When the first game was released in 1999, it already looked outdated. In the modern era it would hardly pass (graphically, among the subnormals, children, and hacks who review games) for a half-assed indie title - even in 1999 (a time when, arguably, nearly all graphics were primitive and 'ugly') it was often remarked upon negatively for its graphical shortcomings. Nevertheless, since the game was a product of pure craft, what graphics it did possess were A) infinitely presentable, and B) charmingly executed. Honest reviewers acknowledged that if the presentation wasn't cutting-edge, it was passable, and in any case it was paired with deep, engaging and challenging gameplay. It also had a magic system that was deliciously broken, and crafty players could discover all sorts of hi-jinks to turn themselves into demigods.
The series might not have ever developed Warcraft's following, but among the hardcore Age of Wonders I is generally acknowledged as a masterpiece. I hate using the word 'hardcore', but that's what it comes down to: the game is unforgiving and if you cannot handle strategy, tactics or adversary, it is best to avoid it. It is one of those games which requires tact and some trial-and-error. There is no hand-holding, and losses are inevitable. The sequel (and its standalone expansion) carried on the tradition with varying degrees of success. The first missions alone can prove, on easy, more difficult than entire campaigns in other games, levels can take long and get brutally difficult even against basic AI. I would not go so far as to call the game masochistic, myself, but others might – odds are they're softies, though, with no real appreciation for challenge and glory.
With the modern explosion of game sequels, it is ultimately unsurprising to see the return of a great series backed with significant nostalgia. Yet the story is probably the best of the year (which is already a good one), even better than the Age of Empires II HD release. One of the best parts is that the success of Minecraft is partially responsible, which means that, whatever you think about Minecraft, it finally gave back to the community. I say all this before Age of Wonders III is even released: good news is good news, and I am happy about this.
After the Nerd Bubble article it may seem that I am a cynical outsider to nerd culture or even an elitist myself, but I am simply a lapsed gamer who used to care too much. I continue to play AoW1 because it is that good, and GOG.com sells it at a fair price (and sometimes a steal price), so anyone can play it even on the most modern hardware. This is truly the best era of gaming: even the ghosts of yesteryear are coming back to life. However, I would like to caution myself and others who are getting hyped already. Let's keep our expectations realistic.
The more I read about the AoWIII project, the more I like it. Michiel can den Bos, who composed music for AoW1 (not to mention Deus Ex and Unreal, two other dear favorites of mine) is apparently on board. Truly good news, because he never did a bad job of scoring a game. Evidently the old crew is, for a large part, assembled on the project. Triumph Studios are no loafers and I don't expect they will release a garbage bag, but it's been a decade since they've tangled with the AoW series. The main question, quite possibly the most pertinent and exciting question, is whether or not Age of Wonders III will recapture the magic of the first game. To do so will be a challenge - the first game had something like 12 races and unit exposition for each and every of the 48+ units. Just to execute this small part (which had much to do with the 'sense of magic' in the wondrous debut) can be difficult, and to ignore it would annoy at least some fans.
In the decade since Age of Wonders took a hiatus, the world of gaming has changed. There are good and bad aspects of this. Those aspects influenced many other sequels – many sequels lack the je ne sais quoi of their progenitors. As the production quality increases, originality and flavor suffer – larger teams tend to deliver products that are extremely well-presented but often hobbled in other areas. The Deus Ex series had this problem; Unreal 2 was terrible compared to the first (a sign of what was going to happen almost globally to single player FPS); Quake 3 skipped single-player entirely and was awesome, but nobody talks about or plays Quake 4 anymore - and Q4 was a thoroughly modern FPS in all the worst senses. Someone could easily do a case study on it.
Diablo is, to my mind, the best series to examine for series-decline and sales-success. The first game was an atmospheric, undisputed champion; the second was a sales juggernaut and a classic in its own right, but the consensus of the hard-core was that it wasn't as good as the first; the third was hyped to hell, released a decade after the second, and introduced a lot of changes - the hardcore despised it. It is hard to defend Diablo 3, the game failed to hook me and I don't have much to say except that I didn't like it. It seemed too intent on distancing itself from its forbears, which is ironic when it retread so much old ground in the first place. It had a real money auction house: a legitimately awful idea that sunk the game in its design phase and left almost nothing exciting above the water.
Sequels and modernity are like a two-sided sword (with cold and poison enchantments). I spent hundreds of hours playing Diablo 2, and I have mixed impressions even of that, but still: I am biased. You can find the shitstorm discussion of Diablo 3 if you look for it, but you might not like what you'll find. The game was very different than the first or second were, a logical but in many ways an unfortunate leap. It had very well done graphics and polished gameplay, but lacked something which the earlier games had. There are many other examples gamers will recount about series that didn't work out long term. Command and Conquer, HoMM, Doom,
So it's fair to have concerns about this newest Age of Wonders. Sequel discussions tend to work in favor of the originals, much like lame-joke hypothetical hipster conversations about bands. It's a shame that people gloss over how good the original game was in spite of its failures and problems. The arguments in favor tend to gloss over the shortcomings, and the arguments against tend to gloss over strengths and originality. I just hope it turns out to be a good game. The Minecraft association alone is likely to bring a wave of newcomers to the Age of Wonders series and introduce it to a new generation of gamers as well.
Sales will likely be quite good – I am already tempted to make a first day purchase, despite Diablo 3 and other lessons from the past – but I hope the execution is even better than the sales numbers. If a series this good is sunk with a modern sequel then it will become a legitimate argument that the modern era of gaming should keep its hands off the past. Seriously. We will have evidence that computer games truly lost something over time, that the old days are truly gone, and all we will have then is our memories. I have a suspicion this is true regardless how AoWIII comes out, but I am intrigued to see how this chapter of gaming history plays out.
I am very excited. I think we will be fortunate with this one. Yet, I am truly biased – I hope this is the awesome new game I've been waiting for and trying so hard to find. The trailer is composed of approximately 99% high-grade hype and I like what I'm tasting. It seems like it will be an inspiring progressive reboot of a beloved series at a time when fantasy TBS-RPG has seemingly become irrelevant and near-death, like a cornered dragon in its death throes...
Age of Wonders, the first was the ultimate gaming masterpiece of all time.
ReplyDelete