Today we might see aoe4 on E3 so I thought i’d put a list together what worries me the most.
-windows 10 exclusive
-windows store exclusive
-not being released on steam and other pc stores
-released too soon
-too few civs
-too little multiplayer and singleplayer features(i.e leaderboard missing cough aoe1 DE, no quicksearch for 1v1/2v2/3v3, no decay system cough aom EE)
-set in a modern era(or anything with guns for that matter)
-it having any sort of homecity or mmo aspect
-relic trying to make it a moba(or a battle royale, mmo, survival, dumbed down version of a rts)
-card game mechcanic like in halo wars 2
-pay to win/loot boxes
-it having relic squad mechanics
-it being made in the essence engine rather than an upgraded bang engine which brings me to some of the following points:
-no editor. triggers, recorded games, modding(and locked behind UWP, so no direct transfer possible), and then us being sold these as dlc’s.
-camera at a weird angle(company of heroes 2)
-units meshing too much into the environment(basically no clear graphics, hard to see whats going on)
-units too big(or ships too big like in aoe3)
-too much screenclutter and special effects, hard to see whats going on
-units and buildings look like diplo or lego plumped on some bad looking realistic textures(company of heroes 2/ hw2, dawn of war 3)
-lag/bad performance
some other points that worry me
-short campaign and too easy(and not co-op)
-the gameplay itself being too spammy(aoeo, sc2) too much units on the screen who are all grouped as one big deathball meaning archers will be OP
-too fast paced(the slower the game is the more strategic)
-too micro heavy but almost no macro(economy aspect is what makes aoe series fun)
-armies being as big as 200 units to the point its more about positioning rather than microing units(really shouldnt listen to any noob who wants 500 units at once on his screen) and you cant see whats going on either every unit just dies in 1 second. individual unit management should be a thing. with stronger units having maybe 1 special ability with a recharge
anyway I hope to see aoe4 today on E3. lets see how many of these points we get down lol
(If they want their way, its ok, but have it as time exclusive.)
-armies being as big as 200 units to the point its more about positioning rather than microing units(really shouldnt listen to any noob who wants 500 units at once on his screen) and you cant see whats going on either every unit just dies in 1 second. individual unit management should be a thing. with stronger units having maybe 1 special ability with a recharge
-too much screenclutter and special effects, hard to see whats going on
(This alone will ruin the game, more units and effects mean more simulation, then more lag. No thank you.)
-too fast paced(the slower the game is the more strategic)
-short campaign and too easy(and not co-op)
-pay to win/loot boxes
-no editor. triggers, recorded games, modding(and locked behind UWP, so no direct transfer possible), and then us being sold these as dlc’s.
-it having any sort of homecity or mmo aspect
-too little multiplayer and singleplayer features(i.e leaderboard missing cough aoe1 DE, no quicksearch for 1v1/2v2/3v3, no decay system cough aom EE)
-camera at a weird angle(company of heroes 2)
-relic trying to make it a moba(or a battle royale, mmo, survival, dumbed down version of a rts)
(uhmmm…yes, this is what I was kept on saying since beginning but you all had misunderstanding, thanks for better words.)
And yes, finger crossed. Good luck for E3 Relic && Microsoft. If they don’t show this in their press conference at least show in PC Gamer Show.
DoW3 was really good example of it,
locked away from public for 5 years in development, what resulted in a game nobody wanted.
A professional team like that one from Blizzard does at least show their creation mid production
and does honestly and openly discuss what direction it should take.
-It is 100% certain that aoe4 will be a windows 10 exclusive. That is because microsoft is getting paid large amounts of money by the NSA to get as much people as possible to use W10, which is basically spyware made by microsoft for the NSA. When you install windows 10 you should read the useragreement. It says literally that you give permission for microsoft to follow what you are typing and doing on your pc.
-I would like aoe4 not to have more then 6 civs. Here is the reason why. Most aoe games have to much civs to have a chance of getting decent amounts of recorded games for the civ. Besides that having a lot of civs is usually bad for balancing and balance is 100% important for esports. And esports is by far the most important reason why SC2 won the RTS battle vs all the other rts games.
Top3 of the worst possible decisions relic could make:
-Pay to win mechanics of any type. Not taking into account that new civs usually are a few percent better, because you had 0 practise with them compared to other civs. But it should be changed with patches over time.
-Grind to win. No RTS players want to grind to get the right gear or cards or level to be competitive. This is comparable to making a game pay to win. In diablo3 the best player in the world is botting thousands of hours a year to farm the best gear.
Micro transactions with 10 dlc’s per year. Relic is a notorious micro transaction company.
The game should have a lot of choices in it. The old rock- paper- scissors style rts games are not good enough. For example i dislike the build villagers build army style rts if that is the only choice you need to make: “make as much stuff as possible”. That is what i like about cards, choosing age up techs or gear being implemented to a game. As long as it is not about grinding or pay to win… The game should be about decisions and not about apm. Apm games suck because whole generations of koreans are burned out before they are 25. I like watching starcraft, but i dislike the fact that a player like MVP was totally burned out of the game. He had to take surgery to his arm/ shoulder and he will most likely never be able to do anything behind a pc for the rest of his live.
So they didn’t showcase anything even though they had a lot of PCs on stage, I hope they do something at PC gaming show. Otherwise I, along with many aoe fans, would be disappointed.
Grind to win. No RTS players want to grind to get the right gear or cards or level to be competitive. This is comparable to making a game pay to win. In diablo3 the best player in the world is botting thousands of hours a year to farm the best gear.
THIS is the thing you and everyone else need to fear the most, because it’s the most probable to feature in the game. Carolina Mastreta, AoE4 dev, stated she was working on such a system.
This is from her Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/caromastretta/
I’m currently part of the design team of Age of Empires IV. My focus is on systems and structures that turn the players time investment in-game into meaningful outcomes: from social systems to progression, retention and identity-building mechanisms. I have a passion for data and research, so I strive to inform my design decisions with a thorough understanding of the market and competition.
I’ve been trying to raise awareness among the community about this before it’s too late but most people wont listen, saying progression systems are something else, when (also corroborated with other information from Relic interviews and jobs) it’s pretty obvious what it’s about. I have also tried to contact Carolina, but she wouldn’t answer. So yeah, this can be the single worst thing to happen to AOE4.
Nice find there. I think that’s actually really good news. I want to sink a ton of time into AoE4 and have all sorts of cool looking buildings and units. I also want to compete with a team in some meta alliance wars. All good news.
Optimism. We know next to nothing about the game. I’d be curious about whether this person’s job description existed for the last few Relic titles and what game features that position contributed. That would be helpful information.
For years and years, every single time MS ever posted about any AoE game, no matter how unrelated the tweet or fb post, it was met with countless players shouting about AoE4. Look back if you somehow don’t remember this.
MS couldn’t announce a new game or patch without the conversation being taken over by chants for AoE4.
As MS was about to launch a remastered AoE1 DE and announce two more, it seems very logical they would simultaneously tell us they are also developing AoE4. It lets us relax and focus on the new releases without worrying that MS is wasting resources on definitive editions at the expense of AoE4. MS assured us they heard us and are pushing out lots of games at once.
Yeah, but it will be too late, so whats the use, might as well not made the game in the first place. Ending up with another DoW3 fiasco where they launched with just 1 game mode, 3 or 4 maps, no mod support, and not even observer support but focusing on expensive cinematics instead, having them wonder afterwards why the game wasnt successful and blame it on “RTS is dead” instead of their head in sand approach?
I’m trying to raise some awareness myself and not be ignorant about it and hope for the best, but are they listening? Do they even care or are we just wasting our time? 0 communication, 0 transparency, just a head in sand approach again Im afraid. They will go like: ok gents and ladies, here is the final project we worked on with apparently 0 feedback all the way, surprise surprise, we hope you like it!
@IamDalv said:
Yeah, but it will be too late, so whats the use, might as well not made the game in the first place. Ending up with another DoW3 fiasco where they launched with just 1 game mode, 3 or 4 maps, no mod support, and not even observer support but focusing on expensive cinematics instead, having them wonder afterwards why the game wasnt successful and blame it on “RTS is dead” instead of their head in sand approach?
I’m trying to raise some awareness myself and not be ignorant about it and hope for the best, but are they listening? Do they even care or are we just wasting our time? 0 communication, 0 transparency, just a head in sand approach again Im afraid. They will go like: ok gents and ladies, here is the final project we worked on with apparently 0 feedback all the way, surprise surprise, we hope you like it
Are you exaggerating.
@IamDalv said:
Yeah, but it will be too late, so whats the use, might as well not made the game in the first place. Ending up with another DoW3 fiasco where they launched with just 1 game mode, 3 or 4 maps, no mod support, and not even observer support but focusing on expensive cinematics instead, having them wonder afterwards why the game wasnt successful and blame it on “RTS is dead” instead of their head in sand approach?
I’m trying to raise some awareness myself and not be ignorant about it and hope for the best, but are they listening? Do they even care or are we just wasting our time? 0 communication, 0 transparency, just a head in sand approach again Im afraid. They will go like: ok gents and ladies, here is the final project we worked on with apparently 0 feedback all the way, surprise surprise, we hope you like it!
We have not even seen or played it yet don’t jump to conclussions just yet. The fact that they announced it the way they did tells me the game is very far off. They have nothing to show yet but they will. Give it time.
I know, but Im talking about the direction they might take, thats not going to change later on if the feedback will be negative, it will be too late. Blizzard for example worked with the community all the way through to make sure they werent heading the wrong way with SC2, and they were very familiar with the IP unlike Relic.