I have now played all three Civ Killers and none have

[Thugless]

Well that’s all 3 played since VI and none really came close.

I know how close to fanboyism it is but they just don’t scratch that itch.

Forcing yourself to take one more turn is not what they mean.

A long 4 month wait. Back to Satisfactory for now.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

Which 3? Humankind, Millennia and Ara?

 

[Thugless]

That’s the ones. Old World good too but not categorised as one that could Knock Civ off it pedestal?

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

That’s the ones. Old World good too but not categorised as one that could Knock Civ off it pedestal?

Which is why I think Old World succeeded, it set out to do it's own thing and did it very well.

The others are just trying too hard to be civ. I gave Humankind 20 hours before I dropped it, gave a stab at the Millennia demo and have decided to not even bother with Ara.

Agree on the long wait until February, can't wait for what the 4X king has in store for us.

 

[Dale]

To be fair to ARA, it's not really trying to be Civ. It's more Anno + Europa Universalis IMO.

 

[King Abbas]

I just hope Civ VII doesn’t turn out to be the REAL civ killer.

 

[bbbt]

To be fair to ARA, it's not really trying to be Civ. It's more Anno + Europa Universalis IMO.

That description gives me vibes of the old Imperialism games that I played the heck out of back in the day.

 

[Kev1916]

In four months you may get your wish , the slim more simplified version may be the end

 

[Dale]

That description gives me vibes of the old Imperialism games that I played the heck out of back in the day.

Having played the heck out of Imperialism games in their day, sorry to disappoint, but ARA isn't like it. Think a PDX grand strategy game like EU, with the heavy resource management and production chains of Anno.

 

[Disgustipated]

I noticed Potato just released a play video of Ara, my first look at it. The civ selection screen is beautiful. The gameplay is.... something. Yeah, not my type of gameplay. Maybe it gets better who knows. It could be one of those games with a bad beginning, but it gets better. But I found myself bored watching it. I only got to the 16 minute mark so far.

As for Humankind, I checked out a Let's Play on that back in the day, and it looked good, but the play was only for the first age I believe. And that first age/era is pretty fun in Humankind. But then the game really doesn't do anything from there. That game was a mistake. But I do vow to try it one more time before next Feb.

I haven't checked out Old World yet, I'll get around to it. I definitely want to try to find and watch a full Let's Play first, I learned my lesson.

Millennia I haven't heard of. Maybe I'll check a let's play on that. But who has time for all these games?

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Never liked the "Civ Killer" rhetoric, as if killing Civ is a desirable or good thing. It also does a disservice to these games; yes, they're all having a go at historical 4x, but they each have interesting ideas of their own, some that work and others that are less successful.

In the end, I suppose it comes down to that "one more turn" loop that Civ has historically nailed. That's the magic that is so hard to capture. Hopefully it's still there in VII, I don't see why not at this stage.

 

[Krajzen]

I'm really curious of ARA, as it seems to be doing its own unique hybrid thing, which may be tight move, being significantly different from civ to scratch different itch. After all, civ is always going to have by far the largest budget and well everything so it's going to crush any too similar newcomer. Millenia had a terrible idea of trying to copy civ while doing minimum variations... and having very low budget overall, so it just comes off as "we have civ at home". Humankind meanwhile really dropped the ball with everything that was supposed to be unique about it being unpopular, while everything else was too similar to civ

You know what would be hilarious? If Humankind 2 announced that they are going to have old style very unique civs you play through all ages like usual, in order to now attempt to gain players repulsed by civ7 with its civ switching
It would also play to Amplitude's strength of designing very distinctive factions (one of the reasons why HK approach to civs was so strange in context of this company)

 

[stealth_nsk]

I more or less like Humankind. I'm struggle to love ARA yet as I tried to play it as Civilization competitor first, going to give it another try.

But unfortunately, for all of those games lower budget is very visible. None of them seem to really compete with civ.

 

[Siptah]

Millenia had a terrible idea of trying to copy civ while doing minimum variations... and having very low budget overall, so it just comes off as "we have civ at home".

Wha? Millennia doing minimum variations? Have you actually played it? It's quite a depart from civ games, and a very innovative one. For me personally, it's the at the top of the civ-likes currently, despite its many flaws (not counting Ozymandias here, which I think is near perfect in what it does). But for me, Humankind also was the civ-killer as in "haven't played any civ after its release for years", so my point of view might be niche.

My curiosity about Ara steeply declined in the last few weeks. But then again, all the civ-likes (except Old World) had terrible starts in which their obvious and fundamental flaws were highlighted much more than the things they can actually do well. For some reasons, I nonetheless enjoy(ed) Humankind and Millennia, but Ara doesn't look appealing. I'd rather try Memoriapolis or go deeper into Millennia for the moment.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

To be fair to ARA, it's not really trying to be Civ. It's more Anno + Europa Universalis IMO.

how?

 

[stealth_nsk]

how?

ARA is a game about resource micromanagement. To build Stonehenge, you need to produce 20 ropes, that sort of game. You don't build empire, you build resources, which improve producing other resources by 5%.

You surely could have some fun from it, but it's totally different kind of fun than Civ games.

 

[Siptah]

ARA is a game about resource micromanagement. To build Stonehenge, you need to produce 20 ropes, that sort of game. You don't build empire, you build resources, which improve producing other resources by 5%.

You surely could have some fun from it, but it's totally different kind of fun than Civ games.

Yes, that's clear. Yet, the question is how it would be EU + Anno. Having production chains and simulate wares is just a fraction of what Anno is about (production chains + logistics + population management + creative city design are at the core for me there, and they are all strongly interconnected). And I haven't seen yet what makes it closer to EU compared to civ when it comes to the other parts of the game.

 

[Vitruvian Guar]

To build Stonehenge, you need to produce 20 ropes, that sort of game.

Okay, I knew that Ara goes a bit too far in the resource management department, for a game of such scale, but I didn't expect that.

 

[bbbt]

(not counting Ozymandias here, which I think is near perfect in what it does).

Ozymandias is great for a quick version of a 4x. And a challenging AI!

 

[_hero_]

ARA is a game about resource micromanagement. To build Stonehenge, you need to produce 20 ropes, that sort of game. You don't build empire, you build resources, which improve producing other resources by 5%.

You surely could have some fun from it, but it's totally different kind of fun than Civ games.

And things like this are why there won't be a civ killer.

Civ has cornered the market on simple and broadly appealing. It's meant to be the 4x game that an 8 year old and an 80 year old can both enjoy. Competitors can't out-compete Civ for mass appeal because they aren't going to have the same name recognition or the same budget. That leaves them with the only option of targeting the more hardcore audience that are disenfranchised by the broad appeal approach Civ has gone for, but that will always be a small fraction of the potential player base.