Sid Meier's Civilization: Beyond Earth

[not an artichoke]

Endless Legend also increases the stack size with tech down the road

 

[Gozma]

The big thing that helped the AI in Civ 5 was the "all units can cross water" thing which lets a high difficulty AI Civ haphazardly spray its production advantages across your Civ instead of having to use some rickety hope-and-a-prayer transport invasion AI, just like on an old Pangea map. On an archipelago it's probably a wash with how much 1UPT helps the human player

 

[tuluse]

Bombers and artillery can cause collateral damage in Civ4. I think they wanted to emphasize differences between units more, but they look it half a step too far.

The lack of zones of control also hurt combat.

 

[Knut]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TFV7lkdahY

the plot thickens...

 

[Gozma]

Kind of amazing the degree to which they refuse to put any extra work into this to make it not obviously a Civ 5 tweak. Like they won't make new versions of 8x8 pixel food icons, or significantly reskin terrain

 

[KoolNoodles]

Are you really complaining about the food icon? Yeah, it looks a lot like Civ5, because it uses the same engine. What other game did that...oh yeah, Alpha Centauri.

Liking the look of the tech web, though will have to play it to see if their choices make sense and how the balance is. Not much was shown, but I like the UI for the most part. It looks clean. The miasma/canyon/mountain area is pretty cool. Hard to really say. I liked Civ5 though(two expansions later).

 

[Renegen]

It looks alright so far, I'm really liking these develop walkthroughs directly from youtube because it shows they respect their customers and know their audience. The game resembling Civ5 a lot and having the same early/mid/late game dilemmas is a real concern however but it fully looks like they're doing everything not to have that happen. The tech tree, the increased importance of that first city, the way other civs arrive after you, the way you know so much of the map, the aliens, map scripts, social policies revamped into virtues, the list goes on. The game may also lack content but there again it's not so bad, Alpha Centauri was actually a quicker more casual experience to Civilization but it didn't feel that way, it nevertheless took less time to complete a game and I liked it. What Civ5 has most going for it is the challenge and the replayability, you just don't know where Beyond Earth will fall in those categories, it could be good or maybe we'll need an expansion first and a 75% sale.

 

[Spectacle]

Are you really complaining about the food icon? Yeah, it looks a lot like Civ5, because it uses the same engine. What other game did that...oh yeah, Alpha Centauri.

Yeah, look how similar SMAC looks to Civ II:

Practically exactly the same game.

 

[Knut]

i also like the fact they put up these videos, so you can get a fairly good idea what the game will look and play like, Pete Murray seems like an alright guy. i guess not everything is bad, but overall impression is still disappointing.

 

[Phage]

It's funny. A year ago when we first got wind of this game I was ready to hit the preorder button. After seeing it in action though - especially coupled with the factions and their leaders (SJW pandering much?) I'm probably just going to sit this out until "Civ: Beyond Earth Gold - now with both expansions and all DLCs, it's actually a fleshed out game!" comes out.

 

[Dickie]

I do kind of wish they'd kept unique units, buildings, etc. to make the factions a little more different. I realize that they plan for your other choices during setup to change up the game up, but I think the faction you choose should have a slightly larger impact.

 

[Raghar]

Are you really complaining about the food icon? Yeah, it looks a lot like Civ5, because it uses the same engine. What other game did that...oh yeah, Alpha Centauri.

Yeah, look how similar SMAC looks to Civ II:

Obvious Civ III.

 

[Destroid]

Civ3 was a shadow of SMAC.

 

[King Arthur]

Are you really complaining about the food icon? Yeah, it looks a lot like Civ5, because it uses the same engine. What other game did that...oh yeah, Alpha Centauri.

Yeah, look how similar SMAC looks to Civ II:

Obvious Civ III.

Warrants further comparison,

They both look really nice, but what stands out to me like a blister on an otherwise attractive woman's face is that Civ 3 doesn't have elevation. Thank you and goodnight.
...
To be honest, that wasn't what I was originally going to say. At first I started writing this post with the intention of making a long, comprehensive list of differences, bulletin style. Then I remembered that has already been done, if not by Brazillian Slaughter alone then through a composite effort spanning multiple pages. Needless to say, everyone is familiar with ocean cities and boreholes.

I am actually one of the few people who liked Civ 3 enough to consider it above Civ 4. While it was a great game, due to user made scenarios, it was minimalistic and there were lots of design deficiencies. It simply does not compare in any meaningful sense to Alpha Centauri. What Destroid said much more succinctly is true, Civ 3 is pallid indeed.

 

[Drakron]

(SJW pandering much?)

SMAC had 7, 4 male and 3 female and I cannot see any difference ... Spartans were lead by a female and Morgan was by a African.

Unless you have a problem with delicious Indian curry ... can you only play SPACE MARINES beefcakes? is that it?

 

[Morgoth]

Haven't watched it yet but is probably shit.

 

[KoolNoodles]

Haven't watched it yet but is probably shit.

Looks like Civ5(duh), but presentation is certainly slick. This is gonna sell like hotcakes. Whether that is good or not we'll see.

 

[Dickie]

Kind of weird that all of the victory conditions besides conquest involve building something. Has it been explained how these things are built? I'm guessing it's not as easy as just parking a worker there and telling him to build it and waiting 40 turns.

 

[KoolNoodles]

Kind of weird that all of the victory conditions besides conquest involve building something. Has it been explained how these things are built? I'm guessing it's not as easy as just parking a worker there and telling him to build it and waiting 40 turns.

"There are multiple stages, for example purity needs to find locations for the settlers to go, so he can be stopped by keeping him in a tight spot or intercepting the colonists. Harmony has a power-up time in which the mindflower needs to be destroyed, and supremacy needs to commit units through the gate, leaving him weakened on the planet."

I didn't see how long exactly it would take to build and place the "wonder", but probably a significant amount of time, somewhere between a normal late-game wonder and building the spaceship parts in Civ5.

 

[cvv]

Bickering about BE using the same engine as Civ5, as if anyone gives a flying fuck, is SUCH a Codex thing to do.

Oh Codex...

 

[cvv]

Yeah but why is everybody's knickers in such a knot over a food icon? Because from the preview videos that's pretty much the only thing that looks the same as in Civ5. Everything else, the style, the UI, the concepts, the menus, the units is completely different.

The point is - even if there are more similarities...who gives a fuck? SMAC was way, way more similar to Civ2 than it was different and so what? It was a phenomenal game nevertheless. Nobody ever thought of whining about it being too much like a Civilization game.

Nah, throwing tantrums about some icons being possibly the same is Codex-level retarded. What I'm worried about - in fact, I'm pretty sure it's gonna be the case - is the game will follow the same development cycle as Civ5: utter, dumbed down, content-anemic shit > first addon > playable > first mods > enjoyable > second addon and a whole slew of mods > a great game. That took two years tho.

I'm looking forward to the BE actually but I'm dismayed by a rock solid certainty the game is not gonna be any good for the next dozen months or so.

 

[Drakron]

Its not just a icon, it seems to be Civ 5 + Expansions ... plus mods.

That doesnt mean its bad per say, Civ V + Expansions have more depth that Vanilla and I do hope they corrected major flaws of Civ 5 were you would be far better off with a small empire that with a bigger one but in the end this seems more of a expansion to Civ V that of a new game, how many bad design decisions it retains is a concern.

 

[cvv]

Its not just a icon, it seems to be Civ 5 + Expansions ... plus mods.

No. Just...no.

That's not what I'm seeing at all.

 

[Morgoth]

True. It's much more dumbed down than Civ V.

 

[DeepOcean]

I'm pretty sure it's gonna be the case - is the game will follow the same development cycle as Civ5: utter, dumbed down, content-anemic shit > first addon > playable > first mods > enjoyable > second addon and a whole slew of mods > a great game. That took two years tho.

I'm looking forward to the BE actually but I'm dismayed by a rock solid certainty the game is not gonna be any good for the next dozen months or so.

So, you agree with me then that I should buy the expansions and this game when they all hit 75% off on steam so they all together cost the same price as a decent game, right?