RTS Age of Empires IV - Medieval Again

[baud]

lol it's medieval!



Medieval II: Total War Age of Empires

They're playing it very safe. Even unit types look like those of AoE 2. They're mostly going for the nostalgia angle, I guess

 

[Morgoth]

It's too early to tell, but it looks to me like they're throwing out AoE's hallmark of elegant simplicity for retarded EPICNESS!!

 

[Delterius]

It's too early to tell, but it looks to me like they're throwing out AoE's hallmark of elegant simplicity for retarded EPICNESS!!

Actually, it reminds me of some early AoE3 trailers. Where it seemed like they were make huge changes from the RTS model to accomodate early modern warfare, only for it all to disappear by release under the excuse that it was too complex for the player.

So I choose to see this gameplay reveal as a cutscene until further confirmation.

 

[Tehdagah]

lol it's medieval!



Medieval II: Total War Age of Empires

They're playing it very safe. Even unit types look like those of AoE 2. They're mostly going for the nostalgia angle, I guess

Yes. Instead of moving the series forward they are remaking a game everyone already played. Nostalgia is one of the biggest cancers in modern pop culture.

14. Years.

R.I.P.

 

[Jimmious]

Nice graphics. No real gameplay.

 

[Tigranes]

lol it's medieval!



Medieval II: Total War Age of Empires

They're playing it very safe. Even unit types look like those of AoE 2. They're mostly going for the nostalgia angle, I guess

Yes. Instead of moving the series forward they are remaking a game everyone already played. Nostalgia is one of the biggest cancers in modern pop culture.

14. Years.

R.I.P.

They made that last one already, just outsourced to another MS Studio who ultimately had to transform it from an RTS to a FPS to get it out the door in 8 months

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

I see no gameplay in this gameplay.

 

[Alfgart]

I don't like it. It looks like the Settlers VII with more HDR, not what I expect from AoE. And considering Relic's last game was the god awful Dawn of War 3, I have 0 faith, they will find some way to fuck the gameplay somehow

 

[karoliner]

Microsoft owns Relic now?

 

[d1r]

This doesn't look good at all. Also, why no WW2 or Modern Warfare?

 

[Monocause]

"Gameplay" trailer doesn't really have gameplay. And yes, not overly optimistic about Relic doing it, but we'll see.

Also hoping that it's not just simply an AOE 2 remake, with Relic's extra 'genre innovations' such as borrowing MOBA elements no one's fucking asked for.

Re: why not WW2/modern warfare and that magazine photo from Ensemble times - face it, it was never meant to be. I don't believe the core gameplay of the AoE series, which was largely intact through all three installments, would work if you tried to fit it into the context of modern warfare. Base building, unit building and management, the way combat works and related abstractions would just feel goofy, not to mention resource collection. In Rise of Nation it "worked" as the game spanned all eras and therefore was cohesive, but it still felt goofy to see a rocket artillery truck pounding infantry units from a range not that different from a javelinman, and to see the said infantry units proceed to run up on foot to the artillery truck under all this bombardment to shoot it with light armaments, promptly causing it to explode. Or to see modern cities still supplied by those 6 blokes chopping up wood in the nearby forest.

I can imagine how with a series of major design shifts, tweaks and redefinitions something *similar* could work, but then everyone would have a fair point that it's no longer really an AoE game but rather some kind of a spin-off.

 

[Endemic]

Base building, unit building and management, the way combat works and related abstractions would just feel goofy. In Rise of Nation it worked as the game spanned all eras and therefore was cohesive, but it still felt goofy to see a rocket artillery truck pounding infantry units from a range not that different from a javelinman, and to see the said infantry units proceed to run up on foot to the artillery truck under all this bombardment to shoot it with light armaments, promptly causing it to explode.

Wasn't a problem for Red Alert, C&C, DoW1, CoH and numerous similar RTS. Though at least C&C had NOD vehicles being airlifted in, which was pretty realistic compared to the rest of the game.

 

[Monocause]

Base building, unit building and management, the way combat works and related abstractions would just feel goofy. In Rise of Nation it worked as the game spanned all eras and therefore was cohesive, but it still felt goofy to see a rocket artillery truck pounding infantry units from a range not that different from a javelinman, and to see the said infantry units proceed to run up on foot to the artillery truck under all this bombardment to shoot it with light armaments, promptly causing it to explode.

Wasn't a problem for Red Alert, C&C, DoW1, CoH and numerous similar RTS. Though at least C&C had NOD vehicles being airlifted in, which was pretty realistic compared to the rest of the game.

You're right to an extent, but look into the detail - CoH is an entirely different genre. It's tactics, not strategy, and it's narrowly focused on a very specific (and very well researched!) point of warfare history to boot. The other games you've mentioned can waive away a lot of inconsistencies and problems due to a sci-fi setting, and they also don't feature a dramatic technological gap that fundamentally alters the nature of warfare.

RoN is a better comparison. It clearly took a lot of ideas from the AoE series. In the same game you field spearmen vs swordsmen, and modern tanks vs rocket artillery. A thousand years ago, melee was a key component of any warfare. Nowadays it pretty much doesn't exist. A medieval Trebuchet could hurl a boulder at ranges of 300 metres, today you have intercontinental missiles, incredibly complicated logistics chains, electronics. Bombers drop bombs from incredible heights remaining out of reach of small arms fire. Your typical grunt armed with an assault rifle can hit stuff up to 500 metres away. RoN used the same gameplay model to go deep into the XXth century and it works from a gameplay perspective - but play it for a while in the modern era and think about what you're actually seeing on the screen and it's just fucking dumb. Start from thinking about modern-age infantrymen shooting at the same range as javelinmen and see where that train of thought takes you.

We've seen dramatic shifts in what warfare actually is numerous times in the XXth centuries. The 2nd world war was hugely different from the 1st, even though the gap between them was mere 20 years. Now compare the 2nd world war to the cold war era armed conflicts where superpowers were involved, then compare those to Iraq, then compare it to how modern war looked like in Georgia or how it looks like now in the Ukraine. Even now, the cyberwarfare front is gaining in prominence and radically changing doctrines, drone warfare is already applied in multiple places and the development of stuff such as laser weaponry or the naval railgun will confuse the fuck out of everyone yet again. Let's not even get into the fact that the US, China and Russia are all reportedly heavily looking into orbital armaments. That could accurately shoot the shit out of things from orbit.

Just think about the implications of weapons that can shoot down long-range projectiles such as missiles and artillery shells with pin-point accuracy and incredible speed, while also being more cost-efficient, ie you're paying less for shooting a railgun than your opponent paid for building a long range missile. This tech advantage alone renders most of your opponents' long range arsenal useless. Then try to think how to reflect that kind of leap in a video game in a way where it's fun. Cause in the real world it's seriously not fun when you're the one who's behind on tech. Hard counter to that is of course ECM, but accurately and entertainingly reflecting ECM in a video game hasn't been done afaik. And if you do ECM, you should also do ECCM. Head's boiling already.

One of the key concepts of the AoE series was navigating your empire through different eras. Now, I realise that games are games and the AoE model wasn't exactly "accurate" when reflecting classical or medieval warfare either, but if you try to bite the XXth century and squeeze it into such a model, even representing "era progression" as 20 year gaps, it just gets bonkers, and exceedingly difficult from a design perspective to produce something that makes sense or would remain somewhat coherent while also being playable and fun.

You can, of course, create modern era howitzers and give them merely slightly better range, damage and accuracy than artillery pieces from the 1920s, but then you should probably wonder why not remove the modern unit models and just call these units catapults and trebuchets, where it works just the same and makes more sense? Also if you go that route, it's basically the first 3 AoE games with a reskin. Change resource names from "stone" to "oil", worker models from people to trucks, reskin a bunch of AoE3 units, remove melee, add some kind of a vacuous mechanic like "airdrops" or "comms jamming". That'd work, sure, but it's horribly unambitious. And kinda dishonest.

Delving into strictly modern warfare is even more mad, as understanding the implications of the incredible pace of progress for warfare is something that often baffles the most brilliant minds in the employ of the modern world's superpowers. I don't see a bunch of video game developers successfully coping with that challenge to produce something that would make even a modest amount of sense and would still be playable. I'm saying that even though it's sad as I'd seriously play the shit out of a game that does fe. hybrid warfare well.

Oh and PS - going into post WW2 warfare is also saddled with political shit. Depending on how you portray stuff, in the US alone you'll either piss off libs or reps. Likewise in the rest of the world, potentially even worse so in Russia and China, to the point where they can outright ban you. Good luck.

 

[Goi~Yaas~Dinn]

 

[Morgoth]

Age of Empires: Modern Warfare be liek "I'm hacking u r stawwk exchange, fugging up u r currency"

Exciting!

 

[theSavant]

Nice graphics. No real gameplay.

I see no gameplay in this gameplay.

Imo it's totally gameplay and ingame graphics. It's probably a scene from a campaign map, which I determine by how the city is constructed and the existance of pavements (which only ever existed in campaigns). Even if the scene is scripted for the sake of the trailer, this is how it will look and feel in the game. There's nothing exceptional in the trailer.

Also hoping that it's not just simply an AOE 2 remake, with Relic's extra 'genre innovations' such as borrowing MOBA elements no one's fucking asked for.

Well... my theories after watching the trailer are:
- They want to make "restart of the IP"
- So they took the game which was most successful (which was AoE2) and modified it appropriately
- Appropriately means it should appeal the largest audience possible (which has to include kids)
- Because of that it also has to become more colorful, cartoonlike and less brutal (though it still looks decent)
- I'm also assuming they make it simpler by removing units from the game (you could say however, that some units in AoE2 were hardly used)
- It's probably also adapted to "requirements of modern games", which is: the game is ready for Microtransactions, DLC (prepare to pay for new civilisations)

 

[BING XI LAO]

I don't get the dislike for mediaeval aoe4, there's a thousand ways it could theoretically improve on aoe2 and add new things. Can we only have one mediaeval strategy game? I would like to see a mediaeval AoE game with stuff like a lance charge mechanic, mutually exclusive techs that reflect real-history heresies and doctrinal disputes, arrows with friendly fire, less emphasis on robotic build orders, battering rams available earlier in the game, farms taking up more space as a means to reward map control without aoe3's somewhat gimmicky trade routes, maybe even morale or fatigue - Dawn of War proves this works in an RTS, some kind of peasant levy mechanic, a trichotomy between agrarian nomadic and urban states, ..... etc, etc etc.

Of course it will actually be shit though either way. Like Star Wars movies, all games these days are shit until proven innocent.

 

[Jimmious]

Imo it's totally gameplay and ingame graphics. It's probably a scene from a campaign map, which I determine by how the city is constructed and the existance of pavements (which only ever existed in campaigns). Even if the scene is scripted for the sake of the trailer, this is how it will look and feel in the game. There's nothing exceptional in the trailer.

I don't think so. I mean they're in-game graphics and all but it's clearly scripted. For example you can't tell if the game will use squads or single units as AoE always did. Also all these villagers moving around, is there an internal resource thing now in AoE or is it just a show? Three horses going on the hill to look at the enemy.. Captain encourages his troops... These are all way too scripted to be "gameplay"
If we don't see actual actions following clicks it's not gameplay

 

[theSavant]

Surely it's scripted, but that's nothing exceptional in a campaign map. Previous AoEs had this too. The trailer shows enough, that you can imagine how the actual interaction will be like (just more chaotic, but otherwise the same as the previous AoEs). I'm not sure why you really need to see someone clicking around.

 

[AgentFransis]

Why does the eagle have an afterburner? And is it related to the siege tower filled with napalm?

Also someone seems to have forgot the saturation setting on maximum.

 

[Sentinel]

lol it's medieval!



Medieval II: Total War Age of Empires

They're playing it very safe. Even unit types look like those of AoE 2. They're mostly going for the nostalgia angle, I guess

Yes. Instead of moving the series forward they are remaking a game everyone already played. Nostalgia is one of the biggest cancers in modern pop culture.

14. Years.

R.I.P.

That isn't official Ensemble Studios art. Why do people keep posting that shit? It was a fan art contest and that was the winner. Probably the biggest mistake they ever made. Multiple Ensemble Studios people have said they had no idea what to do post AoE3, and even AoE3 was a struggle because of how much it deviated from 2.

 

[Goi~Yaas~Dinn]

Why do people keep posting that shit?

Because that's what they should've done.

 

[vota DC]

I see no gameplay in this gameplay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otptS-eOXvI

 

[Endemic]

RoN is a better comparison. It clearly took a lot of ideas from the AoE series. In the same game you field spearmen vs swordsmen, and modern tanks vs rocket artillery. A thousand years ago, melee was a key component of any warfare. Nowadays it pretty much doesn't exist. A medieval Trebuchet could hurl a boulder at ranges of 300 metres, today you have intercontinental missiles, incredibly complicated logistics chains, electronics. Bombers drop bombs from incredible heights remaining out of reach of small arms fire. Your typical grunt armed with an assault rifle can hit stuff up to 500 metres away. RoN used the same gameplay model to go deep into the XXth century and it works from a gameplay perspective - but play it for a while in the modern era and think about what you're actually seeing on the screen and it's just fucking dumb. Start from thinking about modern-age infantrymen shooting at the same range as javelinmen and see where that train of thought takes you.

Empire Earth did that too. In fact it goes all the way from dark age to C&C-level sci-fi. You can even have priests casting literal magic against tanks, which is funny as well as incongruous.

Hard counter to that is of course ECM, but accurately and entertainingly reflecting ECM in a video game hasn't been done afaik. And if you do ECM, you should also do ECCM. Head's boiling already.

I don't think a small-mid scale RTS needs to go into that level of detail. Flight simulators (and a few related games) have though. I brought up CoH because it looks like we'll still be seeing battles fought at the tactical level, with individual unit micro being relevant. Strategy games that focus on theatre-level warfare, and care about details like logistics have limited unit micromanagement (Hearts of Iron, for example).

One of the key concepts of the AoE series was navigating your empire through different eras. Now, I realise that games are games and the AoE model wasn't exactly "accurate" when reflecting classical or medieval warfare either, but if you try to bite the XXth century and squeeze it into such a model, even representing "era progression" as 20 year gaps, it just gets bonkers, and exceedingly difficult from a design perspective to produce something that makes sense or would remain somewhat coherent while also being playable and fun.

Well the trailer looks like a cross between Settlers, Stronghold and AOE. Then again, Relic haven't been known for adding strategic depth to their RTS games lately.

 

[Van-d-all]

Another trailer made in Illustrator that shows absolutely nothing. If they're going to make cinematic intros, bring back the quality ones like CivV or DoW, it's M$ they can afford it, because this thing is on Endless Legend DLC trailer grade right now.