Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 01-25-12 01:45 PM
ET (US)
2 / 16
As it happens with this game and others, AoE is a nice introduction to history, especially for kids and teenagers, and a way for them to learn new stuff. However it is just a game and even though it adds some real history facts, many of what is depeicted in it is inaccurate. First there's a trade off between accuracy/realism and gameplay and then there's the creative license of the game programmers and developers when they were aking the game. Still if it wasn't for AoE I'd give a damn about human history, so thanks to ensemble studios for opening my eyes to a wonderful world.
Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 01-27-12 04:33 PM
ET (US)
5 / 16
Again I find AoE just like wikipedia, a nice starting point to profoundize on history. From there you can search more 'serious' sources of information in search of the truth.
I do agree with your point of view, Crossbowman. The fact that the Far East were the last civilizations to be added to the original AoE, just supports it.
From the three Far East civilizations only the Shang had achieved a real level of 'Empire' at the time span of AoE/RoR. In fact, there's no 'maybe' here, the Shang developed a very complex bronze age society and technologies surpassing in many instances their western civilization contemporaries (by western I mean Mediterranean/Near East). Also instead of Shang, I'd have called them Chinese, as the Shang were just the second Dynasty in the History of China, the Xia (or Hsia, still very obscure in archaeological and objective historical records, even though it has been associated to the Erlitou culture) preceeded them and they were succeeded by the Zhou (one of the longest dinasties in human history, however towards the last centuries BC, the power of the Zhou was symbolic as the regional warlords hold the real power: the Warring States period), the Qin (Qin-ShiHuang or Shi Huang Di, the first emperor of China which unified China and is one of the AIs for the Shang in RoR! and built the first proto Great Wall as the curent Great Wall was built by the Ming), the Han, the Jin, the Wei, Shu and Wu and the Jin, then China was divided in northern and southern independent Dynasties as the Dark Ages started in western Europe. I think they should have made a campaign about the 'Shang'/China instead of the Yamato. However, this is purely speculative, back in the 90's Japan and the Japanese appeal was seen as more profitable than the Sinophilia. In any case most of the names used by the AI for the Shang are not even Shang, i.e. Fu-xi, Shennong and Yao (or Yoa in RoR?), amongst others, are mythological, predinastic figures.
Regarding the others, The Ancient Choson attained a civilization level of organization until the last centuries BC (circa the warring states period of China, not in the mythological Dangun Wanggeom founding in 2333 BC, this is one of the AIs of the Choson in RoR, called Tanggun Wanggon or similar). The ancient Choson entered in conflict with the chinese Han expansionism at the end of the 2nd century BC. The Japanese culture, of which Yamato are the representatives in AoE/RoR, attained civilization level even later (Jimmu Tenno 'founded' Japan in 600 BC, but this is certainly a mythological date, this name is associated with an AI of the Yamato in RoR). They mention rival clans to the Yamato which I suppose should be what they call 'Nara' (which in reality is the region were the Yamato originally inhabited), but to be honest I have no idea if there was such struggle for power in the early Yamato period. Some AIs of the Yamato in RoR such as Nintoku or Shotoku Taishi are from the middle of the first millenium AD, so near the limits of the time span considered by AoE/RoR.
I still think that neither Choson not Yamato should be removed from the game, but they are rather newcomers to AoE time span and their cultures didn't have as much impact to others as the Chinese back then.
Sorry for going off topic, but I suppose it could be seen as related to the Yamato Empire of the Rising Sun campaign. Now regarding the Ascent of Egypt learning campaign, the Hyksos shouldn't be mentioned there, as this campaign deals with a pre-Hyksos invasion timeline. To make things worse, they put the Hyksos in upper Egypt when in reality they arrived from the northeast. That was the frist major mistake I noticed in the game, back when i bought it in 1999.
hittite_man
Clubman
posted 02-06-12 02:01 AM
ET (US)
10 / 16
Aoe has shaped my life since I started playing it back in the day, I now make stone tools as a hobby, I've made a bow, a hammer, axe and some other tools out of stone wood horn and plant matter all using ancient techniques, I have studied every civ in aoe apart from the eastern, and now have a huge love for the very beginnings of civilization, on the topic I have noticed that much of the history is innacurate, but there is enought to get the imagination flowing, most of the greek and roman stories of combat isn't all true from the original source, the truth is often best written from other nations's writters as they have no political motive to stretch a story, bottom line is I love history!