Is AoE3 an upgrade to AoE2?

[Sorvete]

It's a genuine question. xD I only played 1 a loooong time ago, no idea how the series developed itself.

[Nero]

AoE3 has improved the concept of AoE2 significantly in many aspects. But many don't appreciate it since they wanna do things the old archaic way.

Villagers are a lot less micro intensive here which imo makes AoE3 far superior to AoE2. Its more fun to play. It frees attention that is spent on villagers to spend it on the military.

The hometown is a fantastic inovation.

There's a whole bunch of other cool new mechanics that are impossible to implement into AoE2 like the trade route.

In singleplayer AoE2 wins hands down, but in MP AoE3 is way more accessible and fun. But AoE2 MP is way more popular.

[Nero]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Thor II:

The 3D graphics of AOE III (and AOM as well) have several problems. I don't understand why people immediately think that 3D = better. This was not the case with AOE III

The moment you see a cannon shoot off a part of a building it should become obvious why 3D is superior. Its also way more efficient for the devs than having to resort to make 3D and hten converting them into sprites. Sprites also can't tilt or shake well so the ships are way better in 3D.

And then these ships fire at each other breaking apart in the process. Obviously an advancement in graphics. Then there's the shadows and bloom and stuff.

[Sergeant Poultry]

Opprinnelig skrevet av General Plastro:

Opprinnelig skrevet av stefizzle:

did you understand AOE 3? LOL. The whole thing is about colonization IN America

Yes and the colonization of America does not equal to the history of the USA. In AoE3 you can count on your fingers how many missions (outside of Act 1) take place outside the very specifics of US colonial history and the ones that do are fictional scenarios where it doesnt even try to show how things were at the time in those places. Hell, its almost a insult to have that mission in act 3 (or is it Act 4 from the expansion?) where you find the long lost remnants of the Inca civilization

Wheres Simon Bolivar? Paraguayan War? Haitian Revolution?

Hell, even Mexico gets the shaft in AoE3, it only shows up when its related to the US (again).

You clearly never played the game itself. "Count on your fingers the ones that take place outside the U.S"? Act 1 chapter 1 focused on the Otto-Mediteranian conflict, with chapter 2 focusing on the Prussians. The second expansion focused entirely on the American-Native conflicts (which is why they were in there, you even get to play the Battle of Little Big Horn as the Sioux-Lakota) and the final expansion focusing exclusively on the Asian Dynasties, which never featured America. Shogonte Japan and the Indian uprising were fictional to you? I admit basing the Chinese campaign on a loose tail wasn't a great idea, but you never saw the U.S, even though there were Aztecs in the campaign (of all people).

Simon Bolivar WAS in Aoe3, shows how much you've played the game:

https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Sim%C3%B3n_Bol%C3%ADvar#:~:text=*Fandom%20may%20earn%20an%20affiliate,revolutionary%20leader%20in%20The%20WarChiefs.

How else is Mexico supposed to show up unless its in conflict between Spain and America? To have it come up exclusivley by itself would need an entire expansion solely focused on colonization and all those colonies that have now gone on to gain independance.

Next time actually play the game you're trying so vainly to criticize. I personally preferred the AOE2 style of campaign but in no way did it focus mainly on the U.S.

[treats]

Also for OP, AOE2 plays a lot like AOE1 and is clearly a direct upgrade to it

[Whakahoatanga]

Opprinnelig skrevet av WitchingSnake:

AoE3 has improved the concept of AoE2 significantly in many aspects. But many don't appreciate it since they wanna do things the old archaic way.

Villagers are a lot less micro intensive here which imo makes AoE3 far superior to AoE2. Its more fun to play. It frees attention that is spent on villagers to spend it on the military.

The hometown is a fantastic inovation.

There's a whole bunch of other cool new mechanics that are impossible to implement into AoE2 like the trade route.

In singleplayer AoE2 wins hands down, but in MP AoE3 is way more accessible and fun. But AoE2 MP is way more popular.

LOL no. AOE3 simplified AOE2's economy to the point that you can consider it dumbed down. No wonder AOE3s fan base isn't that big compared to AOE2's.

I like AOE3 too, otherwise I wouldn't have preordered it, but it definitely can't hold up to its predecessor.

[Alphakuh]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Szaladon:

Opprinnelig skrevet av WitchingSnake:

AoE3 has improved the concept of AoE2 significantly in many aspects. But many don't appreciate it since they wanna do things the old archaic way.

Villagers are a lot less micro intensive here which imo makes AoE3 far superior to AoE2. Its more fun to play. It frees attention that is spent on villagers to spend it on the military.

The hometown is a fantastic inovation.

There's a whole bunch of other cool new mechanics that are impossible to implement into AoE2 like the trade route.

In singleplayer AoE2 wins hands down, but in MP AoE3 is way more accessible and fun. But AoE2 MP is way more popular.

LOL no. AOE3 simplified AOE2's economy to the point that you can consider it dumbed down. No wonder AOE3s fan base isn't that big compared to AOE2's.

I like AOE3 too, otherwise I wouldn't have preordered it, but it definitely can't hold up to its predecessor.

yes it can. its for me the best aoe so far.

[Whakahoatanga]

Opprinnelig skrevet av stefizzle:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Szaladon:

LOL no. AOE3 simplified AOE2's economy to the point that you can consider it dumbed down. No wonder AOE3s fan base isn't that big compared to AOE2's.

I like AOE3 too, otherwise I wouldn't have preordered it, but it definitely can't hold up to its predecessor.

yes it can. its for me the best aoe so far.

Even Ensemble wanted to give it another name and considered it to some degree a failure. It deviates too much from its predecessors.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-02-14-age-of-empires-iii-a-huge-mistake

You might like it the most but it's probably the one which feels the least like Age gameplay.

[Alphakuh]

lol thats 1 article to this.

its more aoe like any other aoe

[Para]

Opprinnelig skrevet av WitchingSnake:

AoE3 has improved the concept of AoE2 significantly in many aspects. But many don't appreciate it since they wanna do things the old archaic way.

Villagers are a lot less micro intensive here which imo makes AoE3 far superior to AoE2. Its more fun to play. It frees attention that is spent on villagers to spend it on the military.

The hometown is a fantastic inovation.

There's a whole bunch of other cool new mechanics that are impossible to implement into AoE2 like the trade route.

In singleplayer AoE2 wins hands down, but in MP AoE3 is way more accessible and fun. But AoE2 MP is way more popular.

Thanks bro, fully agree on everything you said. I wish more people shared this sentiment.

Also to add:
The MP pacing is much faster in aoe3 than it is in aoe2. Games can be finished at the second age.
With the hometown system you have way more tactical choices that you can implement in a short time which contrast the rigorous tech-branches of aoe2.
Every faction plays completely different from each other.
And there's a lot more

[Trevor Reznik]

Some people prefer each faction playing 99% the same as in Age 2

But I far prefer huge differences like AOM or Age 3 do it.

It also seems like Age 4 will be that way, with civs playing completely different from one another

[Alphakuh]

i also dont like this whole ♥♥♥♥ "just do everytime the same" like you need in aoe 1 and aoe 2

[General Plastro]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Sergeant Poultry:

Opprinnelig skrevet av General Plastro:

Yes and the colonization of America does not equal to the history of the USA. In AoE3 you can count on your fingers how many missions (outside of Act 1) take place outside the very specifics of US colonial history and the ones that do are fictional scenarios where it doesnt even try to show how things were at the time in those places. Hell, its almost a insult to have that mission in act 3 (or is it Act 4 from the expansion?) where you find the long lost remnants of the Inca civilization

Wheres Simon Bolivar? Paraguayan War? Haitian Revolution?

Hell, even Mexico gets the shaft in AoE3, it only shows up when its related to the US (again).

You clearly never played the game itself. "Count on your fingers the ones that take place outside the U.S"? Act 1 chapter 1 focused on the Otto-Mediteranian conflict, with chapter 2 focusing on the Prussians. The second expansion focused entirely on the American-Native conflicts (which is why they were in there, you even get to play the Battle of Little Big Horn as the Sioux-Lakota) and the final expansion focusing exclusively on the Asian Dynasties, which never featured America. Shogonte Japan and the Indian uprising were fictional to you? I admit basing the Chinese campaign on a loose tail wasn't a great idea, but you never saw the U.S, even though there were Aztecs in the campaign (of all people).

Simon Bolivar WAS in Aoe3, shows how much you've played the game:

https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Sim%C3%B3n_Bol%C3%ADvar#:~:text=*Fandom%20may%20earn%20an%20affiliate,revolutionary%20leader%20in%20The%20WarChiefs.

How else is Mexico supposed to show up unless its in conflict between Spain and America? To have it come up exclusivley by itself would need an entire expansion solely focused on colonization and all those colonies that have now gone on to gain independance.

Next time actually play the game you're trying so vainly to criticize. I personally preferred the AOE2 style of campaign but in no way did it focus mainly on the U.S.

You ignored what i said, i already know Act 1 doesnt take place in america, silly, i said so myself. Same for Asian Dynasties. I am not talking about those.

But see, it would be if i nitpicked you for saying act 2 focused on the prussians, when, in fact, it focuses on the russians in the end, but still focuses on the US colonial period for the rest of the act.

I am talking about Act 2 - 5 with the Blackwell questline, the vast majority of the damn game. Having Simon Bolivar show in 1 scenario... wow...

See, he was so important in-game that had actually completely forgotten he was in the game, so much for the guy that kickstarted the whole liberation of most of south america, him and the aftereffects of his revolutions deserved an entire campaign dedicated to it, not a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ scenario.

But since you bought up the wiki link, lets see:

From Act 1 to Act 5 (counting the warchief's expansion as act 4 and 5, despite this act 4 taking place between act 2 and 3 of the original game, but you get what i am saying):

Act 1: 8 missions, all of them about either the Ottomans or the initial colonial efforts/exploration in the americas.

Act 2: 8 Missions about the initial US settlements, its (fairly optimistic) interaction with the natives and their increasing animosity with the british (represented by Warwick), with the russian wildcard at the end of the act.

This leads into Act 4's

Act 4 (Act 1 of Warchief's): The most american of acts, american revolution war for the whole act (8 levels)

Act 3: This where we have some nuance: First few missions take place in the US, while we get the Simon Bolivar mission in-between the remaining fantasy missions with the lost city of the inca. 8 Missions

Act 5 (Act 2 of Warchief's): Entirely US-based again, focusing on the US/North Native Americans. 7 Levels

So yeah, out of 39 missions, we have:

- 8 Missions from act 1 that take place outside US history.

- 26 Missions based on US history

- 1 Mission taking place outside of US history (Simon Bolivar's)

- 4 Missions taking place outside of the US history, within a fantasy scenario (the lost incas and its final showdown with the Boneguard/Circle troops + Act 2's final russian invasion scenario)

Cmon man, you really cant argue that the game kinda heavily leaned on US history, Asian Dynasties tried to remedy that, but as far as the main story goes, its sadly like that.

[Kodaxmax]

It's like comparing starcraft and warcraft. same devs and alot of similarities in design, concept, style etc.., but very different as a whole.

[Sergeant Poultry]

Opprinnelig skrevet av kodaxmax:

It's like comparing starcraft and warcraft. same devs and alot of similarities in design, concept, style etc.., but very different as a whole.

Excellently put, so true

[Sergeant Poultry]

Opprinnelig skrevet av General Plastro:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Sergeant Poultry:

You clearly never played the game itself. "Count on your fingers the ones that take place outside the U.S"? Act 1 chapter 1 focused on the Otto-Mediteranian conflict, with chapter 2 focusing on the Prussians. The second expansion focused entirely on the American-Native conflicts (which is why they were in there, you even get to play the Battle of Little Big Horn as the Sioux-Lakota) and the final expansion focusing exclusively on the Asian Dynasties, which never featured America. Shogonte Japan and the Indian uprising were fictional to you? I admit basing the Chinese campaign on a loose tail wasn't a great idea, but you never saw the U.S, even though there were Aztecs in the campaign (of all people).

Simon Bolivar WAS in Aoe3, shows how much you've played the game:

https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Sim%C3%B3n_Bol%C3%ADvar#:~:text=*Fandom%20may%20earn%20an%20affiliate,revolutionary%20leader%20in%20The%20WarChiefs.

How else is Mexico supposed to show up unless its in conflict between Spain and America? To have it come up exclusivley by itself would need an entire expansion solely focused on colonization and all those colonies that have now gone on to gain independance.

Next time actually play the game you're trying so vainly to criticize. I personally preferred the AOE2 style of campaign but in no way did it focus mainly on the U.S.

You ignored what i said, i already know Act 1 doesnt take place in america, silly, i said so myself. Same for Asian Dynasties. I am not talking about those.

But see, it would be if i nitpicked you for saying act 2 focused on the prussians, when, in fact, it focuses on the russians in the end, but still focuses on the US colonial period for the rest of the act.

I am talking about Act 2 - 5 with the Blackwell questline, the vast majority of the damn game. Having Simon Bolivar show in 1 scenario... wow...

See, he was so important in-game that had actually completely forgotten he was in the game, so much for the guy that kickstarted the whole liberation of most of south america, him and the aftereffects of his revolutions deserved an entire campaign dedicated to it, not a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ scenario.

But since you bought up the wiki link, lets see:

From Act 1 to Act 5 (counting the warchief's expansion as act 4 and 5, despite this act 4 taking place between act 2 and 3 of the original game, but you get what i am saying):

Act 1: 8 missions, all of them about either the Ottomans or the initial colonial efforts/exploration in the americas.

Act 2: 8 Missions about the initial US settlements, its (fairly optimistic) interaction with the natives and their increasing animosity with the british (represented by Warwick), with the russian wildcard at the end of the act.

This leads into Act 4's

Act 4 (Act 1 of Warchief's): The most american of acts, american revolution war for the whole act (8 levels)

Act 3: This where we have some nuance: First few missions take place in the US, while we get the Simon Bolivar mission in-between the remaining fantasy missions with the lost city of the inca. 8 Missions

Act 5 (Act 2 of Warchief's): Entirely US-based again, focusing on the US/North Native Americans. 7 Levels

So yeah, out of 39 missions, we have:

- 8 Missions from act 1 that take place outside US history.

- 26 Missions based on US history

- 1 Mission taking place outside of US history (Simon Bolivar's)

- 4 Missions taking place outside of the US history, within a fantasy scenario (the lost incas and its final showdown with the Boneguard/Circle troops + Act 2's final russian invasion scenario)

Cmon man, you really cant argue that the game kinda heavily leaned on US history, Asian Dynasties tried to remedy that, but as far as the main story goes, its sadly like that.

I always preferred the AOE2 style campaign maps, but looking back they did really spend to much time for a civ/area that isn't even present for online gameplay. In my opinion they kinda squandered the campaign by focusing on individuals and a fictional group. They could have talked about the Napoleonic wars, the transition into the industrial period but instead talked about the fountain of youth. Seriously?