First of all, the "HD" part in the title is a bit misleading. I suppose it implies a graphically revamped version of AoE II, but that's not really the case. They may have added some basic lighting effects (which I personally haven't ever noticed) but for the most part the graphics are the same. The animations are the original ones, which are clearly dated, but just about acceptable. I don't really understand why they didn't revamp the graphics a bit more to justify the "HD" part of the title. The animations for instance, consist of perhaps a couple dozen still images. One for each direction the unit is facing. Could they not have added more to make the animation a tad more fluid?

Could they not have added a simple dust effect that occurs as your infantry / cavalry march across the terrain?
Could they not have revised the density of the objects so that a modern HD monitor would be beneficial by proving a greater overview of the game on-screen?

Then there are the bugs. I've had none, luckily. But I gifted a copy of this game to O'Cram and he has not been able to start it since day 1. He gets some kind of DirectDraw error and can't even load the main menu. The AoE forums are riddled with technical support threads from surprisingly many users. Perhaps the most baffling part of this game is this precise phenomenon: How can a game that was originally released 13 years ago, contain so many technical faults upon re-release? The only answer I can come up with, is incompetence.

Then there's the gameplay. The real attraction is the multiplayer mode as everyone should know. I have perhaps played 30 matches and lost 90% of them. This is pretty frustrating as you might imagine. The way in which I lose 90% of the time, is as as follows:

a) I get rushed within 5-10 minutes by an opponent.
b) An opponent builds a sentry tower practically within my base.
c) Players team-up on a "Free For All" game which should basically mean "All Against All"
d) I lose against opponents who are clearly advanced players, despite having joined a "noobs only" game.

It's not my style to rush. Nor to prepare a defence against a rush. Nor to generally partake in any tactic that I generally regard as "chumpish" or cheap, or lame. I prefer to have fun. To play a game based loosely on what I would do in real life. It seems very difficult to find people online nowadays in any game that are willing to play with this same mentality, ie, in the spirit of gaming, and the game itself. It seems mostly you encounter kids who get a kick out of griefing in order to fill that void caused by their low self esteem, no doubt caused in turn by their miniscule penises.

If you're a reasonable bloke on the other hand (presumably with a reasonable penis) there aren't many ways to get enjoyment out of this game. Team battles, like 2 vs 2, or 3 vs 3 are crapshoot because you never know if you're playing against a rusher, despite there being "NO RUSH" written on the session screen.

The only alternative is to play "Free For All" maps but with the setting that would enable you to define your own alliances switched on. That way, you can play with a friend using voice comms and play defensively. Teaming up on anyone who wants to fight against you. If a rush occurs, the player being rushed pulls back within the ally's base and proceeds to play the game as a kind of protectorate who feeds the other gold, food, etc.

Not sure if this comforts you but other than L4D, every internet game always reverts to its normal 'toilet' state.

Mm too bad the internet is laming you on this game derfmeister. Re: O'Cram's problems, are you sure it's just the game being silly or O'Cram's complete lack of understanding of how a PC works? Because seriously, I've never known him to be able to properly install mods or debug anything properly. He can only work an "install yes or no" button. Might be worth it to roll over to the house and help him figure it out.