18 replies to this topic

[rpgsearcherz]

HyBriD54, on May 8 2008, 08:13 AM, said:

Age of Empires I I thought was a lot better than it's successors (I've never played Age of Empires III but I have played Age of Empires II and I was a bit... disappointed). It was a lot more fast paced and it's graphics were pretty amazing for the time they came out. But some of the controls in the game were annoying, but that was maybe because I was too used to playing Starcraft, Warcraft II and Warcraft III as well as the Command and Conquer games. There were so many different civilisations, but they lacked variety, although some techniques of gameplay required only using certain civilisations, which made it slightly more interesting. In terms of difficulty, Age of Empires I was also a hell of a lot more harder than Age of Empires II (I loved the Castle in Age of Empires II though!). The cheats in Age of Empires I were also... amusing.

I completely agree with this post here. It seems to be this way with most games though. The first one is great, and really builds up anticipation for the next ones, and then BAM! they shoot down our wishes by giving us a piece of crap. If you notice, it is as if the game companies decide that graphics are more important than the gameplay(but then again, a lot of people won't even play games with bad graphics, solely because they just bought their new $3000 pimped out computer and do not want it to go to waste.)

As for the cheats thing, I loved making the cars and just pounding buildings in like two or three hits. I think that was in the first Age of Empires at least, might have been the second one.

I did like, however, when they upgraded the farms by allowing the villagers to auto remake them. That's probably the best upgrade they ever added to the series. Nothing sucked more than looking at your farms and finding out you had 40+ people just sitting there due to having already cleared their farm out.

This all seems to be a little different when it comes to Command and Conquer, though. In my personal opinion Red Alert 2 and Command and Conquer 3 were by far the best of the series(excluding of course Renegade)

[baphometslayer]

Me and my buddies used to play AoE online all the time. As was stated earlier, I always used to play heavy defense and wait for the wonder to win the game for me.

One of my buddies was mega good at the game though and could break any defense I set up. I would have layers and layers of walls with loads of towers between each layer. He would bring in siege and as soon as I brought in my force to take the siege out, he would have the perfect counter for that, normally elephants of horse archers.

AoE 2 and 3 really never did anything for me. AoE the original will always be where it's at!

[rpgsearcherz]

Agreed, but AoE 1 was also pretty easy compared to the rest. I mean, you could sit back for 45 mins and build up your base so you'd have an actual war, or you could opt out of that and just go rush their base within the first 10 minutes and pretty much guarantee your win.

I guess that's the only real bad part about npc's. They concentrate on the same thing everytime so when you play against them you can already tell what they're going to do, and when they're going to do it. Against other players, it's a whole different game. Sadly I never really played it online due to my slow ISP.

Now I just play mmorpg's instead of rts's, .

[Legend Link]

I don't really remember the original Age of Empires to well, but I have the game and I used to be pretty good at it. I remember playing maps that had a combination of land and water so I could use siege and those catapult boats. (Don't remember what those are called.) I always hated how the computers would have hundreds of priests converting your units. Oh well it offered a challenge.

Age of Empires II is probably my favorite. Even if it isn't as hard as the original. It takes place during my favorite period in history, I guess that was a plus for me. I also loved the scenerio maker... That was always fun to make huge battles with.

Age of Empires III is great to. I think it's lacking a few things though. I think it takes place during the most boring time period... One reason why I somewhat dislike it. Overall all three games a excellent. Their my favorite RTS games.

[HyBriD54]

XD. I never actually played Age of Empires online, by the time I actually TRIED, the Internet service thing was already quite dead, so there were no games available apart from the usual primitive method of Local Area Network connection games. Something else I noticed too, you only need one CD for 3 people! How convenient, most of the time you need one CD per person.

If the controls for Age of Empire 1 was more starcraft/warcraft RTS oriented, and that the population was raised to say... 200 or so... then that would be mad. Massive army fights. Just a bit harder to control.

[eukristian]

I think i spent a lot of hours on it since 1997 but as soon as AOE 2 was released , i began playing it .The third game in the series is not as good as the first two , at least that's what i think .

[room2593]

rpgsearcherz, on May 15 2008, 12:06 PM, said:

I completely agree with this post here. It seems to be this way with most games though. The first one is great, and really builds up anticipation for the next ones, and then BAM! they shoot down our wishes by giving us a piece of crap. If you notice, it is as if the game companies decide that graphics are more important than the gameplay(but then again, a lot of people won't even play games with bad graphics, solely because they just bought their new $3000 pimped out computer and do not want it to go to waste.)

What are you talking about, you agree? Seriously? AoE 1 had civilizations that were much the same, the gameplay was the same every time you played, and the graphics for the first were decent for their time...

I like AoE II much better. The strategy of base building actually comes into play. A poor layout can cripple you, while a good layout can make you invincible.

Plus, you'll run into generic race types no matter what rts you're playing, merely because too many playable races cause repetition. You can't make races both simple and unique, unless you have about three or four race types. If you have ten to twenty races, all you're doing is modifying certain aspects and keeping the rest.

Starcraft is a good example of this: they're able to have unique races by keeping down the number. Jack up the number of races and pretty soon you have to start generalizing the units.

[inverse_bloom]

AOE 1 would have to one of my fondest games. In high school i set myself the challenge of finishing it as quickly as possible. So i would come home from school and allow 3 hours for it. It took me 3 weeks which probably isn't extraordinary but i appreciated the challenge nonetheless.

Edited by inverse_bloom, 02 June 2009 - 02:05 AM.

[iGuest]

ive gotta say, I'm replaying AOE 1 and its pretty difficult, to actually play you have to rush, you have to start off and take your enemy right off the bat, and take thier resorces. Its pretty fun, tho I'm used to the later games way of playing. #3 was a bit.. Lacking, but amazing graphics... Which prolly held my attention. Plus I like all history so its different sence in units def kept me thrilled until... I grew up. Lol

but I gotta say # is my favorite. I went thru everything, and nothing beats the expansion, with the aztecs. Thier jag. Worriers rule out every other unit... They are deadly! you have 20-30 of them, you win the game. Simple as that.

but I still get amused for the graphics of weapons and boats from AOE 3, but one has its difficulty that the others don't have. It took me several times to beat the first scenerio, kept getting owned, finally devised plan that was fool proof. Defeated all enemy's... But had to build farms... Never explained how to do that. Spen half an hour figuring it out. ... Tough.