Age of Empires IV is the best possible version of itself, which makes it a masterpiece designed to stand the test of time like its predecessors in the series.

In addition to emphasizing how much I love this game, I proceed to structure this review based on the most derisory reviews I've heard about it. Not to say it's the perfect game, but it's pretty close.

It's a matter of analyzing the decisions that shaped it from a design perspective. Designing a game is, in the first instance, making decisions. Facing one dilemma after another. And Relic Entertainment did not have an easy decision platform given the fame of the saga that was entrusted to it. Taking that into account, it is not difficult to conclude that the decisions that were made, although they would not satisfy everyone, were the best. To substantiate this premise, I allow myself to present the following examples:

-The graphics: Since the first trailer that came out of the game, this has been one of the most controversial topics. Even I was initially annoyed by the graphic style. But beyond being nice or not, which is subjective, it makes a lot of sense. First of all, AoE II came out in 1999, and had one of the most active RTS communities that hasn't diminished over the years, and has only been renewed with the more recent HD and DE versions. My point with this is that it is evident the value that fans of this saga place on good gameplay and historical expertise. We've been playing a game with graphics from the last millennium for decades, without enjoying it any less or abandoning it. Additionally, AoEs have a high density of followers in regions such as Latin America and Southeast Asia, where high-end computers are the exception. With those factors in mind, that Relic has opted for a rather "flexible" graphics model, has been for the best. It's a matter of knowing your target population, and especially for us, a game that's meant to stand the test of time won't or won't because of its graphics. So the graphics are pretty good, and what's more, they're just right.

-The similarity it has with the AoE II: Certainly, this installment evokes several characteristics of the AoE II, more than any other AoE. And in this aspect I want to bring up the experience of what happened with AoE III. That third chapter in the saga was objectively not a bad game. Without delving into that debate, which is not the subject here, the undeniable thing is that the AoE III took so many risks in innovation and moved so far from the formula of its predecessor, that it was simply not popular. Thus leading to the eventual bankruptcy of Ensemble Studios, the original creator of the AoE, and its disappearance. Based on that, you can defend the decision to build on the fundamentals of AoE II to transplant them to IV. Don't get me wrong, this new game is by no means a "copy" of the most successful game in the series, but part of it, and improves on it, conceptually speaking. In short, it's a new, original game, but one that opportunely drinks from II to cement its playability, without straying too far, learning from the frustrating experience of AoE III. After all, why shouldn't he?

-Artificial intelligence: This topic has not been peaceful either, practically in no strategy game. The crucial thing here is to ask what is the purpose of AI in a video game like this? For what and by whom will it be used? It is not here to emulate ethical judgments, nor is it a chatbot. So what for? The answer is simple: to entertain by presenting a gradual challenge to players, mainly those who do not feel prepared -themselves and/or their strategies- for a competitive environment. In my opinion, as someone who plays mainly against the AI ​​and occasionally in online competition, the AI ​​in this game is pretty decent, and it does the job. I've seen phrases like "the AI ​​here fails to emulate a human being..." referring to this game. If you want to play against a human being, you have thousands waiting for you in the arcades, of all levels, the AI ​​is not intended for people who want to live the experience of playing against humans. Again, because this is why Diosito created the humans who are also there, playing, and he anticipated your request.

In short, they are aspects where I think, the game has not been done justice in certain opinions that have been given. The game has more pros, which are sure to be honored in other reviews (although I do give honorable mention to the engineering and development of the music and audio effects, and the unparalleled, top-notch documentary-style campaign), and cons, such as the inevitable bug here and there, or the lack of customization in the keyboard shortcuts. But it is, ultimately, a great game. Highly recommended.