I would partially disagree.
Empires still exist in the modern era, they just don’t call themselves empires anymore.
Empires in the 20th and 21st Centuries are called superpowers.
By any objective standard, the United States, the Soviet Union, and modern-day China could all be considered equivalent to the old empires in terms of their power and influence, both militarily and economically.
AOE 4 should cover the ancient times. You could Say: they already done Aoede"!! Yes, but it’s really old game: no formations, no walls, no inique units and civilizations, pathfinding problems.
On the other hand, AoEO was also covering antiquity and it was the most recent one. I’m afraid there’s an argument for all periods.
Also, imo the word ‘empires’ should not be taken too literally. It’s just another way to portray a civilization in game (and build your own empire with it). There have been nations in age games that were not strictly empires.
I disagree with the idea that AoE IV should return to the Medieval Era. The way the Age of Empires series progressed was through different ages. Like from the ancient era to the medieval era to the industrial age. They should progress forward, as we already have AoE 2 for the medieval era. Perhaps start with WW1, the most logical place to move forward to. I understand that many of you will find it weird to have modern units in the game, but I think it could be done. WW1 did not have extensive use of vehicles, though they did use a lot of cavalry. Infantry was the bulk of all armies and artillery could act as a replacement for the Howitzer and canons from AoE3. They could the WW1 tank as a special unit that is really expensive and could only be obtained in the late game. As for ships, this shouldn’t be a problem, as even Empire Earth manged to do it. Planes should be used like in Star wars Galactic Battlegrounds( AOE2 star wars edition- it’s on steam, check it out!), where planes could be selected and used to attack units. As for the resource management and micro management of cities, I cannot think of a clear Idea. So, this is open for suggestion. Feel free to correct me where possible.
I totally agree with you.
In the past weren’t released many good ancient / medieval RTS games.
Maybe games like 0.A.D.or Ancestors Legacy, but also these aren’t games I would play for months. They aren’t bad, but not as good as an Age of Empires.
So I think it would make sense having a medieval setting in Aoe 4.
Relic has many opportunities to make the game much different to Aoe 2. They use a new engine, possibly different art style, making fights or animations much more variable than in Aoe 2 DE.
Maybe we get more cinematic cutscenes, a more personal character perspective of the history.
It COULD even be possible to create your “own” heroes and so on and so on…
Theoretically there are so much opportunities to have Age 4 in medieval setting without making it feels like a modern copy of Aoe2.
And I think the Definitive Editions will be played by the great Age fans mainly,
Aoe 4 can reach (much) bigger audience, especially with a medieval setting.
I think we have a 40 % chance to get Aoe in medieval setting.
Yes, the DEs are marketed to the existing fan base, whereas AoE IV will presumably be designed from the ground up to be marketed to people who have never played the series before. In that case, there would be ample room for overlap without it just being AoE II all over again
I liked AoE 2, but for a modern game its to slow. I played a few days ago, and there it is why i only play 1 or 2 games in a month. The building phase is too long. It takes 9-10 Minutes to get in to Fast Feudal and about 15 minutes to get in to Fast Castle Age. This is too long, feels everytime a waste of time. In a modern game you should have a good timing attack in feudalage after 6 minutes. That means Feudalage should be finsished after 5 minutes. I dont think they change AoE2 DE in that way… If i am fine and they can make AoE4 what ever they want. But AoE 2 DE only get better textures. That means they could make AoE 4 in antiquity or medival Time and have different game then AoE 2 but or 1. But more based on competitive. This way they would get a bigger fanbase.
Explore the antiquity again.
Honestly, I prefer AOE to remain at the pace it has. It is not supposed to be an RTS about “Base” building. You’re building a city and an empire, not some outpost with an exclusively military purpose. Yeah, the fighting and stuff relies on that, but AOE is about the fantasy as much as the actual conquest. That, and it’s nice to have an RTS that is more methodical and not about “BLITZ UP IN THE NEXT MILISECOND OR YOU’VE LOST”. Being allowed to take your time (but not too much time) to just… I don’t know, lay out your city, think about the defenses, just enjoy the actual game instead of racing to the finish line like you would in StarCraft or Dawn of War. (I’m not knocking either of those two games. I LOVE Dawn of War… but it’s for a different mood than AOE).
As far as whether or not AOE 4 should go medieval; I’m on the fence. At this point, I’m just curios to see what they do at all. My main hope is that they make the game’s scale bigger than AOE 3 either way. As I’ve said in other threads; Age of Empires is about you building a civilization and creating your kingdom, not being a random dude in someone else’s empire, setting up a backwater outpost.
the Empires still existing… but they are called Empires.
Its the question do Microsoft want to have a game that many people will enjoy or do they want to publish a game for some old people that just want to play RTS that it was in the old days. For me I like rankings and games that does not bores me for 10- 15 minutes till i can get the fight. I address the early game. Late Game is fine in AoE 2 and it is what it needs to be. You can have an city or empire but with earlier fights. So if oponnent defend well you get your Late game. (I dont like dawn of war f.e.)
Its the question do Microsoft want to have a game that many people will enjoy or do they want to publish a game for some old people that just want to play RTS that it was in the old days.
Name me one such fast RTS from today besides StarCraft 2 that many people play. There isn’t 
So why wouldn’t they repeat the success recipe of AoE2?
And early game in AoE is very intense I would say, depending on your skill as well, there are a lot of details that you have to pay attention to in preparation for later stages. A proper early game setup is the phase newer players struggle the most actually, whereas in SC2 it’s rather the opposite due to static and explored maps.
AoE 1 Stone Age --> Antique
AoE 2 Medieval
AoE 3 American Colonial Time
AoE 4 Should be end of 19 Century Maybe WW 1–>WW2
I didnt say change the concept, just that early game should be shorter. Its ok to explore, find your sheep, hunt boar etc… But in reducing cost for feudal age for example, would change it a bit… I would maybe do less worker, but would go faster in feudalage… Or other possiblity change time that needs to develope feudalage about 50%. Other possibilty let me create workers during exploration of feudalage.
I would like if games would sometimes start in castle age, not always dark age. This allows to get into interesting action quicker. Castle and imperial age have much more possibilities than dark/feudal. Campaign scenarios usually start from castle/imperial because they don’t want to bore the player with dark/feudal. Also would be interesting to see what kind of meta would pro players come up with for those advanced age start games.
For me Dark Age isnt boring, i like to start in dark age but it needs to be shorter.
There are few (good) RTS games focused in prehistory -> middle age. Age III wasn’t a sucess like older Age of Empires, and I’m sure that at least part of this is to blame this advance in time (beyond middle age).
I see two good options that they can do: go from prehistory to middle age (like a fusion of aoe1+aoe2) or just focus in middle age with a perspective really deep about each continent, making each civilization to feel really unique.
I don’t want to play Command & Conquer or Company of Heroes but “Age of Empires!” <—
Who said Age 3 wasnt a sucess? It was. But we never see anything after this just because microsoft decided to focus on Xbox.
When it wouldnt be a sucees we would never be seen the Expansions. +Mytholigy
Technically true, but the “empires” of the 19th and 20th centuries were nations that had already been established for centuries and reconsolidated their power.
In contrast, Age of Empires I focused on the literal dawn of civilization. Then, Age of Empires II starts in the Dark Ages, when new civilizations rose out of the ashes of the Roman Empire.
So what I mean is that setting AoE IV in the modern age kind of runs counter to the traditional AoE gameplay where you build an empire from nothing. By the 20th century, all the modern civilizations already exist. One could argue that AoE III is similar in this way since it focuses on colonization.
No, is is a waste of time. less deep in History and increases more generic units.