Official AoE 4 Thread
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
I do not think that they will do WW1 or later. It would not fit to the franchise.
Maybve the timeframe of 1500-1900 has potential for another AoE game as the focus of AoEIII was largely on colonization. Whatever happened to Europe in this timeframe was not really part of the game. Anyway, I think we can expect some good ol' sword/bow/cav game. Campaigns could include historical events which were not covered up to now, such as the rise of the Manchu/Qing dynasty, expansion of Islam, Kievan Rus, Fall of Constantinople, Thirty Years' War, Napoleonic wars, Great Northern War, Timurid empire/Mughals, etc.
I would really like to see playable countries like Sweden, Persia, Poland/PLC, Zulu, Mali, Ethiopia or the Umayyads.
Maybve the timeframe of 1500-1900 has potential for another AoE game as the focus of AoEIII was largely on colonization. Whatever happened to Europe in this timeframe was not really part of the game. Anyway, I think we can expect some good ol' sword/bow/cav game. Campaigns could include historical events which were not covered up to now, such as the rise of the Manchu/Qing dynasty, expansion of Islam, Kievan Rus, Fall of Constantinople, Thirty Years' War, Napoleonic wars, Great Northern War, Timurid empire/Mughals, etc.
I would really like to see playable countries like Sweden, Persia, Poland/PLC, Zulu, Mali, Ethiopia or the Umayyads.
Whatever is written above: this is no financial advice.
Beati pauperes spiritu.
Beati pauperes spiritu.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe2/comments/ ... h=41260fba
ZeroEmpires wrote:Meetings & Networking- We met with many of the Microsoft staff and even a couple of guys from Relic. I was very skeptical about these new announcements at first, especially given the track record with AoEHD, but coming away from Cologne I feel very confident. Not only did the Relic guys have a huge passion for gaming, but the things that they were saying showed that they had a good understanding of what Age of Empires means to so many people. They acknowledged that community feedback is going to be important throughout development (and that's going to start as early as next month). They also spoke a lot about how they want to create a game that feels like Age, but that also has fresh and exciting gameplay as well. I can't talk about details (Much like I haven't been able to talk about aoe4 for the last 6 months), but I feel positive. I expect Age4 to be at least 2 years away; but I also expect to be intimately involved with the project so it is very exciting. I hope that I and the others involved can help to steer the project in a good direction.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
sounds about right. 2-3 years is a reasonable time table. queue cautious living.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 2549
- Joined: Jun 28, 2015
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
duckzilla wrote:I do not think that they will do WW1 or later. It would not fit to the franchise.
Maybve the timeframe of 1500-1900 has potential for another AoE game as the focus of AoEIII was largely on colonization. Whatever happened to Europe in this timeframe was not really part of the game. Anyway, I think we can expect some good ol' sword/bow/cav game. Campaigns could include historical events which were not covered up to now, such as the rise of the Manchu/Qing dynasty, expansion of Islam, Kievan Rus, Fall of Constantinople, Thirty Years' War, Napoleonic wars, Great Northern War, Timurid empire/Mughals, etc.
I would really like to see playable countries like Sweden, Persia, Poland/PLC, Zulu, Mali, Ethiopia or the Umayyads.
kiewer rus was from 9 -13th century.
breeze wrote: they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
pecelot wrote:https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe2/comments/6wk4oe/a_summary_of_gamescom_reflection_thanks/?st=J6WBRNMM&sh=41260fbaZeroEmpires wrote:Meetings & Networking- We met with many of the Microsoft staff and even a couple of guys from Relic. I was very skeptical about these new announcements at first, especially given the track record with AoEHD, but coming away from Cologne I feel very confident. Not only did the Relic guys have a huge passion for gaming, but the things that they were saying showed that they had a good understanding of what Age of Empires means to so many people. They acknowledged that community feedback is going to be important throughout development (and that's going to start as early as next month). They also spoke a lot about how they want to create a game that feels like Age, but that also has fresh and exciting gameplay as well. I can't talk about details (Much like I haven't been able to talk about aoe4 for the last 6 months), but I feel positive. I expect Age4 to be at least 2 years away; but I also expect to be intimately involved with the project so it is very exciting. I hope that I and the others involved can help to steer the project in a good direction.
I think to most this is three times good news:
- zeroempires positivity and comments suggest theyre at least staying true to the age principle and that theyre possibly just making a medieval game
- zeroempires claims theyre innovating some which I expect the aoe3 community would generally be more open to and is something I am hoping for
- theyre actually taking enough time to develop this game instead of rushing it for as much $$$ as fast as possible.
- VooDoo_BoSs
- Dragoon
- Posts: 254
- Joined: Jul 7, 2016
- ESO: VooDoo_BoSs
- Location: Australia
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Jerom wrote:pecelot wrote:https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe2/comments/6wk4oe/a_summary_of_gamescom_reflection_thanks/?st=J6WBRNMM&sh=41260fbaZeroEmpires wrote:Meetings & Networking- We met with many of the Microsoft staff and even a couple of guys from Relic. I was very skeptical about these new announcements at first, especially given the track record with AoEHD, but coming away from Cologne I feel very confident. Not only did the Relic guys have a huge passion for gaming, but the things that they were saying showed that they had a good understanding of what Age of Empires means to so many people. They acknowledged that community feedback is going to be important throughout development (and that's going to start as early as next month). They also spoke a lot about how they want to create a game that feels like Age, but that also has fresh and exciting gameplay as well. I can't talk about details (Much like I haven't been able to talk about aoe4 for the last 6 months), but I feel positive. I expect Age4 to be at least 2 years away; but I also expect to be intimately involved with the project so it is very exciting. I hope that I and the others involved can help to steer the project in a good direction.
I think to most this is three times good news:
- zeroempires positivity and comments suggest theyre at least staying true to the age principle and that theyre possibly just making a medieval game
- zeroempires claims theyre innovating some which I expect the aoe3 community would generally be more open to and is something I am hoping for
- theyre actually taking enough time to develop this game instead of rushing it for as much $$$ as fast as possible.
I think they are almost forced to go into WW1 / WW2 territory given the significant overlap AOE / AOE2 / AOE3 Definitive Editions will have with those time periods. Similarly, the chronology of the "Age of" series mandates they need to move forward, otherwise they wouldn't call it Age of Empires 4 (but another DE, or a stand-alone like AOM).
Planes will be a difficult one, but if that's the biggest challenge they are facing, to be honest, I can't imagine it all being too much of a disaster. Staying true to AOE franchise only really requires:
- Settlers with multiple types of resources
- Units that can micro and counter
- Aging up to different levels
- Different civilisations
- MAYBE home city shipments
None of these actually make WW1 / WW2 impossible.
am I missing something big?
- howlingwolfpaw
- Jaeger
- Posts: 3476
- Joined: Oct 4, 2015
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
VooDoo_BoSs wrote:Jerom wrote:
I think they are almost forced to go into WW1 / WW2 territory given the significant overlap AOE / AOE2 / AOE3 Definitive Editions will have with those time periods. Similarly, the chronology of the "Age of" series mandates they need to move forward, otherwise they wouldn't call it Age of Empires 4 (but another DE, or a stand-alone like AOM).
Planes will be a difficult one, but if that's the biggest challenge they are facing, to be honest, I can't imagine it all being too much of a disaster. Staying true to AOE franchise only really requires:
- Settlers with multiple types of resources
- Units that can micro and counter
- Aging up to different levels
- Different civilisations
- MAYBE home city shipments
None of these actually make WW1 / WW2 impossible.
am I missing something big?
I think it could be done easily. And actually be a great game using aoe type strategic play with WW1/ WW2 feel and objectives. with many different types of units and strategic play. I have a vision for it anyhow. hire me pleaseee....
Rename, the Age of Battles (C), or the Age of war (C)
maps would be battle grounds, you would start with a command post (tent, dug out, out post, cement pill box etc... age up) settlers would be like the non duty military command. They construct the battle fortifications, factories, trenches, put up traps etc... Could go to a wood and stone for buildings and coin and food for units. then have other resources like moral or export.
I also think ammunition should be a resource auto generated from factories, because in WW1 after the ammo went out troops had to go melee.
instead of houses, you have tents. then of cource, stables, barracks, factory, and air field. I say look to command and conqueror to do air strikes for ideas
definitely home city shipments. and allied shipments.
- Imperial Noob
- Lancer
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Feb 29, 2016
- Location: Well hello DEre
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
howlingwolfpaw wrote:
I think it could be done easily. And actually be a great game using aoe type strategic play with WW1/ WW2 feel and objectives. with many different types of units and strategic play. I have a vision for it anyhow. hire me pleaseee....
Rename, the Age of Battles (C), or the Age of war (C)
maps would be battle grounds, you would start with a command post (tent, dug out, out post, cement pill box etc... age up) settlers would be like the non duty military command. They construct the battle fortifications, factories, trenches, put up traps etc... Could go to a wood and stone for buildings and coin and food for units. then have other resources like moral or export.
I also think ammunition should be a resource auto generated from factories, because in WW1 after the ammo went out troops had to go melee.
instead of houses, you have tents. then of cource, stables, barracks, factory, and air field. I say look to command and conqueror to do air strikes for ideas
definitely home city shipments. and allied shipments.
basically Company of Heroes with a bigger role of engineers/pioneers?
My biggest two points would be:
1. Age of Empires is sugar and shiny as one of the key elements of it's identity
limit the game to camouflage clothing, green tents, grey supply boxes and scorched land and you are just asking for trouble
We need raxes from red brick, overly visible colorful badges, lots of flags, rainbow airplane paints etc.
2. When compared to the range of units, pet animals, different clothes/armors/architecture AoE 3 has, the game needs to at least not feel 10 years obsolete. Surpassing richness of AoE 3 WC + TAD is in a more modern setting is THE single hardest job for the development team.
U.S native coders, scout pidgeons, bicycle infantry, Soviet machinegun carts, Dutch infantry with anime size machetes, Russian/Polish/Ukrainian cav singing cavalry chants when you click them, Japanese officers with Unction depending on how many enemies have they cut with their swords... now I'm starting to believe this may be doable
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
While its also possible to make a world war age of empires I dont think the game principles do well in that genre. A town center and villagers hacking trees and mining stuff, that doesnt seem to fit well within aoe. The sort of micro aoe has, which is mostly countersystem based, would not really be interesting if there are no melee units anymore. You'd probably move more towards ability based micro I think.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
. They also spoke a lot about how they want to create a game that feels like Age, but that also has fresh and exciting gameplay as well.
To me, this points to a new historical age. They are aware they need to preserve an Age-like feeling to the game, but they also don't want to make yet another medieval Age game. That theme has already been exploited to death. I repeat this question I asked before: how many medieval AOE games can be made before the game can move on to another period? 11? 25?
That's why I agree with Voodoo's argument:
I think they are almost forced to go into WW1 / WW2 territory given the significant overlap AOE / AOE2 / AOE3 Definitive Editions will have with those time periods. Similarly, the chronology of the "Age of" series mandates they need to move forward, otherwise they wouldn't call it Age of Empires 4 (but another DE, or a stand-alone like AOM).
That's right. What's the point or remastering AOE2 and 3 if you're planning on making yet another premodern-era military RTS? None whatsoever. It would be just redundant and a waste of money. It's smarter to take this approach instead: remaster the old classics, to make sure if they don't like the novelty of AOE4, they will still buy something (DEs of AOE2 and 3). It's a fallback strategy, one that, at the same time, achieves another goal: it gives the fans something to chew on for the next few years, until AOE4 is completed. The remastered editions will be finished faster, which will keep fans busy playing them until AOE4 is out. And if they don't like it, they're gonna continue playing the AOE version they like most.
That's a much better strategy, than just throwing money at making DEs of AOE2 and 3 and then making an extra game drawing on the same old, premodern era. That'd be too much overlap and redundancy of effort, imo.
I don't see why an AOE without melee units wouldn't work. Melee can be replaced with another unit stance. If cav is replaced by another raiding unit, then the unit which counters raiders should have a new stance for that.
-
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 1904
- Joined: Feb 11, 2015
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Zero said he spoke to a few Relic team members at the recent gamescon and really got the impression it's set in a classic time period. No modern shizz like tanks.
Download ESOC Taunt Package : http://eso-community.net/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=7250
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Quote? Impression from just a few devs attenting a conference is hardly evidence.
-
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 1904
- Joined: Feb 11, 2015
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
It was on his video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxOcRybNgQg
I didn't watch much of it though so it was probably at the start somewhere.
I didn't watch much of it though so it was probably at the start somewhere.
Download ESOC Taunt Package : http://eso-community.net/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=7250
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Dolan wrote:That's why I agree with Voodoo's argument:I think they are almost forced to go into WW1 / WW2 territory given the significant overlap AOE / AOE2 / AOE3 Definitive Editions will have with those time periods. Similarly, the chronology of the "Age of" series mandates they need to move forward, otherwise they wouldn't call it Age of Empires 4 (but another DE, or a stand-alone like AOM).
That's right. What's the point or remastering AOE2 and 3 if you're planning on making yet another premodern-era military RTS? None whatsoever. It would be just redundant and a waste of money. It's smarter to take this approach instead: remaster the old classics, to make sure if they don't like the novelty of AOE4, they will still buy something (DEs of AOE2 and 3). It's a fallback strategy, one that, at the same time, achieves another goal: it gives the fans something to chew on for the next few years, until AOE4 is completed. The remastered editions will be finished faster, which will keep fans busy playing them until AOE4 is out. And if they don't like it, they're gonna continue playing the AOE version they like most.
That's a much better strategy, than just throwing money at making DEs of AOE2 and 3 and then making an extra game drawing on the same old, premodern era. That'd be too much overlap and redundancy of effort, imo.
What about AoEO? Back to the classic age, as we all know. It's the case that makes the point kind of invalid, as much as I'd like it to be true.
@WickedCossack , so basically this again:
viewtopic.php?f=314&t=11973&p=252152#p252152
lordraphael wrote:zero empires, who aparently had known that aoe was going to be announced, 6 months before the announcement, said that he doesnt believe in a modern era aoe 4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxOcRybNgQg
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Yeah well, we all know how successful Aoeoeo turned out to be..
Ok, so we're supposed to take this guy on his word that he has grounds to believe it's not gonna be modern. I've no issue with that, as long as it won't be about the same historical periods AOE1, 2, 3 were about. It makes no sense to rehash the same old themes. If they make a game about even older empires, like the Sumerian/Akkadian era, I'm fine with that. But I'm bored of medieval military RTS games. If I wanted to play that, I'd play AOE2.
It's inevitable, though, that one day, the franchise will have to move in modern times. Whether it's going to be 4, 5 or 6.
Ok, so we're supposed to take this guy on his word that he has grounds to believe it's not gonna be modern. I've no issue with that, as long as it won't be about the same historical periods AOE1, 2, 3 were about. It makes no sense to rehash the same old themes. If they make a game about even older empires, like the Sumerian/Akkadian era, I'm fine with that. But I'm bored of medieval military RTS games. If I wanted to play that, I'd play AOE2.
It's inevitable, though, that one day, the franchise will have to move in modern times. Whether it's going to be 4, 5 or 6.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Dolan wrote:Yeah well, we all know how successful Aoeoeo turned out to be..
Ok, so we're supposed to take this guy on his word that he has grounds to believe it's not gonna be modern. I've no issue with that, as long as it won't be about the same historical periods AOE1, 2, 3 were about. It makes no sense to rehash the same old themes. If they make a game about even older empires, like the Sumerian/Akkadian era, I'm fine with that. But I'm bored of medieval military RTS games. If I wanted to play that, I'd play AOE2.
It's inevitable, though, that one day, the franchise will have to move in modern times. Whether it's going to be 4, 5 or 6.
Thats your opinion. But I can see a big audience that, if they wanted to play a medieval RTS, wouldn't turn to a 15 year old game.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
But is it really 15 year old if it's remastered?
After all, some people who play AOE2 prefer that old-style game engine to newer engines which have more polished mechanics. That's why they say "AOE2 is a harder game" because it requires you to be good with a worse game engine. Many people who play AOE2 prefer that.
What sense would it make for Microsoft to commission a new medieval AOE game, when they already have a few versions of AOE2 on the market? Imagine the media announcement: hey they made a new Age of Empires game, guess what, it's the same old stuff, just with a new engine. Doesn't sound so compelling, imo. But you never know, Microsoft's decisions don't make sense, as we already know, they just baffle people more and more, so anything's possible.
After all, some people who play AOE2 prefer that old-style game engine to newer engines which have more polished mechanics. That's why they say "AOE2 is a harder game" because it requires you to be good with a worse game engine. Many people who play AOE2 prefer that.
What sense would it make for Microsoft to commission a new medieval AOE game, when they already have a few versions of AOE2 on the market? Imagine the media announcement: hey they made a new Age of Empires game, guess what, it's the same old stuff, just with a new engine. Doesn't sound so compelling, imo. But you never know, Microsoft's decisions don't make sense, as we already know, they just baffle people more and more, so anything's possible.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
You should read the quote from zeroempires more closely.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
I watched the video. Did he have anything else to add in that quote?
-
- Crossbow
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Aug 4, 2017
- ESO: atlas_peido
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Does it take too long to see the first photos?
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Making a medieval aoe4 would kill the most successful of the previous 3 games which already got a remake and a DE. It makes little sense honestly, unless their plan is to substitute that with THE definitive game. This also sound very unlikely.
Just like it seems unlikely that they will not add something new to the gameplay, perhaps controversial (like the card system in aoe3). They simply have to think about something new because it is an actual new game.
To me the most logical thing is to continue through history and make a game in the modern era (both the trailer and the old ES book suggest that btw). Also from an expansion pov ww1 and ww2 are ideal.
They will add something new in terms of gameplay, perhaps new resources (like coal or oil) and they will probably borrow some elements from COH. Like the flag capture mechanic is actually cool as it forces action. AOE3 added something like that with TPs.
Besides all this AOE3 has by far the best theme. The colonial era, the colony idea, trade routes, nats, industrial revolution, all are great game concepts.
Medieval concept is abused since forever (think about chess).
Just like it seems unlikely that they will not add something new to the gameplay, perhaps controversial (like the card system in aoe3). They simply have to think about something new because it is an actual new game.
To me the most logical thing is to continue through history and make a game in the modern era (both the trailer and the old ES book suggest that btw). Also from an expansion pov ww1 and ww2 are ideal.
They will add something new in terms of gameplay, perhaps new resources (like coal or oil) and they will probably borrow some elements from COH. Like the flag capture mechanic is actually cool as it forces action. AOE3 added something like that with TPs.
Besides all this AOE3 has by far the best theme. The colonial era, the colony idea, trade routes, nats, industrial revolution, all are great game concepts.
Medieval concept is abused since forever (think about chess).
-
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 1904
- Joined: Feb 11, 2015
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Could they go back in time? What's before AoE1? I'm sure there's some interesting empires there.
Download ESOC Taunt Package : http://eso-community.net/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=7250
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
There were empires before the Roman, but there's probably much less information about their weapons:
Akkadian
Egyptian
Assyrian
Babylonian
Carthaginian
Chinese ancient empires (Qin, Han, Jin, Wei)
Hittite
Indian ancient empires (Nanda, Maurya, Satavahana, Shunga, Gupta, Harsha)
Iranian
Kushan
Mongol (Xianbei, Xiongnu)
Teotihuacan
So it would be possible to make an AOE in the age of ancient empires, though it would overlap a bit with the Hellenistic and Roman empires, which were covered in AOE1 and AOM (Greek civ).
Akkadian
Egyptian
Assyrian
Babylonian
Carthaginian
Chinese ancient empires (Qin, Han, Jin, Wei)
Hittite
Indian ancient empires (Nanda, Maurya, Satavahana, Shunga, Gupta, Harsha)
Iranian
Kushan
Mongol (Xianbei, Xiongnu)
Teotihuacan
So it would be possible to make an AOE in the age of ancient empires, though it would overlap a bit with the Hellenistic and Roman empires, which were covered in AOE1 and AOM (Greek civ).
- Mr_Bramboy
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 8219
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: [VOC] Bram
- Location: Amsterdam
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
WickedCossack wrote:Could they go back in time? What's before AoE1? I'm sure there's some interesting empires there.
Before AoE1 is AoEO. They could actually visit that period again, seeing as AoEO failed. Or they could ignore that time entirely to avoid any associations with AoEO.
Dolan wrote:There were empires before the Roman, but there's probably much less information about their weapons:
Akkadian
Egyptian
Assyrian
Babylonian
Carthaginian
Chinese ancient empires (Qin, Han, Jin, Wei)
Hittite
Indian ancient empires (Nanda, Maurya, Satavahana, Shunga, Gupta, Harsha)
Iranian
Kushan
Mongol (Xianbei, Xiongnu)
Teotihuacan
So it would be possible to make an AOE in the age of ancient empires, though it would overlap a bit with the Hellenistic and Roman empires, which were covered in AOE1 and AOM (Greek civ).
We have more information about ancient civilizations than you might think. I remember a thread on /r/askhistorians in which a historian shared his PhD/masters (I forgot what it was) which was about ancient warfare. It was an extremely interesting read and made me realize ancient civilizations were more advanced than I thought.
One big empire you forgot is the Greeks, specifically the Mycenean civilization (~1500 B.C). You could make an entire game out of that era with Greek civilizations specifically.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
AOE1 is from the stone age (admitted, I had to look it up again) so going before that is difficult.
To see a world in a grain of saind, A heaven in a wild flower
Hold infinity in the palm of you hand, And eternity in an hour
- William Blake, Auguries of Innocence
Hold infinity in the palm of you hand, And eternity in an hour
- William Blake, Auguries of Innocence
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests