Official AoE 4 Thread
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
I avoided including Greek and Roman empires, because they were partially covered by AOE1 and AOM. But yeah, there were actually quite a few in the Hellenistic period.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Some of the first empires were established in Sumer probably, such as Eannatum's empire in Lagash.
A Sumerian civ might be interesting to see in a game.
A Sumerian civ might be interesting to see in a game.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Dolan wrote: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 also depends on what he means by modern. I wouldn't take for granted he shares the common meaning of this word, as he can mean, for instance, modern as Modern Warfare 3.
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).
He asked about civs before AoE1:
WickedCossack wrote:Could they go back in time? What's before AoE1? I'm sure there's some interesting empires there.
http://ageofempires.wikia.com/wiki/Civilizations_(Age_of_Empires)
If you have a look at the list, you could see some major overlapping
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Well, shiet, I only played Rise of Rome, so I wasn't aware they already had Mesopotamian civs in AOE.
Welp, then there's no other way the franchise can go than into the future. Or do some kind of Empire Earth thing and telescope all the premodern ages into one game.
Welp, then there's no other way the franchise can go than into the future. Or do some kind of Empire Earth thing and telescope all the premodern ages into one game.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
So weren't you able to play civs from the original AoE on the RoR expansion? Sounds weird for AoE
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
You probably could if you had the original AOE. I only had ROR, which had 4 civs.
- howlingwolfpaw
- Jaeger
- Posts: 3476
- Joined: Oct 4, 2015
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
I don't think you can "abuse" a castle game, a GOOD updated medieval RTS should accompany each generation, just like how some movies can be remade many times over like batman, and still be valued. I would be pretty pleased as pop to see a new castle game, has a lot of neat things. I don't want to play the same old aoe 2 with its kind of cookie cutter balance and unit system. needs to be variety and beautiful aoe style. but complex and challenging for new strategic play like terrain advantages.
but i will also be entertained by a WW1-2 game. There is some neat potential there.
but i will also be entertained by a WW1-2 game. There is some neat potential there.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Dolan wrote:Well, shiet, I only played Rise of Rome, so I wasn't aware they already had Mesopotamian civs in AOE.
Welp, then there's no other way the franchise can go than into the future. Or do some kind of Empire Earth thing and telescope all the premodern ages into one game.
I dont see why the franchise has to be in a time period that hasnt been covered yet.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Because it is a new game (and a quite anticipated one) not a remake nor a spin off.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
So starcraft 2 wasnt a new game? The logic is completely absent.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
What has SC to do with AOE? AOE follows history, SC is set in a hypothetic sci-fi world.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
I dont see how it cant be medieval. I dont get the arguments at all. There is no conclusive logic presented except 'aoe2 already exists'. But whatever, theres no point in arguing with you.
-
- Lancer
- Posts: 970
- Joined: Mar 6, 2016
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
_NiceKING_ wrote:borg- wrote:Age of empires 3 was between the century 16 - 19.
~1500 - 1850
1500-1857
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
The logic is that AOE saga proceeds through history in a clear chronological order. That is except for the 2 spin-offs AOM and AOEo. Now they're calling this one AOE 4 so by that logic is going to follow the same chronological order.
They can break this logic of course, just it seems unlikely, especially given the expectations.
They can break this logic of course, just it seems unlikely, especially given the expectations.
-
- Lancer
- Posts: 970
- Joined: Mar 6, 2016
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Actually AoE3 actually reaches until around 1870 as it includes the meiji restoration.
- P i k i l i c
- Howdah
- Posts: 1271
- Joined: Nov 17, 2015
- ESO: Pikilic
- Location: Dijon, France
- GameRanger ID: 7497456
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
InsectPoison wrote:Actually AoE3 actually reaches until around 1870 as it includes the meiji restoration.
yeah I was going to say 1870 because of needle guns and ironclads
-
- Crossbow
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Aug 23, 2017
- ESO: Punisher2L84U
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.
I agree. I think if they stay with the age progression system that we know, I think it might be go a little more advanced then we currently are in the game but not much more (American Civil War being the cut off)
I would live to see more map based advantages and disadvantages. Like holding high ground and changing of the god awful herding concept
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
InsectPoison wrote:_NiceKING_ wrote:borg- wrote:Age of empires 3 was between the century 16 - 19.
~1500 - 1850
1500-1857
1492—1876
approximately
-
- Lancer
- Posts: 970
- Joined: Mar 6, 2016
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
pecelot wrote:InsectPoison wrote:Show hidden quotes
1500-1857
1492—1876
approximately
Why 1492?
-
- Lancer
- Posts: 970
- Joined: Mar 6, 2016
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
pecelot wrote:InsectPoison wrote:Show hidden quotes
1500-1857
1492—1876
approximately
If anything it should be 1565 as thats when the siege of malta with the Ottomans and Knights of St John happened.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
pecelot wrote:InsectPoison wrote:Show hidden quotes
1500-1857
1492—1876
approximately
Some of the campaign happens later than 1876
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Jerom wrote:Dolan wrote:Well, shiet, I only played Rise of Rome, so I wasn't aware they already had Mesopotamian civs in AOE.
Welp, then there's no other way the franchise can go than into the future. Or do some kind of Empire Earth thing and telescope all the premodern ages into one game.
I dont see why the franchise has to be in a time period that hasnt been covered yet.
Because otherwise it makes no sense to re-make AOE1, 2 and 3 with Definitive Editions, if you're planning to launch yet another game that covers the same historical periods.
You could use the "new engine" argument, but then if AOE4 is just AOE2 with a new engine, then they shouldn't make AOE2 DE in the first place.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Lol it doesn't have to progress in time period. Yes, that has been the general trend so far but I'm sure less people are concerned about that than they are the game play and mechanics and setting (roughly confirmed to be medieval-favored). The title AoEIV simply means another installment in the franchise and that's all. Nothing else is guaranteed.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Yes, it's a bit weird to do the definitive editions while releasing a new game but I think you're vastly overestimating what a definitive edition would be. Aoe1 was the easiest to upgrade because it was the oldest, the new skins for it look pretty good but doesnt seem like much or anything of the gameplay changed at all and it still looks like an old game, aoe2 can also benefit from new skins but for aoe3 I expect just a balance patch and moesbar hacks gone and some small eso/graphical updates. I believe it's a pretty logical idea that they're using these definitive editions to hype up and gather the playerbase so that aoe4 is well received at launch. It sounds more logical, from a business pov, to me than making aoe4 in a non medieval era because anyone can see how the medieval era would be the easiest era to make the game in with regards to pleasing the fanbase.
Re: Official AoE 4 Thread
Could be. Then again, Relic never made a historical game before.
They only made sci-fi and modern warfare RTSes until now.
They only made sci-fi and modern warfare RTSes until now.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests