Ara: History Untold

[AntSou]

@Civinator @Bonyduck Campersang the video has English subtitles.

 

[AntSou]

Regarding @Civinator's video in the other thread:

I really like that they are taking a "Score" approach. Humankind didn't quite pull it off with its star/fame system, but I would still like to see an alternative to Civ's victories approach.

Watching actual gameplay is making me much more interested in the game than the trailer. But it also makes it clearer the jarring contrast between the different art styles being used:

The simple "Fortnite" like leaders on a realistic looking map seem like such a blatantly poor choice.

 

[Civinator]

@Civinator @Bonyduck Campersang the video has English subtitles.

That is better for most civers at CFC.

 

[InsidiousMage]

The simple "Fortnite" like leaders on a realistic looking map seem like such a blatantly poor choice.

I understand that the game is still in development but, honestly, at this point the game's UI and general aesthetics are so off putting that it there would have to be a lot of interesting ideas and mechanics in the game for me to even consider buying it. It doesn't help I haven't seen anything interesting about the game at this point.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

I don't know, leaders seem OK-ish too me. Not great, but not so terrible as to put me off

 

[InsidiousMage]

I don't know, leaders seem OK-ish too me. Not great, but not so terrible as to put me off

Its not so much that the leaders look bad, they are perfectly fine honestly, but that they, and the rest of the UI elements, all have different enough aesthetics that they clash in a way that I just find really off putting. The map, the leaders, and the UI all look like they belong from entirely different games and its a sign of bad design that none of the design elements compliment each other. I'm not going to want to spend time playing a game that I don't find visually pleasing.

 

[Hawke9]

I find the UI really off putting. I hope they take a second look at their ui elements, as I think the game could have a lot of potential. It would be a shame if great gameplay ideas are overshadowed by a lack of attention in very prominent design areas

 

[Krajzen]

Here are some excerpts from the Gamestar video:

The recruitement of military units is "item-based". Per example, If you want to produce a unit of archers you need the bows to equipe them. These bows can be gained by production or as a prey:

View attachment 672100

View attachment 672101

Squad-based battles:

View attachment 672102

Only one victory condition: Prestige points (those can be gained for nearly everything):

View attachment 672103

Civ Stats and some buildings:

View attachment 672104

Civ Traits (here India/Ahoka):

View attachment 672105

No tiles, but regions (nothing new, but a nice image):

View attachment 672106

Research is different from the Civ series. Here cards are drawn from a card deck. Only one of three suggested techs can be drawn. Per era there are only nine different cards. I have the feeling, that here the last word is not spoken yet:

View attachment 672107

View attachment 672109

Quests:

View attachment 672108

I know this isn't going to be very profound comment, but i just have this "that is cool" vibe from all that. Many strange ideas (tech system ) but they may be refreshing because of that, and we need innovation.

Tech system sounds very different from civ, and more similar to Stellaris like system with semi-random car decks, which ended up quite cool actually - I'm just interested how do they something like that in a historical game, where technologies have intuitively obvious prerequisites, unlike researching Plasma Cannons before Photon Cannons. My favourite aspects of Stellaris tech system is how much less gamey it feels, harder to optimize and more about the chaotic adventure - you can't meta game by focusing on some tech two eras ahead so you rush enemy with OP unit.

The more I learn of this game, the more I believe in its place on the market next to civ - it seems to try to do something kinda different from civ in every subsystem. Leaders being also cultural figures not just political, regions instead of tiles, squad based combad, card deck technologies, quests, economy based on more resources than just money, only prestige victory - everything is something fresh.

At least it will certainly avoid Humankind's crippling issue of no faction identity and resulting 'complwte sense of schizophrenia and alienation' as put eloquently by one Steam reviewer.

 

[Krajzen]

What exactly is so bad with this UI in your opinion? I don't have any strong feelings about it one way or another, so I'm surprised by the amount of criticism it gets.

Imo it looks similar to many other 4X games, both fantasy and historical. The latter can't focus on aestethic from any particular period or culture due to, well, covering all periods and cultures, so they are used to this vague blue - gold - feelgood - majestic - progress through history - style. Honestly I have always found civ4 UI style to be the most uninspired of them all, in spite of this game being Holy Grail in the genre

My fav style was civ5 art deco (which still checks aforementioned boxes), but I wouldn't like to see it repeated due to playing this game to death, and civ6 did something similar, so I'm not sure how I would design such game's UI myself.

 

[Dale]

I know this isn't going to be very profound comment, but i just have this "that is cool" vibe from all that. Many strange ideas (tech system ) but they may be refreshing because of that, and we need innovation.

Tech system sounds very different from civ, and more similar to Stellaris like system with semi-random car decks, which ended up quite cool actually - I'm just interested how do they something like that in a historical game, where technologies have intuitively obvious prerequisites, unlike researching Plasma Cannons before Photon Cannons. My favourite aspects of Stellaris tech system is how much less gamey it feels, harder to optimize and more about the chaotic adventure - you can't meta game by focusing on some tech two eras ahead so you rush enemy with OP unit.

The more I learn of this game, the more I believe in its place on the market next to civ - it seems to try to do something kinda different from civ in every subsystem. Leaders being also cultural figures not just political, regions instead of tiles, squad based combad, card deck technologies, quests, economy based on more resources than just money, only prestige victory - everything is something fresh.

At least it will certainly avoid Humankind's crippling issue of no faction identity and resulting 'complwte sense of schizophrenia and alienation' as put eloquently by one Steam reviewer.

One of the main designers was at Mohawk working on Old World early on. He "borrowed" Old World's tech system for ARA.

The tech card system works well. In the 2 alpha tests I was in tech worked as such:
- there were different eras in the tech system, like early bronze, late bronze, early iron, etc.
- techs were grouped in eras.
- there was randomness inside the tech era, so you'd be offered a couple of random techs from say early iron.
- once you'd researched enough of an era you'd have a chance of being offered a tech from the next era.
- techs could still have requirements, so you couldn't research composite bow till you had bow, situations.

 

[pokiehl]

What exactly is so bad with this UI in your opinion

Firstly, it is incredibly ugly. City banners and icons are awful flat primary colors. They clash aesthetically with the map graphics as well as the generic transparent material elements of the rest of the UI, which themselves are ugly. Likewise, icons for techs are bright colorful drawings done in a decidedly not modern style. Nothing fits with anything else. It’s like different people of different skills designed each element independently.

I know aesthetics are a matter of taste primarily, but nothing about it is visually appealing and it all looks decidedly “budget”.

Functionally, it’s hard to say without playing, but there’s no reason all 4 corners of the screen should have overlays that extend so far out. Information overload and clutter

 

[Leucarum]

I know aesthetics are a matter of taste primarily, but nothing about it is visually appealing and it all looks decidedly “budget”.

That's a good way to describe it. Everything just looks slightly lower quality and rougher around the edges than I'd expect (assuming a premium price point). Nothing obviously wrong with it, but just looks unpolished.

 

[The_J]

Moderator Action: The thread from the Civ6 forum about Ara has now been merged with the thread about the same topic in "all other games".

 

[civac]

These semi-random tech choices in Old World and Ara seem like a band aid. With a sufficiently well-designed game you'd go for different choices of tech anyway depending on the situation.

In Old World you also got the opportunity to take one of those resource cards over a tech which is admittedly interesting.

 

[Krajzen]

These semi-random tech choices in Old World and Ara seem like a band aid. With a sufficiently well-designed game you'd go for different choices of tech anyway depending on the situation.

In Old World you also got the opportunity to take one of those resource cards over a tech which is admittedly interesting.

In Stellaris (quite damn succesful game, may I add) semi - random tech choices seem to have been working well for 7 years

 

[dagriggstar]

Granted I haven't played any of the ara builds but it's interesting to me that they would go for a card system tech tree. I like it in old world I think in part because that games scope is more limited compared to a civ game. For a game trying to simulate much more of history I'm not so sure.....

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

and another competitor emerges. this time from paradox. they do have some serious experience with strategy games

 

[CivLuvah]

Firstly, it is incredibly ugly. City banners and icons are awful flat primary colors. They clash aesthetically with the map graphics as well as the generic transparent material elements of the rest of the UI, which themselves are ugly. Likewise, icons for techs are bright colorful drawings done in a decidedly not modern style. Nothing fits with anything else. It’s like different people of different skills designed each element independently.

I know aesthetics are a matter of taste primarily, but nothing about it is visually appealing and it all looks decidedly “budget”.

Functionally, it’s hard to say without playing, but there’s no reason all 4 corners of the screen should have overlays that extend so far out. Information overload and clutter

I know it's quite superficial, but I have to agree with this as a first impression. I'm personally put off by UI that feels like you have to do three more clicks for buttons to work.

As a point of example, the map aesthetic of Civ5 was one of the reasons why it did not immediately click for me.

 

[Krajzen]

and another competitor emerges. this time from paradox. they do have some serious experience with strategy games

Well it seems we are going to have an interesting 2024

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Well it seems we are going to have an interesting 2024

Among potentially, Civilization VII, Ara, and Millenia we are either going to be swimming in wondrous new 4X games or depressed by games that are only 'almost good enogh'.

I must say, though, that of those three, knowing virtually nothing about Civ VII and not being impressed (so far) by Ara, I am very intrigued to see what Millenia will do with its 'narrative' and specifically 'alternate history' approach to the genre.