Constructive Criticism on Beyond Earth

[Von Falkenheyn]

Even before this game was officially released, I had mixed feelings based upon the video previews and the various information gathered from the Civilization Analyst. Now, having played some hours on this game I've come to some conclusions based on my experience. I've been with the series since civilization I, so I have witnessed the growth of this series through time.

1. Affinities

This is a great idea, one for which I had lobbied before in another text of mine about ideas for further installments in the series. I'm not so sure the implementation was the best possible. I think that too much weight was placed upon victory conditions and unit specialization. I also think that you shouldn't be able to gather affinity so easily through quests as this can give a crushing advantage. All in all, a good idea which needs to be polished.

2. Quests

Again, another great idea which was poorly implemented. The ideal implementation in my mind would be the way Endless Legend does this. Give a bit more color to it, a few more graphics and a few more choices instead of the same old black and white coin toss options.

3. Tech Tree

The web design is OK although the graphics are not; it's really very difficult to find what you're looking for unless you're searching for it. The tech tree in CIV V is much more pleasing to the eye and much more intuitive. The way to go with tech trees would be a completely non linear system with loose age groupings and as few prerequisites as possible. Again, I must praise the tech tree in Endless Legend for doing a very simple yet elegant job; non linear system with a few prerequisites. To pass from one age to the other you just need X Age I techs. Which ones? It's all up to you. Alternatively, one could go for a linear system with multiple paths such as the old CIV IV system or the one utilized in Galactic Civilization II.

4. One Unit per Hex

Let's start with the positive here: hexagons are great and they're a vast improvement from rectangles. All modern 4X games be it electronic or board games utilize hexagons. The one unit per hex is an excellent idea for tactical games, not for strategic games such as the CIV series. Now, to be perfectly clear here, I'm not advocating a return to the stack of doom, I really disliked that. However, the one unit per hex is clearly not working for the franchise for all manners of reasons. First of all we have problems of scalability (how much space does a hex represent), we have problems of space (later in the game the maps just bog down) and we have problem of sheer tediousness; It takes an X amount of time to simply order around Y units. Not to mention of course that the AI just can't cut it. I understand the background from where Shafer dug that idea; he wanted to blend Panzer General II with the CIV series. A noble idea to be sure but one which can't fit. You can't make a tactical game fit into the same package as a grand strategy game. You have to utilize workarounds. There are several here: You could utilize a tactical minigame such as the one used by the Heroes of Might and Magic series. You could utilize a minigame such as the one present in Endless Legends where armies "blow up" into individual units for combat. Or you could work entirely upon army units as implemented in the Paradox products (Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron, etc). The way this works is, if you place too huge an army on a given space (stack of doom) there are huge penalties on combat efficiency as there are too many units in a limited space. I'm personally in favor of the use of armies as it opens up all manners of interesting customization options such as embedded leaders, tactics advances, weapons upgrades, formations etc. Just consider how much less micromanagement you'd need by moving around armies instead of units.

5. Wonders, Buildings, Resource Interaction, Economy

Wonders are just plain bland, both in terms of graphics and in terms of utility. There is just nothing to compare here with CIV V. Buildings have very limited interaction with relevant resources. Resources can't be combined to produce composite resources. For instance, a titanium smelter (just a fictional example) could produce rare alloys which could be a strategic resource used to create upgraded units or weaponry. Health is really bland and poorly implemented. Again as I've written about this before, local health/happiness or both is the way to go just as it was done in CIV IV. Stations are really poorly done in my opinion. Just send in a trade unit, end of story.

6. Virtues

Virtues are nicely done and I really like the synergies between going deep in one tree and going wide. That's something well done and any issues with this system mainly have to do with re balancing.

7. Intrigue, Diplomacy and Victory Conditions

Intrigue is basically the same as the espionage options in CIV V with some minor upgrades. Nothing impressive or terribly innovative here. You either take it or leave it. Diplomacy is practically worthless; you could adopt a "north Korean" mentality and win the game without having interacted with other civs one bit. Victory Conditions are tedious; after a while you end up clicking "NEXT" waiting to win the game. As I've said elsewhere these should be game ending conditions and not game winning conditions. Winning should be based upon victory points not upon some abstract notion of victory.

8. Variable Start up Power

Again a very good idea. More options to choose from would be very nice.

9. Orbital Level

Another very good idea although I would have liked more interaction with that area. Perhaps operating units and orbital stations would have been nice. I really liked the way the old Activision tittle "Call to Power" handled that issue.

Conclusion
All in all, the game has some neat ideas which unfortunately have been sloppily implemented. Now, if this game had a price tag of 20 dollars I wouldn't be complaining at all. But a 50 dollar game that is essentially a spin-off from an already fine-tuned tittle, which is festering with bugs and poor implementation is really a poor deal. For fifty dollars I have expectations and I will criticize a game harshly. I expect a product to be finished to a high standard and not to essentially play an open beta version of it.

 

[Joch]

3. Tech Tree

it's really very difficult to find what you're looking for unless you're searching for it. The tech tree in CIV V is much more pleasing to the eye and much more intuitive.

There is a filter and search box so you can find exactly what you are looking for. IMHO, the wide open non-linear Tech Web in BE is the most exciting new feature in the game, much better than the linear Civ5 Tech Tree where you wind up researching basically the same techs every game.

 

[GenEngineer1]

There is a filter and search box so you can find exactly what you are looking for. IMHO, the wide open non-linear Tech Web in BE is the most exciting new feature in the game, much better than the linear Civ5 Tech Tree where you wind up researching basically the same techs every game.

I think what he means is that you need to use that to find things, whereas in Civ5 everything was more visually distinct. I still think that simply inserting some color based on primary yield (with maybe highlights for affinity-status as wonder) might go a long way in making things more findable.

After a couple dozen games, people will learn where everything is, but there is something to be said for making it easier to find faster.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Problem with the tech tree is that every icon looks about th esame, it's hard to memorize them.

At this stagte in Civ 5 the players who have spent a huge amount of hours into the game will easily recognize the thumbnails for each and will tell you what it does.

Don't know why they just didn't create unique artwork icons for buildings, wonders etc.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

The Colorful Tech Web mod helps greatly to improve tech tree readability.

 

[Tinker]

There is a filter and search box so you can find exactly what you are looking for. IMHO, the wide open non-linear Tech Web in BE is the most exciting new feature in the game, much better than the linear Civ5 Tech Tree where you wind up researching basically the same techs every game.

That only works if you already know the names of things. How am I supposed to know that my affinity will give me a "Gaian Well" which apparently gives me energy?

 

[Jimbo30]

That only works if you already know the names of things. How am I supposed to know that my affinity will give me a "Gaian Well" which apparently gives me energy?

If you'd never played any Civ game then you wouldn't know that observatories come with astronomy either.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

If you'd never played any Civ game then you wouldn't know that observatories come with astronomy either.

Any slightly educated person knows observatories are related to astronomy
They also know what an observatory looks like

You can't say that about a Gaian well and Terraforming though
(problem of subject matter)

They do have graphical differences (slight) between wonders and buildings

They need more between buildings based on primary yield

 

[roidesfoux]

I feel like affinity advances too slowly in the first part of the game and then too quickly in the later stages.

What I would like to see is some building quests giving affinity points. For example, there's a quest where someone is working on Earth/Alien hybrid plants, and you can allow them to continue the research or stop it. For another one you have to decide to allow cybernetic enhancements for the general public, or limit it to your scientists. You could get 1-2 Harmony points for continuing the research, and 1-2 Supremacy points for allowing cybernetic augmentation for all. This also seems like a good way to balance some of the quests where one choice is much weaker.

 

[joncnunn]

2. Quests

Again, another great idea which was poorly implemented. The ideal implementation in my mind would be the way Endless Legend does this. Give a bit more color to it, a few more graphics and a few more choices instead of the same old black and white coin toss options.

Interesting take on this, most of the complaints I've seen on Quests is actually the opposite. (That one side is an obvious no brainer every time no matter what.)

 

[Breezin]

1UPT is hopefully, here to stay. That was my main and only issue with CIV IV. If CIV IV had 1UPT it would have been the perfect CIV game.

 

[Drowsy Emperor]

I don't see what's so good about affinities. Any linear progression in a strategy game will get really old, really fast and affinities are nothing more than linear progressions. The same applies to virtues vs civ IV civics/SMAC social engineering. All you get with those sort of systems is less flexibility and a more boring game in which you can't change things on the fly and are stuck with past choices.

Without great design it takes very little time for the players to find the most optimal paths and choices and then you're left with a game that has nowhere to go.

Those sort of things are more suited for RPG games where its all about developing a character, if you're running an empire there's no reason to not have the added flexibility.

As I see it affinities, quests and virtues are all subpar ideas. Quests are filler and social engineering is superior to affinities/virtues in every situation.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

If you'd never played any Civ game then you wouldn't know that observatories come with astronomy either.

Maybe not, but you could guess. You could probably also guess that it has something to do with science and space. You probably also could hazard a guess that trains might need coal and swords might need iron.

Ask someone what a Gaian Well is and what fake mineral it needs and what the icon looks like to them. Ask them what invented technology is needed to make it, and what makes a Gaian Well different than a "Xenonursery" or a "Gene Garden" and to differentiate those.

 

[dicemanrick]

There is a filter and search box so you can find exactly what you are looking for. IMHO, the wide open non-linear Tech Web in BE is the most exciting new feature in the game, much better than the linear Civ5 Tech Tree where you wind up researching basically the same techs every game.

There's no filter for Wonders.

 

[Thormodr]

4. One Unit per Hex

Let's start with the positive here: hexagons are great and they're a vast improvement from rectangles. All modern 4X games be it electronic or board games utilize hexagons. The one unit per hex is an excellent idea for tactical games, not for strategic games such as the CIV series. Now, to be perfectly clear here, I'm not advocating a return to the stack of doom, I really disliked that. However, the one unit per hex is clearly not working for the franchise for all manners of reasons. First of all we have problems of scalability (how much space does a hex represent), we have problems of space (later in the game the maps just bog down) and we have problem of sheer tediousness; It takes an X amount of time to simply order around Y units. Not to mention of course that the AI just can't cut it. I understand the background from where Shafer dug that idea; he wanted to blend Panzer General II with the CIV series. A noble idea to be sure but one which can't fit. You can't make a tactical game fit into the same package as a grand strategy game. You have to utilize workarounds. There are several here: You could utilize a tactical minigame such as the one used by the Heroes of Might and Magic series. You could utilize a minigame such as the one present in Endless Legends where armies "blow up" into individual units for combat. Or you could work entirely upon army units as implemented in the Paradox products (Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron, etc). The way this works is, if you place too huge an army on a given space (stack of doom) there are huge penalties on combat efficiency as there are too many units in a limited space. I'm personally in favor of the use of armies as it opens up all manners of interesting customization options such as embedded leaders, tactics advances, weapons upgrades, formations etc. Just consider how much less micromanagement you'd need by moving around armies instead of units.

Very good summation of the inherent problems with 1UPT in Civ, how some other games tackle the issue and some potential solutions. Well done!

 

[Bandobras Took]

Maybe not, but you could guess. You could probably also guess that it has something to do with science and space. You probably also could hazard a guess that trains might need coal and swords might need iron.

I could also guess that Observatories would improve as your technology increases, that trains at some point would cease to need coal to function, and that swords could be made with other metals than iron. I would, of course, be wrong on each of these points as relates to Civ V vs. History, but nothing's stopping me from guessing.

The original comment was "That only works if you already know the names of things. How am I supposed to know that my affinity will give me a "Gaian Well" which apparently gives me energy?"

You know it the same way you figure out that Pyramids in Civ 5 aren't for burying dead Egyptian Pharaohs. You look at the tech tree and the tooltips.

 

[Tinker]

If you'd never played any Civ game then you wouldn't know that observatories come with astronomy either.

Except that doesn't matter at all because you'll come across Astronomy in the linear Civ 5 tech tree whatever you do, and you can simply read the building that comes with the tech there and get the description. In BE you actually have to make choices what to pick and what not to pick in the tech web, and you never even come close to finishing it. There's no way to tell what is where at all due to it all being the same colour as well as having SF names, and no sorting options to filter by affinity or effect.

 

[Joch]

no sorting options to filter by affinity or effect.

Not sure what you mean, there are many filter options, i.e. "Harmony" will highlight "Harmony" affinity techs, "Health" will highlight "Health", etc.

 

[TLHeart]

Except that doesn't matter at all because you'll come across Astronomy in the linear Civ 5 tech tree whatever you do, and you can simply read the building that comes with the tech there and get the description. In BE you actually have to make choices what to pick and what not to pick in the tech web, and you never even come close to finishing it. There's no way to tell what is where at all due to it all being the same colour as well as having SF names, and no sorting options to filter by affinity or effect.

upper left corner of the tech web, you can sort, and you can search.

 

[Arcaian]

I don't see what's so good about affinities. Any linear progression in a strategy game will get really old, really fast and affinities are nothing more than linear progressions. The same applies to virtues vs civ IV civics/SMAC social engineering. All you get with those sort of systems is less flexibility and a more boring game in which you can't change things on the fly and are stuck with past choices.

Without great design it takes very little time for the players to find the most optimal paths and choices and then you're left with a game that has nowhere to go.

Those sort of things are more suited for RPG games where its all about developing a character, if you're running an empire there's no reason to not have the added flexibility.

As I see it affinities, quests and virtues are all subpar ideas. Quests are filler and social engineering is superior to affinities/virtues in every situation.

Not changing things on the fly seems good to me. If it's something that's designed to be variable from the start I guess it would still work pretty well (e.g. civics in Civ IV) but for the most part it takes away consequences. All strategy game decisions shown have consequences, and being able to change at any time means that you can avoid the long-term consequences. Also takes away the ability to do short term vs long term decision - would you rather one free tech or +5% to science? Would you rather +2 food per turn now, or 10% net food? Everyone would just take +2 till it's worse than 10%, then change. Takes away some decisions.

Optimal paths shouldn't exist in a properly designed linear path, as it depends on the initial circumstances. Sure, it may be best to go for tradition as your first policy in Civ 5 for the most part (though this might change with that latest patch), but if you're in an area with a massive amount of land and no AI, it makes sense to go for a liberty start (if properly balanced ). There's no optimum path because each game has a different start. If you had the same start, sure you could work out an optimum strategy and go for it, but the varying initial conditions means there is never one optimum path you can pick before the game starts.

(Sorry about Civ 5 examples - only finished one game of CIV:BE, don't want to use examples I'm not very familiar with)