Humankind Game by Amplitude

[AsH2]

I've been reading Science Fiction since Going to the Moon was Science Fiction and not History, so I wouldn't mind a well-done Science Fiction component to any game, but I can tell you right now that fiction writers have a really bad track record at predicting the future, and that's basically the group game designers fall into. They can select a view of the future and try to 'game' it, but don't expect them to come up with anything that really predicts anything.

I don't - just think they (Civ devs and devs of other 4X games) should try harder to add more (relevant) late-game content.

First, be very careful who you try to label Politically Correct. I am a retired US Army First Sergeant, served from Vietnam to the First Gulf War, and am being very, very polite on these Forums because They Got Rules. But in fact I am about as Politically Correct as Attila the Hun but without his forgiving and laid-back nature . . .

I used the term 'Eurocentric' for a very specific purpose: to indicate that certain Eras in their labeling and commonly accepted meanings refer ONLY to the history of Europe and have a completely different meaning or no meaning at all when referring to the history of Africa, Asia, or any other part of the world not Europe. Politically Correct had nothing to do with it: Historically Factual did.

I did not (and never will) try to label anyone. That was purely a comment on how 'Eurocentric' has and is being used (even in this kindly forum) as if it's a faulty focal that need to be pointed out as much as possible (and changed...to what?).

And on that note, people think they know what the Era designations represent, but, frankly, what people think and what reality was are rarely the same thing. Just for an example, the Medieval Era/Period had constant Technological Progression, a massive social/political change from Fuedal Monarchies to Divine Right Kings and central administrations, and a military change from feudal retainer knights to largely mercenary armies. Between the 'early Medieval' period of 700 - 1000 CE and the late or High Medieval Era of 1200 - 1400 CE things changed for the average inhabitant of Europe as much or more as they had in the transition from the 'Classical' (400 - 500 CE) to the Medieval.
And don't get me started on the on-going debates in academia as to when the various Eras started: that Tempest in a Teabag has been going on since I was in college back in the 1960s, and shows no signs of being resolved.

Which, although I'd prefer to do without them entirely, doesn't mean 'Eras' cannot be used as a Game Mechanic: it's just that the boundaries between them should be kept fluid and possibly even unique to each separate Civilization (based, for example, on heir own technological/social/civic progression) and the Titles given to them should reflect something besides the peculiar situation in Europe if the game is going to attempt to include cultures and civilizations from all over the world.

Yes, I think they (Civ devs) got things a bit wrong when they changed from the previous Golden Age Game Mechanics - eg 'Era' became a big thing.

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

'Eurocentric' does not end in europe. the US is not any less 'Eurocentric' than european countries. any country that is so heavily influenced by the roman empire can be categorized as such i believe
oh by the way firaxis is US based?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I don't - just think they (Civ devs and devs of other 4X games) should try harder to add more (relevant) late-game content.

It's a tough job, because on the one hand you are almost guessing at what is relevant or going to be relevant, and on the other hand (at least this has been my experience in Civ VI) the game is all too often essentially over before you get to the last Era, so any work spent on 'end of game' developments is wasted. I would love to have a game whose elements are relevant right up to the end, but it doesn't usually happen that anything in the game is relevant by the end.

I did not (and never will) try to label anyone. That was purely a comment on how 'Eurocentric' has and is being used (even in this kindly forum) as if it's a faulty focal that need to be pointed out as much as possible (and changed...to what?).

There's nothing wrong with 'Eurocentric' when you are talking about Europe or Europe-inspired cultures/Civilizations (ie: North America and South America, modern Australia/New Zealand) - in fact, it's kind of Unavoidable. When talking abut a game that has been trying very hard to represent Global and multi-cultural developments over 6000 years (long before there was a recognizable 'Europe', in fact) anything that smacks of Euro or any other specific culture/civ Centricism is to be avoided since it is contrary to the global focus. That's my specific complaint about the Eras as they have been labeled and implemented.

Yes, I think they (Civ devs) got things a bit wrong when they changed from the previous Golden Age Game Mechanics - eg 'Era' became a big thing.

Eras are a useful mechanism for the lazy game designer, but they are less concrete on the 'historical ground' and much more volatile than the game assumes. Also important, I think, is that the Civ VI system implies that all Civilizations all over the world march in lock step from one Era to the next, which is, as stated, convenient for the game design but a complete Fantasy. IF they were going to design a fantasy game, then label it Endless Civ and market it as fantasy, not as a 4x Historical game.

'Eurocentric' does not end in europe. the US is not any less 'Eurocentric' than european countries. any country that is so heavily influenced by the roman empire can be categorized as such i believe
oh by the way firaxis is US based?

You can make a case that in the 20th century all cultures everywhere began to acquire a 'European/Eurocentric' veneer on top of their original culture because of the global influence of European technologies and political and social theories (such as Democracy, Communism, Fascism, Socialism, Capitalism, etc)

I think that the physical location and nationality of the designers/teams at Firaxis is less important than the fact that the gaming market is overwhelmingly USA and Europe. After all, Amplitude, which is designing Humankind, is based in France but I don't think you could tell that from their games like Endless Legend or Endless Space 2. If you are going to stay in a business, you aim your products at your customer base, wherever and whoever it is.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

You can make a case that in the 20th century all cultures everywhere began to acquire a 'European/Eurocentric' veneer on top of their original culture because of the global influence of European technologies and political and social theories (such as Democracy, Communism, Fascism, Socialism, Capitalism, etc)

I think that the physical location and nationality of the designers/teams at Firaxis is less important than the fact that the gaming market is overwhelmingly USA and Europe. After all, Amplitude, which is designing Humankind, is based in France but I don't think you could tell that from their games like Endless Legend or Endless Space 2. If you are going to stay in a business, you aim your products at your customer base, wherever and whoever it is.

Indeed. For instance, despite being a company located in France, their game forums are predominantly English-speaking with subforums for other languages.

 

[bbbt]

I think that the physical location and nationality of the designers/teams at Firaxis is less important than the fact that the gaming market is overwhelmingly USA and Europe. After all, Amplitude, which is designing Humankind, is based in France but I don't think you could tell that from their games like Endless Legend or Endless Space 2. If you are going to stay in a business, you aim your products at your customer base, wherever and whoever it is.

Indeed. For instance, despite being a company located in France, their game forums are predominantly English-speaking with subforums for other languages.

Paradox is based in Stockholm, and I'm not even sure all their games have Swedish language localizations.

But it looks like there might be a correlation between countries with welfare states and frequent developer diaries - how does Bioware do on the dev diary front? (/sarcasm)

 

[FinalDoomsday]

Funny, I've found Amplitudes games have felt different to other game's I've played and I've wondered if that's due in part to them being French. I mean just go and listen to Endless Space 2's soundtrack. It's full on electronic and synth and absolutely cracking good too. I cant help but feel France's strong connection with that genre has influenced that game's music.

 

[God of Kings]

Indeed. For instance, despite being a company located in France, their game forums are predominantly English-speaking with subforums for other languages.

...and Amplitude is owned by Sega, which is based in, you guessed it, Japan.

To be fair, Sega does not have much influence on the development of any Amplitude game, other than financing and some marketing. None of Amplitude's games have any Japanese localization.

 

[CivLuvah]

That was purely a comment on how 'Eurocentric' has and is being used (even in this kindly forum) as if it's a faulty focal that need to be pointed out as much as possible (and changed...to what?).

Well if you want to give a fuller picture of history (which historians almost always want to achieve when they write history), focusing on just one area isn't really satisfactory. Pointing out that something is Eurocentric is different from being anti-European.

 

[AsH2]

Well if you want to give a fuller picture of history (which historians almost always want to achieve when they write history), focusing on just one area isn't really satisfactory. Pointing out that something is Eurocentric is different from being anti-European.

Still, that's not actually contributing anything, but stating something obvious. Still, it should be obvious to everyone why those 'Eras' are 'Eurocentric'.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Egyptians

https://twitter.com/humankindgame/status/1204441927627751425?s=19


Emblematic unit: Markabata
Emblematic Quarter: Egyptian Pyramid

Notation in the lower left: Builder

 

[Jkchart]

Egyptians

https://twitter.com/humankindgame/status/1204441927627751425?s=19


Emblematic unit: Markabata
Emblematic Quarter: Egyptian Pyramid

Notation in the lower left: Builder

Ooooooooooooh now we're talking. Builder cultures.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Interesting etymology here. The oldest words for 'chariot' found are Old Babylonian, possibly 'borrowed' from fhe Sumerian, 'narkabat' and the Akkadian 'Magirri' or 'Magiru'. All the words were borrowed back and forth among Babylonian, Akkadian, and Assyrian, and 'Markabata' is simply the Egyptian form of a Non-Egyptian word. Interestingly, in the earliest tablets (dating from just after Hammurabi) there is already a separate word for chariot as opposed to 'wagon' or 'cart'.
Somebody's been doing their research - the 'Maryannu Chariot' in Civ VI, is actually using the word for a hereditary caste of charioteers, and the word 'maryannu' isn't Egyptian at all, it is Indo-European - it first shows up in an order of battle of the Hittite Army at Kadesh, describing their allied Hurrian chariotry.

Of course, the later Egyptian word for chariots was Tanethetry, and a 'squadron' of chariots was a Pedjet. The neat thing about the Pedjets is that they were permanent units and had Unit Names like "Beloved of Amun" of "Overthrowers of Evil" - a nice basis for naming the individual chariot units, but all that nomenclature comes from centuries after the first adoption of chariots in Egypt, and so wold be a little like saying that US cavalry in the Civil War were in Armored cavalry Groups - WWII terminology.

Will be interesting to see what the in-game effects of the Egyptian Pyramids are . . .

 

[FinalDoomsday]

The chariot unit seems to focus on how it was used by commanders for observation and orders so perhaps this will be a support unit. Also pyramids as Egypt's emblematic building! Now I can build as many pyramids as I want!

 

[Jkchart]

Will be interesting to see what the in-game effects of the Egyptian Pyramids are . . .

I wonder if they provide some influence, since Amplitude likes their Influence resource. It would make sense!

 

[SeelingCat]

I really enjoy that they're trying to use indigenous (or indigenous-ish) names for the uniques. The downside is that it always makes me go down the rabbit hole of looking it all up.

In addition to what Boris said above, it seems like Werereyt/wrryt was another word for chariot as well; it's apparently not certain (form what I can tell) if it was an indigenous Egyptian word, although I found one reference suggesting it may have come from Hurrian "Waratušhu", but there's not a consensus either way on that apparently. Tnt Htrj/Tanethetry/Te-net Hetri is interesting in that it uses the word htrj/htr, which appears to have originally referred to a pair/team/yoke of oxen, with the theory going that the meaning of htrj was then expanded to refer to a pair/team of horses, and then to a horse itself. Te-net Hetri also seems to have developed at some point - at least according to some sources I've been reading - a more specialized meaning of "chariotry" as an arm of the military rather than individual chariots themselves.

More back on topic, if Humankind winds up having a Chinese translation, I wonder how one would go about translating a word like Markabata into Chinese?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I really enjoy that they're trying to use indigenous (or indigenous-ish) names for the uniques. The downside is that it always makes me go down the rabbit hole of looking it all up.

In addition to what Boris said above, it seems like Werereyt/wrryt was another word for chariot as well; it's apparently not certain (form what I can tell) if it was an indigenous Egyptian word, although I found one reference suggesting it may have come from Hurrian "Waratušhu", but there's not a consensus either way on that apparently. Tnt Htrj/Tanethetry/Te-net Hetri is interesting in that it uses the word htrj/htr, which appears to have originally referred to a pair/team/yoke of oxen, with the theory going that the meaning of htrj was then expanded to refer to a pair/team of horses, and then to a horse itself. Te-net Hetri also seems to have developed at some point - at least according to some sources I've been reading - a more specialized meaning of "chariotry" as an arm of the military rather than individual chariots themselves.

More back on topic, if Humankind winds up having a Chinese translation, I wonder how one would go about translating a word like Markabata into Chinese?

When I started looking up 'indigenous' names for Units some time ago, I discovered what I should have realized from the start: in many cases, the words were borrowed along with the weapons technology. Since Egypt did not invent the chariot, but perfected their version of a vehicle/weapon used against them by the Hyksos, they apparently also borrowed foreign, or modified words of their own, to refer to them. The same thing had already happened: the words relating to chariots used in Mesopotamia from Old Babylonian on seem to have originally referred to riding in a boat, not a wheeled vehicle, but were adapted for the new meaning and new technology. (Boats in Mesopotamia date back to at least 5 - 6000 BCE, or several thousand years before Chariots of any kind)

Like I said, this should not have come as a surprise: the French word for 'Tank' is Chars - 'Chariot': there ain't nothing more conservative than a military mind . . .

Since there already is a Chinese word that was used for Chariot: Zhanche, I suspect that a Chinese edition of Humankind will simply transliterate 'Markabata' rather than use the Chinese word, which is usually translated pretty generically as "War Vehicle". Also, since I believe they are planning to have several Chinese Factions in Humankind, any early Chinese State in the game may need to use its own word for its own Chariots: they were pretty prominent in Chinese warfare right up to 'Classical' times.

 

[CivLuvah]

Will be interesting to see what the in-game effects of the Egyptian Pyramids are . . .

So these are more like the Sphinx in Civ6 rather than an in-game wonder.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

So these are more like the Sphinx in Civ6 rather than an in-game wonder.

My understanding, subject to modification by the next bit of information revealed, is that Emblematic Buildings or Quarters are more like Uniques in Civ VI than Wonders. That would mean, in this specific case, that you could surround every Egyptian city of yours with serried ranks of Pyramids instead of being stuck with just one in the entire World. Based on some of the released 'screenshots' they appear to also have some kind of Wonder mechanism: at least, St Basil's Cathedral or its near twin was in one of the shots, but I don't remember seeing anything about how, exactly. Wonders would be handled in the game, and exactly how they would differ in effects from the Emblematic constructions.

 

[mitsho]

It's a tough job, because on the one hand you are almost guessing at what is relevant or going to be relevant, and on the other hand (at least this has been my experience in Civ VI) the game is all too often essentially over before you get to the last Era, so any work spent on 'end of game' developments is wasted. I would love to have a game whose elements are relevant right up to the end, but it doesn't usually happen that anything in the game is relevant by the end.

The solution is to either introduce game-changing elements or a victory system that allows you to pick up many points as an underdog in the last Era. The first requires very distinct game eras. Basically you divide the game into several minigames. The prelude of Humankind (roam to decide where to settle) already seems a bit like that.

The difficulty then lies in the balance between introducing new elements and having a coherent game. Otherwise, why not stop your game earlier and be done with it. Isn't the game then two or more games in one? Or: Why do we need the modern era and what function does it serve?

Fortunately, a historical strategy game presents you with quite an easy choice for such game-changing elements: Colonisation, Industrialisation, Flight, Communism, etc. But in my mind, in order to make it work, these need to have an impact and reorder the playing board a little bit. That also means shedding old elements to avoid making the late game turns 20 times the length of the starting one. This is where Civ 6 fails: industrialisation is just a tech that gives a small bonus somewhere. I can't even remember what it does. And the World congress just piles on top with little effect.

But again, you need to find a balance. It's just why game eras are important. I agree with you on how much sense the historical ones make.

 

[KayAU]

The solution is to either introduce game-changing elements or a victory system that allows you to pick up many points as an underdog in the last Era. The first requires very distinct game eras. Basically you divide the game into several minigames. The prelude of Humankind (roam to decide where to settle) already seems a bit like that.

I have recently been playing Stellaris again, and while the late game is by no means perfect, there are a few elements which help keep it engaging throughout:

• There are almost always things which could hurt you, even if you are the strongest of the normal players. While Stellaris has the benefit of its sci-fi setting, it would not be impossible to introduce elements which would keep you more on your toes even if you are the front runner.
• Winning the game isn't the only goal. Stellaris only gives achievements if you play in ironman mode, and many of the achievements are actually...achievements. You also have some late game projects which are truly epic, and worthy of pursuing on their own merits, not just as a means to win the game.