Jump to content

Which Campaign Was More Fun ?


Recommended Posts

I liked AoKs the most because they were very well made gameplay-wise. Also there was more than one, and the campaigns really highlighted the theme of the game - Age of Empires - very well.

While Aom... they simply had a mediocre story with minor special effects and some attempt at plot progression :) I really could care less what Arkanthos was up to or what Kastor really was doing with the atlanteans. The campaign was very loosely tied together with minor themes of mythology. If ES went for something that really highlighted mythology and culture it would've been very good, but I just didn't like their campaign all that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I concur with Michael.

The AoM campaign is by no means the best of its kind (I'm replaying it at the moment, and was appalled by frequently corny script and occasionally dire voice acting), but the technical capability to deliver the plot through in-game cinematics, the use of dynamic cameras, special particle effects, and a character-focused storyline made it more interesting.

In my view, it is focusing on strong central characters that creates an emotional attachment to a scenario.

I simply couldn't get into the Age of Empires campaigns because the fixed camera gave inadequate opportunities for character development and cinematic techniques.

Slightly OT, but I personally prefer to have access to several unrelated campaigns in preference to one long linear one. It has its disadvantages (particularly that they all have to start at basic difficulty and build up), but:

a] I feel a greater sense of accomplishment when I have shorter milestones ("I've completed the Terran campaign" rather than "I've completed 12 scenarios of the singleplayer campaign; 18 still to go");

b] I can work on several campaigns at once, and have the freedom to switch if one stumps me. ie I can't get past the 5th mission with civ x campaign, so I'll have a crack at civ y's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

AoM's was better in terms of special effects and different types of gameplay, and also in terms of "easter eggs", but AoK's was certainly pretty creative for its time. The main thing I disliked about AoM's campaign was the lack of a background story - if you look at Detailed Help on the units you see so much more interesting stuff about each one, but in the campaign it's "Hi Ajax, I'm surprised you're still alive" and then end of dialog. AoK did a lot better with the storyline. For example, I liked the Barbarossa campaign, where it turned out that the narrator was one of the main characters, and the Montezuma one, where the narrative started out as "passed down to you by Chuahtemoc, Eagle Warrior of Tenochtitlan" and ended as "passed down to you by Chuahtemoc, Emperor of Tenochtitlan". Both games unfortunately had mostly B&D scenarios, but then again, that's what the game is about and most players aren't people who play hundreds of Random Map games and thus are bored by B&D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...