Age of Wonders 4 - Review @ PC Gamer

[HiddenX]

PC Gamer reviewed the strategy game Age of Wonders 4:

AGE OF WONDERS 4 REVIEW

Dust off your wizard hat.

Magic is rarely wondrous in its frequent videogame appearances. It harms, it heals and if you're lucky it maybe transforms enemies into sheep or frogs. Not so in Age of Wonders 4, however, where it drives every component of this arcane 4X, dramatically transforming worlds, cities and the creatures that inhabit them. With your expansive collection of magical tomes, you can dabble with god-like powers to your heart's content.

The Wizard Kings--would-be deities--have awoken in the Astral Sea and are ready to exert their influence over the multitude of worlds that exist in this magical realm. As one of these Wizard Kings, or a mortal champion, you must grow in power to dominate these worlds, using magic and warfare to put the competition in its place.

[...]

With all the ways you can develop your empire, Age of Wonders 4 demands to be played over and over. But there's also an overarching progression system, the Pantheon, that encourages you to hop back in. Founding cities, forging alliances, completing quests and countless more activities will net you Pantheon XP, which in turn unlocks points that can be spent on the Pantheon tree. Rewards include new cosmetics, icons and gear, which can be used in your next game. Through this system you'll also automatically unlock new map types. Meanwhile, rulers you've created can join the Pantheon, allowing them to appear in future games as potential friends or adversaries. Conceptually, I'm a big fan, though I confess that I would have liked Triumph to do more with it. A new cape or hat doesn't hold a whole lot of appeal.

Not that I need more excuses to keep coming back. Age of Wonders 4 scratches my itch for experimentation like few other strategy games, seducing me back in to try new tome combos and drag my empire in new, weird directions. And every time, I return from my fantasy foray with a sack full of anecdotes, like when I resurrected a rival ruler who had been plaguing me all game as an undead minion, forced to serve me for eternity. Magic just makes everything more fun.

Score: 87/100

Thanks Henriquejr!



More information.

 

[mbuddha]

Skimmed through the review and some Steam reviews. Looks good. Will wait for patches and a sale. I like a good fantasy 4X game like Fallen Enchantress.

 

[wolfgrimdark]

It is on my wish list as I am on the fence about it. Not sure if I will like it enough to play a lot but has the potential. But also don't want another game in my library I won't finish so still debating. I played AOW1 and 2 but so long ago. Not as big on these games now.

 

[vidder]

Somehow they need some new gameplay mechanics or improvements.. Over the time those games play almost always the same, but they rarely evolved..
Exception: I found "Endless Legend" pretty innovative for its time, because they tried something new (with the combat for example).
I have not tried AOW4 yet.

 

[Morrandir]

It is on my wish list as I am on the fence about it. Not sure if I will like it enough to play a lot but has the potential. But also don't want another game in my library I won't finish so still debating. I played AOW1 and 2 but so long ago. Not as big on these games now.

You could just play AoW3 first?

 

[wolfgrimdark]

I somewhat fell out of RTS games so partly why I never tried AOW3 and the only reason I had some interest in AO4 was some of the RP stuff I kept seeing about it. After reading up, and seeing the story and campaign are lacking, due to procedural maps, I am no longer as interested. If I get bored or want a game diversion may still try it as I like the custom unit stuff I have seen.

 

[Morrandir]

AoW isn't RTS, but TBS though. Perhaps you're mixing it up with Spellforce?

 

[wolfgrimdark]

EDIT: Okay I see RTS is real time strategy vs. TB Strategy but any game with armies and grids and world building like this I just call an RTS but that is my bad use of the terminology. I should just say strategy game I guess.

 

[arthureloi]

EDIT: Okay I see RTS is real time strategy vs. TB Strategy but any game with armies and grids and world building like this I just call an RTS but that is my bad use of the terminology. I should just say strategy game I guess.

This game has literally nothing to do with RTS. It's not bad use of the term, it simply does not apply in any way.

 

[Morrandir]

Well, it has Time and Strategy, so it applies to ~66%.

 

[Vaelith]

I have never tried an AoW, and I'm on the fence about trying it... does this play like a King's Bounty / HoMM game or more like a Civ? I watched a video but it wasn't so clear to me.

 

[Morrandir]

AoW 1-3 are indeed similar to HoMM. AoW 4 seems to be more similar to Civ. However I haven't played it yet.

 

[JFarrell71]

AoW 1-3 are indeed similar to HoMM. AoW 4 seems to be more similar to Civ. However I haven't played it yet.

nvm, I replied in more detail below

 

[JFarrell71]

I have never tried an AoW, and I'm on the fence about trying it... does this play like a King's Bounty / HoMM game or more like a Civ? I watched a video but it wasn't so clear to me.

I don't know what it takes for you to tip it into "more like" one or the other, but there are a lot of similarities between HoMM/KB and Civ in the first place, so it shouldn't surprise you to learn that the answer to which game is AoW is like is "both."

You create and expand cities like in Civilization, managing resources like food and production and buying units. And you roam around the map with armies, collecting resources and getting in fights and triggering encounters in like HoMM/KB. But, I hear you say, you manage cities and buy buildings and create units in HoMM too. And you roam around the map and get in fights with armies in Civilization. Exactly. They share many elements.

The biggest difference, which I would think would have been apparent from the video you watched, is that AoW is less abtracted: the fights take place on a map separate from the world map, and you move your units around and use tons of different abilties, rather than just kinda bumping them into each other Civ style. And, of course, AoW is fantasy, with all that comes with that (magic used on both the map/strategic and battle/tactical layer, for example).

 

[Vaelith]

I guess the difference for me is that Civ feels more about building and progressing technologies in a race against the AIs, your placement in the world is pretty much randomized and the world evolves procedurally more or less, as the AIs are too trying to develop technologies and expand into your own territory. HoMM/KB are more about getting your hero and your hero's army to grow stronger and take on increasingly harder challenges, collecting hand-placed rewards that are meant to help you get through the next encounter until you eventually beat the game.

That was very thorough though, and I think I got an idea, so thanks a lot!

 

[JFarrell71]

No problem. There are the so called "story realms" in AoW4, and there are bespoke campaigns in AoW3 and Planetfall, that have hand placed challenges, encounters and rewards, so you can get that from the series unless you play pure sandbox.

 

[Thrasher]

I liked the stories in AOW 1 and 2. Not sure we get the same level of story telling in 3 and 4.

 

[JFarrell71]

I liked the stories in AOW 1 and 2. Not sure we get the same level of story telling in 3 and 4.

I couldn't tell you, since I haven't played 1 or 2. But the quantity and general quality of story stuff in 3 is similar or better to what it is in most games of this genre.

 

[Thrasher]

I couldn't tell you, since I haven't played 1 or 2. But the quantity and general quality of story stuff in 3 is similar or better to what it is in most games of this genre.

Thanks! Should try 3 out.

EDIT: may be not. Dart’s post on the other thread says that aoe3 story is weak compared to 1 and 2.

 

[Dasale]

Thanks! Should try 3 out.

The 3 is very different than the 1 and probably the 2 is more like the 1. The 1 has a campaign complexity at another level, but the 3 has tactical combats at another level, except that it's not suiting that well 4X to play all combats particularly because there's a lack of terrains diversity, it ends feel repetitive very fast. But AoW3 is fine too with mainly auto combats.

I liked the stories in AOW 1 and 2. Not sure we get the same level of story telling in 3 and 4.

No for the 1 versus the 3.

EDIT:
For the 4 there's another thread in the forum, and I thought from some Steam reviews that the 4 was a more classic 4X approach, but the comments in the forum seems quote the difference is there's much less a focus on a campaign, but it seems still be a 4X very oriented to wars that's no civ like 4X, sig sometimes Steam reviews are hard to read.

To clarify it, AoW series is more a 3.5X because its eXploit aspect is much more limited than usual in 4X. And the 4 seems not different on that aspect.