should maintain and improve. Adding more game modes, content, gameplay features, and customization options would attract a wider variety of players and give them more freedom and diverse experiences. The longer these players stay and the higher their engagement, the more vitality they provide to multiplayer esports—not the other way around, where the focus is only on competitive play at the expense of other players.

When we think of classic esports RTS examples, people always bring up StarCraft II. Even so, its peak popularity came when it was run by Koreans. Watching StarCraft II can be very entertaining, but how many players actually want to get in and play it themselves? From a gameplay perspective, it excludes most players. As the most well-known and essentially the only esports RTS, it brought in very little new blood over the years. Nobody has been willing to replicate its model or gameplay, and few people enjoy it; instead, some players team up to experience its co-op modes rather than competitive esports.

Returning to AoE IV: if the remaining player base consists only of multiplayer players, then the claim that only multiplayer players can sustain the game long-term raises another question: where did the non-multiplayer players go compared to the high popularity and broader player base at launch? Is it because the game effectively rejected non-multiplayer players? A game like AoE IV should carry the responsibility of the Age of Empires IP in this new era, attracting a broad spectrum of players to inject new life into the series. Yet due to the current direction of its operation, most non-competitive players have left. From this, one can imagine a possible chain of events:

Non-competitive players gradually decrease → player base becomes increasingly homogeneous → gameplay becomes fixed to the homogeneous group → ongoing homogenization and exclusivity → updates focus solely on the remaining group, pushing the game further to a single extreme → over time, not enough new blood enters → veteran players leave → the game is left unattended.

I believe RTS needs PVP, but for AoE IV, this one-sided focus is unacceptable. Extreme focus on either single-player or multiplayer alone is not viable. It should inherit all the fans of AoE II and gradually replace it, allowing PVP, PVE, and solo players to fully experience this new era of Age of Empires in their own style and preference. Yet currently, AoE IV is worse than AoE II in this regard, which is a serious problem. The game doesn’t take player experience into account. Once you include a single-player component, you have the responsibility to improve and maintain it—not leave it unattended. From what I see, Worlds Edge has continuously refused to improve the single-player part.

Moreover, among the current online players, we don’t even know how many are playing PVP, how many are playing single-player encounters via mods, or how many are using mods at all. Recently, many of my friends have been playing the mod “Age of Taverns.”

I find it hard to have expectations for AoE IV. As you mentioned at the end, and as we discussed above, some problems may stem from Microsoft’s decision-making, or from issues within Worlds Edge itself. But one thing is clear from my perspective: I believe Microsoft doesn’t really care about the survival of RTS games—even Age of Empires. If they truly cared, the development problems of AoE would have been resolved far more quickly than they have.

2 Likes

Perhaps it’s a translation issue. I wasn’t writing in English when I drafted it. I never said that everyone is a “fanboy” or that anyone who disagrees with me is a fanatic. What I wrote is that there exists a subset of “fanboys” in the Steam community and within Age of Empires IV—people who accept everything unconditionally without criticism, whether good or bad. In fact, this kind of group exists for any game.

1 Like

I think (and you say this later on), that some eSports is fine. RTS games, or at least most of them, need a solid PvP playerbase to generate activity. Single-player content either needs to be replayable, or it needs to keep on being produced, which is an ongoing cost.

Some people are objecting to a lack of new campaigns in IV, and it’s fine to want them. I’m not even saying it’s a bad suggestion. But it’s not content that keeps players around, or engaged, unless there’s some kind of thing that keeps players playing (e.g. replayability). Sultan’s Ascend tried this a bit by experimenting with mission objectives and so on. Even the base campaigns had neat little bits like achievements tied to particular objectives in campaign missions. How successful these are vary depending on the type of single-player player.

I agree that IV has catered too much to the competitive scene. Or not even that - it simply hasn’t catered enough to other demographics. I wouldn’t mind the constant focus on balance patches if it came with other things (and in earlier updates, it did more than it does now). So we have a situation where the developers are trying to squeeze the most of the resource they have (which I said already).

Which takes us back to Microsoft - just like you said. I don’t know if it’s a lack of care, or a lack of willingness to actually spend money. And personally I don’t care which in that case. Either is a poor or short-sighted rationale for a franchise they presumably want to keep leveraging (again, for profit).

Worlds Edge has ALWAYS been over AoE4. Since the start.

1 Like

Apparently Relic never stopped being a part of development either.

1 Like

Yep. They never once said or suggested that Relic wasn’t.

People just started that rumor and ran with it.

1 Like

Yeah it’s not “since WE took over”, but “since 2023” or “after COVID”. WE had changed. Maybe under financial pressure. Maybe a change of course. Everything they do now screams “quick money and lower cost”. They could sacrifice the branding of this francise for that.

I only want them to tell what is going on instead of pretending everything is fine and hyped or even better than ever.

1 Like

There are people who idealize all the crumbs that Microsoft throws at them on the floor.

The signs of mediocrity didn’t come with time; they were always there since the beta phase and never left.

Well the OG civs had higher design quality and campaigns had documentary cutscenes. At least the efforts were there.
Now even that part had died out and they just wanted us to accept and consoom.

That was, is, and will be its nail on its own coffin

Some of you are so dramatic. I should get off of here or I’m going to hurt my eyes from rolling them so hard so often.

2 Likes

I don’t think the campaigns are the most important part, and I’m not too concerned about the campaign content. For Age of Empires IV, campaigns aren’t what it really needs. It’s just that the studio hasn’t taken responsibility for what it should. It’s not just that they didn’t cater to other player groups, but I feel that the studio hasn’t really put in much effort. After all, they haven’t clearly communicated what they’re going through.

As players, we’ve paid for the game and received something that doesn’t really belong to us—only the right to run it. I believe that once we’ve paid, we’ve fundamentally supported the game. If the studio promises continued development, they should fulfill that promise while also addressing the existing issues in the game. Since it includes single-player content, they should also take responsibility for maintaining and improving that part. But right now, the overall development direction of Age of Empires IV is unclear and chaotic.

They keep stumbling around, trying this and that. All the cost of trial and error falls on the players. It feels like an immature couple; I can’t imagine why Age of Empires IV would allow Relic, the Forgotten Empires team, or Worlds Edge to end up like this.

1 Like

Besides the graphics!

I know a great game is not defined by having the best graphics it could.
But a large amount of players actually care about the graphics on a game

I remember how the game was called a MS Clash of Clans, a Fortnite Age Game or simply saying that the game looked too cartoony for them!

A bad mix of saturation, coloring, contrast and lightning plus very small textures and atrocious unit/building scale ratio obligated a large amount of players to drop their hope on this new Age game. The rest is history

Relic and Worlds Edge made very bad decisions with the game since the very beginning
So is what the game is now