Hi. I’m new to the Age of Empires series, and I bought the game recently because I like the battles and some history. I play Company of Heroes 2 sometimes, and some Total War games. I wasn’t really interested in Age of Empires games that much, until I recently found out that Relic was involved in the development of the latest mainline title in the series.
Since I usually play COH I got interested and bought it, since they have developers in common. However I wasn’t very impressed, because Relic knows how to recreate scenarios and war conflicts very well, and I don’t see much of that in this game. I was even less interested in the series, until a friend suggested I try Age of Empires 3, which had a free trial.
I thought it would be more of the same, but what a pleasant surprise I got. I loved how the cannonballs shoot down troops, the naval battles, and all the things you can interact with on the maps, like the tribes. I didn’t know this game was so different from the others in the franchise, and that’s why I never got interested in it at all. I don’t know why this new version was designed to feel so hollow in comparison.
Why did they make such a mediocre sequel in comparison? Is it some kind of reboot? I’d like to know what kind of gameplay consumers are looking for in this series, because I also found out that the third installment has a smaller player base than the second and fourth installments, even though the third feels much more modern and innovative.
in reality aoe3 is the one thats the most out there in aoe series, aoe4 is basically a what if we trimmed aoe2, another game you should give a shot to, down for modern era and introduced everything that is disliked with COH series (camera, input lag, etc.)
i don’t hate 4, but i ain’t blind to things i already disliked in COH2 being included, does the game stand on its own, i guess, but as you said, no innovation to be found
and yes calling aoe4 age of empires rebooted would be probably more accurate given whats on hand
this one is complex, aoe2 released in golden RTS era, and is second only to starcraft games in population, over the years people in 2 did start wishing aoe3’s QoL features that 2 simply lacked, but 2 had more coherent design and overall gameplay, so when aoe2 DE released and included all those QoL features which mostly originated in AOM and aoe3, it effectively made the already great RTS into the RTS that sits at the top of the stack as overall package, with massive singleplayer and solid multiplayer offering, so as a result, big player counts and excellent reputation.
aoe3 when it released in 2005, when RTS was already declining in popularity, meanwhile was actually praised on QoL end and visuals, but its a fact, that i have to admit despite loving the game as much as i do 2, that gameplay wise its not what aoe was prior to it, its almost spinoff level of different, and that massive shift for a lot of people came all at once, to add on top you used to have to grind home city levels to get good cards for civs, home city being another huge change alongside removal of stone as a resource, then the campaigns didn’t go historical route but rather took AOM base and made a fictional tale set in historic period, which didn’t sit well thematically with a lot of people. the last blow with aoe3 was system requirements, which were well beyond most of og aoe2 playerbase pcs, 2020s aoe3 DE corrected a lot of game’s initial problems, home city levels are now cosmetics only, map generation is actually fair now, new awesome civs and inclusion of more single player content and later CO OP play with historical battles, but DE’s problems were elsewhere, the game was incredibly buggy on day 1, took until at least december (game released on october 15th) to be somewhat stable, but another noteworthy thing aoe3 just can’t match 2 in is singleplayer offering, aoe2 just has so much more its not even fair to put side by side, on top the game’s design which isn’t entirely decided on going symetrical or assymetrical causes balance problems, DE has gone more assymetrical but that route is basically impossible to balance with all the one sided matchups, lastly DE downgraded the multiplayer interface like crazy, to the point that a fellow modder recreated original game’s multiplayer interface within DE. There were many really positive changes like in 2 with 3 DE, but not all aoe2 DE features are present, no alt box drag to select vills only, all you have is easy drag military, so half the fuction, the global queue in aoe3 DE is the same as in original game, so you can fill the entire queue just with 1 town center producing vills. but imo biggest reason for 3 DE having less players is people seeing die hard fans of 2 and recently 4 who never actually tried 3 talk shit about 3 without actually playing the game and making conclusions then
as for aoe4, well ensemble, original dev team was dismantled by microsoft in 2009, so a new developer had to step in, in this case relic, but now you have an issue, the engine was never made for this kind of RTS, so a lot of reworking was needed, second game had to meet sales targets, so microsoft used DE’s to build up player numbers to maximize aoe4 potential sales, and third, they already saw which game was most liked by people, that being aoe2, so they effectively tried recreating aoe2 in a 3d engine essence, the COH engine, while placing in enough new mechanics, like areas of influence for each civ, making civs in similar logic to aoe3 base game but with unified design of semi assymetric civ logic, having projectiles always hit as thats how COH works as well, reusing COH capture points as sacret sites and so on. long story short, aoe4 took aoe2 groundwork and trickled some of aoe3/AOM sparkles on it to give a still very mechanically similar civ roster at least visual distiction, so units that are otherwise the same across the board stat wise still use different skins depending on civ, but mechnically they didn’t want to depart too far from aoe2, aka they played extra safe. Sadly using COH engine meant every single bad thing about COH also made it in, and while some of it was addressed since launch there’s still holes, proper hotkey system didn’t happen till 9 months post release, mostly playable, but imo still insufficient max zoom out also took 9 months post launch while at launch both of these feedbacks feel on deaf ears and blind eyes, the open beta max zoom tweak was straight up insulting to everyone who played open beta
the UI was so sterile, still is, it just looked dead, and even functionally the UI was a collosal downgrade compared to 2 and 3 of old, let alone DEs, even shift queue waypoint flags not existing made it over from COH2, aoe4 at launch played worse than aoe2 back in 1999, thats before i mention 150ms of input lag even in single player in aoe4 (old aoe2 and 3 input latency was none existent while in 4 you can clap by the time unit reacts to inputs)
a lot of this was since patched up, like missing hotkeys, UI panels sadly didn’t receive cosmetic or functional makeovers, but the damage was already done
and ofc, aoe4 even just looking at it has no soul and thats not smt you can patch in later, taunts and cheats are a dead giveaway of that fact, compare those to aoe2 or 3, its not even fun to compare
The thing with what you said is that you didn’t specify anything, you just said that you think Aoe3 is better than Aoe4. If I were to argue based on unspecific speculations, I will never meet all your expectations.
In my opinion Aoe4 is a very good game, especially in ranked, I would say it is the best of the franchise in that aspect.
Aoe3:DE on the other hand, you have to consider the flaws of its predecessor:
AoE3 2005
“Aoe3 vanilla (2005)”, or legacy, whatever you want to call it, came with a lot of criticism when it came out:
1.- The campaign was not historical, it was fictional, in a historical game.
2.- The civs you used in the campaign were not the ones in the game, they only resembled some in the game, but for that, they didn´t inspire you to use the actual civs of the game.
3.- The Spanish were pathetic, they were only good for a 10 minute rush, and if the enemy stopped the rush, you have to give up, it was that level of mediocre.
4.- Terrible historical errors: promotion of the Black Legend of Spain, lack of arquebusiers of Tercio, Spaniards lacked Unique Technological Cards, Spaniards with Pirates in Galleons (That should have gone to the English), Portuguese without slaves or black servants, Portuguese with Ribauldoquin (Sacrilege, they didn’t even use them, they preferred to use Falconetes with pulverized shrapnel).
5.- Fantasy of the Inca Empire living in the Jungle in the Campaign will be interesting for Europeans and Americans but OFFENSIVE for Hispanic Americans, especially Peruvians, since it ignores real history: Most Peruvians are DESCENDANTS of the Incas, they did not exterminate them, WE ARE their descendants by Mestizaje. It’s like i would make a fantasy campaign in a historical game about the hidden SAXON people that weren’t wiped out by the Angles or Normans… or wait, that doesn’t make sense, because the Angles interbred with the Saxons creating the Anglo-Saxons. See what I’m getting at?
6.- Self-censorship due to political correctness decisions: Portuguese lack Villager Cards because originally the developers wanted to give them African villager cards, but in the end they deleted it from development and were left without extra villagers.
7.- All civs almost identical: No unique technology different, unique units just had different stats than the base ones of other civs.
8.- No Native, African or Asian civs, pure European.
9.- European armies were not those of the New World, but those of the Old World of that time.
10- All maps of the New World, none European or from another location.
11.- Inability to create custom campaigns and share them, mainly because of how the card system works.
12.- No mountains, there are only cliffs to pretend unreachable terrain elevations. There are very few natural terrain elevations.
13.- The card system was polemical, first because it was an excuse to speed up the games to make a mandatory rush in feudal and second, because there were no real differences between the cards of one civ and another (they were all the same).
14.- The universities from aoe2 were eliminated. That doesn’t make sense, the Spanish built an absurd amount of universities in America… oh, and I understand, Anti-Spanish advertising again.
We had to wait for the expansions (2007) for things to improvements:
Campaigns that teach some history: The American one in Warchieft, Sengoku Wars, 1st Indian Liberation War and China’s overseas travels in Asian Dynasties.
Civs that are not only European.
They finally invented “Unique Cards” for each civ, before all the cards were the same for all civs, with the exception of the Church’s shipment.
Civs that have new and unique buildings, especially the Asian ones with their wonders.
AoE 3:Definite Edition, 2020
And the version you play, the DE (2020), is a POLISHED version that has fixed the hundreds of errors from its original version, 15 years latter.
Native American, European, African, Asian, etc. civs.
Builds are different for each civ, and there is a monthly balance so that no civ is too broken.
Spain was fixed, now it has Builds that work until post-Imperial.
Spanish Galleons no longer drop pirates (OK), and they even have cards for cool unique technologies and even Viceregal buildings (Haciendas).
Iroquois renamed as Haudenosaunee, Sioux as Lakota (OK).
Better graphics.
Card system improvement: Many Cards now works as Unique Technologies for each civ, with passive or active bonuses, and many cards unlock Unique Units for each civs (French Royal Musqueter, Spanish Conquistador, Jet Indian Lancer, Chinese Iron Soldiers, British Rangers, etc)
Many units and new mercenaries with “Activable Skills”.
New Civs, including Incas and Sweden.
AoE IV
Aoe IV is a new game, an improved and 3D version of what would be AoE2: Kings but with current technology. Among some of the best things it has in improvement of AoE2:
1.- It is in 3D.
2.- Collecting sheep with the scout is a lot of fun and not a pain like in AoE2, AoE3, AoM, (where you have to pick each sheep to get it to go to your base).
3.- Unique units with activatable abilities (Longbowmen with stakes, Archcrossers with Paves, invisible Musofadis, etc.).
5.- Landmarks work like the Asian Wonders of AoE3:AD, which is Phenomenal.
6.- Several unique technologies per Civ (In AoE2:DE there were only 2, AoE4: 10,15, 20)
7.- Several unique units per Civ (In AoE2:DE, 1 or Max:2 UU, AoE4: Japanese have 14 UU)
8.- Unique architecture for each civ (Something that even AoE3:DE lacks with several European civs)
9.- Unique models of villagers and base units per civilization.
10.- Separate role of the Crossbowmen and Archers, one anti-heavy and one anti-light, (Unlike AoE2 and AoE3 which is the same).
11.- More types of Cannons than in AoE2 for several civilizations.
12.- Religious units with correct historical representation (Christians: Monks, Islam: Imams, Tengrism: Shamans, Buddhism: Monks)
13.- Unique bonuses for each Civ make them very different to play, to take advantage of the different economic and military aspects of the same (Early units, Rush, economic bonuses, fast castle, double Town Center).
14.- Building influence bonuses induce the player to experiment with city design and urban planning, and to take care to leave free spaces for future buildings.
15.- The UI is functional: It bothered me at first, but over time you realize that it is minimalist and helps a lot in making quick decisions. Of course, it could be improved if they gave it some customization option via MODS, but only time will tell.
16.- Beautiful mountains (Aoe4:1, Aoe3:Zero).
17.- Ranked is balanced, which invites you to use the unique units of each civ from the Feudal Age and the rest of the ages. In other games like AoE2, it was pure Archer in feudal (independent of the civ) and the first one to make knights or mangonels won.
18.- Has enough space for many, many new DLC and civilizations, campaigns, custom campaigns, maps, etc.
Of course, the game still has room for improvement, but even how it is now, it’s still very fun, especially in team multiplayer.
Now, for all the points already discussed, I would say that AoE IV is better in several aspects than AoE2.
Age of Empires III is the game that least resembles the Age of Empires franchise.
The resource collection system is different. The game has cards that can influence the game a lot, etc.The combat scheme is also different because medieval cannons were primitive and simpler. Now, I particularly don’t like Age III and the economy and card dynamics in the game make Age III a non AOE game.
What Age IV could copy from Age III is perhaps the hiring of mercenaries, but alliances with local indigenous have more characteristics of Age III because it is set in the colonial period, so it makes more sense. But Age IV is medieval, where these metropolises emerge, so it doesn’t make much sense for them to exist in Age IV.
The victory by conquering a sacred point and the wonders made Age IV very interesting in my opinion.
Maybe they will add mercenaries in the future. This game is relatively new and a lot is still in development.
The soundtrack of Age IV is incomparably superior!
The Age III also has an old engine, it’s super heavy. I prefer this brand new one, as for the rest you need to wait a bit as the improvements are gradual and take time.
true in a it could hit higher fps with better cpu optimization sense (check AOM:retold for reference on what it could perform like in very cpu heavy scenarios), but not so true on input latency sense, essence in general falls flat in that category, feeling like playing west coast USA server from europe in singleplayer, but at least it is seemingly properly cpu optimized, or at least more properly than aoe3, lets face it, hitting 12 fps with 20% gpu load like aoe3 DE does ain’t exactly playable
soundtrack not really, the entirety of audio design however, absolutely, as entire package, but aoe4 soundtrack to me while more dynamic is a bit less memorable, but ofc its my opinion
aoe4 does win in 1 condition no one mentioned here, not against 2 but it is a win compared to aoe3, and thats visual clarity, be it hp bars, telling units from terrain etc. how visible things are, area where aoe4 falls pretty flat is telling units apart, aoe2 and even 3 in this case have very clear silhouettes with aoe2 having only few exceptions with two hand swordsman and champion, and in aoe3 all musket units hold guns on their side vertically while riflemen hold them in both hands sideways, horses being specific colors for specific unit type which is the case in 2 and 3, and AOM. imo 4 is far weaker in this area, its easier to tell units from background yes, but its often a pain to tell units apart from each other, them using oversized weapons is very much relic compensating for giving all units on foot or on horse identical silhouettes and keeping all horses dark
I don’t remember if Age III had a full soundtrack for each civilization, but AOE IV does.
Some civilizations have boring and dull soundtracks, but Mali has a very unique one with African drums, Mongol uses instruments from the Mongol empire and that unique mouth sound, German has a sinister gothic sacred chant and Rus has a very good soundtrack too, the best in my opinion!
Best soundtrack:
I was watching this HRE youtuber fight a hacker and I remember getting goosebumps from the soundtrack, very well done.
HRE
Does Age III have such well-crafted soundtracks for each civilization?
aoe3, like 2 before it, i see your taking it fairly personaly, has a civ jingle and then unlike 2 a soundtrack filled with tunes that like in 4 change depending on what is going on, they aren’t per civ like in 4, but remember i never called 4 bad, i just called it not as memorable to ME, to me the tunes in 2 and 3, even newly added ones are all memorable, aoe4 to me seems to rely too heavily on main AOE theme everywhere, despite still being high quality work regardless of that nitpick
Music and audio are 50% of the game. The ambient sound and the voices echoing during the gameplay caught my attention. Classical music exists today, but especially because games and movies pay for this type of work, so I felt that the money I spent was very well invested in the product I received, in addition to contributing to the culture of humanity in general, works with music are very significant.
This is all preferences. My preference is AoE2, which outshined and outshines AoE3 by far, imo. And AoE3 probably outshines AoE4, which is odd for me to say.
I never really want to play AoE3 again (only once per 5 or 10 years for nostalgia’s sake), and yet AoE2 is a big draw. Just depends on what type of game and gameplay you prefer. Many love AoE3 much more than AoE2.
If you want walls and castles/forts that don’t work (i.e., collapse when pushed on by a pinky, figuratively speaking), then AoE3 is for you. (Although, AoE2 is catching up in this regard, as defenses have been nerfed beyond recognition over time, along with offensive automations)
If you love build limits and waiting for cannons to swivel around while you take a swig of your Pepsi or Coke, then AoE3 is for you
If you love hearing the sound of a door slamming shut every time you click a building, or hearing “Commandement! Riiight!” and the sound of coins jiggling a million times per match, then, yes, AoE3 is great for this, too
Not being able to wall over various terrain features and getting a train webcam view of parts of the map without effort, then AoE3 shines
Some players probably don’t care about these things, or prefer them. That’s their preference/choice. Thankfully, AoE3 is there for them.
I’m also not a fan of AoE3 & 4’s slow, floaty animations (like for lumberjacks and miner swings) and gravity that is nowhere near -9.8m/s^2.
I love the snappier animations and higher gravity of AoE2, just seems more realistic and less cartoony to me
Floaty anims also made their way to AoM:R. So it’s probably a style choice or thinking that realistic animations are not very important, since 3 of the past 3 games have featured this. I just don’t like it
Sure, AoE2 has many audio and gameplay issues, quirks, and annoyances, as well, but with AoE3 I just can’t.
AoE2 somewhat makes up for it with gameplay that I like. I still need to mod its highly annoying audio files, though. DE made it harder for me, but a user here outlined that it can be fairly easy. It’s still more effort for me to do than AoE2:HD and before… so much so that I haven’t done it in 5 years. Compared to AoE2:HD which I modded in 10 minutes.
Now imagine how I feel about AoE3 compared to AoE2. That’s how mediocre I feel AoE3 is to AoE2, in comparison. If you haven’t tried AoE2:DE, you should give it a try. If cannonballs shooting down troops is a big reason for your AoE3 enjoyment, though, you’ll be disappointed.
Yeah, AoE4’s audio is well done. I don’t like how chatty the units are, though. I wish there was a mod to cut 90% of what they say. When playing RTS games, I just want a quick acknowledgment of my unit selection; not soliloquys.
Oddly, I find AoE2:DEs new symphonic or orchestral soundtrack to be overwhelming, too, so I use the classic soundtrack mod. Not everything needs to be perfect clasiscal symphonies, imo, yet video games are finding this more and more necessary. AoE4’s soundtrack is wordly enough that its high-caliber production doesn’t bother me as much
Aoe3 is more like a spin off, aoe4 is much more like the rest of the games in the series. I have many more hours of aoe3 than aoe4 having played it since legacy, it’s a fantastic game and they can both co-exist as they offer very different things.
Aoe3 wins in terms of things like naval warfare and the card system which allows for a ton of strategic options but aoe4 has far better campaignsand I really like the gameplay.
I think it’s quite important to see AoE 3 rather as a sequel to AoM than to AoE 2 because some of the design decisions (removing stone, simplifying the way economy works with instant-gathering in case of Atlanteans) already was in AoM.
In that regard, AoM was also a sequel to AoE 2 and streamlined some of its aspects, such as Blacksmith/Armory upgrades, moving technologies you’d find in the University in AoE 2 to the respective building in AoM (Wall upgrades, Tower upgrades, Murder Holes/Boiling Oil).
If someone played AoE 2, a lot of things in AoE 3 will make a lot more sense if they also played AoM and vice versa.
big kicker was, a lot of aoe3 design didn’t make sense as sequel to 2 unless you played all 3 games in order they released, and since AOM happens to be the link between aoe2 and 3 and just wasn’t played anywhere near as much as 2 or 3, it makes sense there’s a disconnect
AoE4 basically combines elements from AoE3 and AoE2
Gemeplay is designated to be hybrid between old AoE2 - which is improved AoE1 - the original AoE formula, and innovative Age of Mythology and Age of Empires 3,
For many people AoE3 is “not perfect AoE game” - it simplifies economy too much, the counter system is complicated and bad
but neither spectacular in the mixing which is a dissapointment if there an actual mixing we could have an extra summon abilities like aom god powers per age or the age up mechanic mixed or separately for uniqueness like aoeo or aoe 3 after expansions which they gave more variety than just an extra free building with some adjustment even after the rework of them most of them act lhat way reducing the point of being aoe 4 an game with assymetric civs like aom which did better onthe age up bonus
, always a classic reference
