Instalează Steam
conectare
|
limbă
简体中文 (chineză simplificată)
繁體中文 (chineză tradițională)
日本語 (japoneză)
한국어 (coreeană)
ไทย (thailandeză)
български (bulgară)
Čeština (cehă)
Dansk (daneză)
Deutsch (germană)
English (engleză)
Español - España (spaniolă - Spania)
Español - Latinoamérica (spaniolă - America Latină)
Ελληνικά (greacă)
Français (franceză)
Italiano (italiană)
Bahasa Indonesia (indoneziană)
Magyar (maghiară)
Nederlands (neerlandeză)
Norsk (norvegiană)
Polski (poloneză)
Português (portugheză - Portugalia)
Português - Brasil (portugheză - Brazilia)
Русский (rusă)
Suomi (finlandeză)
Svenska (suedeză)
Türkçe (turcă)
Tiếng Việt (vietnameză)
Українська (ucraineană)
Raportează o problemă de traducere
Reguli și ghiduri pentru discuții
Raportează această postare
3 is good, has some interesting mechanics/card system and 3d models, which don't look as good as 2's sprites
4 is...I refunded it. some people enjoy it, good for them
fact is, the original people were long, long gone from the project by AOE4 and it shows
Why is 2 the best in your opinion over the others can you go into more detail?
the sprites still look beautiful and it has aged well
it does not have the annoying card gimmick, which many don't like
aoe 2 is basically a highly refined classic
AOE1: still has charm and is fun, but hasn't aged so well
AOE2: good quality of life, still looks great, tons of civs, classic gameplay
AOE3: somewhat ugly 3d models, card/home town system gimmick which is fun but changes the game a lot. AOE3 has a great campaign, cool gunpowder and artillery units. it has a lot of positives
AOE4: made by relic, not impressed
AoE2 - numerous excellent campaigns, fluid gameplay, mesmerizing visuals, memorable game overall. Old game that still holds up mechanically, when it has no right to after all these years. You can fault it for certain things, like not being asymmetrical enough or not visually representing its subject cultures when it comes to units, but the solid base is what keeps the people playing it. Aside from certain civs which have weird starting conditions, it's easy to swap civs without feeling lost. The solid core keeps it functioning.
AoE3 - an experimental RTS that I would say is pretty good, if you have the time to invest in it. I think the campaigns are weirdly thought up, especially when they only superficially correlate to certain civs, but otherwise alright. A lot of moving elements to keep track of, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but as someone who never played it before, I find it difficult to get into. One thing I have enjoyed is the soundtrack, though.
AoE4 - Haven't played it, but seen a lot of it. Inferior campaign design (to even AoE1, imo), good building visuals, but questionable unit visuals, very limited replayability for someone who only plays campaigns, only 10 civs available, questionable future imo. Overlaps with AoE2 in time period, with AoE2 beating it in everything except faction asymmetry.
AoM - Haven't played it, but what I've seen of it looks like fun. Happily awaiting the Retold edition.
There is campaign, vs AI, ranked, casual, custom games, and imo most importantly mods, with which ui ones like making trees smaller are accepted and allowed by the community cause.
The community is pre chill as well.
for a majority tho this game is just nostalgic, but really easily accessed with plenty of access for others.
Also Microsoft strangely enough has done a lot to boost this game, like plenty of tournaments.
I recommend looking up either T90 Offical or TheViper on yourtube if you want to know more
Comparred to AOE 1/3/4 comment above me covers it well
In my limited view, AOE2 came closest to hitting that sweet spot of gameplay balancing, civ variety and QOL improvements all the while retaining it's heritage. These are possibly the things that helped foster such a large and enduring MP community.
But AOE2 really perfected what AOE1 started. It fine tuned mechanics, added many improvements, unique units and techs too to make civs far more distinct.
It's a pity that they did not put much effort in AOE1 DE, I do think it deserved better but then again, that might make it a whole different game.
It seems like the upcoming expansion of AOE2 DE might let them do that still, I'd get that instead of AOE1 DE.
Age of Empires 3 is a good game on it's own.
Main issue I have with it is that it covers too much time, and a time where technology changed fast. Seeing conquistadors next to vikings isn't jarring at all to me compared to armoured halberdiers next to trains and cowboys.
They should have gone with either pike and shot era, Imperial period, Napoleonic age or Victorian age. Not all of them.
Actual gameplay is fun though, the cards and shipments do make it a faster paced game and gives more to do in the early game along with treasure hunting and building trade posts.
Each civ is very different while in AOE2 all of them field mostly European looking units.
Because the experience is so different, I can recommend both AOE 2 and 3 DE.
4 I never played, can't comment on.
Age of Mythology is a great game, and I think it's the most popular game in the series after AOE2.
Because it's a spin off and works with mythology, expectations where different, it had more leeway to do things different.
I'd wait until the Retold edition, but the game is fun. Each civ has their own unique roster and buildings, Each civ also has three different variants.
The mythological units and god powers are great but don't make human units obsolete either. It's well balanced enough that they feel strong, but not overpowered.
A nice touch in this game is also that all armour and weapon upgrades are visual, that's going to look amazing in the Retold edition.
Visually, the original has aged poorly though due to early 3D graphics.
- Easy to learn, hard to master. The combat mechanics are possibly the simplest I have seen in an RTS (unit does X damage, armor reduces Y damage, X-Y, done), the pace is pretty forgiving compared to most RTS, most things you understand what they do just by looking at them or seeing their name. But then with now literally dozens of civs there is SO MUCH to learn if you want to be a confident and versatile player. AoE1 is almost too simplistic in some ways, AoE3 is not that intuitive.
- The graphics and overall style of 2 are from pretty much the peak of 2D strategies, when this style of gameplay and visuals was basically perfected. Everyone leaped onto making 3D strategies shortly afterwards, which in retrospect was mostly a horrible idea and most of those games have aged like milk.
- Something about the medieval period hits just right, I think - besides being often quite romanticised, the technology is in that spot where it's very easy to understand what everything does in a game, but there's still plenty of options. This is where AoE1 suffers a bit from things being too simple, and AoE3 suffers from things being much more complex and intricate.
- Iconic and legendary campaigns. Enough said.
I think it's some combination of these, mostly. And I really, really like 1 and 3, but there is something about 2 that is just unmatched.
Montezuma has for me personalyl the saddest ending when you're aware that everything you achieved during the scenarios of the campaign is indeed in vain
2.from what i know it also improved alot since aoe1 so its just better aoe1 with more improved mechanics and people tend to play latest/better versions of the games
3. Its cheap and accesible for more people than aoe 4 it has kinda low requirements and even on low settings it looks better than goofy aoe 4 DE models from what i have seen
you can run this game on low spec pcs and it looks great which is huge for players that don't have latest pc equipment
For reasons above aoe 2 DE has higher playerbase than AOE 4 even tho its older game
All of them are great, number 4 is the best in terms of graphics, animations, and updated UI just a lot of improvements, but number 2 is the most memerable and most fun people had. It is for me at least.