Leaderboard

Quick model of a nubian pyramid:

The Wildfire splash-screen (logo) should come first. No matter what. Possibly followed by other company logos (such as the game engine). These should be included anyway, and the intro trailer should be done once most, if not all, in-game stuff has been done (models and animations for in-game assets). That's not to say you cannot make a storyboard or animatic (2D and 3D) in the mean time. As for hidden logos in the trailer. I think it would be better if they just had a splash-screen if they're important (such as the WFG logo, and the game engine, etc). Anything else, such as Windows/Linux logos should be reserved for the credits or as fine-print for promo stuff (to show which operating systems it is available on). The frozen-time fly-throughs are OK for saving time in development, but most viewers tend not to appreciate them. Regardless, It would be silly to make assets for this before a storyboard has been made and finalised. That way you know which assets to make and don't end up making something that won't be used. Also, if you plan to make high-poly cinematics for the capaigns, I would recommending using snippets of these in the games opening cinematic. It would save a lot of time and you'd be able to include various factions and historical events. But I would also open the cinematic with something like this (but done with high-poly assets): Oh, and maybe create some epic music that builds up to climax. That way the timing of the cinematic can be edited to fit the music - maybe do this after the storyboard, but before the 2D animatic.

Model for Herma: link

The roofs of the Greek temples are full of drawings, why not draw some easter egg tuxes there? hehe! We could also include other symbols on some soldiers' shields... Of course all the fun lies in making them really subtle, so that who is watching just to see the intro will not notice them, but who is really searching for it will. There are already some examples of these things in big commercial games and the fans loved it.

Download the work in progress here: link If you want to contribute, feel free to do so!

The YouTube profile still points to the old site.

I want a penguin warrior (Tux) hidden in the cinematic xD (but without is fine too) Or maybe there could be this little part at the end where you have a Tux (for Linux), a butterfly (for Windows) and whatever Mac has together to show people that it is multiplatform ... wait ... that seems a bit pointless when the game is already installed ... maybe for the trailer!!! (*dream* *dream* *dream*)

The game seems like a total rip-off. I would only get AoK if there was a total remake.

You're lying! It can't be true! 0 A.D. can't possibly be free! It looks much too good for that! xD AoE II still works just fine on my Ubunut 12.10 newly bought System76 without any modding. I must agree that a HD version is nice, but I'm not paying 17€ for that!

From what I've seen, the HD "effect" doesn't seem impressive at all. I agree with Khopesh that this making money with nothing new. AOK is still a great game and should be still played and respected. It's just that this new edition would make more sense being free and Linux-friendly. This would be fresh. Oh, and actually, I don't know if you heard about, but there's an open-source game that is HD too (but better), and also full 3D, and it's awesome and it grows better and better all the time. It's called 0 A.D. People say it's clearly as good as Age of Kings! And it's free ! You should try it !

A bit off topic (I think there was a thread for this but I can't remember where it was, feel free to move my post there): Concerning "Physical correct" behavior vs straight forward game rules: There are mainly two (clean) ways to make a good RTS in sense of game rules: 1.) Add a physics engine at a very basic level and add very simple game rules (Only Movement(Turning) Speed(Acceleration), Attack Speed/Damage, Projectile Speed/Turning Rate(for missile attacks)/Error but nothing like Armor/Attack Type etc.) Example: Total Annihilation, Spring Engine Advantages: Very realistic, what units are good against what other units comes out "naturally" (Without bonus, just by the physics) Disadvantages: Very Hard to balance, a much harder to implement engine 2.) Add a complex set of game rules that allow units to counter specific other units (either by armor/attack type or by another more "natural" attribute like the Unit Size like done in Starcraft) and let the graphics only represent that rules (In AoE/AoC "Bonus vs Unit Type" is also present but seam enforced to me) Example: Starcraft(Damage bonus against units depending on size, Splash damage), Warcraft III(Damage/Armor Type, Heroes take less spell damage), Age of Empires(Damage/Armor Type) Advantages: What units are good against what other type can be determined by the Attack/Armor Type without seming to be enforced. It can also represent the Armors usually worn by the specific unit type if it's placed in an historical setting (like 0 A.D.). Disadvantages: The game is less realistic especially the graphic representation might seam to not always represent the actual outcome in damage (Warcraft III tries to make it a bit better by making all ranged attacks "missile" attacks which on the other hand seam a bit strange in case of auto aiming arrows). As is 0 A.D. is an ugly mix of all. The graphics does not only represent the game rule but interferes with it e.g.: Melee units that attack does not deal damage if the target is to far away after the attack animation is run. Though there is no fundamental physics engine underneath the game archers shoot in physical trajectories (might be still good for the graphics but bad to let that interfere with the game rules meaning every shoot should hit if not otherwise managed in the game rules like a "Chance To Hit" Attribute) We have Damage and Armor Types but also got "Bonus vs". It would be better to have one of this (I'd much prefer Armor/Attack Types). That mix is quite impossible to be balanced and results in many "Bugs" like the missing chasing melee units (Made even worse by having a min. range for non-siege/fast units like Skirmishers). Another game (and I like it) that mixes a bit of all is Warzone 2100. Projectiles (but missiles) have a trajectory that is fixed at the time it goes off directed towards the predicted point of the unit targeted when the projectile (would) collide with the target with an applied Error determined by the upgrades of accuracy for that type of weapon. It also has Damage/Weapon Types that deal different damage to different units dependent on their propulsion: Cyborgs, Hoover/Wheel/Half-Track/Full-Track Vehicles, VTOLs. Also the speed of projectiles greatly matters for hitting a target. But it turns out to work quite well though not really balanced. But in general I think it would be better and a lot cleaner/much less messy to pick one and stick with it and just make additions in an other direction if it works good with the chosen base rules. NOTE: I tried but not always managed to write words that are involved in the game concept with capital initial letters like "Attack Type". Don't know if that is usual practice and I'm quite sure I didn't do it right all the time but I think it makes it easier to differentiate between game concepts and their explanation. Feedback appreciated.