That wouldn’t be a problem how I envision this.
I think almost all players would agree to a minidraft. Even if it were even less, where player A chooses 3 civs to ban, player B chooses 3 civs to ban. The system randomly picks 3 out of those 6. So half the time you are satisfying the civ pickers, half the time you are satisfying the others.
They are ruining the game. If only they’d move R3K civs to their own game mode and stop destroying aoe2.
2 Likes
They are too busy ‘‘Pushing Boundaries’’ and ‘‘Innovating’’
Because thats what our game needs, trend chase other games. Its not like AoE2 is a timeless classic or anything.
12 Likes
Someone saw the steam charts and said: game is not growing like before, when in 2013 we released HD Edition and it was the first online purchasable version of the game available, something must be wrong!!!
2 Likes
Ironically, the trend they’re chasing is already overdone and predictable, but the fact they’re trend chasing in the first place is what is innovative.
5 Likes
The innovation IS being sooooo un-innovative. It’s a 4D chess move you can’t appreciate.
2 Likes
Dont forget the innovative guerrilla marketing strategy of not releasing any trailers and just hoping the community that hates the DLC advertises it for you.
6 Likes
The only good thing about the DLC is that it made some people realize the base game might not need more civilizations. The tech tree and unique mechanics weren’t designed to support endless unique civs.
And the more civs are added, the more they will just end up similar, unless they keep power creeping and throwing in endless gimmick mechanics.
1 Like
B-but… It’s Three Kingdoms, guys! It’s famous and you love the IP, I mean, the setting, right? We even based it off the novel instead of real history, because this was never a historical game! Surely, a million Chinese players will buy the game without a second thought because we’re pandering, I mean, trend-chasing, I mean, we’re doing this because we’re really passionate about money, I mean, passionate about the Three Kingdoms!
Any day now, I’m sure they have no good criteria and will buy, because it’s Three Kingdoms…
7 Likes
The lack of perception you show is truly impressive.
It was a very small minority of reddit that revolted. 180k people on the AoE2 subreddit. No post against the DLC got 1k upvotes while the post in favor of the DLC with more upvotes got 1200.
Did you count how many people on youtube are against the DLC and compared it to the total playerbase? Are you aware that youtube doesn’t differentiate multiple comments by the same person from 1 comment by multiple users when showing the total comments a video has? That youtube also counts replies to comments as comments?
Someone here said there were “many angry comments” in the Jurchens video by Ornlu and that it’s better for the devs to remove 3K from ranked cause the backlash from it would be smaller… Is this a literal joke? I just looked at this video now and I see only 184 comments. When you remove people who aren’t complaining about the DLC and comments by the same person/replies, there isn’t much left.
I rarely use this forum, but I’m glad the devs aren’t listening to the terrible opinions being voiced here. Be it about the DLC or the direction the game is going.
What??? Now I’m sure it will get less positive review than V&V.
1 Like
Just like it was a ‘‘small minority’’ that complained about Victors & Vanquished? The one with overwhelmingly negative reviews? Forums are representative of the community, not the entirety of it.
Our community is also very separated into different niches and gamemodes. Pro players dont care, and obviously you dont care, but plenty of people do.
Do you have any evidence what the ‘‘total playerbase’’ thinks? Most people dont even own any DLCs to begin with. Again, people running defense of V&V kept saying ‘‘most people will like it’’ and it was recieved terribly. Most players of AoE2 dont even have the eat a boar achievement! Your argument basically boils down to ‘‘i dont care and so nobody should’’.
No. The reason the Ornlu video was mentioned is becasue it was the most recent one.
Yeah, becasue the unique castles and monk skins and fire carts were not community suggestions at all. The entire idea of a China DLC was a community suggestion.
You’re just mad people dont agree with you, and saying they are ‘‘terrible opinions’’ because of it. There are plenty of people here with opinions i disagree with, including yours, and i’m not going to start disparaging them or telling they dont matter. Everyone’s voice matters. Thats how a forum works.
Do you have any decent arguments against the idea this DLC is unfinished?It has wierd mish mashes of civs, the patch arrived a full month before the DLC and is full of bugs (including crashes in high profile tournaments), and all 5 of the civs dont have unique audio in any way.
5 Likes
Yeah they said it’s based off Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which is the novel, while the historical text is called Records of the Three Kingdoms. Plus that’s the reason the heroes have superpowers and unrealistic weapons, like Liu Bei dual-wielding huge swords or Guan Yu having his iconic weapon, which is novel-only, and never existed in real life, and presumably a character called Diaochan will also appear, and she’s also ficticious, made up for the novel.
3 Likes
The case of RoR and V&V is different. RoR only offered 1 new civ and a game mode most of the community wasn’t interested in. V&V offered no new civs and no campaign with more than 1 scenario. This DLC offers 5 new civs and 3 campaigns. The fact that people here disliked those 2 DLCs just like the rest of the playerbase doesn’t mean forums are representative. It just means the DLCs were so bad that many people disliked them or thought they were insufficient.
This time, the issues with the DLC are more “nerdy”. Complains about the “definition of what is a civ not being met”, them not being medieval and units from tanguts with khitans. Which is something Age of Empires already does with other civs and people don’t complain about. Genitours to berber, gbeto to malians, arambai to burmese, Keshik to Tatars but not for mongols.
Issues that the average player doesn’t notice or doesn’t care about. Things that are only problems / discussion topics to people who like to discuss the game (forum users).
No. That’s why I was quiet. But you guys started speaking without evidence first, so here I am. Don’t bring up the fact that we are both speculating when you started it first and if you don’t intend to stop it. Worse than that, you guys are discussing changes to a DLC already bought based on YOUR speculation. I’m not suggesting any change based on MY speculation. The burden of proof is on you.
And what does it have to do with the DLC? Nothing. We don’t know the proportion of casuals in any of the sides regarding the DLC.
Ornlu’s video was mentioned together with a comment on how there was a big backlash, supported by the “evidence” of many people complaining in the comment section. And the affirmation that the backlash from removing 3K from ranked would be smaller. Baseless statements.
Big strawmen. My whole point was that the haters of the DLC can’t claim to be the majority of the community. Not that the community is not important. Stop hiding yourself behind the shield of “the community” and using this same shield to push the rest of the community into accepting what you want.
You don’t know from where the changes came. Many things I wanted and never voiced were implemented. And I didn’t read them anywhere. Did the devs read my mind?
Some I did voice and they became true. Can I say that it was MY comment? How do you know that the people who hate the DLC contributed more to inspire changes we see now than the people who like the DLC?
Can you prove that it was the suggestions of the DLC haters that caused the changes we have now more than it was the comments of people in favor of the DLC with the same suggestions? You can’t. It’s speculation and wishful thinking all over the place.
The devs can just think about changes on their own and they coincide with the community. And they can read what the community says and approve it. That doesn’t have anything to do with the issue of the DLC haters being the community or not.
The china DLC was both a community suggestion but also a prediction. People, content creators, predicted the next DLC was gonna be in China. There is an old video by Spirit of the Law on that. He gave his reasons to why he thought it was gonna be china. The “community” is constantly suggesting DLCs all over the globe. And it was only after we already had teasers indicating the expasion was on asia that people dived deep into the speculation.
So stop acting like the DLC being on China was only a thing because the people who think like you and dislike this DLC suggested it.
And in case you didn’t notice, I didn’t shut you up. I did exactly what this forum is made for: I said my opinion. That the opinions voiced here are terrible.
We got 5 very well designed civs. Voicelines misssing can be fixed for Khitans and Jurchens. I miss the campaigns we didn’t get but we did get 3 campaigns. And the civs not having campaigns doesn’t affect their ranked gameplay.
“This time, the issues with the DLC are more “nerdy”. Complains about the “definition of what is a civ not being met”, them not being medieval and units from tanguts with khitans. Which is something Age of Empires already does with other civs and people don’t complain about. Genitours to berber, gbeto to malians, arambai to burmese, Keshik to Tatars but not for mongols.”
Malians in AoE 2 are disappointment for me.
While the rest of the community likes them. This should be another indication that this forum is a nest of nitpickers.
I want many changes to the game and would like things to be as historically accurate as possible as long as they don’t make gameplay worse.
But while these inaccuracies are still present, this doesn’t “ruin the game”. Just like Khitans having Tangut stuff (Especially while we don’t have Tanguts) doesn’t ruin the game.
This is the exact feeling this whole thing gives off. It’s disrespectul to the playerbase, but even more so towards chinese players. I wonder if chinese players can see how insulting the situation is.
4 Likes
That’s like setting a game in feudal Japan to appeal to Japanese players, but then proceeding to disrespect their culture and history. Wait, that happened.
4 Likes
The nerdy complaints are part of it, yes. But you think everyone loves the hero units? Or the fact that we have very strange bonuses and mechanics, like damage reflection? A lot of mixed feedback on those sorts of things too. Even Hera thinks its wierd for buildings to give food and he is as far from a ‘‘history nerd’’ as one can get. A lot of gimmicky stuff.
And besides, ‘‘nerdy’’ complaints have been listened to and acted on the past many times. The dedicated userbase of a game is always worth listening to, because they are the most likely customers for additional content. AoE4 even changed the name of civilizations becasue of community feedback, after it was announced as a DLC.
I at no point said that ‘‘the only reason there is a Chinese civ is because I, or this specific forum, decreed it so’’. The community as i said engages in a variety of game modes, websites and plataforms, and cannot be generalized into one opinion. The community did however ask for ‘‘civ splits’’ for a long time, and since Dynasties of India’s pre release days people have wanted Chinese medieval civilizations like Jurchens and Tanguts. I also did not say the entire community ‘‘is a DLC hater’’, rather, reception has been pretty widely mixed to negative, a lot like V&V and RoR. A wide range of people dislike the DLC to varying degrees for a variety of different reasons. The idea that anyone who doesnt just cheer on anything released becasue ‘‘they are a hater’’ ignores all feedback on the matter, a lot of which i find quite reasonable, some less so.
My point is ‘‘most people’’ just dont have a side at all. They dont care, many dont even know there is a DLC (there was no trailer in youtube or anything, another reason that i think this whole thing was rushed out to meet the PS5 release; trailers take time to make). Some might not even remember they even own AoE2. ‘‘total playerbase’’, much like the total number of users in a forum, is not as relevant as engagement data (which i presume the devs have at their disposal). The so called ‘‘silent majority’’ simply just… doesnt care.
The reason V&V is so universally lambasted is becasue a lot of these casual players had to play gimmicky scenarios without base building, its a special case yes, but a lot of places like the Reddit had people ‘‘dont complain and be happy the game is being supported’’, and i dont think this is a viewpoint that is beneficial for the game long term.
‘‘Everyone here has terrible opinions and the devs shouldnt listen to them at all’’ doesnt add to any sort of discussion. It’s dismissive, reductive and doesnt engage with the variety of opinions here. There is also plenty of users who do like the DLC as is here. My opinion is that the DLC has unfinished elements, and that Three Kingdoms factions dont fit in the game very well at all, especially ‘‘Hero’’ elements. Is it ‘‘terrible and not worth listening to’’ ?
Debatable. Very gimmicky bonsues, sometimes recycled from Battle for Greece like the Athenian food from wood one. I for one do agree the civs seem fun to play, but any discussion about civ design is always subjective. Especially as they are always subject to changes or reworks.
And thats why we are in the forum ‘‘complaining’’! Nobody here hates AoE (i hope 11). We want the game to be better. For some people, seems like the game to be better is to cut civs from ranked, which i vehemently disagree with. For others, it would mean a major buff to Janissaries. Or making the Jurchen emblem have blue instead of green. We arent a ‘‘nest of haters’’.
I mean, even the RoR Romans got their own Latin voiceover. Thats just one factor on why i think this DLC does feel ‘‘rushed’’. AoE3 even has Manchu unit audio ready to use if they cant record new ones.
Actually from the datamines we know they are all 5 scenarios long with several reused maps, including the final one for each. So around 10 scenarios. I hope the campaigns are fun, but i also worry about how short they are. There is also the opportunity cost: the campaigns about medieval china like Yue Fei we will, at this point, probably never get, becasue of the period picked here being unrelated to AoE2 in general.
Again, i asked you ‘‘how is this DLC does not have unfinished elements’’. Well?
Malians are a very popular civ despite innacuracies, like Armenians, Celts, and Koreans. People in enthusiast forums are more cognizant of innacurate elements in them, yes, but its usually one unit or so, in civs the average person doesnt know about. The issue here is one of opportunity cost; these civs are in the game in lieu of things that were hinted at, and that people wanted. Nobody ‘‘hates’’ the malians civ as a concept, because it was a major empire in medieval history.
However, that doesnt mean that African Kingdoms at release did not have a variety of issues, especially with multiplayer lag and bugs. How good a DLC in the end, is and the content of its PvP civs dont always match.
2 Likes