Maximus_Prince
Chieftain
Considering the current status of the game is Humankind worth getting yet or should I wait until another major expansion comes out and bugs are fleshed out?
I want your opinion: Is this game worth purchasing at the moment?
- Thread starter Maximus_Prince
- Start date
It's a great game imho and I think with the current -80% reduction it's worth it for anybody who has a mild interest in strategy games. It's been in a good status for quite some updates and continually getting better. I‘m still surprised when I see the steam reviews and can‘t comprehend it.
Why wait? Development will continue and I'm not sure the price will drop much lower (a potential free weekend aside). Also, if you get it now, you get the wonder pack for free. It's certainly a good time to find out for yourself. I would recommend to give it a few hours though or at least 2 games, as the learning curve with all the mechanics is quite steep (but with maybe 20-30 hours not that long).
While I'm looking forward to some overhauls of existing mechanics, I'm not sure more major expansions are needed to enjoy the game (but I think the culture packs are great value). While there are still bugs, I know of only a single major one: in independence wars, accepting an offer to go back to the state before the war will release the vassal. Other bugs are more mildly annoying than a reason not to play.
That said, if you dislike some of the core mechanics, such as culture switching, simultaneous turns, or fame, this might not be for you. And I wouldn’t bet any money that they‘ll go away. I think those are neat, however.
Why wait? Development will continue and I'm not sure the price will drop much lower (a potential free weekend aside). Also, if you get it now, you get the wonder pack for free. It's certainly a good time to find out for yourself. I would recommend to give it a few hours though or at least 2 games, as the learning curve with all the mechanics is quite steep (but with maybe 20-30 hours not that long).
While I'm looking forward to some overhauls of existing mechanics, I'm not sure more major expansions are needed to enjoy the game (but I think the culture packs are great value). While there are still bugs, I know of only a single major one: in independence wars, accepting an offer to go back to the state before the war will release the vassal. Other bugs are more mildly annoying than a reason not to play.
That said, if you dislike some of the core mechanics, such as culture switching, simultaneous turns, or fame, this might not be for you. And I wouldn’t bet any money that they‘ll go away. I think those are neat, however.
Last edited:
Maximus_Prince
Chieftain
I agree a lot on the part of the reviews. Seems people were looking for a glorified civ mod slash clone.
What appeals to me with this game is that its design choices seem to be be catered more towards realism and historical accuracy compared to civ which turned more into a historical brawl fest. (If I wanted a war game I would be playing Total War)
I also hate how 4x games have really been lacking in diplomacy. Civ 4 IMHO had more sensible world congress/ UN resolutions
What appeals to me with this game is that its design choices seem to be be catered more towards realism and historical accuracy compared to civ which turned more into a historical brawl fest. (If I wanted a war game I would be playing Total War)
I also hate how 4x games have really been lacking in diplomacy. Civ 4 IMHO had more sensible world congress/ UN resolutions
Humankind‘s diplomacy is more nuanced than civ VI‘s, and the world congress is actually interesting - but sadly, the latter is part of a dlc and not in the base game. That said, there is erratic behavior by the AI every now and then, and some leaders have personalities that are hard to keep friendly with. Still better than civ‘s agendas, but not as great as, e.g, EU IV.
KayAU
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2014
- Messages
- 1,115
I just returned to Humankind after a long break. While I have been critical of some of the fundamental design choices, Humankind has always been at least a pretty good game, with lots of interesting and enjoyable parts to offset the parts I don't like. For me, I bought it at full price, and feel it was worth it. With the current discount, I would say it's a complete no-brainer.
ATM I have the same question -
need my speed
Rex Omnium Imperarium
Without watching the video, my main reasons for immediately dropping the game are... No, is: A distinct lack of immersion.
You can subdivide that point into reasons such as:
-Technology names are bland, sometimes weirdly chosen, and do not make you truly feel as though you are progressing through archetypical ages (think of the medieval era, and you think of castles, feudalism, theology, these kind of hallmarks, and so on).
-Buildings/districts/bonuses are bland; on the one hand, some in name, like the above point, on the other hand, the game revolves around spamming districts (which further reduces them to generic 'Industry Quarter' which is not immersive) and/or making the perfect jigsaw puzzle.
-Yields are... Weird. Complicated, on one hand, with many possible interplays - irrelevant, on the other hand, as in, the balancing is seriously off - these points combined further increases the feeling of 'oh let's just queue up whatever thing has a +Production and not look at their name/image', i.e. reducing immersion.
-Diplomacy/friendship/roleplaying immersion is hard, when suddenly the Phoenicians have disappeared and I have no idea who they are now.
-Plus, despite the AIs having agendas, I never felt they had recognisably distinctive personalities as Civilization IV's AIs have.
-I also think the ultra high movement speed contributes to this; you're racing all over the map and have less of a feeling of 'this is my land'.
-Added to this; the game speed itself is ultra fast (yes, I play a modified Marathon that is even slower, tech-wise; experiencing every technology, era, and unit to the fullest does a >lot< for immersion).
And so there are more points to make, but I am at work.
You can subdivide that point into reasons such as:
-Technology names are bland, sometimes weirdly chosen, and do not make you truly feel as though you are progressing through archetypical ages (think of the medieval era, and you think of castles, feudalism, theology, these kind of hallmarks, and so on).
-Buildings/districts/bonuses are bland; on the one hand, some in name, like the above point, on the other hand, the game revolves around spamming districts (which further reduces them to generic 'Industry Quarter' which is not immersive) and/or making the perfect jigsaw puzzle.
-Yields are... Weird. Complicated, on one hand, with many possible interplays - irrelevant, on the other hand, as in, the balancing is seriously off - these points combined further increases the feeling of 'oh let's just queue up whatever thing has a +Production and not look at their name/image', i.e. reducing immersion.
-Diplomacy/friendship/roleplaying immersion is hard, when suddenly the Phoenicians have disappeared and I have no idea who they are now.
-Plus, despite the AIs having agendas, I never felt they had recognisably distinctive personalities as Civilization IV's AIs have.
-I also think the ultra high movement speed contributes to this; you're racing all over the map and have less of a feeling of 'this is my land'.
-Added to this; the game speed itself is ultra fast (yes, I play a modified Marathon that is even slower, tech-wise; experiencing every technology, era, and unit to the fullest does a >lot< for immersion).
And so there are more points to make, but I am at work.
KayAU
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2014
- Messages
- 1,115
@need my speed
You and the video are not that far apart, it also complains about blandness and lack of balance.
For me, as I said, my main issues are with some of the fundamental design decisions, and especially how the map and cities work. I would have strongly preferred a more free-form approach to city placement and map exploitation to the fixed region system. There is also too much sprawl, and instead of thinking carefully about district placements, I end up just plopping them down wherever the UI suggests. As a smaller point, while the map visuals up close are beautiful, most of my time is spent looking at the intermediate zoom level, which is kind of dull. The UI also feels a bit overloaded.
That said, the game has some clear strengths as well. Starting out in the Neolithic, and getting to explore a bit before settling is good. Getting to a new era and being able to choose a new culture feels pretty great. Initially, this also led to the game feeling a bit schizophrenic as all your neighbors also changed, but I feel like the have succeeded in mitigating this somewhat with updates, as the leaders are now more in focus. My favourite feature, however, is probably the scoring system. I did not expect this to be the case, but I think I prefer it to Civ-style victory conditions. One of the problems with civ, and especially Civ VI, is that the winner is determined very early on, but you still have to slog through the last 60-70% of the game in order to fulfill one of the victory conditions. In Humankind, each era star and fame point is a goal in itself, which I just find more enjoyable. You also have the deeds to pursue. I'm sure there is room for tweaking and improvement, but it's a great idea, already pretty well implemented.
I would also like to mention the narrative focus on the game. Yes, after a while you will start clicking through those interludes, and it would have been nice with some more variety in both those and the narrator's commentary, but it's still a nice touch. It reminds me a little bit of Alpha Centauri, another Civ-like with a strong narrative focus. If I were to suggest something for the devs, it would be to double down on this, even if it doesn't impact gameplay. For example, they could bring the world deeds more into focus. I remember Alpha Centauri had a Monument screen. Completely pointless in gameplay terms, but it was just nice to have this place where my it said that I was the first to create a naval unit and unlock the secrets of the human brain. Just like I liked the completely pointless Palace screens in the earliest civ games.
Actually, they could make these things count for gameplay purposes as well if they wanted to. How about making a bonus tree where you unlock things every time you reach a set number of deeds? It would give you another incentive to explore and pursue certain goals.
Anyway, I'm rambling now. I think my main point is that the game has it's strengths and weaknesses, and while it doesn't beat the civ-series for me, it succeeds in being different and interesting, which makes it worth playing.
You and the video are not that far apart, it also complains about blandness and lack of balance.
For me, as I said, my main issues are with some of the fundamental design decisions, and especially how the map and cities work. I would have strongly preferred a more free-form approach to city placement and map exploitation to the fixed region system. There is also too much sprawl, and instead of thinking carefully about district placements, I end up just plopping them down wherever the UI suggests. As a smaller point, while the map visuals up close are beautiful, most of my time is spent looking at the intermediate zoom level, which is kind of dull. The UI also feels a bit overloaded.
That said, the game has some clear strengths as well. Starting out in the Neolithic, and getting to explore a bit before settling is good. Getting to a new era and being able to choose a new culture feels pretty great. Initially, this also led to the game feeling a bit schizophrenic as all your neighbors also changed, but I feel like the have succeeded in mitigating this somewhat with updates, as the leaders are now more in focus. My favourite feature, however, is probably the scoring system. I did not expect this to be the case, but I think I prefer it to Civ-style victory conditions. One of the problems with civ, and especially Civ VI, is that the winner is determined very early on, but you still have to slog through the last 60-70% of the game in order to fulfill one of the victory conditions. In Humankind, each era star and fame point is a goal in itself, which I just find more enjoyable. You also have the deeds to pursue. I'm sure there is room for tweaking and improvement, but it's a great idea, already pretty well implemented.
I would also like to mention the narrative focus on the game. Yes, after a while you will start clicking through those interludes, and it would have been nice with some more variety in both those and the narrator's commentary, but it's still a nice touch. It reminds me a little bit of Alpha Centauri, another Civ-like with a strong narrative focus. If I were to suggest something for the devs, it would be to double down on this, even if it doesn't impact gameplay. For example, they could bring the world deeds more into focus. I remember Alpha Centauri had a Monument screen. Completely pointless in gameplay terms, but it was just nice to have this place where my it said that I was the first to create a naval unit and unlock the secrets of the human brain. Just like I liked the completely pointless Palace screens in the earliest civ games.
Actually, they could make these things count for gameplay purposes as well if they wanted to. How about making a bonus tree where you unlock things every time you reach a set number of deeds? It would give you another incentive to explore and pursue certain goals.
Anyway, I'm rambling now. I think my main point is that the game has it's strengths and weaknesses, and while it doesn't beat the civ-series for me, it succeeds in being different and interesting, which makes it worth playing.
need my speed
Rex Omnium Imperarium
Fully agreed, and this ties into my point about buildings/districts as well. You don't have your 'city with a plains cow tile', you have 'huge random massive region of the map' (that you identify far less with) where you randomly spam whatever district or building seems to have the appropriate +yield, and both of these factors combined lead to less immersion.
And yes, a lot of my 'less immersion' also translates to 'dullness' (such as the above), good point indeed.
I love everything you write about narrative, yes.
Personally I cannot recommend the game.
Many ideas look good on paper but are unbalanced or plain not fun.
Both your and ai's empires tend to be bland and the choice of variety is more like an illusion, every game feels pretty same.
and there is the game's biggest problem:
I feel the replayability value is low and the game feels simply mediocre.
Many ideas look good on paper but are unbalanced or plain not fun.
Both your and ai's empires tend to be bland and the choice of variety is more like an illusion, every game feels pretty same.
and there is the game's biggest problem:
I feel the replayability value is low and the game feels simply mediocre.
It's fine. I play it occasionally when I need something sorta civ-like that isn't civ.
That said, I've never enjoyed it enough to play past the Early Modern Era. It inevitably just sorta becomes frustrating to play for me. And not in the way that Civ sorta slows as you have too much to do in a single turn, but in an actively "I want to stop playing now" sorta way.
That said, I've never enjoyed it enough to play past the Early Modern Era. It inevitably just sorta becomes frustrating to play for me. And not in the way that Civ sorta slows as you have too much to do in a single turn, but in an actively "I want to stop playing now" sorta way.
In my opinion, Humanking is a very good game in its current state. Don't expect it to be like Civilization 5 or 6 though, this game should be judged by its own merits. As someone said it earlier, the core game is enough, you can add the culture packs if you want but they are not required at all.
I don't like the "Together we rule" DLC though. To my eyes, it adds confusing mechanics and irritating features the player has no grip on. I play without this DLC and won't use it unless it is completely overhauled (which is improbabIe, IMO).
Knowing Endless Legend or Endless Space can help as there are common mechanisms and design concepts.
I don't like the "Together we rule" DLC though. To my eyes, it adds confusing mechanics and irritating features the player has no grip on. I play without this DLC and won't use it unless it is completely overhauled (which is improbabIe, IMO).
Knowing Endless Legend or Endless Space can help as there are common mechanisms and design concepts.
Similar threads
