AGE OF THE EMPIRES
This was one of my fav games to play...I still play it once in a while when i'm bored...
Celts are the BEST! |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
which one
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
AOE...AOC IS GOOD TOO.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
I got conned into buying AoE3. It's actually pretty fun and I own. Also, it is fun to watch Evan send in his covered wagon and villagers into battle. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
GoT |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
i actually played this game when i had surgery cause i was laid up for a while and my lil bros played it...haha i actually lived it - i was apple's people!
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
i used to play aoe2 pretty seriously back in the day. i dabbled with age of mythology when it came out, but quit after about 3 months.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
which one [/ QUOTE ] the star wars one |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
When i take a break from hold em i like to play NOOB games and use japanese...MONKS/SAMURAIS/ornager combo owns!
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
i was apple's people! [/ QUOTE ] O M F G GoT |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
Huns rape. I wouldn't mind playing a game or two of this if someone really good wants to, although I am currently playing AOE3 at the moment.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
If we're talking AOE:2 + expansion, Spanish are the best and I don't think it's close.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
Starcraft was miles better.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
Starcraft is the most overrated game in history.
AOE 2 was a ton of funs. I used to love watching other people's games for ideas and build strats almost as much as playing sometimes. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
i had a hard time getting into AOE , i think because i sucked at it. plus it reminded me too much of starcraft , which i liked better.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
Starcraft is the most overrated game in history. [/ QUOTE ] blarg, i used to think you were reeally cool. now i hate you deeply. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
Sprites v. 3D, jokey hideously rule-bound physics vs. realistic physics. Outdated well before it even came out.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
its all about balance and gameplay imo. its a strategy game, not a real life physics simulator.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
If we're talking AOE:2 + expansion, Spanish are the best and I don't think it's close. [/ QUOTE ] I think the Turks can give them a run for their money, especially if you get enough bombard towers built into a wall-like formation. Their accuracy specialty helps, too. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
Outdated well before it even came out. [/ QUOTE ] No way. Starcraft was the first game of the genre where the different sides were truely unique, yet still very balanced. This is what made is so damn fun. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Outdated well before it even came out. [/ QUOTE ] No way. Starcraft was the first game of the genre where the different sides were truely unique, yet still very balanced. This is what made is so damn fun. [/ QUOTE ] Quote ofr truth. Still the best balanced AND varied factions in an RTS. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
Plus, best storyline ever. Singleplayer = amazing for RTS, plus so damn balanced for non-abusiveness.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
AOE1 is one of my favorite games of all time. my friends and i used to be pretty good, ranking in microsoft zone's top100
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Outdated well before it even came out. [/ QUOTE ] No way. Starcraft was the first game of the genre where the different sides were truely unique, yet still very balanced. This is what made is so damn fun. [/ QUOTE ] Big deal. An extra side. And it certainly wasn't the only game where people have felt it was balanced. The gameplay mechanics were amateurish and retro years before it came out. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
its all about balance and gameplay imo. its a strategy game, not a real life physics simulator. [/ QUOTE ] Both of which can be greatly affected by how physics is handled. "Rules-based" physics are nowhere near as immersive or compelling as rules that let you do what you want and have it make sense instead of conform to some more or less arbitrary rule set. Having a reasonably balanced game is hardly a world-class achievement. The gameplay was decent RTS standard gameplay. Some people got off on the story(yawn). Some people thought a third side was mind-blowing(feh?). For many it was simply their first introduction to a RTS, or to one that had a large readily available online community to play against, which is pretty vital to an RTS. It was a competent and colorful RTS, promoted far more heavily and far longer and more broadly than any game I've ever seen. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
Starcraft is the most overrated game in history. [/ QUOTE ] Dems fighting words! |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
Every once in a while even Blarg is wrong. This is clearly one of those times =) Just because you feel the game is lacking in many areas you can't really argue its success. If the game is so flawed and its only strengths were its marketing, then how come it's still played by thousands of people? How many other games from '98 can boast this?
Swede |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
Some people thought a third side was mind-blowing(feh?). [/ QUOTE ] Its not that the number of sides, its that each side was completely different. Hell, AOE has way more than 3, but they are all essentially the same. In other games the difference is that one side builds a litter faster, or one has a special unit... This was the only game of its kind where each side was truley unique. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
Every once in a while even Blarg is wrong. This is clearly one of those times =) Just because you feel the game is lacking in many areas you can't really argue its success. If the game is so flawed and its only strengths were its marketing, then how come it's still played by thousands of people? How many other games from '98 can boast this? Swede [/ QUOTE ] When did I ever argue its success? At least financially or in terms of popularity, which it appears you are getting at. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
My point is that the commercial success and extreme longevity of the game indicates that it's actually a very well constructed game, in spite of all your complaints about it. That's all.
Swede |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
I didn't say it wasn't. Just that it was overrated.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
I was and still am one of the best AOE conquerers players in the world. Top 500 at my peak in 2003.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
Top 500 is one of the best in the world?
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
I was and still am one of the best AOE conquerers players in the world. Top 500 at my peak in 2003. [/ QUOTE ] DM or RM? |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
If we're talking AOE:2 + expansion, Spanish are the best and I don't think it's close. [/ QUOTE ] Are we talking RM or DM? Because in DM, which is what I played, Huns beat all other civs. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
"Rules-based" physics are nowhere near as immersive or compelling as rules that let you do what you want and have it make sense instead of conform to some more or less arbitrary rule set. [/ QUOTE ] Would you consider chess to be nothing more than an arbitrary rule set? |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
I wouldn't consider it physics based.
|
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
I was and still am one of the best AOE conquerers players in the world. Top 500 at my peak in 2003. [/ QUOTE ] I was like 1950. By the way, huns are definately the strongest in RM and DM, but I always had a soft spot for the celts. Nothing like men at arms raping skirms. |
Re: AGE OF THE EMPIRES
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I was and still am one of the best AOE conquerers players in the world. Top 500 at my peak in 2003. [/ QUOTE ] I was like 1950. By the way, huns are definately the strongest in RM and DM, but I always had a soft spot for the celts. Nothing like men at arms raping skirms. [/ QUOTE ] 1950 in rated? I was 1900 in rated DM :P..not anymore though. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:10 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.