Mythos_Ruler Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 Ouch: A scathing review of AoEO.I pretty much agree with the review. The things you are forced to unlock, like buildings and ships and units, etc. were things that came without this requirement in past games. The only "innovation" in the game is in the way you are forced to unlock everything. Want to play with powerful heavy cavalry? Too bad, you have to grind through 15 hours of missions first. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! I liked the customizable tech tree at first, but really? I have to grind through 50 missions first before I get the ability to build a castle? Screw that. If you are forced to unlock things, they should be special things, not items you should be able to build normally (a watch tower, really?), Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shield Bearer Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 Really stupid. I got bored within the first 2 hours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ykkrosh Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 It sounds kind of like they took a decent (albeit old-fashioned) RTS design, and then stripped out most of the features so they could gradually feed them back to players as a reward for playing; the result is that you spend a long time playing an incomplete RTS game (which is less fun and less well balanced because of what's missing) and all you end up with is a complete RTS game that you could have bought from a shop ten years ago and played without all this levelling-up hassle.Presumably it would be better if players started with access to a complete RTS game, which was properly fun by itself (so it wouldn't be perceived as grinding), and then the persistent online features were built on top of that instead of subtracting from it (though I don't know exactly what that would entail). (Or at least 'better' from the perspective of experienced RTS gamers - presumably Microsoft's money-counters and (they hope) hordes of semi-casual gamers will have a different perspective.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Android_ Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 It sounds kind of like they took a decent (albeit old-fashioned) RTS design, and then stripped out most of the features so they could gradually feed them back to players as a reward for playing haha well said. by the way apart from the lack of gameplay innovation i think there has been a clear and significant decrease in the quality of the scenarios and campaigns since aom, with aoeo being the end of the line... the missions are ridiculous. i'm surprised by this because there are probably some guys left with them who made the aom campaign and so they should know a scenario does not always have to follow a standard you-start-off-with-a-TC-now-go-and-kill-things pattern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chakakhan Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 Presumably it would be better if players started with access to a complete RTS game, which was properly fun by itself (so it wouldn't be perceived as grinding), and then the persistent online features were built on top of that instead of subtracting from it (though I don't know exactly what that would entail). (Or at least 'better' from the perspective of experienced RTS gamers - presumably Microsoft's money-counters and (they hope) hordes of semi-casual gamers will have a different perspective.)They have "Pro Packs" that let you start with an already leveled up Civilization. I agree that they did mostly strip things away just so they could add the leveling up concept. I thought the game was fun, leveling up took a bit too long though. The AI is really good and the pathing is really good, so that was entertaining for me from a technical perspective.The biggest problems are: Leveling up is tedious and takes too long.Online competitive play can potentially be very unbalanced. Advisers and gear can modify your stats pretty dramatically and you have to find these items to unlock them. So the fact that everyone has different stuff makes competitive play unbalanced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Android_ Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 well yeah the gameplay as such is pretty much like that of AoM without myth units and god powers, and with stone as a new resource instead. i do agree with you on the levelling and balance issues as well. (one of the few games i played was vs. an egypt player when i was greek, and he was lvl 10 while i was lvl 8, which meant he could age up to age 3 and build elephants. the result was ridiculous: although my economy was way better than his and i could crank out 200+ spearmen amongst other units, he would beat me with a total of 30 elephants, of which i killed about 10. it was so preposterous i actually had to smile haha.)but then again, is this the RTS market of the future?? refurbishing 10 year old games and adding some 'facebook generation' widgets (while cutting all support for user made content)?i think 0ad is a good way to show where rts games could have gone instead: less dumbification, more user-made content! (that's what all this '2.0' stuff is about right? ('web 2.0' etc.) so why shouldn't it work for games too?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chakakhan Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 but then again, is this the RTS market of the future??Great point! You have to be on the internet to play a lot of games now. I think this is one way the game studios get around pirating. Starcraft II has a hosted model as well (although it is modable). More people play Starcraft II mods than the actual game now.This is why I got so interested in 0AD. It has the potential to be all the things I imagined AoE might have become. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Android_ Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 hehe. i really like the spirit of you guys here. makes me wish i could contribute, now if i only knew c/javascript . maybe i'll try to get into it once i have time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeru Posted August 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 i think 0ad is a good way to show where rts games could have gone instead: less dumbification, more user-made content! (that's what all this '2.0' stuff is about right? ('web 2.0' etc.) so why shouldn't it work for games too?)Web 2.0 and cloud computing and all that stuff would have never been possible without free and open technologies and standards: HTTP, Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP, (X)HTML/CSS, JavaScript, RSS/Atom, open browsers, ...Perhaps 0 A.D., and particularly the 0 A.D. game engine, can bring forth a similar movement among computer games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeru Posted August 27, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 Gamespy was pretty happy with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos_Ruler Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 Gamespy was pretty happy with it.I really don't trust mainstream reviews anymore. I've been burned too many times and there is review creep, where more and more games are being reviewed at higher and higher scores, while ultimate satisfaction from gamers continues to go down. It seems like this guy, despite what he says about being jaded, was not very critical in his thinking at all. He himself said he had a budget of $40 AUS... but he then goes on to actually pay $50 AUS and he still only has a small percentage of the game's content and can only "equip" his 1st tier items. Sounds like a huge money sink, while before with AOE1/AOE2/AOM/AOE3 $50 would get you the whole game, and then a year later $30 would get you a nice hefty expansion pack. It sounds like with AOEO you're looking at $200 to access all of the content. I'll stick with 0 A.D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ykkrosh Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 It sounds like with AOEO you're looking at $200 to access all of the content.They have "Season Pass" bundles which give you all the content over a six month period for $100 (USD), so it won't be $200 unless you like the game enough to spend a year playing it, in which case surely $0.50 per day isn't such a bad deal, compared to spending $50 for a standard game that's probably ten hours long and that you probably won't play all the way through anyway (I guess they realised the terrible situation that people are still playing AoK after a decade without giving any more money to Microsoft, and are making sure to fix that this time...)I'll stick with 0 A.D. That costs hundreds of thousands (or maybe millions) of dollars worth of man-hours, so I think AoEO is a relative bargain at any price Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuliusColtranePille Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 "This is why I got so interested in 0AD. It has the potential to be all the things I imagined AoE might have become. "word. already when AoE III came out, i couldn't wait to get a finely refurbished AoE IV which would have taken place in the ancient world. as a player who grew up with AoE and AoK (as there should be a lot of around here) you def can imagine what a budding surprise 0 a.d. was for me (as i learned about the game only before 3 weeks). besides, the kind of user generated content which is displayed by the work around 0 a.d. retrieves a certain feeling of the old internet aura in which there was the utopia of creating an antithesis to the industries (think this development gets quite a cynical peak with AoE Online in comparison to 0 a.d.)maybe it's not the best thread to do so, but as this is my first post: you guys made me really happy!looking forward to alpha 7. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeru Posted August 27, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 Any thread is the right thread for kind words like these. Thanks so much, Julius. How did you find out about 0 A.D.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuliusColtranePille Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 on some AoE III online-community wasn't really into "modders-sphere" before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos_Ruler Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 They have "Season Pass" bundles which give you all the content over a six month period for $100 (USD), so it won't be $200 unless you like the game enough to spend a year playing it, in which case surely $0.50 per day isn't such a bad deal, compared to spending $50 for a standard game that's probably ten hours long and that you probably won't play all the way through anyway You are comparing apples to oranges. RTS games (and other games with multiplayer capabilities) aren't a 10 hour affair. I have not played a PC game in over 10 years specifically for its single player campaign. I'm a multiplayer gamer. I played Age of Mythology, an RTS game, online for 7 years. It cost me a total of $80. Now, for AOEO, you've shown a pricing plan that could cost me $100 every 6 months for the same level of gameplay and enjoyment I got from AOM for $5.72 (average) every 6 months (or 3p per day). AOEO is not a good value compared to a lot of (better) RTSs. Ain't gonna do it, cap'n!(I guess they realised the terrible situation that people are still playing AoK after a decade without giving any more money to Microsoft, and are making sure to fix that this time...)Such a terrible situation! Blizzard must have been horrified that people have been playing Starcraft 1 for 13 years. Let's forget about pirating for a moment (which was common for SC1, especially in South Korea). I still see Starcraft 1 on the shelves at my local Walmart, right alongside Age of Empires Gold. These companies are still making money off of 10 year old games. That's fine and right. Blizzard found many ways to monetize the popularity of Starcraft too.I really have no point, just chatting. That costs hundreds of thousands (or maybe millions) of dollars worth of man-hours, so I think AoEO is a relative bargain at any price Yeah, I love being locked in to pricing schemes and DRM-lite, so I'll go with AOEO I guess. In all seriousness though, at this rate it doesn't look like I'll be buying any new AAA games for a long time. DRM malware junk, Internet registration, pricing schemes, nerfed multiplayer capabilities (check out the difference between Modern Warfare 1 and Modern Warfare 2 in the multiplayer dept.)... I'll be sticking with indie games for a while. Last AAA game I bought was Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare two years ago (at a discount). Gamers have to take a stand against this stuff. Call me a crusader... -------------------------------------------------The ultimate problem with AOEO is not its pricing scheme or even its "social" aspects. The problem isn't its cartoonish graphics. The problem is that the core gameplay has NO innovation. The game adds nothing new to the franchise whatsoever. I like the customizable tech trees, but in the end, it's basically the card system from AOE3, and they aren't so much as "customizable" per se... they are basically unlockable features that should be available from the beginning. This is not innovation, but hamstringing. These are steps backward. AOEO is just not that good of a game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Android_ Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 The problem is that the core gameplay has NO innovation.Word. I strongly agree with JuliusColtranePille as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pureon Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 Yeah, I love being locked in to pricing schemes and DRM-lite, so I'll go with AOEO I guess. In all seriousness though, at this rate it doesn't look like I'll be buying any new AAA games for a long time. DRM malware junk, Internet registration, pricing schemes, nerfed multiplayer capabilities (check out the difference between Modern Warfare 1 and Modern Warfare 2 in the multiplayer dept.)... I'll be sticking with indie games for a while. Last AAA game I bought was Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare two years ago (at a discount). Gamers have to take a stand against this stuff. Call me a crusader... The next game I'm contemplating is Anno 2070, if the gameplay is anything like Anno 1404 then I'll definitely try it and probably waste countless hours in front of it. Lots of people have been vocal about Ubisoft's extreme DRM, and while that was a massive turnoff, I still purchased Anno 1404 and enjoyed it. I only have one game installed on my computer at the moment, and it's Company of Heroes which I still frequently like to play/mod. 0AD is not classed as a 'game', it's more than that The last game I bought though was Starcraft 2, despite winning 2 out of 3 online matches it didn't entertain me enough, and liked to overheat my old graphics card. I still haven't tried AOEO, the gameplay videos haven't interested me at all, which is disappointing. But it is free... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Posted August 29, 2011 Report Share Posted August 29, 2011 (edited) You are comparing apples to oranges. RTS games (and other games with multiplayer capabilities) aren't a 10 hour affair. I have not played a PC game in over 10 years specifically for its single player campaign. I'm a multiplayer gamer. I played Age of Mythology, an RTS game, online for 7 years. It cost me a total of $80. Now, for AOEO, you've shown a pricing plan that could cost me $100 every 6 months for the same level of gameplay and enjoyment I got from AOM for $5.72 (average) every 6 months (or 3p per day). AOEO is not a good value compared to a lot of (better) RTSs. Ain't gonna do it, cap'n!The flip-side is with the ability to charge over time, the campaigns can be expanded on, updates can be made to 'balance' PvP so the expected life of the game would far surpass a normal $60 RTS from the store. It also allows you to not spend the $100 - just spent $20-60$ unlocking your 1-3 favorite civilizations if you're not interested in the questing and making your city look beautiful. I could be wrong though... I don't have a great understanding of their price models and what the various prices offer.Edit: Thanks Pureon for mentioning Anno 2070, I'm going to follow that game closely. Looks like fun, I've always liked RTSes and to a lesser extent world building/shaping games so I'll probably end up getting it. To address Mythos Ruler about not buying a game any time soon - I kind of agree. There's one definite buy for me GW2 but that's about all I can see myself getting now. Unfortunately the trends in the gaming industry seem to be moving towards the Phone/Tablet APP games and other games for casual audiences. The Wii sold huge, iPhone/Android App games sell well, Facebook and other social networking games seem to do well. Maybe we're just being caught at a bad time in the history of the gaming industry - the casual gamer is driving the market. The upside is there's only so much further casual gaming can go, the Wii is out, Microsoft put out their motion sensor thing and there's not much more to expand on in terms of App and Browser games. Maybe in 10 years (or less) - we'll see a return that blends some of the new stuff technology that has been refined and perfected (motion sensors) with the 'hardcore' (all relative when compared with App games) games. Edited August 29, 2011 by Silver Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shield Bearer Posted August 29, 2011 Report Share Posted August 29, 2011 Anno 2070! AWESOME! I noticed some that you were an Anno fan, Pureon, especially after your mock up of the main menu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pureon Posted August 29, 2011 Report Share Posted August 29, 2011 Good to know I'm not the only Anno fan here! I noticed some that you were an Anno fan, Pureon, especially after your mock up of the main menu I haven't seen an Anno main menu for a good 5 months or more, so hopefully it's not too similar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shield Bearer Posted August 29, 2011 Report Share Posted August 29, 2011 Its the same side ribbon, but not too similar, although when my brother saw it he said 'Hey, its like Anno!' but that's 'cause I asked him to notice the new menu Now, i'm gonna play 1404, excuse me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chakakhan Posted August 29, 2011 Report Share Posted August 29, 2011 Wow, I never heard of Anno. What a neat looking game! I am going to have to purchase that and try it out when I have some free time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pureon Posted August 29, 2011 Report Share Posted August 29, 2011 Let's not forget about Alpha 7 guys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chakakhan Posted August 29, 2011 Report Share Posted August 29, 2011 Yea, don't worry, when I have free time means some time after October 1st. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.