Age of Empires definitive edition [remaster]

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quote

celebrate this announce, we’re also opening up the multiplayer beta to more players worldwide starting January 29 so everyone can get a taste of the game for free before it launches on February 20. You can find more information on the beta and sign up for it at AgeOfEmpires.com.
Read more at https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2018/01/18/age-empires-definitive-edition-launches-february-20/#4gVIbmRmXoqXzZRS.99

Now its open, even myself is beta. but I haven't time to test, lol.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Now its open, even myself is beta. but I haven't time to test, lol.

I want to try singleplayer guddarnit.

[Lion.Kanzen]

3 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I want to try singleplayer guddarnit.

The good thing of the game  is sound ,is  very superior to the rest departments, specially animation.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Spoiler

Quote

I love Age of Empires and I'm a long time fan. I have high hopes for this game and enjoy the 3D style. But there's something that I want to address and that's the general appearance of the buildings and such in general. The buildings feel too small and don't look realistic enough, in my opinion. I'm not suggesting they go for fully ultra-realistic buildings, of course, but the game honestly looks like those numerous mobile games and I don't think that suits it at all. I haven't played all the civs and seen all of the buildings but so far I'm already questioning certain aspects of it. If it sounds blunt or aggressive that's my bad, but I really want this game to live up to it's name. Some examples:

• The stone age houses are tiny, and since they have the fire pit it looks rather awkward when you have multiple beside one another. I think the fire pit should be removed and the buildings themselves should be scaled up to the full size of the collider.
• Imho the Town Centre should be an actual building, in AoE II it looked like a proper centre of your base, in this game it just looks a little bit underwhelming. The barracks looks far more impressive.
• The first tier of stone walls literally looks like Clash of Clans or something. I love Aoe but this just looks awful
• The early granary looks like some sort of giant ceramic vase
• I'm not even sure what on Earth the stone age dock is supposed to be. It's like dirt arranged into a plus sign? If it's going to be called a dock can it at least be an actual dock?

I like AOEII's approach best, where the buildings take up the full area of the "plot" for the most part. Buildings feel very small and honestly, the current style looks like something I'd play on Facebook. Although I'm sure some exceptions could be made for the stone age, I believe there should be more actual buildings, and pretty much everything should be larger visually, to really feel like a city or fortress. Obviously this is a remake but I feel like some liberties ought to be taken.

As for the UI, it needs MAJOR changes in my opinion. First I'll mention some basic stuff I noticed:

• The icons are a decent size and well spaced out, but the text is always smaller. The text should scale up with the icon to make it consistent and easily readable.
• The resources bar should at least have an option to anchor it to the side of the screen, rather than being randomly positioned
• The big Roman numeral beside the age is a waste of space, the player knows what age they're in.
• The map is nice but the big box around it just takes up space.

I think my biggest issue with the UI is it feels overdone and clunky. The buttons have the shine/gloss effect over them and the frames have all these intricate designs, but the actual units and buildings follow a very clean, crisp design. It just doesn't fit and seems out of place. I think the UI ought to be made more minimalist and simple, and also more responsive.

Like the core gameplay is Age of Empires, make no mistake, but it just looks underwhelming and the UI is an eyesore.

 

The feedback from users.

[Lion.Kanzen]

A little cheat

Quote

If you want to play solo you can go to:
Editors -> Create Scenario

• Players (first row third column, top left)
• Change player 1 Civilization to the one you want to play.
• Increase player 2 starting resources to increase difficulty. (500 food/500 wood for hard difficulty)
• go to map (most top left button)
• Bottom left choose Random Map
• Pick map size and type, then press Generate map.

menu -> test to play the map.

 

[av93]

2 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

  Hide contents

 

The feedback from users.

The feedback of one user (and people that had liked the publication). I don't agree in nothing, seeing the youtube videos. 

[Lion.Kanzen]

5 hours ago, av93 said:

The feedback of one user (and people that had liked the publication). I don't agree in nothing, seeing the youtube videos. 

I read that forum all days, today they give me the beta access, but mostly of users can access in multiplayer, but 17 Gb of space... 4K no thank you.

the complaid for the graphic is rare but are similar.

[Lion.Kanzen]

@Jarkendia from vidaextra (news) 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

Tatoh

[niektb]

I got access to the closed beta too but I found it rather annoying to play. Pathfinding and unit behaviour are rather poor (but maybe that's an accurate representation of the original game?)

[Lion.Kanzen]

Never I saw a RTS with full of bugs like this.

Reported by a user.

Spoiler

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

Spoiler

Quote

I see a lot of complain, or ideas about modernity.
While I understand that "realistic" stuff sounds cool to suggest, and that eveything that prevent us from doing effort, seems cool, there is many reason why we should worry about some of the Ideas proposed.

First, age of empire is an RTS. The difference with a 4x like civilization, its because the game is not only about strategy. There is also the "RealTime" part : TIME. This is really important.

Why ? because a big part of the strategy is what will you do of your time ?
_How will you organize
_How will you prioritize
_How can you increase the efficiency of the TIME
To get closer to victory.

How will you organize:
is pretty simple. It consist to anticipate the actions that you will need to do, so you never get overcharged by it, and you can Use your APMS in an efficient way.
Example : if you know that planting farm with require somes precious seconds to you, don't launch an attack when there is only 10 food left in your farms. Or you will be not producing/not watching your army.

How will you prioritize:
Sometime, stuff you can't anticipate happens. you get attacked, and at this moment, many point of the game require your attention.. you won't be able to handle everything so it means you will have to do something :
MAKE A CHOICE.
Will you decide to sacrifice your army ? (if not big), or will you sacrifice your economy having iddle farmers/fishing boats, resulting in no production , so no army, in the next minute ?

As part of a strategic game, I think that the most opportunity like this to "choose", the more "deep" and interesting the game become.

How can you increase the efficiency of the TIME
Simple. Like all the pro player know, by doing more action each second.
so, By increasing your APM, that is a personal ability on which you can improve over time.
The fact you can improve something about yourself, a physical and psychological ability, is what bring a lot of fun to the game, to IMPROVE yourself and get better in order to win => its the core spirit of a game.

Thats all those mechanics that make the overall game enjoyable.
And that explain while, in some modern game with a lot of comfort/automatic option, the game becomes boring.

So the main problem here is to always have a lot of stuff to do, in order to organize your time, prioritize your action, trying to improve your APM.

if you remove stuff to do, you remove thoses 3 aspects of the game.
Why organize if in the end you have plenty of time to do everything.
Why prioritize, if you can do both actions ?
Why improving your APM, if you are idle half of the time ?

Congratulation your game , without you realizing it, has become linear, repetitive and boring.
=> thats the failure of many RTS game, and people doesnt understand why.
They have many great comfort option, the game is beautiful, but still... they are bored when playing it.
they dont feel the little frustration that you can do better, or that things can happens differently, the little thing that make you relaunch another game .

Some successful modern game have understood it, and if they indeed have simplified some mechanics, they have added others mechanics so you always have way more stuff to do than you actually can.
Starcraft2 for example has a very simplified economic, but has a very important army micromanagement, and scouting/exploration mechanics, a deep counter units mechanics and a very big technologic tree, that you need to anticipate because you may need each and every type of unit in a game, depending on the anwer of the ennemy, so the mind is always busy.

But in a Age of Empire1 remake its impossible.
The counter units mechanics is poor, most of the time the units you decide to create are the strongest of your civilisation and you don't really adapt to the ennemy composition, the ennemy base scouting is useless because you can't deduce anything or a counter strategy from ennemy's base like in starcraft..

All you have to do is micromanage a tons of economicals units, and producing a ton of army.
If you decide to remove some mechanics, you have nothing to replace it with that doesn't already exist in the game.
For someone who can manage to handle everything in age of empire1 removing something, even if it is a boring action, just means : the game itself will become boring, because you will be a little more idle than you were, no more dynamics "time"-related choices , because now you have more time.

While some may enjoy playing more casual and reducing the game with good player thanks to that, for me its the death of the game.

Farms
So while there is good suggestions for comfort :
_walkable farms (even if im very happy to have my farm to protect my villagers from direct contact in a toolrush, so i can escape)
_right click, to rebuild farm instead of B+F

I'm not aggree with some others option like Automated-rebuild Farm / infinite farm
Because it remove something concrete to use your APM, or dynamic-strategic mind.
If you push the idea so you can undestand me : Lets say the moderns games now are not only about queue but about full automate.
you want auto villager production,
Auto villager assignation
Auto farm rebuild

You basically have an "auto economy", and you just lose 50% of the game interest.
I won't get into the villager queing, but its the same idea.

Gates:
Same for gates. Its a nice realistic ideas, that bring a lot of comfort and seem pretty logic.
But the fact is that in age of empire1 a wall is a strategic choice. It means sometime its good, sometime it is not. you have to choose wisely.

A wall without gate is a jail. You can't help your ally, you cant explore, you cant attack and defend at the same time.
No wall means you are in danger. everyone can come to your base but you are totally free

So you have a real choice there. Something to sacrifice, something to win.
Choice means strategy => we are in a RTS that what we want

The game get deeper because you don't know if the ennemy will choose to wall or not.
so you take risk you have to take decision too.

Now lets say you have gate :
There is not more counterpart to making wall.
Everyone make a wall.
No more decision about it, so no more strategy on this particular detail.
And as everyone make a wall every game, its a lot of counter strategy choice that disappear, you know from the beggining that your opponent will be walled.

No more choice, no more strategy about it, the game gets poor, no more fun.
But.. you got realism and comfort..

Thats basically two example but what I want to express is that when you ask to add or remove something to the game you have to think to the deepest of what it will means for the game, the strategies, the player, and don't stay to just the basic idea "woa automated farm its modern, its cool !".

"Real"! RANDOM MAP
Another aspect of the game is the RandomMap.
And thats what I like, because in Realtime strategy you can also think "strategy in real time, strategy at each moment".
That exactly what real random map is.
=> you cannot plan your strategy before playing.

Thank to random map :
you have to first witness if you find your food right away or not. If you find your food maybe you won't find your wood, or it will be very far
So you cannot decide your strategy before playing you will have to ADAPT
ADAPT = to rething the Strategy at every moment.

That kind of stuff doesn't happens on starcraft, the map are already decided and you know that at 2mn27second you will be constructing the X building.

in age of empire, **** HAPPENS.
And yeah sometime its crap, you're pissed. but the ennemy have the same % of chance to having badluck at some point too.
Its like Poker. Bad luck happens, not every player have the same cards, but you have to deal with it.
And the best always succeed anyway, because of ADAPTATION capabilities.

Moreover age of empire1 never was a 1v1 contest RTS. it was more a 3v3 or 4v4 big, fun and unpredictive games. Don't try to copy X other RTS, let aoe1 be aoe1.
if you want to have a totally symetrical, predictiven, monotask strategy game, play chess.
Age of empire is the total oposite

And sometime you'll have some good surprise, like your allies that didn't find his gold but has found a LOT of stone, and has just totally destroyed the ennemy army with a unnplanned defensive strategy of 10 defensive towers in his base and accross the map.

Or an ally that started the game on an island and that comme to your rescue with a lot of boat armies from the coasts , that you never expected to see on a land battle.

So I won't force you to agree on X or Y proposition, i just want you to go for the correct question.

but my final world would be :
Its strategic, unpredictive, Fun, what else do we care about ?

Age of empire 1 : Don't try to copy others half assed RTS, be Yourself and be Proud , you're the more fun to play of All !!! You could be ashamed of your graphicals but now your time has come, Assume your own style !

Thank you for reading until the end.

 

Interesting thought from purist gamer.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Almost nothing he says there interests me.

He spends 3 paragraphs arguing against gates for Christ's sake.

Edited February 8, 2018 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Almost nothing he says there interests me.

Its the opposite to our gameplay. I'm not surprise. but @DarcReaver what you think.

[Lion.Kanzen]

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quote

We are not, in any case, before a simple facelift, since this update of the 1997 classic will also improve other aspects, such as control, adding production queues and things that we see today as standard, but without changing , in any case, the essence of an RTS that does not seem to pass the years. Because yes, the original 'Age of Empires' is still the most addictive and even has a charm that does not seem to replicate its remake, giving the feeling of (maybe) being overloaded by that detailed aesthetic.

By Jarkendia

[Andrettin]

5 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Almost nothing he says there interests me.

He spends 3 paragraphs arguing against gates for Christ's sake.

Indeed, I feel the same way. And saying that higher APM being necessary to play well is something *good* is a bit too much for me as well. The more a high APM is required by a RTS game, the less strategic it actually is, the more it becomes a fight against the interface.

[Skhorn]

Those are 5mins of my life that i will never get back

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, Skhorn said:

Those are 5mins of my life that i will never get back

But was fun, lol. is unbelievable guys like that. this why I love this project, Its  natural evolve without change era. I  don't like those kind blizzard fast strategy.

But isn't bad see Pro playing those classic like Tatoh and theviper , but destroy the immersion.

[Lion.Kanzen]

https://www.ageofempires.com/news/age-empires-definitive-edition-3d-2d-game/

Quote

This also explains why the game is such an incredibly large download (17GB!) compared to the original (300MB). With all graphical novelties combined, the new upgraded Trireme graphics are as big as the complete original game. But hey, now we go in 32 directions, we can zoom in from HD to 4K and beyond, we have sails that play nicely in the wind and the crew can gaze at themselves in the reflections on the water.

Eh... there a things named compression and optimization...

[Skhorn]

You didn't know? Extra large files it's their new feature

[Lion.Kanzen]

32 minutes ago, Skhorn said:

You didn't know? Extra large files it's their new feature

I don't need play that at 4K all I want is oldie or HD textures with some new gameplay.

[DarcReaver]

12 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Almost nothing he says there interests me.

He spends 3 paragraphs arguing against gates for Christ's sake.

 

12 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Its the opposite to our gameplay. I'm not surprise. but @DarcReaver what you think.

Well his arguments are pretty retarded. It's the typical eyesight of people who don't want to loose an advantage. If a game requires you to destroy/rebuild walls and you mastered this "feature" you don't want it gone. Because it's something other people cannot do aswell as you can.

The issue with this is that this type of person does not differentiate between "good" and "bad" Actions and APM. You can get 300+ APM by just spamming right clicks. That doesn't make you a good player. Same - building and destroying walls does not define a good player. 

The point about "random maps":

Quote

Real"! RANDOM MAP
Another aspect of the game is the RandomMap.
And thats what I like, because in Realtime strategy you can also think "strategy in real time, strategy at each moment".
That exactly what real random map is.
=> you cannot plan your strategy before playing.

I think he is pretty spot on on this point. This is what makes AoE games different from other RTS. It's a good feature. But his view on "it's good luck/bad luck" like poker is bad. There should be some basic balance in the map layout. If it isn't, the game is not fun. No matter if 1v1 or 4v4. The easiest way to get rid of these people is to get someone who is a better player than they are, and then abuse them for dozens of games with the @#$% they say that should stay in the game. To the point they're so pissed off that they quit or admit that they were wrong. 

6 hours ago, Andrettin said:

Indeed, I feel the same way. And saying that higher APM being necessary to play well is something *good* is a bit too much for me as well. The more a high APM is required by a RTS game, the less strategic it actually is, the more it becomes a fight against the interface.

Indeed. Useless, tedious micro is cancer. Nobody needs units that are too retarded to move properly, or to destroy walls to get units through a wall. 

5 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

But was fun, lol. is unbelievable guys like that. this why I love this project, Its  natural evolve without change era. I  don't like those kind blizzard fast strategy.

But isn't bad see Pro playing those classic like Tatoh and theviper , but destroy the immersion.

True, those purists are cancer for games. If you follow their opinion you'll alienate 99% of the community. This is probably someone who never played some other game and didn't evolve further at all. It's the same type of people who only play the most basic, unpatched version of a game, because they think that balance changes are unnecessary, because "it makes the game more hard" ... Which is retarded. AOE 1 Rise of Rome is Chariot archer spam in 99% of the time with assyrians. If MS/FE had put in the vanilla game stats I'm 100% sure the community would be even more dead than the one from Dawn of War 3 or Age of Mythology.

AoE DE at least has some nice tool rushing options, and it's possible to use other civs than just Assyrians. I have decent sucess with Greeks and Sumerians in 1v1 for example. 

Considering that on the 1st day of "open beta" in AoE there were like 40 rooms open at the same time. The 2nd day there only were like 15 open. This shows that many people try it out but obviously they dislike somehting about the game - maybe the balance, maybe the gameplay, and maybe the controls. A lot of people expect certain "quality of life" changes to a modern game.

Edited February 8, 2018 by DarcReaver

[av93]

I don't understand why they didn't put farm queues and gates..