Do you have any links for the SC2 community criticism?Certainly so far the game is being heavily critised in both aoe2 and SC2 communities.
I disagree!
To me almost every interview implied multiplayer was not a priority.
I even said as much long before any stress tests, open betas, etc.
I understand your point but I think its a vast oversimplification of the Rus. They very much had Vikings and also non-vikings who did raid, conquer and expand. The Kievan Rus conquered a lot of territory, and famously fought the Byzantines multiple times. They would even go on to play a huge role in Byzantine history with their alliance and lend their Vikings to the Byzantines, leading to the formation of the Varangian guard that provided wealth and veteran soldiers and led to a restoration and minor golden age of the Byzantines.I question the influence and projection of power of the Rus though. They were basically swept aside by the Mongols and the void filled in by the Golden Horde and on the East and the Polish Lithuanian union on the west. They were reduced to some principalities around Moscow until basically Russia rose to power hundreds of years later.
Before all that the Rus were just some settlements of people. As you said, Slavs with Scandinavian rulers. But they didn't raid, they didn't expand. They just existed. That's kind of the difference between a Viking and a Scandinavian. A Scandinavian is just a farmer minding his own business looking after his family. A Viking is a raider, a warrior, an adventurer. To me the Rus is more like the Scandinavian farmer, a sedentary, non-adventurous life-style.
Not criticizing, just saying, not really worthy of inclusion in a video game. The Rus didn't do anything notable. But I could be wrong.
Rus was a major player in Eastern Europe, had a lot of interaction with Byzantine and later Lithuanians and Teutonic Order. Their trade network expanded all the way into German city states and the Islamic world.I question the influence and projection of power of the Rus though. They were basically swept aside by the Mongols and the void filled in by the Golden Horde and on the East and the Polish Lithuanian union on the west. They were reduced to some principalities around Moscow until basically Russia rose to power hundreds of years later.
Before all that the Rus were just some settlements of people. As you said, Slavs with Scandinavian rulers. But they didn't raid, they didn't expand. They just existed. That's kind of the difference between a Viking and a Scandinavian. A Scandinavian is just a farmer minding his own business looking after his family. A Viking is a raider, a warrior, an adventurer. To me the Rus is more like the Scandinavian farmer, a sedentary, non-adventurous life-style.
Not criticizing, just saying, not really worthy of inclusion in a video game. The Rus didn't do anything notable. But I could be wrong.
Why does it matter so much to you what Microsoft claimed? Winter and many of his viewers are interested in competitive RTS, therefore when a new RTS comes out it is useful for him to review it from a competitive stand point to let his viewers know if it is worth the buy or not for them. A review is made to let the viewers know if they should buy the product or not, not evaluate the work of Microsoft employees.Right exactly, in this case Microsoft never claimed the title would be the next major competitive RTS.
Or going back to our analogy, the manufacturer never said the car would be able to fly.
You just somehow expected it to able to fly and now are disappointed that it can't.
Again, I don't think one needs to watch a 50-minute video in order to come to the conclusion that AoE4 is not geared towards multiplayer, when even before you watch it you already know you won't be able to customize hotkeys or that you won't have a ranked ladder.
Those things make it perfectly obvious to me multiplayer is not a priority.
And again to make it clear: I think thats bad! lol
I was obviously hoping this game would have the ambition to become a major esport title.
Why does it matter so much to you what Microsoft claimed? Winter and many of his viewers are interested in competitive RTS, therefore when a new RTS comes out it is useful for him to review it from a competitive stand point to let his viewers know if it is worth the buy or not for them. A review is made to let the viewers know if they should buy the product or not, not evaluate the work of Microsoft employees.
"...to come to the conclusion that AoE4 is not geared towards multiplayer,". This is not the conclusion drawn in the review. It draws the conclusion that AoE4 is a fun casual RTS with amazing music which delivers the AoE experience, but is not a good competitive RTS since the multiplayer is lacking.
I do see where you're coming from Masmorra, but the fact of the matter is they launched the game with a multiplayer option. If they were pitching it as the next amazing single-player RTS game only, then they should not have had multiplayer in the game at all.
But obviously that would be completely terrible because lots of people like playing multiplayer, and will buy it just for that, so they have included a multiplayer option. I think that therefore validates any criticism towards that aspect of the game - its not really the same as the laptop heating analogy or any of your other ones.
That is what he is doing, to an extent (allthough nowhere near to the extent you seem to believe), but you fail, in my opinion, to explain why its a problem. There is nothing wrong with evaluating it from this perspective since there is an expectation from the RTS community attached to the AoE name and the RTS tag. If a significant portion of people expected cars to fly or laptop to heat rooms, then it would be relevant to, partially, review them from that perspective. Just as I might be interested in if a clock has an alarm feature even if its primary purpose is to show the current time.That's what I feel like Winter is doing here. Rating the game based on something the makers of the game never claimed it would be able to do.
Don't ask rhetorical questions online, they will be answered:Aren't these the exact same conclusions?!
That's a rhetorical question, it is the same conclusion.
Maybe I just worded it in a way that didn't make it very clear what I actually meant...
That is what he is doing, to an extent (allthough nowhere near to the extent you seem to believe), but you fail, in my opinion, to explain why its a problem. There is nothing wrong with evaluating it from this perspective since there is an expectation from the RTS community attached to the AoE name and the RTS tag. If a significant portion of people expected cars to fly or laptop to heat rooms, then it would be relevant to, partially, review them from that perspective. Just as I might be interested in if a clock has an alarm feature even if its primary purpose is to show the current time.
I am also curious about the following: If the world was identical to now, except that the review proclaimed it was an AoE2 killer and the competitive aspect is utterly fantastic and he will never play SC2 again eventhough it was marketed as a casual RTS, would you then consider the review irrelevant?
Don't ask rhetorical questions online, they will be answered:
Gearing something towards something means preparing it to do that thing. The conclusion "not geared towards multiplayer" contains no implication of whether the multiplayer is good or bad, competitive or not competitive. It simply states the main focus was something else. If you mean something else with this statement you will have to explicitly type it out, because then there is clearly miscommunication. The conclusion "not a good competitive RTS since the multiplayer is lacking" contains an assessment of the quality of the competitive aspect of the product, which is completely lacking from the first conclusion.
Don't ask rhetorical questions online, they will be answered
A philosophy we all should followI'm certainly not buying a 60€ game as long as you can't even customize your hotkeys lol
Ok, I will clarify by quoting you since the implication was not clear. This is what your original post said:No one said it is a problem, he's obviously free to do whatever he likes!
that is what I am refering to when I said "problem." So to rephrase. You have not succesfully demonstrated why reviewing a game from the perspective of what the devs tried to achieve is the only way to make a review that doesn't miss the point. What is THE point anwyay. Maybe start there.Unpopular opinion: I think that videois totally uselesskind of misses the point...
Please consider making a relevant response or none at all. Your ramblings about keyboard warriors is irrelevant and waste both our time.
I can also mention that the "Don't ask rhetorical questions..." was an attempt of me at making an amusing remark to lighten the mood of the discussion.
Im not upset. I just asked you to address my arguments or don't respond, because when someone responds, I prefer to get something out of it. Especially if we are engaged in a discussion and I am interested in the persons perspective. I was simply disappointed with the response but claiming you wasted my time was probably an exaggeration so nothing to be sorry about. The discussion in and of itself could, after all, be regarded as a time waster.lol I have no idea why you are so upset about this.
That quote was just mostly tongue-in-cheek.
As for the rest...I was giving my opinion on a video.
It's totally fine that you disagree with my opinion.
In fact I even said I knew a lot of people would disagree!
I'm sorry I wasted your time!
Im not upset. I just asked you to address my arguments or don't respond, because when someone responds, I prefer to get something out of it. Especially if we are engaged in a discussion and I am interested in the persons perspective. I was simply disappointed with the response but claiming you wasted my time was probably an exaggeration so nothing to be sorry about. The discussion in and of itself could, after all, be regarded as a time waster.
Looking forward to the video and all future content. The podcast is awesome (i am assuming you are the person running the youtube channel massmora_AOE?)!
That is indeed what I misunderstood and I apologize for being somewhat aggressive about it.I thought the "don't ask rhetorical questions" thing was legitimately funny, I wasn't being ironic haha
I guess that's where the misunderstanding came from!
That's indeed me, thank you very much for the nice words!
I thought the "don't ask rhetorical questions" thing was legitimately funny, I wasn't being ironic haha
I guess that's where the misunderstanding came from!
That's indeed me, thank you very much for the nice words!
I was told AoEZone is a cesspool of negativity please delete this nonsenseThat is indeed what I misunderstood and I apologize for being somewhat aggressive about it.