Forums - Gaming Discussion - What went wrong with Age Of Empires?

Tagged games:

Age of Empires 1 was a great game------->Age of Empires 2 was one of the best games of all time------->Age of Empires 3 was one of the worst games of all time

WHAT HAPPENED?! What ASSHOLE was responsible for this? >:{

This reminds me of Turok: Evolution (one of the best games of all time) being followed by Turok (2008 game) which was a piece of shit...

*sigh*



Around the Network

The Xbox



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

zarx said:
The Xbox


Whaddaya mean?



2D -> 3D, at least for me, same thing happened with C&C.



@Twitter | Switch | Steam

You say tomato, I say tomato 

"¡Viva la Ñ!"

Is AoE III really that bad? I've always had my eye on it as a game I'd get eventually because I loved AoE II so much. And I also liked Age of Mythology, but not as much as AoE II.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Around the Network
man-bear-pig said:
zarx said:
The Xbox


Whaddaya mean?


MSGS moved all their resources to the Xbox, and pushed Ensemble to make Xbox games which then constantly got canceled. I never actually played AoE3 (loved the first 2, just never got round to 3 for some reason) but from what I heard the dev team wanted to do something really diferent with the game, some of that stuff didn't really pan out. Tho it still managed 2.5m copies and was reviewed well so it can't have been that bad. Pity they never got the chance to take another crack at it as MS wanted more Halo games.

 

Some of the canceled games looked good



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

For me, going from sprites to polygons, so going from 2D to 3D as TomaTito says, made it lose some of its appeal, of its "magic". Btw, the same thing happened with Mythology, which was even worse because it had those mythical creatures that ruined the game for me.

They also got the age setting wrong, it was more modern that the previous games, but it didn't advance enough, or any. I mean, playing as a prehistoric village that manages to become the Roman Empire is satisfying, but playing as British citizens that try to conquest North America... and that's it, isn't that exciting.

The more sensible approach would have been do a "Empire Earth" game. Starting with prehistoric men and ending with intergalactical civilizations.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

binary solo said:
Is AoE III really that bad? 


YES.



TomaTito said:

2D -> 3D, at least for me, same thing happened with C&C.


Hmm...interesting. The simpler the graphics, the better the game when it comes to RTS games. Same with Cossacks (EW > NW)



JEMC said:

They also got the age setting wrong, it was more modern that the previous games, but it didn't advance enough, or any. I mean, playing as a prehistoric village that manages to become the Roman Empire is satisfying, but playing as British citizens that try to conquest North America... and that's it, isn't that exciting.

The more sensible approach would have been do a "Empire Earth" game. Starting with prehistoric men and ending with intergalactical civilizations.

This, so much this.

AoE 3 had innovative gameplay mechanics but the historical time period between the 16th century and the Industrial Age simply wasn't interesting. And I didn't want to freaking colonize America, give me something epic! And the SP campaign that depicted the history of the fictional Black family was far from epic (not that SP matters that much for an RTS).

The Ancient times and Medieval times just are so much much more interesting settings than the era between 1500-1850, from a historical and mythological perspective, at least in the context of a game.

And swords-archers-siege is much more exciting than guns and cannons.

Clearly they should have tried an Empire Earth approach or just chosen a different epoch no matter if it had ruined the chronological order.

So that's what went wrong. Age of Empires 3 failed. Actually it already started with AoM, because they chose bad timing to go off the historical path and it fractured the player base. And only 3 civs in AoM, WTF was that? AoE2 was dearly loved not least because it had so many civs.