whenever you try to do something with the game, too much stuff breaks.
With the recent DLC you imported some assets from AoE1:DE into the game, and now half the game is f###ing broken.
Spectating broken, watching recs broken, hotkeys broken, joining games with the lobby code broken, etc.
The DLC was released without any testing at all (Or someone in the office said’ f### it, we just release this #### now, as it is’)
It’s way too bugged.
Steam rating for the game is 42% (2023/05/17), which is absolute rock bottom, consindering that you build everything on an approved platform.
Please keep the software quality up. Test new patches, try to fix old stuff before adding new features.
Thanks you very much.
Yeah, I don’t know what anyone expected if they found this surprising. Bugged updates are par for the course, but when they coincide with the most obviously controversial DLC by a mile, it creates an unnecessarily bad perception of the DLC. The silver lining is that the negative reviews provide a moment of reckoning and visibility for the recurrent quality control issues. Hopefully those managing AoE2 pick up on that signal at least and invest more into quality and maintenance. A lot of the complaints with RoR will be fixed eventually (bugs, limited content), but it will be hard to redeem some of the negative first impressions created by poor pathing/AI, lobby bugs, subpar communication prior to the DLC, etc. And I wish more players would send the message that they’re willing to wait longer for ############ to be more thoroughly tested, rather than demanding everything ASAP, which surely contributes to some of the rushed and half-baked outputs we get.
I’m disappointed. With coming of RoR, I wanted to go back to aoe2 after a longer break, but all the issues releated to it changed my hype to frustration instead. It feels like no real regression tests are make.
I haven’t tried the new DLC yet (though I did purchase). A good friend has told me of the new issues since the DLC release. I haven’t screamed this much at a game in… ever. There were a couple things that really bothered me before the patches but overall I enjoyed the game. I was a beta tester for ‘AOE Online’ and never (ever) was this frustrated with the game as I am now. Very long time player and purchaser of the game but I’m about this close || to just moving on.
Well this DLC was doomed to fail. People had expectations that were on two extremes. Many people wanted AOE1 civs to be more like AOE2 and join the roster, while many other people wanted AOE1 to stay original, original terrain, original everything. It was impossible to match expectations.
I for one love the DLC and gave it the best rating. I just want more Aoe 1 content.
Aoe DE was just left for dead.
I always liked Aoe 1 and it’s time period more, so getting some updates to the gameplay from Aoe 2 is SUCH a big thing. I want more though…new civs, new campaigns, etc. I hope it sells well and they fix the bugs. I don’t want Aoe 2 DE to kill Aoe 1…a second time.
I think “fail” is too strong a word until we see how the sales do relative to other DLCs, but I agree with the sentiment. All the more so since they were deadset on making this “an AoE2 DLC,” resulting in them having to make a series of suboptimal compromises to justify the strange initial decision. Like adding a civ with minimal new assets, no campaign, and no ranked play until some point in the future, as the only selling point on the AoE2 side. If they had just remade AoE:DE as a standalone, (in the AoE2 engine, with the same QoL improvements as now), it’s a lot more straightforward and I think they avoid 90% of the major complaints that aren’t bug-related, while also giving people who wanted a more expansive version of AoE1 the ability to “add” UUs/UTs, etc, in scenarios.
When did it ever happen the first time? Well after the ES era, AoE1 maintained a sizable fanbase, even if it was smaller than AoE2s. And if you’re talking DE era, AoE1:DE’s own lackluster implementation and poor management sowed the seeds of its own failure and obscurity. Regrettable, but the expected price of a poor showing, and nothing to do with AoE2.
In any case, I think any talk of AoE1 dying is dramatic and premature, and all the more so when AoE2 is clearly breathing new life into 1 via the port, at clear cost to its own quality and development. And I’m with you in very much wanting this project to succeed, if for no other reason than that the less RoR holds itself up, the more AoE2 will have to carry it. The devs surely have not come this far to abandon RoR in the face of criticism. The resulting relationship is that RoR cannot die unless AoE2 dies. They’re joined together in an arrangement that isn’t what I’d have preferred, but it can, and now must, be made to work.
They each have their own fanbase. It’s not AoE2 DE that killed AoE1, it’s the lack of players in itself.
Which is terrible. AoE2 DE dev team have the worst prioritization ever. Instead of improving or at least maintaining the quality of the game, they invested into weird things like Xbox version and RoR, which brought so much burden to maintenance, and further delaying truly critical things like fixing path finding. It’s absolutely annoying to the core fans that kept the game alive for decades.
No, Aoe 1 DE was abandoned in an unfinished and incomplete state so they could develop Aoe 2 DE.
Aoe 1 DE has many units including the cheat units not even updated.
It lacks some buildings to this day. In fact it took over a year for the Tool age Egyptian house to get added.
This DLC was the best solution, by putting it all in one game we can have both games in one, and Aoe 1 will get the support it needs.
I do worry about this a lot. Especially given the dev teams spotted history with buggy releases, was adding such major features really worth the increased maintenance burden ? Obviously someone thinks yes but this seems dubious to me…
Would love to see the data on how many sales they got from the Xbox release and Rome dlc