New Preview: "10 Ways Civ: Beyond Earth Is Nothing Like Civilization V"

Excellent 2 page preview on the features that make CivBE different:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/12357-Preview-Civilization-Beyond-Earth-Comparing-Beyond-Earth-and-Civ

Pretty good rundown, and an accurate one for the most part.

I don't understand why people are so desperate for this game to not be CiV. I thought it was a pretty good game.

Esperr said:

I don't understand why people are so desperate for this game to not be CiV. I thought it was a pretty good game.

Click to expand...

But why release the same game twice? Except if your game is called Call of Duty, obviously.

@topic: Interesting points. I strongly disagree with 5.) though.

Yes I don't know what they're smoking for #5. BE has a lot more early +health buildings than ciV (for happiness).

What is true is that BE no longer has CS and luxury happiness having to rely only on virtues/policies and buildings.

Esperr said:

I don't understand why people are so desperate for this game to not be CiV. I thought it was a pretty good game.

Click to expand...

It's the best game ever, but after playing it for five years... want something new.

Esperr said:

I don't understand why people are so desperate for this game to not be CiV. I thought it was a pretty good game.

Click to expand...

If you look at comments on articles or YouTube (and even the occasional post on this forum), you'll see that this article is sorely needed: they're full of trolls/people who don't know much about BE saying it's nothing but a reskin.

"Outpost, You'll be a City Soon"

I'm probably going to sing that song every time I find a new outpost now.

Esperr said:

I don't understand why people are so desperate for this game to not be CiV. I thought it was a pretty good game.

Click to expand...

I like Civ V a lot, too, but, for me, I want BE to be different not to be better but just so there are different strategic considerations - so I have to re-learn what works best. I just skimmed this article, since I figure I know most of the details, but it sounds like most of the points on the list relate to the necessity to create new strategies, which is great.

Im looking at BE, and after watching a lot of the LP's and junk it looks like a reskinned civ V to me. Sure theres a few little change here and there, but theres nothing about it that is actually new, the mechanics have just been picasoed. Aaaaaand that's totally not a bad thing. Granted I haven't actually played it yet.

Esperr said:

Im looking at BE, and after watching a lot of the LP's and junk it looks like a reskinned civ V to me. Sure theres a few little change here and there, but theres nothing about it that is actually new, the mechanics have just been picasoed. Aaaaaand that's totally not a bad thing. Granted I haven't actually played it yet.

Click to expand...

If BE is a reskin of Civ 5 then Civ 2 was a reskin of Civ 1, Civ 3 was a reskin of Civ 2, etc. It is a ridiculous point that applies to game sequels everywhere and just serves as a pointless reason to hate something which people are far too willing to do nowadays.

It is also very telling to the knowledge level of the individual making the claim. Nobody who has played Civ 5 can look at BE and say it is just a reskin. Only somebody who doesn't really play the games and doesn't care about the mechanics of the game would come to such a conclusion. There is a saying out there in regards to skill/knowledge. I am paraphrasing from memory but it goes something like: Individuals have a minimum level of competency they must achieve before they can recognize if they are actually good at something or not. Everybody who says BE is a reskin is broadcasting loud and clear that they know next to nothing about Civ games.

HecatesLover said:

If BE is a reskin of Civ 5 then Civ 2 was a reskin of Civ 1, Civ 3 was a reskin of Civ 2, etc. It is a ridiculous point that applies to game sequels everywhere and just serves as a pointless reason to hate something which people are far too willing to do nowadays.

It is also very telling to the knowledge level of the individual making the claim. Nobody who has played Civ 5 can look at BE and say it is just a reskin. Only somebody who doesn't really play the games and doesn't care about the mechanics of the game would come to such a conclusion. There is a saying out there in regards to skill/knowledge. I am paraphrasing from memory but it goes something like: Individuals have a minimum level of competency they must achieve before they can recognize if they are actually good at something or not. Everybody who says BE is a reskin is broadcasting loud and clear that they know next to nothing about Civ games.

Click to expand...

Yes, how dare I speak against BE oh grand master of civilization with my limited competence of civilization V. I never said a reskin was a bad thing, all of the civ games have pretty much just been prettier reskins with mechanics jumbling, civ V broke away a lot from the original formula, but the first three especially were just more progressive versions of the same game over and over again. But this is not a bad thing at all, I just accept it instead of trying to justify it being some totally completely new product. Its pretty common in the game industry, look at COD, actually look at most succusful game franchises, its the same game over and and over again with better graphics and some stuff. Its call of duty 3....in modern times! It halo 3....but now your a generic soldier...it starcraft 1...just prettier...

Esperr said:

Yes, how dare I speak against BE oh grand master of civilization with my limited competence of civilization V. I never said a reskin was a bad thing, all of the civ games have pretty much just been prettier reskins with mechanics jumbling, civ V broke away a lot from the original formula, but the first three especially were just more progressive versions of the same game over and over again. But this is not a bad thing at all, I just accept it instead of trying to justify it being some totally completely new product. Its pretty common in the game industry, look at COD, actually look at most succusful game franchises, its the same game over and and over again with better graphics and some stuff. Its call of duty 3....in modern times! It halo 3....but now your a generic soldier...it starcraft 1...just prettier...

Click to expand...

I think HecatesLover came off a little harsh there - I love the fact that BE is coming on the coat-tails of civ5: BNW, which I find an excellent game (something we all agree on), but the mechanics are what makes the game. Therefore I wouldn't consider it a reskin.

Reality is a cut-down reskin of imagination.

The problem Esperr is that reskin has become a stupid cry (similar to battle cry) for the hateful idiots who just take one quick look at BE and decide to start badmouthing it on the internet. Also reskinning something is literally just changing the graphics and adding no new content or changing any mechanics. It is impossible to claim that BE is just a different skin on exactly the same game as Civ5 unless you know so little about Civ games that you can't tell the difference.

The use of the same graphics engine and the similar UI make it difficult to tell how different the game plays

One could argue that Chess is simply Checkers reskinned...No, it is a different game on a similar setting and with a few similar rules and objectives - but only a few. In the end the proof is in the playing - and we will soon have our own opportunities to confirm or disprove whatever bias we bring to the discussion table about BE.

Seek said:

I think HecatesLover came off a little harsh there - I love the fact that BE is coming on the coat-tails of civ5: BNW, which I find an excellent game (something we all agree on), but the mechanics are what makes the game. Therefore I wouldn't consider it a reskin.

Click to expand...

Really? I thought Esperr came across like an ignorant troll. I thought HecatesLover's response was pretty restrained.

Martinus said:

I thought HecatesLover's response was pretty restrained.

Click to expand...

I would say the same.

The ability to compare and contrast can be, at times, a contentious and an emotional thing, wrapped up in our preconceptions and prejudgements. For those of us who loved Civ 5 - most of whom probably still do - a game that retains similar mechanics but introduces demonstrably new elements will likely be welcomed for both it's similarities and it's differences to the previous Civ game. On the other hand, if people were dissatisfied with Civ 5, because of mechanics that exist in a similar form in Civ BE, they may think that Civ BE has not changed enough. Either position has merit.

What doesn't have merit? People saying that Civ BE is 'basically the same game', or that Civ 5 is a 'reskin'. They haven't shown evidence of even the most rudimentary attempt to compare and contrast, and why they should think their judgement has any worth is beyond me.

Magma_Dragoon said:

The use of the same graphics engine and the similar UI make it difficult to tell how different the game plays

Click to expand...

It's this, really. The overhauled graphics and move from squares to hexes made it abundantly clear to everyone (even those who didn't know the games that well) that Civilisation 5 was not Civilisation 4.

You actually have to delve into the background systems a bit to know just how much changed between those two games - there were vast changes like going from stacks to one-unit-per-tile, the focus on wide-versus-tall empires, the morph of civics into social policies, the lack of tech trading... but just looking at the games from the outside you wouldn't see that stuff.

I'd say Beyond Earth is a lot closer to Civilisation 5 than Civilisation 5 was to Civilisation 4, so the label of "reskin of Civilisation 5 to be on another planet" is a lot more forgivable than labelling Civ 5 a reskin of Civ 4.

There are a lot of systems that return in Beyond Earth with a bit of tweaking - trade routes, health, expeditions, technologies, spies... and it's clear from certain things like the leader dialogue that they used the same code base as Civ 5 to make Beyond Earth.

I always get a chuckle when people insist that the aliens aren't barbarians as well - they are, they've just got one difference, which is that shooting the aliens increases their aggression level, while barbarians were the same level of aggressive all game regardless of your actions. I don't think that's enough to make them count as an all-new completely different mechanic.