You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

General Discussions
Moderated by Maffia, LordKivlov, JimXIX

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.63 replies
Age of Empires III Heaven » Forums » General Discussions » What this Expack *should* have been
Bottom
Topic Subject:What this Expack *should* have been
« Previous Page  1 2 3  Next Page »
Mythos_Ruler
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 00:12 AM EDT (US)         
Now, some of you would tell me to "shut up and take it" but what I am doing here is being a little more in-depth with how this expack could have been a great great game.

What the expack should have done was expand upon the colonization aspect of the game. To do this, advance the time period of the game an additional 25 years up to around the year 1875 (give or take). What the expansion would have covered was the colonization of Africa, India, and Asia by the Western powers.

"Wow!" you say, "Way too much territory to cover in one expack!" But not really if you take it in a broad context of global colonization. Although these were seperate areas, having their own significant events, they were all tied together under the banner of European expansion and colonialism.

The campaign would take a group of intrepid explorers across the continent of Africa, founding settlements and making contact with the native tribes and kingdoms. You are then taken about an East India Company ship to India where you have many adventures. Lastly, the player goes to Asia, where European powers are struggling with the United States to open up the vast East Asian realm to commercial exploitation.

The number of Random Map opportunities astounds, as does the variety of possible "native" civs the player could align themselves with. Not only that, but with such a globetrotting colonial theme the possibility would exist to bring in any number of new playable civs that would not have normally been probable with an "American Continent"-only expack.

List of new Playable Civs:
Belgium
Italy
Sweden
The United States (yes, this is now possible)

(Incomplete) List of new "Native" Civs:
Maasai
Tutsi
Mali
Zulu
Pushtan
Hindus
Chinese
Japanese
Koreans
etc.

New custom scenario opportunites would explode, as well as the possibility of very cool new units available only in the last age, like gatlin guns and ironclads. Not to mention new native units like Samurai, Zulu warriors, elephants, ninja, etc.

In closing, it is inconceivable to me with such a huge success on their hands that is Age of Empires III, that ES wouldn't have put it's best foot forward on expanding their top selling game in a manner similar to(not necessarily exactly like) what I have outlined. It is my hope they will reconsider their "1 expack only" policy and expand upon and supporting with greater gusto their award winning (and extremely profitable) game and its stellar theme.

AuthorReplies:
Natus
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 04:15 PM EDT (US)     26 / 63       

Quote:

Natus, I'm starting to get a bit bothered by your constant flamings. You should learn a bit more history before you keep bashing.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the fireplace. You've obviously hardly cracked a book on US colonization/conquests, so I'm not even going to reply to your dunderheaded hair-splittings, semantics, and whitewashing. And if you can't see that we are an imperial power now, no matter how "benevolent", you need to open your eyes. But this is starting to fall under Political & Historical Discussions, and unlike you I don't want to hijack Mythos Ruler's fine thread.

Quote:

You're writing it off before its even out. Scratch that, you're writing it off before you even know anything about it apart from a rough idea of what type of civs are going to be in it. nice

It's called a Discussion forum, dick. If you think we're all hopelessly in error, don't respond. This is exactly what this forum is here for, and Mythos_Ruler's contribution was exceedingly positive, unlike yours.

Quote:

the expansion includes the natives of the country that was colonised as major players, making it look less like a cakewalk for the europeans. I would say thats expanding on the colonial aspect.

Yeah, and whom did the Natives colonize? That's his point.

Quote:

A lot of people are going to be happy with the expansion as is. For me it covers an area that I'm interested in, but that was covered rather thinly in the basic game.

Thinly? A dozen native civs with at least two units a piece and their own techs? Have you played the game?

Quote:

Ok so you don't like it, and have probably decided against buying it before you really know much about it. That may or may not be your loss. But just because you don't like the idea, doesn't mean its a bad one.

As has been said over and over and over (and ought to be stickied somewhere so squirts with reading comprehension deficiencies can read it): this is where we discuss the x-pac, whether we like it or don't like it. Mythos-Ruler did a lot of work on this thread, and yes, if it's our opinion that ES' idea is a bad one, then it is. We are not making assumptions; I think ES has given us all quite a lot of information. You love it, we don't, and there isn't anything you (especially you) can do about it.

polydeuces
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 05:52 PM EDT (US)     27 / 63       

Quote:

It's called a Discussion forum, dick.

Try posting without the insults next time


Quote:

If you think we're all hopelessly in error, don't respond.

What? so if i disagree I shouldn't post anything? How would that be a discussion then?

Quote:

Mythos_Ruler's contribution was exceedingly positive, unlike yours.

This makes no sense. Mythos was negative about the announced expansion and positive with an idea for his own. I was the opposite. Don't like it? tough. I don't need your permission to post my views.


Quote:

Yeah, and whom did the Natives colonize? That's his point.

No-one. My point is in the expansion we're probably going to see the European colonization of the Americas from a new viewpoint. That's expanding on the colonial times if you ask me.

Quote:

Thinly? A dozen native civs with at least two units a piece and their own techs? Have you played the game?

Its very thin compared to the European civs. There's more to the Iroquois than tomahawks and mantlets, and now we get to see that in game.

I don't mean that as a criticism of the vanilla- i like how the native allies work. But for me, expanding them to full blown civs is a great idea.


Quote:

As has been said over and over and over (and ought to be stickied somewhere so squirts with reading comprehension deficiencies can read it): this is where we discuss the x-pac, whether we like it or don't like it.

Yes, I know. Mythos said why he didn't like the x-pac and gave a version he thought would be better. I said why i didn't like his version and why i like the x-pac as it sounds now. What part of this do you have a problem with.

Quote:

Mythos-Ruler did a lot of work on this thread

a) i never said otherwise. In fact, i said that the amount he suggested would be more appropriate for a new game rather than an X-pac.

b) The amount of thought someone puts into a thread doesn't dictate whether or not people can criticize it.

I severely doubt Mythos-Ruler is curled up in a corner, sobbing just because i didn't like his ideas. Once he reads my post, I suspect he'll fire back with his own arguments and the whole debate will be flying.

This is a discussion board after all. They ought to sticky that somewhere.


Quote:

and yes, if it's our opinion that ES' idea is a bad one, then it is.

No, it just means you don't like the idea.

Quote:

We are not making assumptions

Yes, you are.

Quote:

I think ES has given us all quite a lot of information.

No, they haven't. All we know is there are three native civs, one of which is Iroquois. We don't know how the new civs will work, what units/ techs they have, what buildings they have, what maps there will be, what new native allies there will be... you get the idea.


Quote:

You love it, we don't, and there isn't anything you (especially you) can do about it.

I never tried to force anyone to like anything. I just gave my opinion. If you can't deal with other people having views that conflict with your own (and you're giving the impression that you can't) then you need to stay away from forums.

EmperorPatrick
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 06:27 PM EDT (US)     28 / 63       
@Novoa, I never said that the US established a strong influence over South America. As you said, South America is only part of Latin America. That's why I included the area around the Panama canal to differentiate between the distinct areas within Latin America.

Quote:

I really do not understand where you get the US was imperialistic over Latin Ameri


I really do not understand where you saw me say that.

Quote:

People from the Phillipines and Central America/Caribbean aren't "barbaric races and people."
You clearly don't know the meaning of the word barbaric, what a shame...


I never said that. That's why I put barbaric and uncivilized in quotes. Don't impune my intellgience by saying I don't understand the word barbaric. You clearly didn't understand my post, and have a skewed perspective of history. Read up, buddy. Also, ever heard of Social Darwinism? It was the beleif that in human society, as in the natural world (as explained by Darwin in On the Origins of Species), there exist superior and inferior races and nations. This twisted view of Darwinism was used to justify the conquering and colonization of lands that seemed inferior to Westerners. Europeans nations, as well as the US, used Social Darwinism in their Imperial enterprises. The first major blow to this perceived Occidental superiority was Japan's victory over a major European power in the Ruso- Japanese war of 1903- 1904. The Japanese proved that Westerners could not so easily "write off" less developed countries.

AOE III/TWC: 1st Lieutenant
TAD: Master Sergeant (~30 Games Played)

[This message has been edited by EmperorPatrick (edited 03-16-2006 @ 06:28 PM).]

Yamato Take
Prince of Tennis
posted 03-16-06 06:35 PM EDT (US)     29 / 63       
See while you people wherre in the General Discussions going "i wonder wen teh expansion will come out. !!!!11! 1337" people in the Future ES Games Forums were designing civs nad Natives for the X-pack. None of us really ever thought that they would make native civs, but they went and did. I suggest all of those that are really interested in the X-pack have being about world colonization, check out the Future ES Games Forum and my "New Native Civs" in my signature.

Really Mythos is just telling you guys what we thought about in the Future ES Games Forum.


Cosmopolitan? Check.
fernandoarteaga
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 06:53 PM EDT (US)     30 / 63       

Quote:

No matter how many things the government teaches us(Monroe Doctrine, Roosevelt, etc.), none of those things ever did establish the US as a major influence or "Imperialistic" over South America. The only people in the continent that let the US act "Imperialistic" over them are the Mexicans and the rest of Central America and the Caribbean.

Well, thats depending on whats your definition of Imperialism, A marxist o any Leftist guy could tell you, that the economic or political control is also other way of "Imperialism", though im not Marxist, i agree that Imperialism is not only direct territorial conquest but also indirect methods.

And now by that, i can say, that US of course had and has control over many countries not only in Latin America but in all the world.


The privilege of absurdity; to which no living creature is subject but man only

[This message has been edited by fernandoarteaga (edited 03-16-2006 @ 07:00 PM).]

Smertios
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 06:59 PM EDT (US)     31 / 63       
The X-pack will be great. Some won't like it, for sure, like you Mythos. But Europe already got its chance on the first version. It's time for something new...

And what would be the point of all that in a game about the Americas?? I think we will have to wait for AoE4 for that...

EmperorPatrick
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 07:28 PM EDT (US)     32 / 63       

Quote:

The X-pack will be great. Some won't like it, for sure, like you Mythos. But Europe already got its chance on the first version. It's time for something new...
And what would be the point of all that in a game about the Americas?? I think we will have to wait for AoE4 for that...


Indeed.

AOE III/TWC: 1st Lieutenant
TAD: Master Sergeant (~30 Games Played)
Mythos_Ruler
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 07:38 PM EDT (US)     33 / 63       
Well, I seriously don't disagree that my original post would make for a good AOE4 or AOE3.5 or something. My whole point of the thread was that the game wasn't just about "colonization" but had a specific theme regarding the imperial powers struggling against each other for control over the "lesser" peoples, their lands, and resources. My problem with the current expack is, like someone else said, "Well, who did the natives colonize?" The answer to that question spells why making native civs playable is a bad idea in regards to the theme of the game as established. One could say it is ES's perogative to change the theme of the game for the expack, and I can't disagree. It is their product and I really have no say in what they will do with it. However, as somewhat of a designer myself (video games, web design, graphic arts), I find fault artistically with making a thematic break like that. So, what I did was put together some ideas that would bring the game to new ground (literally), while maintaining the original theme of imperial powers stuggling with each other during an historical era of colonization.

About the U.S. - It is very true, given the thrust of the game as currently designed (vanilla and possibly chocolate) that the U.S. would not be a good choice as a playable civ. However, as outlined in my original post, the U.S. would very much be an applicable civ. Not only did the U.S. exhibit imperial influence over the Philipines, Hawaii, Cuba, Puerto Rico, et. al. in later years, but does anyone not forget the Westward Expansion, Manifest Destiny, etc.? Not to mention American attempts at forcibly opening Japan to commercial exploitation.

This all could possibly fit if the expack would have broadened to include Africa, India, and/or Asia.

RiderOfEternity
Skirmisher
posted 03-16-06 07:41 PM EDT (US)     34 / 63       
Not a bad idea actually Mythos.

Leader of Liquid Fire. Animator Seb C.

One does not simply leave HG
Yamato Take
Prince of Tennis
posted 03-16-06 07:47 PM EDT (US)     35 / 63       
Exactly Mythos, and there might be a very corny reason that the U.S. will be in the X-pack. ES always likes to keep it an even number of civs, (AOM was an exception because the civs were so different) and with the eight civs plus the three native civs will be 11. Mabey they'll put the U.S. in to tie things up. If the Incas can compete with Russia, so can the U.S.

Cosmopolitan? Check.
Novoa20
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 00:25 AM EDT (US)     36 / 63       
The Incas make more sense than the US considering they were around Discovery Age. The same goes for the Iroquois.

Quoted from Natus:

Mythos-Ruler did a lot of work on this thread, and yes, if it's our opinion that ES' idea is a bad one, then it is. We are not making assumptions

Please, do not make me laugh. Mythos and the rest of the guys who frequent the "Future ES Games Forums" clearly know that your statement isn't true. I could have very easily as well gotten a whole topic about this(And I have) by using the overview information so many of us did in the Future Forums. The list could go from Yamato's Japan civ. to Custer's Italian civ.

Not to say that Mythos did add some of his personal ideas, but I'm completely sure Mythos didn't take "A lot of work" in the thread.

Quoted from Natus:

It's called a Discussion forum, dick.

Look Natus, it is clearly noticeable that you are a very brigth person and not some nincompoop that doesnít know how to actually discuss, but your use of words is really poor and thus I wonít discuss anything with you either until I see that your responses reach a certain level of more maturity.

Quoted from EmeperorPatrick:

@Novoa, I never said that the US established a strong influence over South America. As you said, South America is only part of Latin America. That's why I included the area around the Panama canal to differentiate between the distinct areas within Latin AmericaÖ

ÖI really do not understand where you saw me say that.

Hereís where I saw you say it:

Quoted from EmperorPatrick:

Ever heard of the Phillipines? The Panama Canal and Latin America? I guess not.

I understood that your were speaking of the Phillipines, the Panama Canal, and Latin America.

If you meant to insert "in" instead of "and" then perhaps you should pre-check your writing before you submit it for it really seems as if you were saying something else.

You say I impune your knowledge, then donít impune mine either by saying I donít know anything about the conquest the US made and simply the buying of the Panama Canal(Which is a very long and complicated story), and social Darwinism(Which is something that basically has proven not to be true).

EmperorPatrick
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 06:46 AM EDT (US)     37 / 63       

Quote:

social Darwinism(Which is something that basically has proven not to be true).


Yeah, I know that. I hate how the completely valid theory of Evolution was so badly abused that it led to racism and hatred, as well as violence. I also never impuned your intelligence. Furthermore, it is know that the US was one of the countries in the so called "Imperial Ranks" in The Pacific after the taking of the Philippenes.

AOE III/TWC: 1st Lieutenant
TAD: Master Sergeant (~30 Games Played)

[This message has been edited by EmperorPatrick (edited 03-17-2006 @ 06:50 AM).]

Natus
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 07:10 AM EDT (US)     38 / 63       

Quote:

The X-pack will be great. Some won't like it, for sure, like you Mythos. But Europe already got its chance on the first version. It's time for something new...

The x-pac might be great. We can all hope for the best. But saying it will be great is just as silly as some people saying it will suck.

But I really don't understand this "Europe already got its chance on the first version" malarky. That's like saying, "The Medieval civs got their chance in AoK, now it's time for something new." Like what, Rise of the Serfs? The reason "Europe got its chance" was that the entire game was based on them! Now ES is pulling the equivalent of a fast one and because all anyone wants is "new, refreshing gameplay", it's A-OK. That worked really well for AoT.

Novoa20
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 08:40 AM EDT (US)     39 / 63       

Quoted from EmperorPatrick:

I hate how the completely valid theory of Evolution was so badly abused that it led to racism and hatred, as well as violence.

The theory of evolution was frowned upon by several nations(Considering that the Catholic Church didn't approve it). The only part that the nations actually took what could be said "advantage" of is the one that said that some races where better than others,etc. That led to violence(as you said) and more violence.

Going back to the point of the US colonizing, the only place the US actually "colonized" was when they bought the Louisiana territory(It was still wild and unknown), but that's just it. Alaska had already been settled by Russians, Oregon was settled by British, Americans, etc.
The Mexican territories were already settled by Mexicans.

US colonization is basically as short as Belgium's. Both of them don't need to be on an X-pack that supposedly leads on the "theme" of colonization.

The only important thing Belgium did was open the interior for the rest of the Empires. Even then, Belgium was the nation that treated the Africans the worst. With so much bad history(And definately poor unique armies)Belgium is definately and should definately never be thought of as an option(Even if they seem more logical than Switzerland or Serbia, who wouldn't do any good either).

polydeuces
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 12:44 PM EDT (US)     40 / 63       

Quote:

So, what I did was put together some ideas that would bring the game to new ground (literally), while maintaining the original theme of imperial powers stuggling with each other during an historical era of colonization.

I still think the original theme was the colonisation of the Americas specifically. Granted, it was a time of colonisation, and other important events fit into this timeline (Napoleonic wars, Anglo-Dutch wars in Europe as well as struggles in Africa). But from a European perspective, the discovery and colonisation of America was huge. Every major power (and some minor ones) in Europe wanted a chunk. Thatís why this game focused on it, rather than a general whole world theme seen in previous games.

Quote:

My problem with the current expack is, like someone else said, "Well, who did the natives colonize?" The answer to that question spells why making native civs playable is a bad idea in regards to the theme of the game as established.

Just because the natives didn't colonise anywhere in the time period, doesn't mean they weren't involved in the colonisation. They didn't all meekly ally with European powers to help with their foreign squabbles, and thatís an idea the expansion will (presumably) expand upon.

Quote:

However, as somewhat of a designer myself (video games, web design, graphic arts), I find fault artistically with making a thematic break like that.

This intrigues me. Do you have any plans to make an African mod? You'd be limited in the natives you could use, but it might be worth a shot?


Quote:

About the U.S. - It is very true, given the thrust of the game as currently designed (vanilla and possibly chocolate) that the U.S. would not be a good choice as a playable civ.


Agreed.

Quote:

However, as outlined in my original post, the U.S. would very much be an applicable civ. Not only did the U.S. exhibit imperial influence over the Philipines, Hawaii, Cuba, Puerto Rico, et. al. in later years, but does anyone not forget the Westward Expansion, Manifest Destiny, etc.? Not to mention American attempts at forcibly opening Japan to commercial exploitation.

I see what you mean, but expanding the length of time the game covers wouldn't suit an X-pac very well.


Quote:

This all could possibly fit if the expack would have broadened to include Africa, India, and/or Asia.

Again, to cover all these continents adequately would require more maps, natives and technologies than an expansion pack could ever cover. And thatís before you add any new major civs.

There are several areas an expansion could have covered. Extra European civs would have been a favourite for many, and i think a couple of Asian civs may have been popular too.

I'm willing to bet a colonisation of Africa expansion was considered by ES at some time, even if it didn't make the short list. It would not have been my favourite option, but i would have brought it if it played well and brought new variety to the game. The fact that they didn't doesn't suggest a failure to make the most of the game. They're keeping true to a theme (this is an area i think you're reading too much into.)

As far as I'm concerned (and i doubt I'm alone in this), stronger native tribes was one of those viable options. I really don't think that an expansion down this route will detract from the game, or be a notably poorer option than Italy/Sweden or other alternatives.

Assuming that it plays well.

Edit: Edited for my appalling mutilation of the word "adequately"

[This message has been edited by polydeuces (edited 03-17-2006 @ 12:49 PM).]

Joeking14
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 01:16 PM EDT (US)     41 / 63       
polydeuces mos AoE xpack expand the timeline.

(\__/)
(O.o )
(> < )This is bunny. Copy bunny into your siginature to help him on his way to world domination!
_.+._
(^\/^\/^)
\@*@*@/
{_____}
Mythos_Ruler
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 01:56 PM EDT (US)     42 / 63       
Thanks, polydeuces, for using rational and dare I say it, calm discussion.

What Joeking says though is true. Both the expansion packs for the previous AOE games added to the originals' timelines. Rise of Rome added a whole 200-300 years (!)to the original Age of Empires, while The Conquerors Expansion brought Age of Kings forward about 100 years or so. I see no reason why an AOE3 expansion couldn't add a meager 30 years (give or take).

Quote:

Yeah, I know that. I hate how the completely valid theory of Evolution was so badly abused that it led to racism and hatred, as well as violence.

Like any other theory, belief system, philosophy, and religion, it was hijacked by those with their own social aims. It's an example of how science can be taken to extremes when mixed with religious and/or nationalist furvor.

polydeuces
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 03:22 PM EDT (US)     43 / 63       
I wasn't aware AOK expanded the timeline, and i never played aoe expansion- I probably should have checked that one.

polydeuces = wtfpwned.

I think the rest of my arguement still holds true though. For the time being.

Gaurdian_112
Banned
posted 03-17-06 04:03 PM EDT (US)     44 / 63       
Man it should have been an Asian expansion. Asian civs would have added the much needed art diversity this game lacks. Even the freaking Ottomans share European buildings-how LAME.

If they added Japan, it would've worked too, since they had cannons, muskets, etc...

If they 'WHAT IF' with Ottomans, they can 'WHAT IF' with Japan.

Lawfire
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 04:29 PM EDT (US)     45 / 63       
We can all say ES should have done this or should have done that, all day long. What if this and what if that. I think their idea is a good one, and to be honest, they haven't let me down with one of their games or expansions yet. I was a little skeptical about the whole homecities concept they introduced in this game, but I grew to love it.

I know everyone won't agree, but you can show them you don't agree by not buying it. It's not going to be out for 6 months or more, it's a little early to be pissed off about it...


Step inside this nightmare where I live, The madman roams inside my head.---Black Label Society
Joeking14
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 05:25 PM EDT (US)     46 / 63       
Gaurdian_112 they could could of also done a "what if" the europeans had jets and UFOs with lasers and space travel.

(\__/)
(O.o )
(> < )This is bunny. Copy bunny into your siginature to help him on his way to world domination!
_.+._
(^\/^\/^)
\@*@*@/
{_____}
Novoa20
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 05:55 PM EDT (US)     47 / 63       

Quoted from Lawfire:

It's not going to be out for 6 months or more, it's a little early to be pissed off about it...

Very true.

I still hold my point that a second X-pack is possible, and that could add Asia and Africa for colonization.

Lone Rex
Skirmisher
posted 03-17-06 07:51 PM EDT (US)     48 / 63       
Agreed, kinda like World Colonization this time.

(\__/)
(O.o )
(> < )This is bunny. Copy bunny into your siginature to help him on his way to world domination!
Plays: Age Of Kings:The Conquerors, Age Of Empires III and Rise Of Nations.
Be courteous to all, but intimate with few; and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence. George Washington
Smertios
Skirmisher
posted 03-18-06 07:09 AM EDT (US)     49 / 63       
Well, I would like to see world colonization, but not in this game...
Bakma
Skirmisher
posted 03-18-06 10:47 AM EDT (US)     50 / 63       
Safavids and Moghuls and maybe the Khmer would be great
« Previous Page  1 2 3  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires III Heaven | HeavenGames