We Want Age Of Empire 4!

A new aoe can cover all saga, like :

age 1 : tool age
age 2 : antiquity
age 3 : feudal
age 4 : Renaissance

Something like that.

@Amphiprion said:
A new aoe can cover all saga, like :

age 1 : tool age
age 2 : antiquity
age 3 : feudal
age 4 : Renaissance

Something like that.

No, No, NO! That’s sound like Empire Earth game, which was made on purpose to explore all ages but without focusing on too much stuff as AoE does.

A new AOE must follow a age order that cover a specific timeline as the previous games did. You can’t jump from antiquity to renaissance in one game.

Empire earth = 15 different age.

A new AOE must follow a age order that cover a specific timeline as the previous games did. You can’t jump
from antiquity to renaissance in one game.

What’s specific timeline cover aoe1 ? -10000 to +500 ? Time is continuous, we split up the periods arbitrarily (antiquity is not same for europ and asian).

Honestly though, how could an AoE IV set in modern times even work thematically? In ancient times, cities had to defend themselves. In medieval times, you had castles and fortified towns.

But in modern times, how would it even work? There isn’t enough time for an empire builder RTS to take place in, there is no open space to build new cities in, and modern supply chains don’t work that way. People during World War I didn’t go to the middle of nowhere, start a new village, build up a city, then build tanks and planes in their back yards. It just didn’t work like that. The disconnect between gameplay and reality would just not work.

Even in AoE III, to use the post-medieval period, they had to set the game in the New World and place an emphasis on the new colonies being bootstrap affairs with shipments from the Home City. (Quite clever, actually: the historical limitation became a gameplay feature.) But in WWI? It doesn’t make sense!

Not to mention that AoE III had to be very careful with how it used cannons and rifles to still make its style of combat work. If you have access to machine-guns and aircraft, the old style of playing AoE just wouldn’t work. If you tried implementing the old style of combat with new technology, you’d be stuck in trenches, unable to move without sacrificing half of your army, in a massive war of attrition where you fight for months over a few square feet of mud. You know
 LIKE WHAT HAPPENED IN REAL LIFE

AOE4? Sure.

WWI? ■■■■ no.

No thanks.

@“Andy P” said:
This series is about when empires were around. I think that puts us firmly in ancient times. If I wanted to play a game with tanks and lazer guns, I’d already be playing one.

Many empires exited well into the twentieth century. British, French, Dutch, Germans, Japan had Empires as late as the 1940’s. The world wars brought most of the imperialism to an end due to costs and political frictions. The few remaining empires tended to stagnate and released their holdings to help balance their post war budgets, or lost their holdings to native rebellions.

@“qweytr24” said:
With the Definitive Edition just announced A0E4 is not going to be coming anytime soon. And if it comes, it should really focus on the ancient or medieval eras. One of the main reasons I didn’t like AoE3 as much was the more modern time period.

I think you are right about not seeing an AoE4 soon. It would not make sense to release a new game while remaking an old one. It would compete with itself too much.

I might get some flack from some die-hard AoE1 and AoE2 fans, but I rather enjoyed AoE3. Sure it had its down points. I thought that revolutions was a poorly executed concept, and I could not understand why the last age was disabled in death match, but I did not have a problem with the time frame. I did hope for a more historical story and more nation options, but the units and game play were excellent.

@“Onkel_Egon” said:
Well it would be hard to implement the new kinds of warfare in a single game with ages to go through. E.g. the first age being WW1, the gameplay would be more like trench warfare, just sending troops to the enemy while firing with artillery. In the next age you would need to adjust the gameplay to this dynamic “Blitzkrieg”. And then in a chapter after you would have alter the gameplay from mass army to special forces. But also the problem on how someone would implement planes, atomic bombs etc. 
 I guess it is just impossible to create an AOE with such an discontinuous gameplay.

While I think the units and weapons would not be a problem to implement as long as thought and care is taken, I do see your point about ages. After 1800/1860, the Revolution of Military Affairs became increasingly rapid. By the Great War, the pace at which new technologies were being developed caused effective strategies and tactics at the beginning of the war to become outdated by the end of the war, and military commanders often failed to grasp the changing methods of warfare. With technologies and units changing much faster , it would be extremely difficult to assign ages to level through. There would be so much missing.

@“Fritz Kolbe” said:
Many empires exited well into the twentieth century. British, French, Dutch, Germans, Japan had Empires as late as the 1940’s.

If you are merely pointing out the simple fact that, yes, technically there were empires in the 20th Century, then I will assuredly agree with that noncontroversial point.

But if you are arguing that the Age of Empires franchise covers the two World Wars, then we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

If it is made the right way, that’s ok. I dislike linear gameplay of AoE 3, with that ‘history’ mode. I like most the way that the two older games are made. And about a WW2, i prefer medieval (knights, knights, hehehehe). But, if it is a good game
 that’s ok. To now, i’m happy with this definitive edition.

@“Andy P” said:

@“Fritz Kolbe” said:
Many empires exited well into the twentieth century. British, French, Dutch, Germans, Japan had Empires as late as the 1940’s.

If you are merely pointing out the simple fact that, yes, technically there were empires in the 20th Century, then I will assuredly agree with that noncontroversial point.

But if you are arguing that the Age of Empires franchise covers the two World Wars, then we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

Postapocalyptic age so we can start again in the stone age ;p

I would love an Age 4. I think a game set in Victorian/Edwardian times would be very difficult for them to pull off, but I don’t think it’s impossible. If it were the old ES team making it, I would have full confidence it’d come out good.

I’d also be really happy with a new game set in an earlier period. Another brand new ancient or medieval game, or another fantasy one like AoM. But I do think that if they set it anywhere other than in the real world at a time more recent than Age 3, they absolutely cannot call it Age of Empires 4. That name should be reserved for a game that continues in the tradition of each new main Age game being set at a later point in time than the last.

@ZagorathAus said:
I would love an Age 4. I think a game set in Victorian/Edwardian times would be very difficult for them to pull off, but I don’t think it’s impossible. If it were the old ES team making it, I would have full confidence it’d come out good.

I’d also be really happy with a new game set in an earlier period. Another brand new ancient or medieval game, or another fantasy one like AoM. But I do think that if they set it anywhere other than in the real world at a time more recent than Age 3, they absolutely cannot call it Age of Empires 4. That name should be reserved for a game that continues in the tradition of each new main Age game being set at a later point in time than the last.

I still don’t get the point. AoE main idea was to cover the historical periods where empires rise and fall or gave us a game to teach us about human history through strategy and battles?
I always have believe the second reason was the core purpose of whole AoE franchise.

Another redux of AoE to include post medieval warfare would be a big downer in my book.

@KingDarBoja the Edwardian era ended over 100 years ago. If that’s not a “historical period”, I don’t know what is. The scramble for Africa, a major series of imperial actions not too dissimilar to the discoveries of the New World, also occurred around the Victorian and Edwardian periods.

May I just point out that this exists?

It’s from the booklet of AoE III, I think, and it suggests that AoE will continue past revolutionary era into 20th century and then futuristic times.

Now, obviously, they don’t have to necessarily follow this; they could go into Civil War and then maybe WWI, but this booklet does show that, at one point at least, Microsoft’s gameplan was to make a modern-era AoE

@WolfieInu said:
Honestly though, how could an AoE IV set in modern times even work thematically? In ancient times, cities had to defend themselves. In medieval times, you had castles and fortified towns.

But in modern times, how would it even work? There isn’t enough time for an empire builder RTS to take place in, there is no open space to build new cities in, and modern supply chains don’t work that way. People during World War I didn’t go to the middle of nowhere, start a new village, build up a city, then build tanks and planes in their back yards. It just didn’t work like that. The disconnect between gameplay and reality would just not work.

Even in AoE III, to use the post-medieval period, they had to set the game in the New World and place an emphasis on the new colonies being bootstrap affairs with shipments from the Home City. (Quite clever, actually: the historical limitation became a gameplay feature.) But in WWI? It doesn’t make sense!

Not to mention that AoE III had to be very careful with how it used cannons and rifles to still make its style of combat work. If you have access to machine-guns and aircraft, the old style of playing AoE just wouldn’t work. If you tried implementing the old style of combat with new technology, you’d be stuck in trenches, unable to move without sacrificing half of your army, in a massive war of attrition where you fight for months over a few square feet of mud. You know
 LIKE WHAT HAPPENED IN REAL LIFE

Well, part of the storyline of AoE follows into the American Revolution. They weren’t building new settlements during the war. I don’t really think in any battling or skirmish situation ever did armies ever create entire new towns solely for the purpose of war. Set up bases and forward fortifications? Sure. Armies have and still do do that. AoE’s style of creating entirely new towns isn’t really realistic in any warring scenario, so I don’t think it really matters.

And wait, in that first bit you were complaining that the game style wouldn’t be realistic enough, but then you’re complaining that the game would also present the same challenges that happened in real life; that it would make the game too realistic. I’m so very confused


@“Andy P” said:

@“Fritz Kolbe” said:
Many empires exited well into the twentieth century. British, French, Dutch, Germans, Japan had Empires as late as the 1940’s.

If you are merely pointing out the simple fact that, yes, technically there were empires in the 20th Century, then I will assuredly agree with that noncontroversial point.

But if you are arguing that the Age of Empires franchise covers the two World Wars, then we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

I do not argue that the Age of Empires franchise covers the two World Wars, at least not currently. I argue that Empires were not delegated to the ancient times as Andy P said. I do believe that the Age of Empires could, with some adaptation, in future cover more modern wars, but I would prefer a less over-played period.

I also lay out many challenges that would come with Ensemble making a game in a more modern era. The shifting and diverse technologies, the change in tactics and strategies, the lack of stable ages to progress through all would make such a game difficult to create and still feel like a true Age of Empires sequel. There are so many technologies that would need to be left out. Strategies and tactics would be difficult to implement and still feel AoE. The modern age tech advances so fast that we see many generation of tech in single ages. These challenges would need to be overcome. If they can do that, I see no reason why the game should not be produced and tried. If they can’t overcome these obstacles, well, I’m just as happy with my AoE3, Command and Conquer series, and Company of Heroes games.

@“smitske” said:
Postapocalyptic age so we can start again in the stone age ;p

So would that imply that current empires are rebuilding from the stone age up, or would we make up new factions likely based on geographic and demographics to rebuild in the stone age? :stuck_out_tongue:

@“whahuh82” said:
It’s from the booklet of AoE III, I think, and it suggests that AoE will continue past revolutionary era into 20th century and then futuristic times.

Now, obviously, they don’t have to necessarily follow this; they could go into Civil War and then maybe WWI, but this booklet does show that, at one point at least, Microsoft’s gameplan was to make a modern-era AoE

I would like to see and AoE set in American Civil War, and perhaps the Crimean War as well. I thought that should have probably been added to AoE3 as an expansion.

@“Andy P” said:

@“Fritz Kolbe” said:
Many empires exited well into the twentieth century. British, French, Dutch, Germans, Japan had Empires as late as the 1940’s.

If you are merely pointing out the simple fact that, yes, technically there were empires in the 20th Century, then I will assuredly agree with that noncontroversial point.

But if you are arguing that the Age of Empires franchise covers the two World Wars, then we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

I do not argue that Age of Empires currently covers the world wars, but I do argue that with some ingenuity they could in future.

I also make the case why such a task would be daunting should Ensemble ever attempt to make a modern era game. I specifically state that technology has been extraordinarily diverse in the last hundred years. Any attempt to create a game spanning even the last hundred years would have a ton of relevant content missing. The changes in tactics and strategies would be difficult to program in and still have the gameplay feel like a true AoE sequel. Lastly, I state that the advancement of modern technology allows us to see many generations of tech within a short period of time. The lack of definitive ages makes structuring a modern AoE game difficult.

If the developers can overcome these obstacles in an innovative and fun way, I see no reason not to create an AoE4 game. If the developers cannot, I am just as happy with my AoE3, Command and Conquer series, and Company of Heroes games.

I don’t care which AOE game is next but when i saw the trailer for AOE 4, i wanted it. After i heared no news about it, i gave up hope of AOE 4 coming to life. AOE 4 should be next.

There was never a trailer for AoE4.