ES_MattP
VIP
posted 10-29-12 11:30 AM
CT (US)
1077 / 1201
@ Taichi San> Is that a picture of your CD or my CD?
ES_MattP
VIP
posted 10-30-12 01:30 AM
CT (US)
1079 / 1201
@Taichi San> The Beta 2 CD has the retail installer on it. I'd need a clean system that doesn't have an AoK installation on it to check it out (the CD files are mostly dated 6/28-6/30/99)
Empires2.exe is just the safedisk loader - 234KB - file version 00.11.23.0622
The_Biz
Squire
posted 11-08-12 01:13 PM
CT (US)
1085 / 1201
age of empires for xbox. i can't wait
microsoft is dead
if you really want a new age game make it yourself
MartiNZ
Squire
posted 11-22-12 04:42 PM
CT (US)
1087 / 1201
Surely it *would*. Man they should really work alongside the new expansion work and the userpatch guys .. monetise it for everyone!
Alexastor
AoEO Seraph
(id: Kastor)
posted 11-30-12 12:13 PM
CT (US)
1089 / 1201
Matt, can you at least tell us whether whatever was planned has been canceled or just on hold or delayed due to other reasons?
AKFrost
Squire
posted 12-01-12 10:33 PM
CT (US)
1090 / 1201
I bought AOE3 and checked it out.
It's a LOT closer to Warcraft III than Age of Empires. The basic foundation of AOE was gone.
It was fun, I'll grant it that, but it sticks out like a sore thumb in the AOE franchise.
So yeah, I don't think III's sales will remotely correlate with II, no more than any other RTS.
MartiNZ
Squire
posted 12-02-12 09:45 PM
CT (US)
1093 / 1201
Yeah although I wouldn't have described it as more WC3 like ... I guess maybe thinking of explorer abilities? Possibly minor tribes = mercenary huts?
But in general gameplay terms, AoE3 is still an AoE game in that you have a lot of villagers/settlers and then quite a lot of military units; versus WC3 where you don't have very many economic units and just a few groups of 12 military units maxes out your population, not to mention you have to pay upkeep for such.
Anyway, AoE3 certainly did make things different, and with levelling and cards, I would rather say it has the most in common with AoEO with levelling, gear and advisors. With the expansions AoE3 also brought in (much) bigger differences between the civs, which I guess is common with WC3 and AoEO, and tbh, coming to the game way too late, I preferred AoE3 vanilla for the generic-ness that I was used to from AoK.
AKFrost
Squire
posted 12-03-12 09:54 AM
CT (US)
1094 / 1201
It's got a bigger army because WC3's units tend to cost more space, but a mortar's still 4 pop, and most knights are 2. This is a fundamental break from AOE where everything was 1.
Also, in AOE2, you have dropsites. Only in Warcraft III were there peons that didn't require to move back and forth (wisps for wood, acolytes for food), even starcraft didn't let have that feature.
heroes. Granted, Warcraft III's heroes were slightly more powerful and RPG-oriented, but still, a break from AOE. You also creep for treasure, which also didn't exist in AOE. Natives are kinda like the neutral buildings in War 3. Gaia didn't have that kind of thing in AOE.
And yes, asymmetrical races is a huge thing.
The only thing AOE-like is the ages, except it's got five now instead of the traditional 4. The home city thing has no War equivalent, but it's also got no AOE equivalent.
So in short, if you played 3, there's no remote guarantee that you'll like 2, unlike the relationship from 2 to 1.
LmScar13
Squire
posted 12-06-12 10:39 PM
CT (US)
1098 / 1201
Once you get past the graphics though, AoE:O is a pretty darn good game. For a few bucks (or two months of Bing Searches) you can get a premium/pro civ and play PvP without tech tree limitations.
The quests are nice, and though the MMO aspects of gear/money/unlockables take time to get used to, the actual gameplay is really good and is close to AoE2, closer than AoE3 and maybe AoE1.