AOE-IV Is Age of Empires 4 a failure?

[SuperskinnyBLS]

Its sad to see how aoe4 dont manage to live up to the hype.

How is that sad xd

 

[Halleju]

Nili is hopefully getting paid by MS for his tournament coordinator role so he kinda has to be on the good side of MS products.

stop saying "Nili" and "Microsoft" like they belong together. They have nothing to do with each other. Nili is a tournament coordinator for Forgotten Empires. Even Microsofts janitor doesnt know who Nili is.

b2t: I personally think its a bit of stubborness on his side. Since he was one of the first and loudest to turn from Aoe2, he doesnt want to run back after the first problems. He'll wait out a bit more, at least one major patch.

 

[Adico]

Conclusion
Yes, I am writing the conclusion here to help TL:DRers. I think the core game is fun but in need of attention. Out of the game, there is a lot to be done to help it. It's not a failure, yet, but also not a success story, yet.

Singleplayer:
I think the single-player campaigns are the strong point of the game, and having played them and seen the cutscenes is clear that it was a pretty big focus in the game's development. Most people's first interaction with AoE IV's gameplay will be through that, so it's a great intro to the game's core gameplay loop while also being a nice complete story for each.

Multiplayer:
I will hold off until we see an entire ranked season play out. I know people, especially here, like to bash the game for its current meta, but every multiplayer title had terrible metas in their early months, and it is inevitable.

There is a legitimate argument to be made that the game should have launched ith a ranked season already, and that is something I agree with, but ultimately I don't think it matters as much.

The game's core ideas for its 1v1 and team matches are solid. The way the dark and feudal age play out is, for the most part, a pretty entertaining offering for players as it is more involved with scouting, securing, and preparing for how the entire feudal period will go and what are your options for castle and imperial.

Esports
It might just be that this is the space I spend most of my time in, but AoE IV esports so far feels like such a wasted opportunity. Prize money alone an esport does not make. I was expecting a lot of work to be done behind the scenes to make sure that when AoE IV was released, there would have been an infrastructure in place to help players and organizers build up their events, instead:

• Smash.gg, which MS owns:
  • They didn't have the game listed until I asked them about it a week before GENESIS.
  • They didn't have the Civ available to be picked until a few weeks after release.
  • They don't have the maps, a feature I asked for a few days ago, so hopefully soon.
• Challonge:
  • It does not have an official AoE IV category, leading to TOs using "Age of Empires IV", "Age of Empires 4", or just "Age of Empires" for their events.
• Battlefy:
  • Still no AoE IV category as of writing.
• Matcherino:
  • They didn't have an AoE IV category until I asked them to add it.
• Toornament:
  • The only one to have the category at release.
• The AoE official discord:
  • Oh, no tournament promotion channel.
  • No dedicated esport channel for the whole franchise.
  • No events are set up for significant events.
• The AoE official forums:
  • No Tournament or esport category.
• The AoE IV subreddit:
  • Until recently, it didn't have an event calendar that I made and now maintain.
  • I am the one who writes the tournament mega threads after doing one for GENESIS.

Liquipedia was more prepared for the release than most bracket hosting and tournament promotion websites, and even that I had to go and ask MS/WE for assets like civ flags and map icons, which we never got, so I had to take them from the game after release. Why?!

There seemingly is no cohesion in anything leading to so many occasions where people are confused about where to look for tournaments, how to read liquipedia, or how to register for events, steam ids, etc. It's a never-ending problem that has clogged the pipeline of new players to the point that now I think a lot of people have given up in competing in it because they don't know where to sign up, or think "ah, there are a lot of top players already and no small leagues promoting up and comers, might as well not try".

Then there is the whole topic of how tournaments are structured with single elimination after single-elimination events. There are no groups, no double elim (outside of smaller series), and they qualify based on ladder results.

There is also this horrible idea of seemingly having all tournaments be in the weekends and EU hours. As if there weren't five other days where you could run groups/extended brackets or four different continents full of talent that want to compete.

This shows the player population from the Tournament Rankings.​

It feels like every event is just there to maximize the block of hours in a single weekend and not give players a consistent playing platform with a reward at the end. I get why, with only 1 of the 4 announced S-Tier events being sponsored by a company that makes a product instead of a streamer, you quickly see why they may want to make sure they can get as much exposure as possible.

I want to be clear, I am not angry or anything with them. They are doing what makes economic sense and their events are great. But I am livid that there are no incentives to foster a stronger identity in the esport community. There is no overarching feel of "I am participating in the scene" from people who watch and then go on to play in smaller series because they are not doing that! There is no activation of the community in any way.

I can already see the main argument being, "well, that is because the game sucks" which sure if that is the angle you want to take, go for it, not here to fight on that hill. But for me, many terribly made games still get a stronger sense of belonging than AoE 4, and that sucks.

 

[kw1k000000]

I can already see the main argument being, "well, that is because the game sucks" which sure if that is the angle you want to take, go for it, not here to fight on that hill. But for me, many terribly made games still get a stronger sense of belonging than AoE 4, and that sucks.

To be honest it feels like that you (and some other individuals) are making more efforts and are invested more in aoe4 than the company Relic themselves, which probably explains why the game itself is an unfinished bugfest.

 

[King_Boo]

Big difference in RAW and rare

steak tartar lets go!

 

[Snippy]

How is that sad xd

Cause i like to play good RTS games

 

[SuperskinnyBLS]

Cause i like to play good RTS games

Then u must have not enjoyed Aoe 4 xD

 

[SouFire]

The game is clearly a failure from any perspective, estimated sells are not that high, they obviously got a lot of revenue cause they sold it overpriced but in terms of big sales it wasn't that great, now in terms of active users and player it had close to 75k on steam which isn't something big for a AAA release, after a month those number shrinked to 34k and now that we are getting close to the third month the game barely peaks 15K, age of empires games offers lots of hours of replayability cause you can play vs bots and friends or just building cities, etc, but aoe4 failed miserably it couldn't keep even those players, their MP playerbase was x2.4 larger than aoe2 but not anymore.

In terms of viewership well the game never had it's own viewers, it was depending on big streamers to boost their numbers but as soon as they changed the game or the big events lost attention, the game has not interested viewers in the game itself.

I had to unfollow nili, not because aoe4 content but because he was disrespectful with the game where he made his name and popularity, other aoe2 streamers that also put aoe2 in second place also lost my attention, such greedy ambitions always have a price.

So what is left in aoe4 are mere overs from other rts games trying to find a new game to make their livings or wait until the budget is over, well that about the pro gamers, casual players that weren't good on aoe2 or aoe3 are enjoying a lot aoe4 cause the game is simplified and more basic, at the end aoe4 will be another aoe3 in terms of small player base.

 

[Tempires]

Rumours say Microsoft/Relic is making Xbox version (Said insider build can be other game too).

New patch for aoe4 is in release candidate phase. Also some other news maybe coming soon?

https://twitter.com/AgeOfEmpires/status/1480975673011359746?s=20

Age of Empires IV has been out for over two months, and we can’t wait to continue this journey together! We’ve got exciting plans for January and will have more details to share soon, including plans for an upcoming patch.

Pros like marinelord seems to be just looking for balance changes (looking at marinelord's patch post on reddit)

 

[z3us]

It is a great success. There are daily TG pro games in BF and Nomad. This is directly cause of AoE4. In my book, this is a win-win situation.

 

[doacid]

I had to unfollow nili, not because aoe4 content but because he was disrespectful with the game where he made his name and popularity, other aoe2 streamers that also put aoe2 in second place also lost my attention, such greedy ambitions always have a price.

It can go both ways, when you don't like a certain type of person chances are the person doesn't like you either. So maybe they can look at the bright side and be happy about losing some of those viewers.

 

[Captain Binjuice]

Aoe4 has a lot of potential

BUT MUH POTENCHAL

 

[LowEloNobody]

Singleplayer:
I think the single-player campaigns are the strong point of the game, and having played them and seen the cutscenes is clear that it was a pretty big focus in the game's development. Most people's first interaction with AoE IV's gameplay will be through that, so it's a great intro to the game's core gameplay loop while also being a nice complete story for each.

As soon as I read this I could not take the rest of this post seriously. One of the most well-respected campaign players / reviewers / creators is Ornlu, who truly gave AoE4 an unbiased shot and ended up with this:

Why I did NOT enjoy the Age of Empires IV Campaigns (Review)

Oof... yeah... we all knew this was coming...In this video, I do my best to break down the various reasons as to why I found all of the launch Age of Empires...

www.youtube.com

The campaigns don't even have the same balance patch as the main game. They literally published beta version campaigns and then changed the rest of the game later. It's a terrible introduction to the game because you have to re-learn the game balance to play online.

There is a legitimate argument to be made that the game should have launched ith a ranked season already, and that is something I agree with, but ultimately I don't think it matters as much.

You may not think it matters, but the game is dropping pros and ranked players in droves, so apparently it matters at least somewhat. By the time they come our with a ranked season, there won't be anyone left playing ranked.

The way the dark and feudal age play out is, for the most part, a pretty entertaining offering for players as it is more involved with scouting, securing, and preparing for how the entire feudal period will go

The top complaint from pros is that the meta is incredibly predictable, routine, and boring. You are either going to see professional scouts or a mongols tower rush in 75% of games. Not to mention water balance which is completely busted

Prize money alone an esport does not make

This is a point I entirely agree with.

To be honest it feels like that you (and some other individuals) are making more efforts and are invested more in aoe4 than the company Relic themselves, which probably explains why the game itself is an unfinished bugfest.

This, basically.

 

[LowEloNobody]

It can go both ways, when you don't like a certain type of person chances are the person doesn't like you either. So maybe they can look at the bright side and be happy about losing some of those viewers.

Except viewers become subs and subs is money in your pocket. Streaming is a business, and I highly doubt Nili is making full-time money to be a tournament coordinator for MS

 

[doacid]

Except viewers become subs and subs is money in your pocket. Streaming is a business, and I highly doubt Nili is making full-time money to be a tournament coordinator for MS

Not all people choose the job that give them the most amount of money, many (most?) prefer earning less but liking it more. Similarly when you're a streamer you have preferences over the type of audience you want. Money isn't the only factor, albeit an important one.

 

[Biz]

aoe4 is essentially a beta game. basically everyone who wanted to play more than campaigns and who wasn't a streamer told them to delay it. they did not listen.

still, the game got good enough reception/sales/attention from what i can tell (from a product success perspective). it's not a massive profit, but it looks like the budget was also small, so i expect it's enough to greenlight an aoe5. 4 has room to improve, but i'm not sure where they'll take it. the way the franchise is managed is a failure, but maybe it meets xbox's goals.

better to spend money making new games (like aoe4) rather than waste more money flying people to castles or ruining aoe2 even further with more unnecessary civs and position-pick settings imo. aoe4 seems like it got other RTS players to actually play aoe. empire wars did not. and aoe4 is basically the only reason why there is lag-free netplay in aoe2. i don't know whether the technology they're using now could have worked in 1999, but it's what saved 2DE from being just another HD edition

if the dealbreaker for you is camera perspective, then your only hope is aoe5 uses a different one. aoe4 can eventually patch balance and hotkeys and bugs, but i don't think they'll change the rendering method

but even with a bunch of things missing, games of 4 feel more like classic aoe econ than 2DE does. you can gather from the map for most of the game instead of just herding some stuff to your town center in dark age and then playing farmville. real aoe was always about a spread-out eco in the early game with small groups of scattered vils. we're supposed put mills and fishing ships all over the place to collect wild food sources, and aoe4 at least recognizes that. the barren maps of 2DE ladder and boar-luring/deer-pushing dumbed down the game too much. mass-farming behind walls is supposed to be how imperial age economies look, but 2DE players are doing it from feudal.

in aoe4, i can afford heavy-food units with few farms. 8-16x as much food from berries compared to aoe2. 6-7x as much food from hunting compared to aoe2. 2-3x as much sheep as aoe2. boars on the map instead of under the TC. so much more flexibility in builds because i can use resources for things that aren't farms and farmer upgrades, and much more counterplay (because that eco is exposed)

i wish the publisher was better and the UI wasn't awful, but the strategy choices the game presents are solid. they aren't all balanced yet and the game should have been delayed, but it's a decent start. they have already patched a lot since closed beta. they are slow, but i see progress.

they also got rid of a bunch of garbage from aoe2, which is a good foundation for aoe4 and any future aoe games. i don't miss things like quick-walling / deer-pushing / boar-stealing / sheep-scouting / inaccuracy / dodging / farm-reseeding. and there are a bunch of other intelligent changes like starting with 0 stone (instead of enough for 2 extra TCs) and rams actually being useful and stronger units actually requiring new ages instead of just technology upgrades

you won't realize how bad the aoe2 xbow meta is until you play other games that don't let you just mass low-tier units and then upgrade them to uncounterable units with the click of a button. and even when that upgrade path exists for some units/civs, you don't get to hide them inside buildings like aoe2 lets you. aoe4 buildings have no garrison space. it's also nice to a play a game where 60% of openings aren't drush and where the ladder maps actually have resources on them.

seeing random aoe2 ara-only players complain about aoe4 balance/meta is funny though. like something is too strong and will probably get nerfed, which is perfeclty normal for new RTS games. yet they act like the sky is falling. meanwhile xbows/bloodlines have been been overpowered in aoe2 for decades and position-pick destroyed the civ balance on most maps, but they act like that's fine. there are a few fundamental things that i'm worried about with aoe4 balance (mainly teamgame rush distances / water economy / knights in feudal), but some civ or UU or landmark being too good is such a temporary thing given how new the game is.

 

[HongeyKong]

but even with a bunch of things missing, games of 4 feel more like classic aoe econ than 2DE does. you can gather from the map for most of the game instead of just herding some stuff to your town center in dark age and then playing farmville. real aoe was always about a spread-out eco in the early game with small groups of scattered vils. we're supposed put mills and fishing ships all over the place to collect wild food sources, and aoe4 at least recognizes that. the barren maps of 2DE ladder and boar-luring/deer-pushing dumbed down the game too much. mass-farming behind walls is supposed to be how imperial age economies look, but 2DE players are doing it from feudal.

In aoe4 sheeps / hunts provide way more resources + towers are way cheaper, thats why. And thats why I dont like pro scouts.

 

[lecracheursagacite]

aoe4 is essentially a beta game. basically everyone who wanted to play more than campaigns and who wasn't a streamer told them to delay it. they did not listen.

still, the game got good enough reception/sales/attention from what i can tell (from a product success perspective). it's not a massive profit, but it looks like the budget was also small, so i expect it's enough to greenlight an aoe5. 4 has room to improve, but i'm not sure where they'll take it. the way the franchise is managed is a failure, but maybe it meets xbox's goals.

better to spend money making new games (like aoe4) rather than waste more money flying people to castles or ruining aoe2 even further with more unnecessary civs and position-pick settings imo. aoe4 seems like it got other RTS players to actually play aoe. empire wars did not. and aoe4 is basically the only reason why there is lag-free netplay in aoe2. i don't know whether the technology they're using now could have worked in 1999, but it's what saved 2DE from being just another HD edition

if the dealbreaker for you is camera perspective, then your only hope is aoe5 uses a different one. aoe4 can eventually patch balance and hotkeys and bugs, but i don't think they'll change the rendering method

but even with a bunch of things missing, games of 4 feel more like classic aoe econ than 2DE does. you can gather from the map for most of the game instead of just herding some stuff to your town center in dark age and then playing farmville. real aoe was always about a spread-out eco in the early game with small groups of scattered vils. we're supposed put mills and fishing ships all over the place to collect wild food sources, and aoe4 at least recognizes that. the barren maps of 2DE ladder and boar-luring/deer-pushing dumbed down the game too much. mass-farming behind walls is supposed to be how imperial age economies look, but 2DE players are doing it from feudal.

in aoe4, i can afford heavy-food units with few farms. 8-16x as much food from berries compared to aoe2. 6-7x as much food from hunting compared to aoe2. 2-3x as much sheep as aoe2. boars on the map instead of under the TC. so much more flexibility in builds because i can use resources for things that aren't farms and farmer upgrades, and much more counterplay (because that eco is exposed)

i wish the publisher was better and the UI wasn't awful, but the strategy choices the game presents are solid. they aren't all balanced yet and the game should have been delayed, but it's a decent start. they have already patched a lot since closed beta. they are slow, but i see progress.

they also got rid of a bunch of garbage from aoe2, which is a good foundation for aoe4 and any future aoe games. i don't miss things like quick-walling / deer-pushing / boar-stealing / sheep-scouting / inaccuracy / dodging / farm-reseeding. and there are a bunch of other intelligent changes like starting with 0 stone (instead of enough for 2 extra TCs) and rams actually being useful and stronger units actually requiring new ages instead of just technology upgrades

you won't realize how bad the aoe2 xbow meta is until you play other games that don't let you just mass low-tier units and then upgrade them to uncounterable units with the click of a button. and even when that upgrade path exists for some units/civs, you don't get to hide them inside buildings like aoe2 lets you. aoe4 buildings have no garrison space. it's also nice to a play a game where 60% of openings aren't drush and where the ladder maps actually have resources on them.

seeing random aoe2 ara-only players complain about aoe4 balance/meta is funny though. like something is too strong and will probably get nerfed, which is perfeclty normal for new RTS games. yet they act like the sky is falling. meanwhile xbows/bloodlines have been been overpowered in aoe2 for decades and position-pick destroyed the civ balance on most maps, but they act like that's fine. there are a few fundamental things that i'm worried about with aoe4 balance (mainly teamgame rush distances / water economy / knights in feudal), but some civ or UU or landmark being too good is such a temporary thing given how new the game is.

Idk if I fully agree with this (I think it is possible you are being too kind to AoE4 in your effort to explain how poorly AoE2 gameplay design has been handled during DE) but it certainly was enjoyable to read.

 

[LowEloNobody]

better to spend money making new games (like aoe4) rather than waste more money flying people to castles or ruining aoe2 even further with more unnecessary civs and position-pick settings imo

Ok Mr. Salty pants. Just go back to voobly and play user patch already

 

[Sticky Ice Cream]

No, Age of Empires II's sequel is not a failure. It's a big commercial and popular success that's still known amongst the RTS community. AoE II being the much, much more popular game doesn't make Rise of Nations a failure.

 

[_Ra_]

Some of us have been around the block for a while. We saw aom and aoe3. We knew what to expect.

Aoe4 is exactly as expected

 

[SuperskinnyBLS]

Some of us have been around the block for a while. We saw aom and aoe3. We knew what to expect.

Aoe4 is exactly as expected

AoM singleplayer is still very enjoyable!

 

[komtan]

Regardless of how good the game is,
komtan was very disappointed to see that MS is not interested in supporting the community or treating AoE as another eSports game.
I could see that MS were chasing success as a simple single player game.

Even if AoE4 becomes more interesting in the future, it is not unlucky interest in will return.
so almost player byebye AoE4, comeback old games.
...gogo aoe2 forever(^_-)-☆

 

[SiegeEngine]

We've seen the most potential with aoe2. Don't they realize after numerous trial and errors with the other aoe games that they suck and is not as entertaining as aoe2? This is also considering the fact that aoe2 still has pathing bugs since its release and yet, it still has the most viewers out of all of the aoe series.

 

[Biz]

Idk if I fully agree with this (I think it is possible you are being too kind to AoE4 in your effort to explain how poorly AoE2 gameplay design has been handled during DE) but it certainly was enjoyable to read.

aoe4's novel additions are mostly bad/unnecessary. fortunately, they are also not a huge part of the gameplay

most of the advancement is just copied from post-aoe2 ensemble games, which they carried over into aoe4. there are probably some starcraft influences too

it's a lot of simple things like giving you cartography from the start of the game or removing collision from workers. none of this was invented by relic or world's edge or aoe4, but someone somewhere in the process decided to keep and reject various elements from aoe2 / aoe3 / aeo / SC2, and in a lot of cases made the right calls

it's a more preferable situation to aoe which was just doomed from inception, despite being a much better game. and they even learned from aoe3 about what not to do, while still carrying forward some of the interesting parts

In aoe4 sheeps / hunts provide way more resources + towers are way cheaper, thats why. And thats why I dont like pro scouts.

i wouldn't mind if they got rid of it, but the intent of the tech is okay. it's supposed to be something that lets you spend APM+attention+resources to increase safety and reduce villager walking time. and it mostly works as that because you can choose whether to buy it or not. in most matches, i have more important things to focus on and just mill the deer like ensemble intended

We've seen the most potential with aoe2. Don't they realize after numerous trial and errors with the other aoe games that they suck and is not as entertaining as aoe2? This is also considering the fact that aoe2 still has pathing bugs since its release and yet, it still has the most viewers out of all of the aoe series.

that's what aoe2DE is for
aoe4 is a different game. different goals. different audience. different developer.

relic made a lot of new games (homeworld, company of heroes, dawn of war), not just remakes. you don't have to like those games or aoe4, but they're one of the few RTS developers left

if you don't want to pay attention to any other RTS games you don't have to. some people want the genre not to be dead though. i hope to see SC3 and AoM2 and RoN2 and aoe5 some day