By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

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

Tagged games:

You pretty much said it in the OP.

The 2nd one was one of the best games of all time.

After the second one there was seemingly no way to mostly keep things the same... so they had to try a wild departure... afterall this isn't like a FPS where you can just tweak stuff a bit and be fine and sell new copies.



Around the Network
JEMC said:
Baalzamon said:
JEMC said:

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

Do not even bring Empire Earth into this.  That series had the same issue.  The first one was absolutely amazing, and the second one was horrible compared to it.  The third one was absolutely atrocious.

Please don't get me wrong. I was only using Empire Earth to show the time frame I think Ensemble should have used for Age of Empires 3, not that they should have copied that game.

We could discuss if going from prehistoric times to the future was necessary or not, maybe going from the Middle Age till today could have been enough, but focusing the game on that short period of time like they did, went against them.

 

A little off-topic: does anyone know how to make Age of Empires run on Win 7 without problems? It's very odd to play with when rivers and seas are purple, among other things.

To be fair, Rise of Nations did something similar and was released and published by Microsoft 2 years earlier. Both Ensemble and Microsoft probably had that in mind when developing AOEIII.



Considering that the market is returning to much more old school values you would think that consumers would be yearning for another AoE2 a la NSMB. A remake with updated graphics (I mean it honestly doesn't need them at all) would seel like hotcakes I think and cost what, like nothing!

If all the upcoming consoles go the Pad-Controller route then I think it would make RTS games like this popular again, except now for consoles. Pikmin is already going to be one of the showcase games for what RTS games can do, obviously Pikmin is a very accessible RTS.



Ahh the memories

 

 



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints

thetonestarr said:
Slimebeast said:
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.

1000% only this. Anything else is wrong.

AoM was also a genius and objectively great game, and if you didn't like it you're wrong. There were also four civilizations, with the quite cheap and easily obtained expansion. You can't have a dozen civilizations in a game about well-known mythology. It just wouldn't have worked out right, and would have been too convoluted and complicated.

Also didn't Age of Mythology give players 3 different gods for each of the 3 nations, in order to cause it so there would be like 9 different civs based on which god the players picked with each of the 3 base nations.  Ok, this might of gone up to 12 civs with the expansion.



Around the Network
richardhutnik said:

Also didn't Age of Mythology give players 3 different gods for each of the 3 nations, in order to cause it so there would be like 9 different civs based on which god the players picked with each of the 3 base nations.  Ok, this might of gone up to 12 civs with the expansion.

It does have three different gods for each civilization, and each god comes with their own special powers, units, and upgrades. For each age, you also choose between two different minor gods, which offer different powers, units, and upgrades. So while you may not have a whole ton of choice when it comes to how the units look, there are tons of different ways to approach playing even the same civilization. 



Scoobes said:
DanneSandin said:
I just looked up AoEO - 3 (THREE) playable civs! Unless you buy the premium package, then you get an additional 2 civs... Dafuq? really? I wanna be able to choose from a variety of civs!!

It's because each civ is completely customisable and you have to build them up yourself. Essentially, you control how your civ develops. One player playing as the Greeks could have a very different civ in terms of bonuses, techs and units then somone else playing as Greek. Plus, because you have to build up a single civ, it takes ages to get them up to lvl 40, so you'll have a tough time playing all of them to a competitive level.

well, that does seem pretty sweet! It's kinda like a RPG RTS?? but do you have to compete online? I'm not good at that stuff. I once tried to play starcraft online and was killed after like 5 minutes of play... I suck at multiplayer online.



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

robzo100 said:
Considering that the market is returning to much more old school values you would think that consumers would be yearning for another AoE2 a la NSMB. A remake with updated graphics (I mean it honestly doesn't need them at all) would seel like hotcakes I think and cost what, like nothing!

Absolutely. I am sure we'll some day see at least a Kickstarter project trying to make a spiritual sequel to Age of Empires 1/2.

The question is who is going to make it. Hopefully Rick Goodman and Bruce Shelley get their masterminds together. That would become absolutely huge and immediately break a new record on Kickstarter.



DanneSandin said:

well, that does seem pretty sweet! It's kinda like a RPG RTS?? but do you have to compete online? I'm not good at that stuff. I once tried to play starcraft online and was killed after like 5 minutes of play... I suck at multiplayer online.

You don't have to compete online.  Almost all of the quests you run into are playable by single-player.  However, some single-player quests are easier if you co-op with a friend. 

The revamped AI will force you to learn to be competitive online, you can use lazy strategies early on, but once you hit about level 20 you best step up your game or you're going to be served a can of whoop-ass.  It's not as bad as when they made the initial changes, but it's still more difficult than it was originally.  There were level 5/7 quests I would do just for something to XP up on, which were seriously good time-wasters.  Now, with a high level civ, and the changes, they are challenging if you don't act fast.

AOEO is not for the faint of heart.

Also, while you don't have to play online against other people, there are PVP matches that earn both XP and Gold (you need this), and you can also be a part of an alliance which will earn you gold and empire points (again you need these).

The civs available in AOEO are Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Celts, and Babylonians.

AOEO is free, with the booster packs and premium civs being available with the Empire Points.  Empire Points are earned in-game or can be purchased through Steam or Games for Windows Live. 



Adinnieken said:
DanneSandin said:

well, that does seem pretty sweet! It's kinda like a RPG RTS?? but do you have to compete online? I'm not good at that stuff. I once tried to play starcraft online and was killed after like 5 minutes of play... I suck at multiplayer online.

You don't have to compete online.  Almost all of the quests you run into are playable by single-player.  However, some single-player quests are easier if you co-op with a friend. 

The revamped AI will force you to learn to be competitive online, you can use lazy strategies early on, but once you hit about level 20 you best step up your game or you're going to be served a can of whoop-ass.  It's not as bad as when they made the initial changes, but it's still more difficult than it was originally.  There were level 5/7 quests I would do just for something to XP up on, which were seriously good time-wasters.  Now, with a high level civ, and the changes, they are challenging if you don't act fast.

AOEO is not for the faint of heart.

Also, while you don't have to play online against other people, there are PVP matches that earn both XP and Gold (you need this), and you can also be a part of an alliance which will earn you gold and empire points (again you need these).

The civs available in AOEO are Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Celts, and Babylonians.

AOEO is free, with the booster packs and premium civs being available with the Empire Points.  Empire Points are earned in-game or can be purchased through Steam or Games for Windows Live. 

The more I hear of this game the more I wanna play it... I might even try to lure one of my bros into play with me!! But how different can the civs become? My favorite ancient civs are the Romans - but they're not playable... Can the Greek become something similar to the Romans (which actually be pretty cool if it was possible, and kind of realistic; the Romans "borrowed" quite a few things from the Greeks).



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.