@jinzo9988: Eurgh, please no. I HATED the ammo system of 2 & 3, it just turned it into another generic, cover based shooter (Gears of Mass Effect). The heat based system (in context, too!) was refreshing.
HOWEVER I think they should have allowed you to pick an additional weapon mastery from the start. Such as I went with the shotgun, and tweaked the game to unlock the sniper rifle. Being unable to zoom with it was absolutely silly.
I could live with a non-mastered assault rifle because it still...worked as a backup weapon, but a sniper rifle you can't zoom or shoot with at all? Daft. Should be able to use all weapons in at least a basic, non-mastered manner and have them be "ok".
In #2 I also hated how you could only use one ability at a time. It allowed so much more strategy in the first game, planning your chain of attacks as you entered a room, managing cooldowns etc.
The only real other complaint I had was that too many rooms, caves etc were re-used. I'd seen the same cave system hundreds of times. I understand that was probably due to limitations of the time, but a little more environment variety in the first would be nice, too.
Other than that, needs a graphical update and a few slight tweaks here and there and all's good. One of the most refreshing parts of it is that it didn't play like a "modern" game.
@noskytoohigh: Because that's the whole point, "modernising", because it's "problematic".
Just make a new bloody game, that reflects the values that you have at the current time, rather than going back and changing old stuff! I'm not talking about the history IN the game, I'm talking about the history of the game as it was originally made. Just leave it as it is.
If want to "do better" in future, fine. But this whole "We must go back and erase everything that is problematic to make it more sensitive" is absolute crap and borderline dangerous. You're going to end up like China with such attitudes.
Whether you agree with the old one or not, that's how it was made, leave it that way. As you can tell I don't agree with the whole aspiration of making stuff that never offends anyone, as that's an impossible goal and leaves us all with bland shit. But even if you are in support of such, surely you understand the value of NOT re-writing history and having these older problematic things around, so you can learn from them when you make something new and "modern"?
I'm not talking specifically about AOE3, just the precedent of erasing or modifying the past to have it comply with current ideals and certain group's sensitivities, rather than simply reflecting on how it was, and WHY it was like that back then. That attitude always goes too far, and never ends well.
@xantufrog: Because I don't agree with re-writing history to suit the crybabies of current times. We wouldn't have any history if we kept doing that! AND you'd never be able to actually learn.
Is this where we're at, now? Re-writing the history of 15 year old games to ensure they're less "problematic"?
Really, mates? Has anyone even actually given a shit, in all the time this game has existed? Take your toxic SJW history re-writing crap elsewhere and leave the game as it is.
If you wanna approach new games in a different way then fine, but there's no need to go back changing old ones. It was how it was at the time as it was made, people will understand that.
@MAD_AI Well to be honest the game was pretty much done by the time the Kickstarter campaign was ran. The funds from the Kickstarter were just to help marketing, UDK engine licenses, pre-orders, things like that.
Besides the Age of Chivalry HL2 mod (of which this game is based on), this is Torn Banner's very first game, they developed it over 2-3 years I think, funding it out of their own pockets until the very end.
BobT36's comments