60 réponses à ce sujet

[fchopin]

Uploaded the game from steam and waiting for Friday.

Anyone else playing the game?

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Not soon. And I'll be on a trip.

 

inb4 "this game sucks basketballs" or "this crap is worse than Empire Earth III" or "it doesn't look like Civilization IV, so I'll pass"

comments.

[Fidite Nemini]

 

"it doesn't look like Civilization IV, so I'll pass"

 

If it doesn't play like CiV, it's worth a look into, but for that I'll wait a while and see how the players, both old and new think about it. ANd more importantly, if they're going to release tons of mini-DLC for individual nations/map-packs again.

[OdanUrr]

[wolfhowwl]

I think I will wait for a package edition like I did with Civ V.

[Cyonan]

I imagine i'll hold off on this one for a little bit. Looks like a fairly solid start for some expansions to flesh things out more, but I already got plenty of other games to play at the moment.

[Fidite Nemini]

How's the AI and the game philosophy?

 

Can you just play the game like in IV or do you have to play to win against a metagaming AI like in V?

[Dean_the_Young]

How's the AI and the game philosophy?

 

Can you just play the game like in IV or do you have to play to win against a metagaming AI like in V?

 

I never felt much of a difference in terms of gaming the AI's bonuses and patterns, so I may not be the best person, but...

 

From what I've seen and heard, the AI is mediocre. The diplomacy system is, at it's core, still close to the V system of BNW, with a new 'favor' mechanic (basically IOUs that can be traded back, a good idea) replacing the World Congress system (a shame to lose). The AI still isn't that great with military tactics, still can't do the great exploits that the player can, and still relies heavily on internal bonuses to compensate at higher difficulties. Most pre-release players and livestreams haven't exactly struggled against the enemies, even at higher difficulties.

 

On the other hand, the game philosophy seems very strong: a much more customizable approach to building your future and developing your civilization in a more unique way than in previous games. Starting with the 'customize your start bonuses' seeding venture and going on through the numerous game quests and building customizations, there's a lot of options to pursue- so many, in fact, that trying to get them all isn't exactly feasible. The unquestioned core of the philosophy of a unique civilizational growth is the tech web, which is impressive on multiple levels- by decoupling military progress from specific technologies, the game breaks the old Civ habit of the warmonger race to decisive military techs. While 'optimal' routes through the tech web are sure to follow, there are a lot more viable paths through the tech web, and a good deal more versatility to different contexts and scenarios. While there are always 'strong' and 'weak' techs, there's enough viability that you can end up with different tech catelogs in different games, rather than retreading the same tech lines over and over and over.

 

If 'no reason to play the game the same way twice' was a design philosophy, the game aced it.

 

The ideology and virtue systems are also strong. Tweaks and minor balancing aside, they're all generally balanced and developed vis-a-vis eachother, rewarding a variety of playstyles and enabling a good deal of flexibility in favor of player preferences.

 

Civ:BE is the first Civ game I've seen where 'role playing' is a legitimate prospect.

[2Pac]

A Very Good improvement from V

[Lotion Soronarr]

HMm....

 

I have my hype-shields on so I'll wait to see more.

[fchopin]

I could not start the game last night in the UK so will try tonight after work.

[OdanUrr]

 

Civ:BE is the first Civ game I've seen where 'role playing' is a legitimate prospect.

 

Ouch.

[AlanC9]

So this is basically SMAC: The Next Generation, eh? Sounds OK to me.

[Catastrophy]

It's basically Civ5 with a crappier UI, some really good new gameplay elements and a botched ending. It gives out fewer feedback on what's happening than Civ5 - a thing I can't still wrap my head around.

 

To give an example: I lost my first playthrough but it didn't tell me why - there is just a textbox basically telling "game over - you suck" and there is the other popular button "one more turn" but you can't click it (maybe because I lost?). Quite a kick in the face.

 

A lot of stuff that people expected to carry over from Civ5 isn't in and I say "good riddance" to many of them (like that stupid famous special person mechanic that was so heavy on culture anyway), the happiness is now "health", but works differently (but how isn't explained in-game).

 

The damn city states are gone and with them go their stupid pop ups about what they want me to do, but instead you now keep clicking on trade routes to repeat after like every 20 turns. A standard city can have 3 routes, there's a tech for at least 1 more per city.

 

"Open Border" hugfest is back - hooray. So all in all you do happy useless clicking pretty often - just like in Civ5. (And you can't just end the turn. NO! You gotta respond to all the petty things you don't give a crap about).

 

Unit experience has been nerfed hard, that's one good feature from former games they didn't take over (Why???). Some feel the units lack variation (there is some kind of auto-upgrade system - so you don't see so many different units in the field).

 

If you're looking for a real weird and good strategy game that is Civ-like, set in the future "abroad" and don't fear eye cancer, then play Alpha Centauri (if you can make it run on your rig).

 

Sounds negative? Yeah, because it's too much like Civ5, only Civ5 didn't troll me so hard with the victory conditions. It's got less feedback on what's going on and how you're doing (you CAN retire and see the powergraphs - but not in-game - wtf).

 

But to be fair it has some nice ideas, like quests and shaping your faction by making decisions about building perks, there's a non-linear tech tree, a rudimentary orbital layer, it has new victory conditions (which need milestones to be fulfilled) and a new espionage system. I expect mods can add some more to the game. I also expect the publisher already has some ideas when to put the stuff in, that they could have put in up-front.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Seems like a good release, worthy of getting the vanilla. You can get a Pack of DLCs later.

 

 "game over - you suck"

lol

[AlanC9]

No. If you go into this thinking it's Alpha Centauri 2, you're in for a disappointment. Like I said, it's more like a re-skinned Civ V, but with with its own distinct tone and ideas, much of which I don't think have been fulfilled yet.

 

Sure. My point was that SMAC was a re-skinned version of that era's Civ version. I guess I should have been clearer about that.

[In Exile]

Sure. My point was that SMAC was a re-skinned version of that era's Civ version. I guess I should have been clearer about that.

 

Yeah, but I thought it had more personality than Civ, plus it tried to have that kind of unique reactive sci-fi plot (for a turn-based strategy game anyway). I liked as much as the old Heroes of MM games and Age of Wonders. 

[TheJediSaint]

Got my first victory (Promised Land) with the Slavic Federation.  Yuri Gragarin expy for the win!

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

http://angryjoeshow....h-angry-review/

 

I think I agree with this, though I've played only 40 turns or so.

more likely a 7/10.

[fchopin]

I find the game boring so will wait for DLC's to change how it plays now.
I give a 6 or 7.

[Fidite Nemini]

http://angryjoeshow....h-angry-review/

 

I think I agree with this, though I've played only 40 turns or so.

more likely a 7/10.

 

Ahh, good, I was waiting for his review. He's one of the few reviewers that actually go into detail what a game does, instead of just what they think a game feels like.

 

 

And having seen his review: nope. Not going to buy Civ:BE.

 

Instead going to check out his recommended Endless Legends.