macfoshizzle
Member
I wish they would announce a spiritual successor to the original series for PC.
First Etherlords and now this. Bad few days for classic PC IPs
"As of March 31, 2014, the game has sold 680,000 copies in Europe and North America.[25]"Company of Heroes 2 sold 380,000 copies in the first 5 days.
Age of Empires has a much larger mindshare than that game.
Age of Empires IV would be a huge undertaking. Minimum 2-3 years development, that's a AAA sequel. How else would they do the franchise justice?I also don't understand why a new AoE needs to be a "massive AAA sequel". That seems like arbitrarily setting the bar to further your point.
Bring back good memories of another game.
Don't worry, 8 people will buy the eventual PC port on the Windows Store.
Who wanted this?
Oh man, Lords of the Realm 2 was sweet. I'm sure I've long since lost the disk like most of my early PC games.
You keep making ass pull claims about the market and its reasons. Where's your proof about the genre being dead?"As of March 31, 2014, the game has sold 680,000 copies in Europe and North America.[25]"
Like I was saying, the genre is dead. Spending 2 or 3 years developing a AAA game to sell 700k copies isn't going to get it done.
By making a solid game with a smaller budget, mainly coming from the graphics/art side of things.Age of Empires IV would be a huge undertaking. Minimum 2-3 years development, that's a AAA sequel. How else would they do the franchise justice?
Age of Empires IV would be a huge undertaking. Minimum 2-3 years development, that's a AAA sequel. How else would they do the franchise justice?
"As of March 31, 2014, the game has sold 680,000 copies in Europe and North America.[25]"
Like I was saying, the genre is dead. Spending 2 or 3 years developing a AAA game to sell 700k copies isn't going to get it done. It sucks, RTS is one of my fav genres. I still remember playing Red Alert over a 28.8 modem.
Age of Empires IV would be a huge undertaking. Minimum 2-3 years development, that's a AAA sequel. How else would they do the franchise justice?
AoE games are massive. I don't know how you could make a real sequel with a smaller budget. That's a bold claim to make... a lot easier said than done.By making a solid game with a smaller budget, mainly coming from the graphics/art side of things.
Making it a game that is accessible to tons of people on a varying level of hardware with solid mechanics seems like a much better bet.
I think your arbitrary "AAA or die" stance is the source of your confusion here.
CoH2 released on June 25, 2013. That quote of its sales says as of "March 31, 2014". Correct me if I'm wrong but that's not one month.Those are almost 700,000 copies in ONE month. Rome 2 has sold well over 1.5 million copies by now in about 8 months.
We're not asking for some ridiculous Halo 5 budget. You can make a really good strategy game with a small, talented team in a couple of years.
This is categorically untrue. They're massive in terms of mindshare, absolutely. RTS games are naturally less intensive in terms of asset creation than any AAA today.]AoE games are massive[/B]. I don't know how you could make a real sequel with a smaller budget. That's a bold claim to make... a lot easier said than done.
AoE3 had what, 8 nations? Each with some distinct units. It had natives, it had a campaign, multi-player, and really good graphics for its time, easily the best of any RTS out when it released...not even close. If you want them to make some barebones sequel with average graphics for $5 mil or whatever that guy above said, then don't call it Age of Empires IV.This is categorically untrue. They're massive in terms of mindshare, absolutely. RTS games are naturally less intensive in terms of asset creation than any AAA today.
This is categorically untrue. They're massive in terms of mindshare, absolutely. RTS games are naturally less intensive in terms of asset creation than any AAA today.
You people sure do love to whine about mobile games, don't you?
T
The reason it's irrelevant is because gaming habits have changed. Mobas and F2P are huge now. The RTS genre is a fraction of what it was in 1999, which is why it's silly to compare sales of a game from 1999 to today.
To be honest I mostly like to ignore mobile games.You people sure do love to whine about mobile games, don't you?
That's Starcraft. It's like using Diablo 3's 15-20 million sales as a baseline. Blizzard is in another stratosphere in terms of sales.Ermm...look at how crazy Starcraft 2 sales have been . It's the fastest selling RT of all time an. AoE is the second biggest IP in tje genre. If Starcraft 2 still sold like crazy new AoE would too. Especially since strategy games are booming right now and pcgaming as a whole completely dwarfs the state it was in 2000.
You got petite indie strategy games like Reus selling 700K, ,Civ V is nearing 6 mlns and Total Wars are constantly increasing their sales too.
My only question for this is how could AoE be competition to their Xbox? It's a genre that's non-existent on consoles. A full-fledged AoE4 sequel would have no impact on Xbox at all in terms of competition.The reason why Microsoft won't make the game is simple:Xbox. Nothing else. They see PC gaming as direct competition to their console, so every dolar spent on PC gaming is not only a dolar that could have been spent on Xbox, but it's a dolar spent againt Xbox. AoE wouldn't work on Xbox,same with Flight Simulator. So they get killed, despite the fact that they were highly profitable.
That's Starcraft. It's like using Diablo 3's 15-20 million sales as a baseline. Blizzard is in another stratosphere in terms of sales.
By the way, anecdotal of course but Heart of the Swarm was the first Blizzard RTS game (full or expansion) that I never bought, which was something I never thought could happen.
My only question for this is how could AoE be competition to their Xbox? It's a genre that's non-existent on consoles. A full-fledged AoE4 sequel would have no impact on Xbox at all in terms of competition.
You people sure do love to whine about mobile games, don't you?
You people sure do love to whine about mobile games, don't you?
Are you even trying to pay any attention to the discussion?That's Starcraft. It's like using Diablo 3's 15-20 million sales as a baseline. Blizzard is in another stratosphere in terms of sales.
That's precisely the point. By not being on consoles and being something capable of remembering to people that Xbox isn't the alpha and omega of gaming, it implicitly becomes a "competing product" to the Xbox brand for Microsoft.My only question for this is how could AoE be competition to their Xbox? It's a genre that's non-existent on consoles.
That's Starcraft. It's like using Diablo 3's 15-20 million sales as a baseline. Blizzard is in another stratosphere in terms of sales.
T
My only question for this is how could AoE be competition to their Xbox? It's a genre that's non-existent on consoles. A full-fledged AoE4 sequel would have no impact on Xbox at all in terms of competition.
AoE3 sold 2 million lifetime. Regardless if it was a disappointing sequel or not, how is that in another stratosphere compared to non-Blizz RTS games?And AoE is another stratosphere in terms of sales compared to other RTSes aside from Starcraft. It's like saying investing in Assassin's Creed doesn't make sense because they sell less than Call of Duty titles each year. Sure...AC isn't as big, but it's still ridiculously massive IP that has no problem making huge profit with each entry. AoE is the same in RTS genre.
AoE3 sold 2 million lifetime. Regardless if it was a disappointing sequel or not, how is that in another stratosphere compared to non-Blizz RTS games?
I'm sorry, what?Do you even know what game genre you are talking about when you post in this thread?
First of all, no..it didn't sell 2 mln units in lifetime. It sold that much till mid 2008.AoE3 sold 2 million lifetime. Regardless if it was a disappointing sequel or not, how is that in another stratosphere compared to non-Blizz RTS games?