AGS Steam Games

Forums → Games → Age of Empires Online

39 10731
Prawny
offline
Prawny
71 posts
Nomad

I have been a fan of the Age of Empires series for a long time and Robot Entertainment (Mostly old Ensemble Studios staff) are releasing a new game next year.
[url=http://www.ageofempiresonline.com/]
So have a look, the Graphics and ideology of it seems a bit weird but it looks like it still could be good.

  • 39 Replies
Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

Massive Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Real-Time Strategy Game.

I want my tenner.


Dang...

And Battle for Neswoth had a shot at fusing fantasy turn-based strategy with RPG.
Basically, every unit possesses a level which then increases with experience points. Experience points are gained when a unit kills an enemy. With the level up comes extra damage and defence points etc. Every new unit starts off at level 1 and older, "veteran" units follow you throughout every mission until they themselves are defeated.
It's an extremely good fusion and it starts making you think about whether or not it's worth making new units, should you put your high level guy there?, how should you divide the experience?
Furthermore, it's free and it's open source. I'm not too sure if the developers (or the community!) ever made a stable multiplayer add-on, but there's bound to be something of the likes since the game is practically based around a markup language and Lua, easy programming languages for an experienced programmer to get to grips with.

Dead Rising 2 + Battle for Neswoth I'll look up later
Sounds very cool, kind of like Warcraft III and some of Command and Conquer Generals. Command and Conquer only had 4 ranks:
Normal
Veteran
Elite
Heroic.
Veteran done a slight bonus to everything.
Elite unlocked slow HP regeneration out of combat.
Heroic gives a great boost to everything.

WCIII only does it for heroes I believe - I haven't played it before honestly.

HighFire got a thread out before you.

I was thinking that as well!
How come no one answers my threads

There's one thing that will stop me buying it: P2P.

Definately.

Also, problem is the community may be a pain. World of Warcraft's stereotypical player is... awful. In a word. However they are not like that.

Think Modern Warfare 2 behaving kids, except about 2x worse.
Yeah, have fun with that.

Then again, as I've already said before in a previous thread, RTS's don't usually attract kids as they are attracted to the FPS's. I find this a good thing (being a kid myself) as I won't have to wade through idiots to get to the occasional fun person.
I've no problem with fun people, but there are more than plenty of people who will greet you with a curse word and "off".

I won't play if its bad community (which it won't be, I guess). And P2P.
I may do if it is only bad community.
P2P = Instant no.

I've high expectations, also.
It won't be cult fanbase either, I think they make "sections" of skill level for players, so players of same skill level fight against (or with) eachother.

- H
Prawny
offline
Prawny
71 posts
Nomad

The game is not pay to play as it has been mentioned. It is free to download and you will buy additional quests. Age of Empires still has a solid fanbase but never went as big as starcraft, Blizzard is a really bug company and can manage it.

Shenko
offline
Shenko
1,059 posts
Treasurer

its sounds really fun if they pull it off

knight_34
offline
knight_34
13,817 posts
Farmer

Massive Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Real-Time Strategy Game. And Battle for Neswoth had a shot at fusing fantasy turn-based strategy with RPG.

Basically, every unit possesses a level which then increases with experience points. Experience points are gained when a unit kills an enemy. With the level up comes extra damage and defence points etc. Every new unit starts off at level 1 and older, "veteran" units follow you throughout every mission until they themselves are defeated.

It's an extremely good fusion and it starts making you think about whether or not it's worth making new units, should you put your high level guy there?, how should you divide the experience?

Furthermore, it's free and it's open source. I'm not too sure if the developers (or the community!) ever made a stable multiplayer add-on, but there's bound to be something of the likes since the game is practically based around a markup language and Lua, easy programming languages for an experienced programmer to get to grips with.


Don't you mean Battle for Wesnoth?

That game is just awesome. Finally found someone here who has played it aside from Pazx. Built-in multiplayer is good enough. I've played a few online games. Two years on, it's still probably my favorite open source game.
Prawny
offline
Prawny
71 posts
Nomad

It's their first game as a studio but many of them have a lot of RTS experience. I can't tell you if it is good, however, I'm under an agreement

Shoestring
offline
Shoestring
152 posts
Nomad

wow! i thought i was like the only one who knew about this game...
been a really old fan. And I'm really excited for online!

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

It's their first game as a studio but many of them have a lot of RTS experience. I can't tell you if it is good, however, I'm under an agreement


Alot of people say Call of Duty Black Ops is gonna be good, I'm not in agreement

AoE / Any RTS > CoD / Any FPS.
Honestly.
There's millions of reasons.

- H
Elitemagical
offline
Elitemagical
1,207 posts
Nomad

It won't be cult fanbase either, I think they make "sections" of skill level for players, so players of same skill level fight against (or with) eachother.


I think the fact you implied that match-making is going to be the dominant multiplayer system killed off my interest. I'd rather people were able to join any server they wanted, get their ass handed to them, or leave victoriously.

Don't you mean Battle for Wesnoth?


Gah, sorry mate you're right. For whatever reason I began calling it Battle for Neswoth (anagrams anybody?) and have never broken the habit since. It's been ages since I played it, but I've got the installer now, I'll take a shot at multiplayer.

wow! i thought i was like the only one who knew about this game...
been a really old fan. And I'm really excited for online!


Until it was announced by practically every single reliable website who're on top of the latest gaming and tech news.

AoE / Any RTS > CoD / Any FPS.


FPS > Strategies, but strategy games are still cool. ;D
Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

I think the fact you implied that match-making is going to be the dominant multiplayer system killed off my interest. I'd rather people were able to join any server they wanted, get their *** handed to them, or leave victoriously.

Then make it optional.
You can either enter your selected, fair rank system where you should have a challenge.
Or, you could have freestyle games with friends. Or to make friends

By the way, they also said that some matches will have rewards (such as experiance), so I'll have to step in and say the more 'free' mode should not allow that, for obvious reasons

Until it was announced by practically every single reliable website who're on top of the latest gaming and tech news.

I don't read them. >.>
Seriously do you? :O

FPS > Strategies, but strategy games are still cool. ;D

Strategies - require more thinking, have much better strategies and usually have a more mature community.
USUALLY.

FPS - basically point and shoot, where you're only pro when you've played it for 3 years and can measure reactions by a fraction of a second, little strategy involved within it and you cannot tell me people are mature in it.

- H
Elitemagical
offline
Elitemagical
1,207 posts
Nomad

I don't read them. >.>
Seriously do you? :O


/., GameSpot, Eurogamer and then Sickipedia for news on the world around me. Important to be up to date on the newest releases.

FPS - basically point and shoot


So? They're fun and that's what I'm looking for. Strategies I sometimes feel are too slow.

you cannot tell me people are mature in it.


Many people are mature in FPSs, in fact there's a massive adult community in most FPSs, MW2 however, does not, and you shouldn't generalise the community based on your observations of MW2.
Prawny
offline
Prawny
71 posts
Nomad

Strategy games > FPS by far.

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

So? They're fun and that's what I'm looking for. Strategies I sometimes feel are too slow.

Indeed, the first 10 minutes usually nothing is going on. But when you're better it can go flying by.

People usually think an average RTS game takes about an hour and a half. I seen SHOUTcraft eSports on YouTube and the longest time is just over 30 minutes. It's very quick paced compared to peoples guesses

Many people are mature in FPSs, in fact there's a massive adult community in most FPSs, MW2 however, does not, and you shouldn't generalise the community based on your observations of MW2.

You're right, honestly. I did generalize it too much. The other FPS I play on (except from CoD4) is BFBC2, people don't always talk on it, but they never moan about hacks or anything. I'm not exactly sure why either ...

That's also a problem, however. There is such a severe lack of communication (and thus team-work, which this game is more based around on), it gets kinda robotic, or 'dead' I suppose.

With StarCraft II people don't talk either, I seen. But there is more on your mind and more to do than mere typing. You need to handle economy, military, strategy, positioning, researching, transport, etc. And it will end up slowing you down (which it does not in an FPS unless you are an idiot and do it in the middle of the map). This isn't a "full" excuse for why I like RTS better. It's an open spot - but it is still valid to a fairly large margin.

Strategy games > FPS by far.

Yeah. Like I said, you need to handle so much more that a kid wouldn't want to (generally, I'm a kid and I <3 RTS's!), FPS's are a little too simple, I mean. If they added vehicles like in BFBC2 and Halo, it changes it greatly. Especially when there are different ways to effectively fire like this in BFBC2:
Assault - Short bursts of fire to maintain accuracy.
Engineer (Spec Ops for MW2) - Short Range and medium bursts to full automatic shooting.
Medic (uses LMG) - Keep firing to keep accuracy up (and gets it higher, actually).
Recon (Sniper) - Depending on the range you will need to aim higher so the bullet will full and thus actually hit your target. Generally taking the most finesse against more combat-aware opponents (not hiding in a corner open to sniper positions, or they keep moving, etc).

Come to think of it, it would be nice if this actually happened to vehicles. Who agrees?

Anyway, I don't think people who played for 2 years and can kick an averageplayers @ss is exactly 'skill' for something so simple.
And there are more tactics to follow in RTS's.

- H
Prawny
offline
Prawny
71 posts
Nomad

Definately. I agree with pretty much all of what you said, RTS games are awesome. TBS? Not so much.

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

TBS? Not so much.

Indeed, simple games like Chess are fun, but complex ones that are TBS seem more simple.

Chess is great

Age of Empires Online may be one of the greatest games ever made. It's a new genre - MMORTS, one of the best mixes, honestly. And it is from one of the series that started the whole of the RTS industry! Which I think I'll add is returning to the more favored AoEII style - though I must say it reminded me of Age of Mythology more than anything else!

- H
Prawny
offline
Prawny
71 posts
Nomad

It's great fun and well executed.

Showing 16-30 of 39