At no point did I say that everyone plays this game out of nostalgia.
This is the problem with quoting words out of context.
What I mentioned is that campaign content, especially the 1999 Vanilla campaigns (JeanneDArc, Barbarrosa, Saladino, William Wallace), are unlikely to get reworked, because they have their own fandom, and like one of the reasons, for nostalgia’s sake, nobody who plays the game to relive those old times (including me) would want them modified just for the sake of keeping up with the trend of reworking everything.
At most, the changes that some campaigns have been received have to do with civilizations that were used as placeholders (Teutons used as Hungary and Polony in the Genghis campaign), and that were not the correct ones for enemies, and that now that there are more truthful ones, they are included, but in general, the narrative and most aspects of the levels are maintained.
For example, the Pacachuti Campaign, now feels more “Inca” than ever without those eagle warriors.
On the other hand, when I commented, the topic was in the AoE4 forum, so I could discuss things about that game, especially directed for new AoE4 players. But now that the topic is in the AoE2 subforum, it loses its purpose, since this has been discussed quite a few times, for example:
- How to Play AOE2, Just Started and its Too Difficult Compared to AOE4
- What AOE2 Players think of AOE4?
- Is AoE4 the end for AoE2?
There are things that are appreciated in each game, and things that are not, and that’s why some prefer to play single-player or multiplayer content from one game or another, notable differences between 2D vs 3D, micro vs macro, etc., etc.
And that’s fine, everyone has their own tastes.