Suggestions for 0 A.D.

[FirePowa8]

The Hellenes and Celts are the two civilizations the crew want to be most 'complete' first off, so they (and we) know what to expect. We're starting to get a taste of Romans in new screenshots, and hopefully things will lead to the Persians later. They're the civilization I'm most excited about.

[history999]

it is awesome how you guys are keeping it realistic, it makes the game more intriguing

[Belisarivs]

Being a veteran player of AOK MP, I know how exciting and heart racing it can get, extremely impressive to me that such a game could do that to you despite the graphics then werent so good.

You don't like AoK graphics? I find it more detailed and nice than that of AoM ....

[FirePowa8]

I honestly think AOK had the patchiest looking graphics of all the AOE games, at least I think it was the smallest leap from the last game. The buildings and units are scaled better than they were in AOE1, but it still didn't feel that different.

[Undo]

But AoM sucked completely...

[FirePowa8]

I think you'll find that a majority of people who post on this forum will disagree with you completely.

[Belisarivs]

I think you'll find that a majority of people who post on this forum will disagree with you completely.

But I agree with him.

Sorry, but AoM except 3d graphics adds nothing. I played whole campaign and that was great. But that is all. AoM simply looked as if engines did it, not people who enjoyed it. If I had to choose between AoK and AoM, I'd throw the latter one away without any hesitation.

Edited November 30, 2006 by Belisarivs

[Ykkrosh]

I've not actually played either AoK or AoM - but from the perspective of someone making tools for modders, AoM is certainly not as nasty

[Undo]

I simply think that 3D graphic technology was not advanced enough to make AoM the great game it should have been.

[FirePowa8]

But AOM added so much more than just 3D graphics. Play it again. It was the biggest jump, both gameplay and graphics wise, of the series.

[Undo]

I've played it a long time, you know... But eventually those rude and primitive 3D graphics made me stop.

[Mythos_Ruler]

The only thing that stopped me playing AOM was it's superficiality. Sure there was lots of "layers" in the countering system, but it didn't *feel* deep. Plus the game didn't feel as exciting as AOK. Pop cap was low. Units moved kind of slow. The mythologies were blandly portrayed. And last but not least, the Atlanteans were a horrible choice as an xpack civ.

[Undo]

They sure were! What was ES thinking when they created "the Atlanteans"? Everyone knows those gods were plain greek. IMHO they faked those atlanteans because they didn't want to tire themselves researching for another civ-set. :@

[Villi]

Sorry, but AoM except 3d graphics adds nothing. I played whole campaign and that was great. But that is all. AoM simply looked as if engines did it, not people who enjoyed it. If I had to choose between AoK and AoM, I'd throw the latter one away without any hesitation.

Aom added:

-3(4) unique civ's, not only in looks, but also in gameplay.

-The minor (and major too) god choices giving the player the ability to pick from decisive bonuses throughout the game.

-God powers.

-Settlements as key-points to fight over on maps.

-A more fast-paced gameplay than AoK.

-A fresh theme.

I think both AoK and AoM was great games, but saying AoM added nothing but 3D graphics is untrue.

Edited December 2, 2006 by Villi

[Dnas]

AoK was constrained by its technology. With 2d graphics, it is EXTREMELY difficult to have unique art, etc. for as many civs as it had, without exploding in how much space you use (which is limited, and was even more limited back then).

AoK, for its technology and time, was an amazing game. I am more of a modder than a gamer, so, yes, I did mostly abandon it for AoM, because AoK wasn't particularly easily moddable. But as a game, AoK was considerably more fun.

AoM had a new 3d engine, and thus had all the advantages of a 3d game, but didn't go any further. So yes, you will see many things where AoM improves over AoK. With the new engine, it would be silly if it didn't.

But we should have seen a LOT more. Not just the obvious things, but new things to truly exploit the engine. We haven't seen anything particularly innovative (in my rather sideways look on things anyway ) yet in even AoE3, much less AoM.

Of course, AoM is a good game too. But not for innovativeness.

This is why you'll find AoK has a much more loyal fanbase than AoM. The developers put more work into the gameplay and innovation, and it shows.

[FirePowa8]

How can you say the developers put more work into it? It seems to me that there was a very equal amount of interest from the production side in all AOE games, including AOM.

Sorry, but I honestly cannot understand why everyone loves AOK so much, I've played the AOE games for years and AOK never seemed as big a step up from AOE1 in comparison to AOM from AOK.

AOE3 is vastly underappreciated, when you say it adds nothing graphically, you should really play it on a good graphics card. It adds as much as can possibly be added. Gameplay wise? More work has gone into the home city idea than in any new concept for earlier AOE games. There are literally hundreds of different cards, and considering that, the game is pretty darn well balanced.

[Justinian]

AOM was great.

2-3 years ago. compared its 3d engine to today's, and it looks like effluent, but back in it's day it was probably groundbreaking.

AoM was also great because the campaign was mad. The adventures when you didn't have a base... although it was pretty bad when you tried (as I do) to make huge bases with multiple everythings and hundreds of houses.

Edited December 3, 2006 by Scipii_Alemanus

[Mythos_Ruler]

What is lacking in later Age games (AOM/AOE3) is AOK's sense of urgency. What I mean is, in AOK everything moved so quickly. Villagers chopped trees quickly. Units moved very swiftly around the map (high rate of speed). And you had to micromanage a lot more (farms, trade routes, more military units). All of those things brought a sense of urgency to the game that was fun and exciting. With AOM and AOE3, eventhough they feature "faster starts" the unit interaction (that urgency I was talking about - movement rates, econ/military balance of micromanagement) is not nearly as exciting as AOK. That is the thing people talk about when they say AOK is the better game or when they say AOK was the best RTS ever created. The player had to be ON THE BALL at all times, necessitating an exciting level of involvement.

[FirePowa8]

That I can understand from an AOE1 point of view too, even though there were often fewer units. I played an offline game of AOE1 the other day for the first time in a while, and the economy in particular always kept me on the edge of my seat, if only for the fact that resources were gathered so quickly and the need to rebuild storage pits.

I think that if this featured in AOE3 though, the game would be almost unbearably fast and difficult to master. To me, it does everything else better than AOK, especially regarding civilizations and units.

[Death General]

Hi

Although I haven't commented before, I have been following the project for a while now... And I have a suggestion for you guys.

http://www.wildfiregames.com/~art/showcase...plite-basic.jpg

In that screen it shows the basic hoplite with a few different shields and clothing. I was wondering if you could extend that unit variety a little further. Perhaps some algorithm could be used to randomly give variety like Tall-Short, Lean-Wide, and Light-Dark skin to all units. It would go far in separating 0AD from the other RTSs where all units look like manufactured clones.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Some scaling can be done. It's actually a pretty good idea. We plan to implement that for trees anyway. We'll see what we can do!

[FirePowa8]

I'd certainly like to see something like that done (similar to 'hairy' Celt edit, Michael ), as long as it doesn't make units too hard to recgonize. For non-professional armies, it certainly makes sense to see a variety of different people.

[Justinian]

Is this going to be another case of Age II requires 900 food and 300 gold. because that sucks bad

[Mythos_Ruler]

What do you suggest?

[Belisarivs]

Is this going to be another case of Age II requires 900 food and 300 gold. because that sucks bad

I see no better way how to put strategic thinking into game without making it like Settlers. This style of game could be pretty annoying.