Age of Empires IV is coming

cedarfarms · Post by **cedarfarms** » 30 Jul 2015, 01:25

If you actually open the link and read the comments someone literally asked if this is picutres of AOE4 and robot entertainment responds with basically that Microsoft owns Aoe4 and it isnt theirs to make, so i think this is false hope

cedarfarms · Post by **cedarfarms** » 30 Jul 2015, 01:36

Ive been reading that article and did some other research about the RTS game microsoft is working on and every source seems to agree that it will either be solely on console or console and PC, so sadly if its on console i think that eliminates AOE4 and kind of favors a huge microsoft mistake of making another halo wars

lemmings121 · Post by **lemmings121** » 30 Jul 2015, 01:37

"AoE belongs to Microsoft. It's not ours to make. That picture is some layouts for our new @OrcsMustDie website."

lol

91 · Post by 91 » 30 Jul 2015, 05:45

neuron wrote:
mitoe wrote:I think its just that SC2 kind of has a monopoly on the genre at the moment.
More like LoL and Dota have that monopoly, in the sense that most RTS players migrated there.
Difference between them:

[table style="border-collapse:separate'border-spacing:1px'"][tbody][tr][td style="border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]
[/td][td style="text-align:center'border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]Number of players[/td][td style="text-align:center'border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]Tourney prizes[/td][/tr][tr][td style="border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]SC2[/td][td style="text-align:center'border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]~150.000[/td][td style="text-align:center'border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]$250.000 (WCS 2014)
[/td][/tr][tr][td style="border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]LoL[span] [/span][/td][td style="text-align:center'border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"] 27 million /day
[/td][td style="text-align:center'border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]$2.13 million (2014)
[/td][/tr][tr][td style="border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]Dota2[/td][td style="text-align:center'border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]772,649 /day[/td][td style="text-align:center'border:1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0)'padding:3px'"]~$11 million (2014)[/td][/tr][tr][/tr][/tbody][/table]
The business model also changed a lot. LoL is F2P, SC2 costs 60$ I think. Also the entry barrier is much lower for LoL, whereas for SC2 its quite abrupt, its not a game for casuals.

So overall, there have been lots of changes in the RTS scene since AOE3 was made. Some people say SC2 is the last classic RTS game of AAA quality, and nobody else will invest in a triple A RTS, since it costs way too much to develop (so you need to charge players a lot) and people prefer free-to-play games which are also easier to play/learn.

I agree. I think the reason LoL is doing well are 2 reasons:

1. Its free to play
2. Its really easy to play and have fun straight away as a beginner.

The 2nd condition could easily be applied to an AoE game, which is why I think it could be successful. AoE is REALLY simple to play at a beginner level!!
The free to play part Im sure could be used too. In AoE3 money could be used to maybe do custom paintings for your buildings walls, level up HCs faster, custom colours for unit clothes etc.. Sounds ridiculous maybe, but I believe it would work.

What makes people spend money on a game are 2 things imo:
1. Something that saves time and lets you reach a goal faster (level up HC)
2. Something that is visible to other players during online games (skins etc)

Probably wouldnt be HC system as in AoE3, but some similar levelup thing would have to be used. I keep my hopes up, and I do believe there will be an AoE style RTS game sometime in the future. Maybe wont be AoE, but at least something very similar

momuuu · Post by **momuuu** » 30 Jul 2015, 10:14

lemmings121 wrote:"AoE belongs to Microsoft. It''s not ours to make. That picture is some layouts for our new @OrcsMustDie website."

lol

kinda said and confronting for them to have gone from a company involved with aoe to a company that made orcs must die.

Im not sure if aoe can be pure f2p, but 30? plus the option to buy cool kids is possible. Hell, you could make people ''earn'' new civs and cards, either by playing a lot or by spending money on the game. Its surely possible.

One last little note: the dota2 prizemoney is kinda misleading. They have one huge tournement every year where the money they get from stuff you buy goes directly to the prizepool. Normal tournements probsbly have lower prizemoney than LoL.

Mr_Bramboy · Post by **Mr_Bramboy** » 30 Jul 2015, 10:18

jerom wrote:
lemmings121 wrote:"AoE belongs to Microsoft. Its not ours to make. That picture is some layouts for our new @OrcsMustDie website."

lol
kinda said and confronting for them to have gone from a company involved with aoe to a company that made orcs must die.

Hell, you could make people earn new civs by spending money on the game

Please dont.

lemmings121 · Post by **lemmings121** » 30 Jul 2015, 12:40

jerom wrote:
lemmings121 wrote:"AoE belongs to Microsoft. Its not ours to make. That picture is some layouts for our new @orcsmustdie website."

lol

Im not sure if aoe can be pure f2p, but 30? plus the option to buy cool kids is possible. Hell, you could make people earn new civs and cards, either by playing a lot or by spending money on the game. Its surely possible.

Sounds like AOEO
The game was actually good/decent, but the fact that it was advertised as F2P, while it just impossible to actually play for free made everyone run of it, and dont spend a dime on it.

Its hard to know where to get you money in f2p games, LOL it self isnt F2P, you have to buy those buff cristals or whatever they are called to play competitively.... the thing is that the game is playable without them,

(not like aoeo "hey look, my skirmishers have 50% more hp then yours for the same cost! this is such a great rts!")

91 · Post by 91 » 30 Jul 2015, 15:11

lemmings121 wrote:
jerom wrote:Im not sure if aoe can be pure f2p, but 30? plus the option to buy cool kids is possible. Hell, you could make people earn new civs and cards, either by playing a lot or by spending money on the game. Its surely possible.

Sounds like AOEO
The game was actually good/decent, but the fact that it was advertised as F2P, while it just impossible to actually play for free made everyone run of it, and dont spend a dime on it.

Its hard to know where to get you money in f2p games, LOL it self isnt F2P, you have to buy those buff cristals or whatever they are called to play competitively.... the thing is that the game is playable without them,

(not like aoeo "hey look, my skirmishers have 50% more hp then yours for the same cost! this is such a great rts!")

Not really true.

Everything (I mean things affecting the game, not skins for example) you can buy in LoL, you will also earn by playing many games - just like you do in AoE3 with HC cards - you earn them from XP. In LoL you wont face people far from your xp level, and will therefore have equal games.

Once youre a high enough level you have the exact same things as paying users. You dont have to spend anything on LoL, and can still play competitively - might only take some time to get there.

lemmings121 · Post by **lemmings121** » 30 Jul 2015, 15:23

91 wrote:
lemmings121 wrote:(...)

Everything (I mean things affecting the game, not skins for example) you can buy in LoL, you will also earn by playing many games - just like you do in AoE3 with HC cards - you earn them from XP. In LoL you wont face people far from your xp level, and will therefore have equal games.

Once youre a high enough level you have the exact same things as paying users. You dont have to spend anything on LoL, and can still play competitively - might only take some time to get there.

Good to know. I was missinformed then. aparently you can buy those stuff, but you can also grind to buy with in game money?
---

But I dislike this model for a RTS game, The main point of a rts is strategy and balanced games, giving people advantages from the start is bad imo..(Yes, hc leveling is bad, and should be all unlocked in online play by default imo)

91 · Post by 91 » 30 Jul 2015, 15:26

I agree, I don't like having to spend so much time on it either, just to get competitive cards/upgrades. Unfortunately, it's what brings more people into the game (the level up part. The feel of getting stronger/better/getting more things). On the other hand that means there will be more people playing

Also, a lot of people consider paying just to support the game, which also helps everyone in the end. I think more people do this if they actually get something nice in return - for example saving some time

lemmings121 · Post by **lemmings121** » 30 Jul 2015, 15:42

91 wrote:I agree, I don''t like having to spend so much time on it either, just to get competitive cards/upgrades. Unfortunately, it''s what brings more people into the game (the level up part. The feel of getting stronger/better/getting more things). On the other hand that means there will be more people playing

Also, a lot of people consider paying just to support the game, which also helps everyone in the end. I think more people do this if they actually get something nice in return - for example saving some time

Yeah, tbh it wouldn''t be bad a game like aoe3, that is f2p with only a few civs/low lvl hc on the start, that you could buy a "competitive pack" and just unlock everything. If that brings more people in, great!

(as long as they didnt add a new OP stuff every month, forcing people to keep buying. this would make me quit for sure.)

Papist · Post by **Papist** » 30 Jul 2015, 15:46

I have no issue with F2P games assuming they can actually be played without paying. I have played dozens of F2P games (from shooters to RTS), and to date have only spent real money on one (and it was 3 bucks). I have always felt that simply buying your way forwards defeats the point of the game. Isn't a big part of the game supposed to be saving and building? What does one do after they buy everything?

Microsoft made a mistake in AoEO by offering sub-optimal content for people who weren't shelling out money. You get people to buy in by offering good content for free with the promise of more if one buys in. You don't give them shit and give them a choice between grinding or spending a weeks salary. Nobody is going to buy new content when they hated the free version.

pecelot · Post by **pecelot** » 30 Jul 2015, 15:50

jerom wrote:Didnt that article end up referring to aoe castle siege?

Castle Siege was released in September 2014, that article was from January this year.

Papist · Post by **Papist** » 30 Jul 2015, 15:54

pecelot wrote:
jerom wrote:Didnt that article end up referring to aoe castle siege?
Castle Siege was released in September 2014, that article was from January this year.

Its probably Castle Siege II then.

adderbrain5 · Post by **adderbrain5** » 30 Jul 2015, 16:17

All there ever was was rumors of rumors on an Un reputable website

Nothing to see here plus one

thebritish · Post by **thebritish** » 30 Jul 2015, 16:17

papist wrote:
pecelot wrote:Castle Siege was released in September 2014, that article was from January this year.
Its probably Castle Siege II then.

I dont think games are released every 3 months

momuuu · Post by **momuuu** » 30 Jul 2015, 16:50

The thing with free to play is that you often dont get any value for your payments. Im a hardcore aoe fan and would easily spend 60 bucks on the game, but if youre only gonna get 1 civ for 30 bucks then Im actually going to not pay.

Maybe the aoeo system couldve worked. LoL HotS and hearthstone are all using it to great succes. Especially hearthstone can be compared to it I suppose. The problem with aoeo wasnt necessarily the system, the problem was that they shipped an uncomplete ugly looking game with a terrible online environment and nothing like a serious campaign. Never judge a book by its cover is something that many people say, but even more people disregard it. Aoeo got off to a bad start and the gameplay wasnt good enough to make up for it.

lemmings121 · Post by **lemmings121** » 30 Jul 2015, 17:46

papist wrote:I have always felt that simply buying your way forwards defeats the point of the game. Isn''t a big part of the game supposed to be saving and building? What does one do after they buy everything?

I agree with you, but not for all games.

In a rpg, where the main point of the game is grinding and leveling, makes no sence at all to buy a "xp pack, max lvl in 5 mins!1!"

But I do not play Aoe thinking "just 5 more games and I will unlock 700w for my brits! yea! then I''ll get a headstart everygame on people who dont have it!"

For me the single most important thing in a rts is both players having the same starting conditions, and I would refuse to play a RTS where someone will always have a headstard.

So yeah, make a f2p, but me and everyone else who likes to play rts for the strategy will just have to buy all civs and techs..

"Tell people there is an invisible man in the sky who created them and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them that the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure" ~George Carlin

nice quote.

momuuu · Post by **momuuu** » 30 Jul 2015, 17:50

lemmings121 wrote:
papist wrote:I have always felt that simply buying your way forwards defeats the point of the game. Isnt a big part of the game supposed to be saving and building? What does one do after they buy everything?

I agree with you, but not for all games.

In a rpg, where the main point of the game is grinding and leveling, makes no sence at all to buy a "xp pack, max lvl in 5 mins!1!"

But I do not play Aoe thinking "just 5 more games and I will unlock 700w for my brits! yea! then Ill get a headstart everygame on people who dont have it!"

Have you actually played aoe3? Because in the beginning its just like that when leveling up your hcs ')

lemmings121 · Post by **lemmings121** » 30 Jul 2015, 17:55

jerom wrote:
lemmings121 wrote:I agree with you, but not for all games.

In a rpg, where the main point of the game is grinding and leveling, makes no sence at all to buy a "xp pack, max lvl in 5 mins!1!"

But I do not play Aoe thinking "just 5 more games and I will unlock 700w for my brits! yea! then Ill get a headstart everygame on people who dont have it!"
Have you actually played aoe3? Because in the beginning its just like that when leveling up your hcs ')

yes, and I hated that

worst part in aoe3

but now everyone have everything unlocked, so its fine

momuuu · Post by **momuuu** » 30 Jul 2015, 18:05

lemmings121 wrote:
jerom wrote:Have you actually played aoe3? Because in the beginning its just like that when leveling up your hcs ')
yes, and I hated that
worst part in aoe3

but now everyone have everything unlocked, so its fine

well thats the idea. Eventually everyone will have everything unlocked, but people who hate unlocking it can pay to bypass it. Then you can do what they did in heroes of the storm: rotate the free to play civs, so that there are 3-4 civs free to play that week, but so that you can spend money (or earned gold or sth) to unlock all the civs at any moment in time.

But then theyre just going to create a million civs and destroy balance.

Maybe just a small price (40??) and then purchasable skins and stuff would be the best system for an rts like aoe3.

lemmings121 · Post by **lemmings121** » 30 Jul 2015, 18:15

jerom wrote:
lemmings121 wrote:yes, and I hated that
worst part in aoe3

but now everyone have everything unlocked, so its fine

well thats the idea. Eventually everyone will have everything unlocked, but people who hate unlocking it can pay to bypass it. Then you can do what they did in heroes of the storm: rotate the free to play civs, so that there are 3-4 civs free to play that week, but so that you can spend money (or earned gold or sth) to unlock all the civs at any moment in time.

But then theyre just going to create a million civs and destroy balance.

Maybe just a small price (40??) and then purchasable skins and stuff would be the best system for an rts like aoe3.

Yes, a few civ rotating for free each week, the possibility to buy the civs permanentelly sounds really good, but as you said.... its good, as long as they dont decide to add a new civ every month, screwing balance.

Maybe making the game "complete" F2P to get people, and just sell skins to proffit could work.

but for me, a complete game, on full price is just fine... but I guess thats not how things work anymore..

momuuu · Post by **momuuu** » 30 Jul 2015, 18:23

Maybe they could make a neat campaign editor and allow people to create stuff there and sell it for like an euro in the workshop. Then the publishers get 50% or something of the profit, while not having to devote resources to the developement of this stuff. Thats what they do with the dota2 skins.

thebritish · Post by **thebritish** » 30 Jul 2015, 21:56

neuron wrote:
jerom wrote:Maybe they could make a neat campaign editor and allow people to create stuff there and sell it for like an euro in the workshop. Then the publishers get 50% or something of the profit, while not having to devote resources to the developement of this stuff. Thats what they do with the dota2 skins.
+1

+1

ESOC

Top Live Streams

Legacy AoE3