That would be so unlike Microsoft.so i think they got everything wrong in current...market
That would be so unlike Microsoft.so i think they got everything wrong in current...market
Why do they have to look as plastic toys is the questionIt's seemed to be a good rule of thumb. If I looked at an army from a bird's eye would I really be able to tell apart a light cavalry man from a scout cavalry?
They don'tWhy do they have to look as plastic toys is the question
Yeah but game budgets are higher and I don't think any publisher is paying the same wages as 1999. But why does it even matter if 50 or 200 people worked on a game if the game made by 200 people isn't objectively better in most ways than the one made by 50? What I'm saying is that alot of things may have increased but quality isn't one of them.Games also used to be made by 2-50 people back in the day and now there are hundreds of people working on it, I just fished Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order (great game) and the credits where like 15 minutes long.
Wouldn't be the first time a giant like Microsoft somehow found itself behind the trends anyway and used executive meddling to sloppily catch up. I see Microsoft intrusively putting its fingers into AoE II as far back as the original release, according to Sandy Petersen's story about the "Real Reason Why Koreans Are In AoE2" here:But well i thought the cartoonish graphics were in order to attract more players following a dota2 or fornite game model, free multiplayer grants bigger player base in the long run, they have got more money by buying simple skins and for a poor visually game like aoe4 skins would make a lot of sense, but they are not following that model, so i think they got everything wrong in current game market.
because these people need to get paid. And judging "quality" before anyonne has played the fished game is just stupid.why does it even matter if 50 or 200
You can't judge definitively but you can start drawing preliminary conclusions.because these people need to get paid. And judging "quality" before anyonne has played the fished game is just stupid.
When someone chooses to pre-order a game, they're doing so after making an assessment of quality. They think the quality will be good based on pre-release information, and hence pre-order it. Similarly, this is also an assessment of quality before release based on pre-release information and I think they're gonna mess this up. And if a studio / publisher hires more than the number of people needed to make a good game and make a bad game instead, its not up to the players to be charitable and buy the game even if it sucks.because these people need to get paid. And judging "quality" before anyonne has played the fished game is just stupid.
It absolutely does make sense to compare the two. Not in terms of the technical execution but.. subjective perception of the two.AoE2 is a 2D game it makes no sense to compare it to a game that has to render in 3D.
Aesthetics transcend medium.AoE2 is a 2D game it makes no sense to compare it to a game that has to render in 3D.
I was specifically talking about computing power required I think we all agree that Age4 is ugly.Aesthetics transcend medium.
Yeah but there is almost two decade difference...The graphics actually remind me of Praetorians if anyone played that. The terrain textures / colour palette look very similar
Woof.View attachment 193448
AoE 5 will weigh more than Call of Duty
Oh my bad. You are definitely right about that.I was specifically talking about computing power required I think we all agree that Age4 is ugly.
That's because AOE 4 is a proper 3d game. AOE 2 is a 2d with pre-rendered sprites on a checkerboard grid. This takes alot of strain off of the system because the animations and scenery is prerendered. This comes at the cost of things like pathfinding (this sort of system limits granularity of movement), and modern features people expect (like being able to rotate the camera), among many other things.About system requirements; AoE4 is more demanding, requires DX12 and still manages to look worse:
AoE4
AoE2 DE
- MINIMUM:
- Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
- OS: Windows 10 64bit
- Processor: Intel Core i5-6300U
- Memory: 8 GB RAM
- Graphics: Intel HD 520
- DirectX: Version 12
- Storage: 50 GB available space
- MINIMUM:
- Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
- OS: Windows 10 64bit
- Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Athlon 64x2 5600+
- Memory: 4 GB RAM
- Graphics: NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 420 or ATI™ Radeon™ HD 6850 or Intel® HD Graphics 4000 or better with 2 GB VRAM
- DirectX: Version 11
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Storage: 30 GB available space
- Additional Notes: 2GB of video memory + 4GB of system memory required
I can think of many old 2D games released around the same time as AoE2 that allowed for camera rotation?That's because AOE 4 is a proper 3d game. AOE 2 is a 2d with pre-rendered sprites on a checkerboard grid. This takes alot of strain off of the system because the animations and scenery is prerendered. This comes at the cost of things like pathfinding (this sort of system limits granularity of movement), and modern features people expect (like being able to rotate the camera), among many other things.
How much does it really mean that it is a "modern" game? Anyone developing a new game can make the graphics arbitrarily bad seeking to make it playable on a wider variety of systems. I don't think it is impressive as much as it speaks to the growth strategy they are employing?To be honest I hadn't seen these specs and quite frankly I'm actually impressed they think a modern game could run on a 6 year old budget laptop CPU with no discrete GPU.
My point exactly comparing AOE 2 DE's system requirements to AOE 4's is apples to oranges.I can think of many old 2D games released around the same time as AoE2 that allowed for camera rotation?
When I say modern I mean a 3d rts game with modern pathfinding instead using a simple A* formula on a checkerboard grid (which is much more cpu intensive).How much does it really mean that it is a "modern" game? Anyone developing a new game can make the graphics arbitrarily bad seeking to make it playable on a wider variety of systems. I don't think it is impressive as much as it speaks to the growth strategy they are employing?
Aoe3 has camera rotation and 3d sprites and its sys reqs are much lower. From what I've read, DX12 is just lower level and I mentioned it because DX12 is exclusive to Windows 10. If it'll be anything like DE, then the min requirements won't be the minimum required to play online and it actually be somewhere in the middle. Here's AoE3 DE's requirements:That's because AOE 4 is a proper 3d game. AOE 2 is a 2d with pre-rendered sprites on a checkerboard grid. This takes alot of strain off of the system because the animations and scenery is prerendered. This comes at the cost of things like pathfinding (this sort of system limits granularity of movement), and modern features people expect (like being able to rotate the camera), among many other things.
DX12 is just a graphics API, most CPU's igpus (an proper dedicated GPUs) made in the last 8 years support it. It's flat out better than dx11 or any previous directx API on equivalent hardware when utilitized properly.
To be honest I hadn't seen these specs and quite frankly I'm actually impressed they think a modern game could run on a 6 year old budget laptop CPU with no discrete GPU.
You made it sound like a tradeoff of AoE2's simple graphics was the inability to rotate the screen. I agree they are still apples and oranges of course.My point exactly comparing AOE 2 DE's system requirements to AOE 4's is apples to oranges.
Even standard laptop CPU from 6 years ago is quite powerful so presumably it compensates for the increased degree of difficulty? I mean think about the chips that the original AoE2 was expected to run on. Without looking it up I would not be surprised if they were weaker than those in some modern smart appliances.When I say modern I mean a 3d rts game with modern pathfinding instead using a simple A* formula on a checkerboard grid (which is much more cpu intensive).
Yeah that is true. The early returns are not promising but can't fully judge without seeing release.As for the style, I'm not even defending it. I need to see the game in person to really judge.
I am confused what you mean here. Is the issue that the game is zoomed out in the YouTube videos or that graphical quality is lost in the process of transferring the game to a YouTube video and then a YouTube video to a still image? Theoretically if the video is showing zoom at the level players will be playing at then that is an accurate representation of what they will see in game.However, I think part of the problem here with alot of these graphics complaints relate to the fact that most of the images are just crops of youtube videos. Many 3d isometric games have Level of Detail scaling that increases the polygon count as the player zooms in.