Just because gamers generally favor Age of Empires II doesn't mean Age of Empires III is a bad game. This may appeal to some gamers, but many long-time Age of Empires fans missed the meticulous building style of Age of Empires II. Building a thriving city with a bustling economy feels like it's been pushed off to the side while small skirmishes and scuffles are on full display. However, Age of Empires III tends to focus on military building and combat more than anything else. Age of Empires II emphasized city building and drilled its importance into players right from the start. It feels more like a side project than a key aspect of the game. Players don't grow emotionally attached to their civilizations as much as they did in Age of Empires II. Simplifying Age of Empires III's core mechanics caused the game's city-building elements to suffer. Related: Crusader Kings III's Patch Notes Are Just as Amazing as Its Predecessors' The game still managed to gain a loyal following, but its audience is dwarfed by Age of Empires II's colossal player base. The developers even admit they dropped the ball by adding too many new features into Age of Empires III, causing it to barely resembled the rest of the series. Many fans found themselves returning to the second game despite it being somewhat primitive when compared to the third entry. It strayed so far away from what made the original titles so great that it ended up feeling like a completely different game. While Age Empires III is great in its own right, it failed to captivate fans the same way as its predecessor.Īge of Empires III is one of the rare games that suffers from too much innovation. Although there are three major releases in the iconic franchise, Age of Empires II seems to be the favorite among fans. Its elaborate management system and massive military battles have made it a stable in PC gaming for over 25 years. So far as RTS Franchises go, Age of Empires remains one of the most beloved of all time.
0 kommentar(er)
