f13.net

So, this just got announced.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtYWqE55s24

Screenshots Spoilered because they are big.


The screenshots look a lot like Civ V, but there isn't any indication what the game is going to play like.  A lot of people seem to be hoping for Alpha Centauri redux.

In any event, I'm interested.

Put me in the Alpha Centauri 2.0 hopefuls.

I have seriously good memories of that game, and still fire it up every once in awhile.

I just got Alpha Centauri wood.

I always liked Alpha Centauri alot more than the (other) Civilization games so here's hoping to an AC sequel  :thumbs_up:

I hope it's something new and unique, don't like this perpetual riding on past glories.

It's a Civilization game. That's not possible by definition.

I don't think Sid Meier is capable of recreating Alpha Centauri this many years later. I expect a Civ 5 reskin, like the crappy Anno reskin - but I'd love to be surprised since I haven't really enjoyed CIV since 3 and loved AC.

Oh hell yes. I've got almost 900 hours played on Civ V and I need MOAR.

I... look forward to this, despite prefering Civ IV to V.

I've learned my lesson. I'll buy it once I see the reviews. Certainly not on release day.

If they let me design my own prototype units I'm in.

It's branded Civs, so I don't expect this.  Promotions, sure, but not wholesale customization.

I'd prefer to be wrong here.

V is now so lovely after being so meh.

These guys have my money: they work to make it right even when it's not quite.

But I would very much prefer AC2.

Alpha Centauri is in my trinity of perfect games. I love it so very much.

Yeah, I'm gonna keep an eye on this one, could be great.

I really had a lot of fun with Civ5, and on the other hand, I really like the freedom in visuals and mechanics that a more exotic setting (fantasy or sci-fi) brings to a 4X game.  So this could shape up to be pretty cool.

(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/641/298/448.jpg)

Really want cool races like AC.  Loved the videos on some of those tech trees. 

I'm also in the 'Alpha Centauri was my perfect Civ Game' I would love Alpha Centauri 2.0

http://youtu.be/Z_WSgMhfuic - Civ: Beyond Earth trailer REMIX

Wait, wasn't Alpha Centaur actually made by the other guy, Brian Reynolds?

*wonders if that was a Steve Jobs <> Steve Wozniak situation*

Sky can give you details as he's been stalking Reynolds for years; but yes, it was.

Reynolds was lead designer on SMAC, Civ2, and Colonization. Guy ate my life in college.

Yep. Mine too. Between him and the fuckers who made Magic: The Gathering, I had to take two freshman years.

Final Countdown trailer. It's on now.

Yes, Reynolds 15 years ago not being involved is why I don't really care about this. After Rise of Nations, Reynolds dicked around and let his lackeys do shit. Now all of the people involved with all those companies make butt for games.

I'd know, I worked with them.

I expect this to be a reskin of Civ 5, people will hail it as Jesus come back, but it simply won't be. Was excited until I saw a screenshot. Will probably purchase it the same way I bought Civ 4 and 5. Steam Summer sale 2015.

I admit, I was pretty happy that I held off on Civ 5 until maybe three months before the latest expansion pack. (Which I did later get). I understand it wasn't nearly as fun at launch.

I didn't say it because of what Schild said. My comments about Reynolds are historically accurate but not relevant in a modern context.

My prediction is this will be as much Alpha Centauri as the Colonization remake was Colonization.

The XCOM remake sorta raised my bar on remakes.

That one felt right.

It is definitely NOT Alpha Centauri 2.

http://www.pcgamesn.com/civilization-goes-beyond-earth-not-back-alpha-centauri (http://www.pcgamesn.com/civilization-goes-beyond-earth-not-back-alpha-centauri)

It may or may not be a good game. It does sound intetesting. So did Civ5. I'll wait and see. Meanwhile I've just finished an AC game all the way through to the closing credits for the first time in a decade. Such a great game even if it bogs down at the end just as the combat really gets interesting. I'm thinking maybe I'll do that again.

Still looks pretty good to me.  I like a lot of the ideas they want to try out, and with the description of having to fight the planet and tereforming terrain, I feel gameplay (if not flavor) will still be fairly similar to AC.  Look forward to seeing how this turns out.

Also, seems like it would be fairly easy for a dedicated group to mod it into an AC remake (well, AC by another name.  I'm sure lawyers would get involved otherwise).

Seriously? Fuck this guy. This clown was barely out of middle school when Alpha Centauri came out. He has no idea what that game was about if that's his major takeaway. And we are going to have to listen to this "lead designer" on this game? Over and over they seem obsessed with pointing out that so-and-so decisions aren't right or wrong. Right or wrong. Right or wrong.

So we get the continual homogenization of this game. They were terrified of doing religions in the first place because of right or wrong, and even when they did them, they have no flavor at all. I don't like the direction. Everything they talk about just seems really safe and boring in that piece.

....but it is true.  I liked Alpha Centari because it was dark, dystopian, and even playing as the UN faction you were being a dick to your own population.  Nobody was good, and technology was ultimately terrifying, as those awesome project completed videos showed.  I appriciate them not forcing us into playing black or white good/evil factions, and allowing you to pick a set of beliefs to run with.  You can then Role-play that faction into some sort of ultra-righteous fascists to your hearts content.   :awesome_for_real:

And I never understood your hatred of the Civ V religions.  I much prefer being able to customize my religions own set of beliefs, giving the game far greater depth and strategy than a cookie cutter "Cities with the Jewish faith produce 20% more gold and build banks at half the cost" template you seem to want.

Religions in FFH2 gave you stuff like drowned units that came back to life and could walk through water (back before everyone got magic boats).


...you knew it was only a matter of time.

But really, that game did religions right. They had strong flavor and a big impact on gameplay, and lots of variety to suit your style.

I didn't say it wasn't true, but the great part of Alpha Centauri was that it wasn't afraid to be dark. And that you could design your own units. That was so huge, and it's been completely lost in the succeeding games. Everything I've read there makes me think they are afraid of any controversy or much innovation. It's like they are taking some parts of Alpha Centauri, not calling it that, and then slapping Civ elements into it.

My hatred of Civ V religions is because you can basically pick any of them, and it doesn't make any difference. You can still have the same system of adding on beliefs without reducing the religion at the beginning to a name. What's the difference between taking Judaism or Islam? Nothing, so why even offer it? Why not just let me write in my religion name, because that's effectively all it is doing? Religions should have good parts and bad parts to them, and be distinct, with subfactions and units. They crapped out on them because they didn't want to piss people off.

Sky is right on FFH2 with religions. They were an interesting addition to the game. They had value and drawbacks.

I still think the game has potential to be good.  I liked Civ V, even if it took a couple expansions to really nail it.  So it isn't Alpha Centauri 2, but if it is Civ 6: Civ in SPPAAAAACCCEEE, that might be good enough.

It's not going to be a bad game in my mind. It's just not going to be a game that's going to get me to part with release day money, especially given the release state of Civ 5.

I'm quite optimistic, this is Firaxis. They will have to let me down quite a bit after the turn-around on Civ5 and the marvelous Xcom-Remake before I don't trust them on a new game release.

"Man has to leave a destroyed Earth to find a new home".  How is that in any way different from AC?  We're not dystopian!  Give me a break.  It's impossible to not compare it to AC.  I dislike being pessimistic upfront, but this project leaves me cold.  I'll be pleasantly surprised if it isn't generic and lacking.  The only way this is different from AC is tone.

Based on them starting with, "we aren't really AC", I was hoping for something grander.  Like a economically, culturally and militarily battle for a solar system.  You faction starts with certain tech, on a certain rock and you ramp up and compete from there.  I was hoping for something more than revisiting the, "start from scratch cause you left Earth in a hurry" scenario.

Seems like they are doing Civ but without real world 'lore'.

Which doesn't seem like a great idea, but you never know I guess.

I think the execution of the game will be fine. It will be a playable, semi-enjoyable empire game.

But it could be great, and they seem intent on making something fairly bland and user-directed.

This thread is a fantastic example of how acronyms can be confusing.  Despite a love of Civlization and Colonization, I somehow missed the boat on Alpha Centauri.  So every time I read "AC" in this thread, my brain translates it into Assassin's Creed.

e: I'm sort of looking forward to this, btw.

I'm glad it's not just me that's doing that.

Well, to be honest, the first 4 posts did flat out say Alpha Centauri. 

Asheron's Call was nothing like Civ.

Asheron's Call is another AC game I didn't play. :oh_i_see:

I was in the beta but I have taken this fact off my resume.

Is it wrong that I'd prefer an official Fall From Heaven type thing over this?

Considering where that guy ended up and what resulted? Yes.

Or a new Colonization. That'd be cool.

You could even apply a licence to it, CivotR, or SWCiv. I just think the game benefits a lot from referencing established stories.

So this is coming out soon and it still seems like it probably won't be great. Anyone found any evidence to indicate otherwise?

As near as I can tell, consensus seems to be: wait until two expansions, then buy it, much like Civ 5.

A friend of mine played it a bunch at Firaxicon and he said it is pretty solid. He is insanely into the Civ series though, so he is probably biased.  My plan is to get it on steam sale at some point.

Anyone who went to Firaxicon is as a reliable reviewer as folks who go to Blizzcon.

I'm interested because I love 4x games, but I'm waiting this out.

I have it prepurchased and will be losing sleep at the end of this month.

Pretty sure I fall in the CivLife category though.  It's likely my most played game series of all time.

Ditto, but I don't see enough different from Civ5 to justify the purchase.  Hell, even on the CivFanatics forums they appear to be making 1:1 comparisons to a lot of Civ5 stuff because it's the same engine.  Seems like BE is just a mod.

Being a mod isn't a bad thing (cough obvious reference cough). But it has to be an interesting use of the tools, pushing the engine to be better and adding in diverse content. That's been Firaxis' traditional weak point, as evidenced by most Civ titles requiring two expansions to be good and the Civ 4 'mods' like Colonization.

I keep hoping that they learned something from the development of X-Com.

Being a mod isn't a bad thing, no.

Expecting me to pay $60 for a mod IS.

Luckily I have way too much shit to play to even contemplate buying this at release. I will wait at least until the holidays, and more likely for the first expansion.

http://kael.civfanatics.net/

I know I go on about it, but if you haven't dug into it, you really should give it a shot. Also, free.

except the 9.99 for Beyond the Sword?

We had a new Colonization (it was based on the Civ IV engine) and it sucked.   :heartbreak:

I expect this to be decent (ie., not a catastrophe), but underwhelming. From the details out so far it seems to be light on game-play complexity. Nothing for the old-skool Alpha Centrauri crowd.  :wink:

The playable "nations" and leaders look very generic and uninspiring. Which is not a dealbreaker for a 4x game, but a missed opportunity none the less. Compare that to AC Miriam Godwinson or Pravin Lal.

"We were really inspired by Alpha Centauri, so we decided to make a game that is nothing like it apart from copying the thematic background, because we feel that gamers are too stupid to like things because they actually know what they like, and will just enjoy this because we've told them it is what they will like."

It might still be an ok game, but I'm not getting the good feeling.

I think they are just saying that because AC has such a special reputation among Civ fans. They sort of have to.

No they don't. No one young enough to not have played AC cares, and those who have played AC and loved it won't be fooled. Lip-service isn't going to sell games.

What exactly is every bodies gripe with the colonization mod/expansion?  It plays exactly like the original, but with civ 4 graphics.  Which, if that's the complaint (that they didn't make a more in depth version with new stuff), then sure.  It's just that I only ever here people complain about not liking it without specifics.

As far as this game goes..... Looks promising, I'll see how word of mouth reviews look after release.  Firaxis is pretty good at mod support, right?  Perhaps this is a good opportunity for a FFH level Alpha Centuries mod.   :why_so_serious:

But it worked out so well for that last Master of Orion!

 :cry:

Jesus, trigger warning that shit. 

Also pre-ordered it.  Will report back to the hive as soon as I know anything.

and nevermind cause  for some reason I have a copy in my steam library. woot.

muhahah

There are a ton of detailed preview videos out there for this that they've done; I think it looks like it is going to be fantastic.

I certainly hope you are less than wrong.

Might be. But past XP with this game maker leads me to believe I should wait until the first major patch (not just minor patches) before it is a polished worthy game play experience.

Granted, Civ V wasn't that great upon release, but XCom: Enemy Unkown was awesome as soon as it came out and it is the more recent example.  Firaxis is capable of creating good games that don't need patches to make them good.

Ingmar and me seem to be polar opposites in regard to game taste, so consequently I hope he will hate it.  :grin:


Impression from someone who had their hands on it: "better civ game, recommended, civ fans should get addicted."

Does anyone here remember Civilization: Test of Time?  It was basically a bunch of Civ 2 mods that were packaged together and sold at retail.  The future themed one was actually really fantastic, and my favorite incarnation of Civilization to date.  Beyond Earth has me hoping I'll hit that high again.

You're never going to forgive me for hating Witcher 2, are you?  :why_so_serious:

I'm excited about this, but don't want to get burned on another pre-order.

Those of you feeling more adventurous, do post impressions when you get a chance.

I'm kind of torn.

I've pre-ordered every Civ title after the first one.

And for 3, 4 and 5 I've played it a couple hours and shelved it until the second expansion completes it.

Was all excited to play this after midnight tonight, but it doesn't release until Thursday.

Am I petty for caring that this game isn't as pretty as Civ 5?

I've been playing FFH2 again and thinking the same thing.

I get over it quickly, of course.

Steam says Oct 24th, which is Friday.

It depends where you live. Apparently it unlocks at the same time everwhere, which makes it early Friday morning in Australia and parts of Asia, late Thursday evening on the west coast of U.S. and anything in-between for the people in-between.

detailed map (http://i.imgur.com/hLhoeWm.jpg) for the in-betweens.

So west coast gets to play Thursday night, east coast sucks it. Nice.

Da Fuq!?

That map has unexpected production values.

If it makes you feel better, East Coast and West Coast will be be able to play at same MOMENT, just the time shown on the c'clock will be different, due to time zones.

Funny thing is an east coaster will be able to play on the 23rd at 9 pm, while I have to wait until the 24th 1 am, when in actuality I will be launching the game 5 hours earlier!  :psyduck:


In conclusion, regional differentiations feel outdated. Releases should be simultaneous world wide nowadays. We are living in the future, basically!

I keep getting tempted by the idea of this game, but think I need to dig out my AC disks instead.  Nothing's going to match Nerve Stapling your Fascist faction to quell rebellion while you churn out another 4 mindworms to slaughter the naive Gaian forces.

They tryin to TAKE MAH JERB (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=768h3Tz4Qik)

The one thing that will make me buy this is if any reviews say "the AI is much better".

An almost impossible task, but still.

Btw, probably known already from the prio Civ iterations: http://well-of-souls.com/civ/civbe_overview.html

It's pretty nice if you want to read up on what affinities do, virtues, how the tech tree looks, etc etc...

Edit: An "Oh my!" at this victory condition:


 :ye_gods:

Well, now I know what my first game will be...

Caved and pre-ordered. GMG has it for 25% off right now.

Not for me, just looked.  :sad: Also I am pretty sure you Americunts (I mean that in a nice way!) pay less than whatever is the currency exchange for € 49.99. *grumble grumble*  :mob: :mob:




Edit: I take everything back. Going on greenmangaming shows me the normal price, with no hint of a discount. But using This Link (http://www.dealzon.com/deals/civilization-beyond-earth) (found via googling) redirects to GMG with the game 25% off.

Proof:
(https://i.imgur.com/9Q8lQu4.png)(https://i.imgur.com/BX4NVRI.png)

Bought as well. Thank you Velorath for the tip.

The 6 free gifts are 6 custom maps?  Oh, marketing. :why_so_serious:

I am so weak...

See you all Thursday!

(Thanks for the deal calapine)

 :heart: :heart: :heart:  thanks, wouldn't have known this without you!

I loved the nerve stapling guy. Okay bitchy workers get back to your jobs or I will "fix" this problem once and for all!

No one posted the intro cinematic yet?


It's vurrry good: Civilization: Beyond Earth – Opening Cinematic  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbTfLeBsu8Q)  :heart:

Why did they just leave the settlers in their dirty earth clothes? Seems like some swanky spacesuits would have been in order.

Yeah, I was thinking that too.  They are going to be in stasis for a while, I can't imagine those nasty cloths they happen to be wearing the day they got on the ship are going get the job done.

The GMG sale almost had me, but I can't bring myself to give Sid Meier even 25% off retail. Will buy @ $25 or less for the bundled edition.

I wanted to do this when it showed the game as $37 instead of $89.99 - yes, that is what they are trying to charge Australians - but it went and turned in to $63 when put in to the cart. Evil bastards.

Edit: Did find the other one worked though. $41 got me over the line here...

GMG apparently doesn't want my money, as it refuses my Visa Credit Card, Mastercard Debit card, and even pay pal account, since it can't groke my ip is in Poland and my cards are all US.  I even tried on my work PC which is VPN'ed back to the US as a washington IP, still no go.

Guess they really don't want my money.   :oh_i_see:

Joystiq review makes me glad I waited. This one before the jump really got me:

Ow.

Though the gameplay all sounds pretty much as expected (Civ 5 with few flavor mods) this sounds nice:

Ed: goddamnnit, that's what I get for being addicted to caffeine again and posting before coffee.

Psst. Your image links are broken.

A lot of people are saying it feels a bit like a Civ 5 mod.  But I'd play a good Civ 5 mod.  I don't think I'd pay 50 bucks for it, but then I don't pay full price for many games anymore to begin with.

Merusk's post, with the invisible quotations fixed:

Thanks, Cal. It's fixed now.

Civ games have always had crappy production values with poor UIs, typography, graphics, cinematics, animations, etc., etc.

I buckled for 2 reasons: 1, it's a tradition going back to when half of you were in diapers to buy the new civ at launch. Second, some of the new mechanics look interesting enough that I want to check them out.

But watching a couple gameplay demos, the UI definitely got little love. The rich art deco style of Civ 5 was so nice, it looks like they just stripped it out and put in black rectangles. And for some reason the little things like crossed sword icons kinda bug me in a futuristic setting.

Civ 5 units earn experience from fighting, what does that reviewer mean its a departure?

The difference is they promote into different kinds of units rather than just get small bonuses that upgrade them.

Different thing. Unit types as a whole upgrade, but individual units also get experience upgrades just like in Civ 5. Which is what this quote seems to be referencing.

You're not that old and neither is Civ.

Sky is clearly counting from the 1981 Avalon Hill release.

Civ 1 was 1991. We played a floppy pirated version on my college buddy's 386.  :why_so_serious:  some here may have been 3 or so but anyone under 35 would have likely been playing other things.  

I find that hard to believe. Boardgames weren't launched back then. They trickled and you were lucky to even find them or know they existed, what without the internet and shit. And two, he's not THAT old.

Edit: I think the youngest person here is NiX. He would've been.... 5, I believe. Maybe 6. He was 17 or 18 when f13 launched.

Edit 2: Strazos is the same age as Nix I think.

Eh? How do you figure? You do realise this is a gaming forum and that quite a few were probably playing games at a young age?

I fall in to that group and while I never played Civ 1, it was because I didn't know about it, age didn't have anything to do with it.

There are people who didn't play a pirated copy of civ 1 on a 386?  :uhrr:

I first played Civ 1 on the SNES which came out in...95? 96?

Because home computers weren't ubiquitous in 1991 and dropping 2-3 grand for one wasn't common? That it only seems common today because there might have been a home PC surge sometime in 1996ish, lead by strange companies that did mail delivery?

Nah.

That's what I did. It was my first experience with ARJ. Mindblowing - compression!

Nope, everyone read Computer Gaming World and the market was so small anything that existed was covered in there.  And if you couldn't afford it you pirated it.

I first played Civ in the 'Ars Electronica' (a sort of science-art-museum) which had PC running some games. That and 'Sim Ant'. Memories....

Beyond Earth:

• First crash (lock up) at turn 33.  :why_so_serious:
• Civ roots are very present. It feels like playing total conversion mod.
• First start I land in what is 2/3 desert. Second start the same with mostly tundra. "Yes, this is clearly Civ!"
• Despite this the different map and colour schemes take somewhat getting used to. "Is this a relic or a resource I am looking at?"
• There used to be a button in the right-hand corner to toggle map options: Show tile-grid, show resource yield, show resource icons. All those would be helpful due to the unfamiliar map, but they are either gone or I am just too blind to find them.
• The UI in general could be a bit more 'pleasant looking'. Doesn't feel they iterated it very much.
  
• The 'Tech Web' seems quite more extensive than the old Tech tree. Each Tech has 3 sub-techs that can researched or skipped. A bit like in Moo2 where one had pick 1 tech out of a general field.
• I like the choices for customising buildings and those from quests. Feels it adds some depth/character to your nation. Definitely something that would fit in Civ 6 as well.

Sky said it was a tradition to "buy the new civ at launch". This means you just need to have played Civ 1 before Civ 2 came out, not right away asap when Civ 1 came out. It is highly highly unlikely many here were in diapers when Civ 2 came out. Most would have been in their teens.

As to your other point - this is a gaming forum with most of the population here being (I would guess) 30+, chances are we're far far more likely than the average person to have had a computer in the early 90s.

Being at work I've read a few reviews before playing tonight, most of the poorer rated ones tend to focus on stuff like "the AI players don't have any character" and "there are too many decisions" or "there is too much unfamiliar stuff", mostly with a comparison to the other civ games.

Were they just playing Civ on the easy difficulties? Because I fail to grasp how anyone could intuitively understand the many many mechanics and decision implications of Civ 5 without having to read a lot and make a lot of decisions...

I am babysitting a problem with my server room UPS that is going to keep me from playing this at 9.  :heartbreak:

People are dumb?

It's Civ more or less. Happyness is called health. Instead of Iron and Oil there is Titantium and Petrolium. Barbarians = Aliens.

The decisions are of the sort of: You made your first culture building. Do you want to it to a) produce 1 extra culture b) have no upkeep. It's nothing world shattering

Quick Civ V <> Beyond earth dictionary:

Happiness = Health
Culture = Culture
Gold = Energy
Faith = Doesn't exist anymore.

Settler = Colonist
Worker = Worker
Scout = Explorer
Warrior = Soldier

Mine = Mine
Farm = Farm
Pasture = Paddock
Trade Post = Generator

Fish = Algae
Pearls = Coral
Cows = Little alien insects

Tech Tree = Tech Web
Social Policies = Virtues
Ideologies = Affinities
City States = Stations

Monument = Old Earth Relic
City Wall = Defense Perimeter
Granary = Nanopasture
Library = Neurolab


It's really not rocket science!  :grin:

This sounds like a reskin. Fuck you, Sid Meier. You lazy asshole.

It really, really does.

Somebody tell me there is *something* that differentiates this from a Civ 5 mod. Something in mid to late game perhaps?

I was all ready with cash in hand, but now I'm waiting for one of those mega Steam sales to come along.

Eh, not really.

It may be a bit of a re-skin, but it's not because there are equivalents. It it a Civ-style game, after all. never pretended it wasn't.

I can play in a few hours and then add a considered opinion! Wheee...

Yeah, I always played with that on. As did most people I suspect. No idea why they thought it would be a good idea to take out.  :mob:

Hopefully easy to mod back in by some equally annoyed person.

There is a button on the minimap with those options.

Yeah, it's the tiny eye on the top left (of the minimap). Just found it myself.

My first impression is that it doesn't feel that much like Civ.

But then I've played about 40 hours of Civ 5 in the last week, so the subtle difference might be coming off stronger than for others.

Edit: Also it is really ugly. Fluro green does not an nice looking game make. I seriously dislike this. Game itself seems ok, but I'm not sure I can tolerate this eyesore. Would rather be playing Civ 5 TBH.

Edit 2: Pretty sure AC still used quotes from human history too. The writing in this is naff. And the quests have no personality at all (and have a lot of opaque game modifiers - it would have been great to know that fences could also make trade ships not die to aliens, I would have built it far earlier). Game actually does feel like a TC and a little bit soulless...

Just played for um... last 6.5 hours. Time for bed. Engine wise its obviously built on Civ 5. Differences that are actually different? The three ideologies actually have a big impact - quite a few techs have requirements in these, and its obvious there will be some strategies in getting the right balance between more than one ideology. Unit upgrading is pretty slick, not only do your units get tougher, they gain abilities based on the ideology you used to upgrade them. The tech tree is much less linear feeling. Its more cloudish now - in most Civs, by the time you get to say a tier three tech, you've probably only skipped a couple of the tier one techs. Here, you can shoot right out in one direction and ignore everything else if you want to. After six hours playing my units still can't embark, because I just totally ignored most of the "basic" techs.

My first 30 minutes with the game I was feeling kind of "meh". Then 6 more hours passed.

Eh, that tech 'web' still has the 'things towards the edge are more expensive'. So you do end up with more in the middle (or should) and just not as many on the fringes.

The real difference is the 'leaves' for the main techs, which you can much more easily skip if they don't suit what you're doing, and the don't give you a pre-req for anything else.

I've given up though, I find the UI to be quite bad, ugly and 'cheap', and the world colours are really annoying me. Maybe when I'm less tired it wont be so bad.

Also trade routes are possibly broken good.

Have played for a few hours, it's ok as a civ 5 sci-fi mod, it is no AC2.

I played a couple hours last night thanks to timezones and pretending to be in Australia. (Thanks, Australia!) My morning-coffee thoughts follow.

From a hundred-foot view, it looks and feels a lot like modern Civ. You are still building cities, building units and structures inside cities, improving tiles, and going to war. You're still researching techs, you still have the same five basic resources as Civ5 (food, production, money, culture, science). You can still win by murdering the shit out of everyone around you, and you still still be irritated by Space Montezuma (Brazilia) randomly wardeccing.

Some elements are adapted from Civ5, such as "Virtues" - they're best described as the lovechild of Civ5 Brave New World's Ideology system and base Civ5's Social Policy system, but broader and deeper. Some elements are tweaks to add depth, such as "Quest Decisions", which allow you to customize your civ with a choice between two bonuses each time you build a new type of building, or the new Covert Ops system, which is Civ5-style but adds new missions and ways to use your spies.

Most of the stuff is akin to a cousin-once-removed of its analogous Civ5 system. Research is now arranged in concentric circles instead of lines. Affinities takes bits of BNW Ideologies, Unit leveling, the old Tech tree/unit upgrading system, and tack on some graphical flair.

The differences are in the details, of what buildings, units and tile improvements actually do. I found it a lot more difficult on my first go-around, because it's not quite obvious which buildings should be built in service of which goals, and which tile improvements I should be building.

The big difference is in playstyle. In Civ5, you basically picked something to shoot for at the outset and then executed that strategy over the long term. You picked your Civ5 civ with a victory and path in mind. In CivBE, it feels like you're forced to be flexible. The "civs" don't railroad you towards given types of victory or play; instead, your game is shaped by the tech, affinity and quest decisions you make.

In CivBE, you have to adapt your strategy to the evolving situation on the map. You may go in thinking you'll go for the Harmony victory, then get stuck somewhere which has none of the resources required for it. You may go in thinking you'd prefer to lean heavily on trade and found only a few cities, then find yourself alone, and on a continent devoid of strategic resources. Adapt.

TLDR: It's not a radical departure, it's not SMAC; it's space-flavored Civ5 BNW turned 90 degrees sideways and with a much greater degree of flexible thinking involved.

My main complaint so far is that it seems more... flavorless than the earlier Civs. Without the context of history to inform how I'm thinking of things, the buildings and techs just feel like generic sci-fi mush with some stats tacked on. The flavor text is appallingly written, leaning heavily on the idea of tossing out a familiar idea or quote, then sticking one or two words in there that go "lol space". In SMAC, at least, there was a (skippable) bit of flavor text explaining what sci-fi gubbins I'd discovered was supposed to be; here, it's just "+1 energy to geothermal" or whatever.

The UI is also pretty bad, particularly the city UI.

Buy/Don't Buy: Buy for giant Civ5 nerds. Everyone else, don't buy, wait for a -50% steam sale and some balance/UI patches.

Oh, one thing I forgot to mention. The introduction of the rifts/craters means the maps have more "texture". There's more obstacles to movement, which tend to create natural corridors of development and chokepoints, far more than the generally wide-open spaces of Civ5. Again, something that forces you to consider your tactics and adapt.

I'm torn. I haven't gotten really into the last few Civs. I mean, I bought them all on release, played them for 100 hours straight but then dropped them. I got the first Civ1 for christmas from my dad. I was 11.

I think I'm going to skip this one and wait for a sale. Too much else on my plate right now.

And that's saying something, as Civ has always been flavorless compared to FFH2 and SMAC.

It's a decent civ game. They never light anyone's fire on release, but you'll always get your money's worth if you're a TBS fan.

I do like the quest/decision system - it's something they put in the engine while working with Kael during Beyond the Sword, btw.

If you watch that video without sound, it looks like they are shipping the Jews to - at best - Space Israel.

They're Indians?

Anyway, after 150 turns or so, I like it. The way you deal with aliens is a good bit different than barbarians; seems like only siege worms will fuck with you without you fucking with them first. I like the expedition thing. The breadth/depth thing with the ideologies is pretty cool, and I like the tech branch/leaf thing better than a lot of other tech tree systems I've seen.

Problems: I agree that the UI feels pretty clunky; there's a lot of little touches missing, like things highlighting when you hover on them etc. And I don't know if it is because I'm color blind but I have a really hard time spotting miasma and differentiating some of the resources, so I have to play with resource icons turned on and check the tooltip on any square where I'm going to have a guy stop for a turn (maybe this is just Sid Meier space tradition because AC was awful for this sort of thing too before they added the color blind setting). Also the leaders thus far seem to have basically zero personality.

It's not just you. Partially it's probably just a matter of getting used to, but the map wasn't very good at telling at the first glance what's going on. Like you I did the tooltip-thing to see what I am actually looking at.

Btw, there are 3 different surface types: Lush, arid & 'something else', which are just visual variants and do not affect game-play. Maybe one of those is more friendly to the colour blind eye.

Yeah, I turned off the tooltip delay. Still, though...didn't want to go to bed last night (thanks for the midnight unlock, the taxpayers are getting less than 100% today, hah).

Yeah, having slept on it I think most of the points are covered here.

Actual gameplay is different to Civ 5, though still similar in many ways.

But the UI is bad, the writing and story element are laughable, the colour palate is very poorly chosen, and it just isn't that polished. The game is ok but has no character. I doubt it will have much popular appeal and much expansion support either.

I'd rather see a new expansion for Civ or Civ 6 than them keep working on this. However it is not a bad game, and for those who love Civ and are burnt out on Civ 5 (which whatever Sky says is the best Civ ever after the expansions) it is worth a shot.

Apparently this game has a very complicated back story involving dirty bombs and nuclear war that's not reflected at all in the game (at least as far as the ~200 turns I've played so far):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/10/24/the-wacky-geopolitics-of-civilization-beyond-earth/

Just to confirm: trade routes, specifically internal ones, are broken good.

Agree here.  I'm having fun with it but I'm a Civ Slut.

That said, the UI is so horribly unpolished.  The color palate is shit.  The maps and icons are...worse than before somehow.  

The game has NO heart at all either.  Doesn't feel like someone really cared when they made it.  Devs really missed the boat in mining ten thousand fantastic sci fi books/movies for quotes to go with their upgrades.

I have been playing all day though.

I somehow expected the fauna & flora to differ from planet to planet, but the universe seems to be filled with the same green/grey murky shit on every planet that isn't earth. Lot of missed opportunities here, the tech web and alignment system are enough to make me play this over CiV V for a while though.

Harmony seems to be the easier route so far, if I go a bit aggressive most aliens out there start one-shotting my explorers and my marines aren't doing much better.
Been in a few wars with the human AI as well and they still seem dumb as dirt.

After sinking most of last night and this afternoon into the game I would say that the comments here are generally spot on.

Thanks for all the impressions and comments; going to hold off. I still haven't gotten around to playing Civ 5 despite owning it and it's expansions for more than year.

Do. It is great.

So, I pulled an all-nighter last night for my second game and this time I took the lead early and won handily, playing Space Australia, focusing on Purity ideology (Space Australia is full, go home spaceboat people), and winning with a Contact victory.

I basically stand by my comments above. This is basically some very nice mechanics evolved atop the substrate of Civ5, and they actually do change the way you have to approach the game. The biggest weaknesses, as repeatedly noted, are the terrible UI and the sterile, joyless feeling to the sci-fi fluff.

(I did find one neat bit; check out the description of the Cynosure. It's only found in the Civilopedia. Most of the wonders have awful flavor text, this one's pretty good.)

A couple other observations:

- Trade routes are completely broken. With the right choices, you can get 3+ trade routes per city, and each internal route will pump up your cities' growth and production rates. Tack on some nice city-state ("station") trade routes, such as +science or +culture and you will absolutely rocket through the game.

- Rushing down one of the four virtue trees to get one of the big +health or unhealth-reducing virtues is important for not getting slapped with unhealth penalties. That said, a few turns of those penalties won't hurt too much.

- Aristocrats seem broken, in the bad sense of the word. I think their +health bonus might not get applied. Also, money is retardedly easy to get with trade routes, so they're kind of shit even if their +health does work.

- Artists seem broken, in the good sense of the word. I think their +health bonus stacks per population instead of being flat. Also, culture is so amazingly powerful thanks to virtues that they're awesome no matter what.

- The game seems to favor a steady expansion rate and higher numbers of cities than Civ5. There are fewer +% buildings and more buildings that offer a flat +X to any given stat/resource, so having more cities is a much bigger advantage than in Civ5. The main limiting factor seems to be how well you can worm settlers through the aliens and improve the land.

- The Contact victory seems broken, both in a buggy and a "too-easy" way. I only fulfilled one of the three requirements for the first stage (researching a very early tech) and was able to move swiftly on to the rest. Supposedly, I either needed to do a ton of exploration to find a relic or to get an end-game tech and build and expensive unit in addition to researching the first-stage early tech, but I never completed either of those requirements and the game moved me on up towards victory anyway. By the time I was at the very last stage of the Contact victory (building and dumping money into a huge artifact), I was just barely entering the outer two tech rings and maybe 2/3 of the planet had been settled. The other victory types seemed much, much further off.

- Some of the question decisions are a little too easy. Aliens not attacking trade routes and +1 trade route are both so hilariously overpowered as to make the choice obvious.

For some reason I assumed the same thing (maybe due to the description of different planets).  Would have preferred this to what we got as it could have taken the "adapt to the circumstances at hand" that Yoru is talking about to the next level - e.g. if the planet has aliens that are largely unworkable, you need to no choose Harmony.

The more I read in this thread, the more it sounds like an incomplete mod. How depressing :(

I'm a little sad to have my decision to wait for it to go on sale on Steam validated like this.

Actually I think CIV IV had some mods that were as extensive if not more so than this is compared to CIV V.
The rework of the tech-tree to a much more non-linear tech-web is the most (only?) fundamental change here.
Virtues, although slightly less linear than in CIV V, feel like a step back in some ways since there's less of them and the removal of luxuries means you're almost forced to shoot for the happiness health virtues asap.
Nixing luxuries didn't exactly make resource management more exciting either.

It's hard for me to be disappointed with a new CIV game, CIV V was probably still the game I played most when this launched, which is part of the problem perhaps; I can't help but constantly and minutely comparing them and honestly if CIV BE launched at the same time as CIV V (with at least the first expansion), I don't think I'd be playing BE atm.

That's how I feel too. And it's funny how that goes. This isn't a potentially fun to watch train wreck like Star Citizen, this is just a disappointingly unrealized release that falls far short of (reasonable) expectations.

I was looking forward to playing this, now I'm not. Maybe I'll drag out my old copy of the original Alpha Centauri and replay it. It's been so long since I've messed with it that it will probably feel like a new game..

It's not so bad. I played last night in multiplayer with 6 people and that was quite fun. For anyone not a Civ addicted it's probably best to wait until the game + 1st expansion are on sale.

The great thing about 4x games is just how long they stay viable when they're great.  I still break out Master of Magic once or twice a year and play a game.  It's only really started to feel clunky in the last 2 or 3 years and that's all UI not gameplay. 

Goddamn them for never making a true successor.

I don't think this game is redeemable. They won't be able to G&K it. The issues are too fundemtal.

Maybe they can borrow some ideas from it for Civ 6 though. Even then the ideas are mostly crap or trivial. What Civ really needs is a massive focus on decent AI development.

Played through it a bit, and I agree with the general consensus so far.  Its not bad, just sort of bland and unimaginative considering the possibilities they opened up with this setting.  I do think that it could potentially be turned around by a G&K style expansion, however.  I'm getting some fun out of it though, so not a waste.

I guess the glass half full outlook on this is that, since they claim to have given it heavy modding capabilities, somebody will do an FFH2 style conversion and create an Alpha Centari remake.   :awesome_for_real:

I've been having fun bringing a Stalinist regime to an alien world.

Don't worry, lamaros, every time I talk about games needing better AI I'm told it's not a big deal and everything is fine in the world of gaming AI. Meanwhile something like Mordor comes along and shows what one fucking cool trick can do. We should be dealing with complex interplay of multiple AIs making decisions based on thousands of data points. But I guess 'Things aren't going well here, please give us x of resource y' is fucking top notch 21st century AI.

Dear devs, stop trying to film citizen kane and make some AI that doesn't shit the bed. Thanks.

Meh, ever since Civ 3 I've pretty much played nothing but Pangea maps, which gets ride of 70% of the AI's stupidity.  The AI in Civ 5 actually seems to do a pretty good job overall.  Pangea and a higher difficulty rating makes for fun/challenging games.

The AI is still awful in CiV. Yes it is a very complex game and playing well even for humans is quite hard, but the AI is absolutely a key weak point and should be a massive focus. I imagine things like the tech web will only make it harder for it.

I'd love the AI difficulty to be based on how clever the AI plays, not how many game advantages it has. Sadly we are no where near that.

Ok... for all the other idiots trying to build a work barge to harvest sea tiles... rejoice, sea barges are not a unit like the old work boat... they are an improvement built by your worker.  I'm not going to disclose how many games and how many turns I played before connecting those dots.

Some minor quality of life tips:

1) To skip the '2K - Firaxis Games - AMD Gaming evolved' videos at the start go to: '%Steamlibrary%\steamapps\common\Sid Meier's Civilization Beyond Earth' and rename/delete the file 'CivBE_Logos.bk2'.


2) To skip the ERSB 'Online content not rated' popup at the start go to: '%SteamLibrary%\SteamApps\common\Sid Meier's Civilization Beyond Earth\assets\UI\FrontEnd', find the file 'FrontEnd.lua' and open it with a text editor.

Find the following three lines:


and comment them out by adding '--' in front of them. Result:



3) The game has Depth of Field effect: parts of the map that are not in the center are slightly blurred. If one find that annoying (as I did), it is easy to fix. Go to '%user%\Documents\My Games\Sid Meier's Civilization Beyond Earth'. Edit the file 'GraphicsSettings.ini' with a text editor. Change the line 'Enable DoF = 1" to "Enable DoF = 0"

Adding code to start up files?

Yup, sounds like a Civ game.

Also, I've played way too much of this already this week.

Yeah this game did kind of move in and take over my gaming time.

My wife managed to talk me out of buying Beyond Earth, but now I've re installed Civ V and am finding myself playing a ton of that instead.

I'm trying to think of a "Sid Meier" branded game where the AI was NOT dumber than a fence post and where the UI didn't fail on so many counts of ease -of-use and actively preventing you from accessing the information you most need when forcing you to make a situational decision. Pirates maybe? SMAC was the best of the CIV lot , and I credit Brian Reynolds for that, and even its UI was pretty horrible.  Ah, maybe that civil war RTS where he was able to reasonably hide the sucky UI and AI behind hand waving about fog of war and the average ignorant alcoholic civil war General.

I've not played this again since my first go around, but reading the civ fanatics forums highlights there are some other amusing issues with the game. Many of which will be fixed, I expect, in time. But it will still be an eye-straining, personality devoid, AI defeating system which adds little novelty for its complexity.

I only saw this now, and it's not that I am biased against young chronologically challenged people, but it made me cringe somewhat. This is the Dev team:

(http://i.imgur.com/srdeuKz.jpg)

They probably weren't alive when Civ 1 was released. Doesn't that make you feel....old?

Which fits nicely with their quote of "We took to Alpha Centauri for inspiration, so we read about it in Wikipedia!"   :why_so_serious:


Which ties in with a nitpick I have about the banal writing in this game. Random quote by Elodie (the "French-culture leader")


(http://i.imgur.com/yT3ZepO.png)

I doubt the devs did the writing, but it would fit. It just sounds like what a teenager would think that an old, cultured person would sound like.

Oh well.  :oh_i_see:

Heh.  That makes a bit of sense.

Although the civilopedia entries aren't half bad.

If space wasn't such a niche audience (and Civ 5 wasn't also a bit of stuff up at launch) then I wouldn't hesitate to call this a cash grab. It's a half arsed mess.

I guess they probably didn't have to pay the devs much...

On a more positive note, the soundtrack is pretty good.

Sid Meier's Civilization: Beyond Earth - Official Soundtrack - Promethean  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXH-VPrUjBs)

Yeah, I expect they actually pulled some time on one of Firaxis' regular writing staff to do some of those, and then tossed the quotes and log entries at Timmy the Intern.

Played a bit more as well as reading up it on at Civfanatics, and there are so many issues with the game in term of balance and game-mechanics (the trade-route micro, oh god the trade-routes...) that while I want to play it seems just best to put the game aside, forget about it and come back after two mega-patches.

REXing is soo strong, trade route are so OP and several quest choices are so unbalanced it boggles the mind how they slipped though. It's just a mess really.  :sad:

Stupidest bug yet. If you kill aliens with ranged units, it doesnt count towards making them angry.

So that's why some people (and reviews) are reporting fighting off alien hordes, whereas players like me find them easier than barbarians in Civ 5.

A couple complaints I have after a few runthroughs:

1) The maps are too roomy. I never really have to care about having enough room to grow. I've finished 3 games so far and never come into real conflict with another civ without picking the fight myself. I think the main culprit is that we have too much room to expand.

2a) Victories are mostly possible too early in the game. Most of them are achievable well before you've seen even half of the techs in the web.
2b) The computer doesn't seem to understand this and doesn't beeline for anything, making it too easy to beat on pretty much all difficulties based on what I've seen so far and reports from people who've tried the hardest level.

I tried to give this another go and gave up after about 15 turns. It's just not a very good game, especially compared to Civ 5 BNW, for far too many reasons.

1 and 2b I agree with from my playthrough, at middle difficulty.  2a I believe is by design, and not necessarily a bad thing, IMO.

Of course it is. It's directly related to point 2b. Cherry picking techs is fine, but being able to cherry pick too early and win is an issue. Winning nearly every victory type on the hardest difficulty before turn 250 shouldn't be easy.

I'm glad the AI doesn't beeline for easy wins, as I do not. I don't even come close to min-maxing in games, so this isn't a big deal at all for me. I tend to pick my tech for RP reasons (I'm playing as the not-Soviets, teching accordingly), only wavering from that when I have an immediate need (to exploit a resource or snag a unit).

Though the trade routes do get a bit naggy, it has yet to bother me. Maybe putting in a checkbox for 'continue this route until disrupted' or something would be cool. I have to watch several routes that go through hostile waters; but all my domestic routes stay pretty static. I do like that they are units and the routes need to be protected.

I'd say I probably have enjoyed this one thus far more than any civ launch since Civ 2 or SMAC.

Sorry I'm not on the hater train.

We are talking about the hardest difficulty. That doesn't mean you can't do whatever you want on the other ones. But the hardest difficulty needs to have a challenge to the better players, or it is pointless...

It's dying pretty quickly.

http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=65980q8930&from=1412690246

While I see what you're going for, Mr Bias; it's not unsurprising for this kind of title. Civ fans snap it up at launch, everyone else waits for a sale.

That's not a sales graph, it's a time played graph. So, Civ fans snapped it up at launch, played it a bunch then overwhelmingly went back to Civ V.

Which is again, pretty typical. I've already put in as much time with this as with Civ 4 or 5 at launch.

Plugged in a few more strategy titles.

But Football Manager 2015 has eclipsed Civ V.

Civ: Beyond Earth has almost fell below Europa Universalis IV.

Dominions 4 is not an available option from the pulldown game menu.

Will probably eventually buy this title, next year, after patches and/or expansions flesh out balance and gameplay issues, which are endemic to Civ games the last few iterations.

Civ V came out, in what? 2010? Yet, I just passed the 100 hour mark recently and it took BNW + patches to make it an enjoyable experience for me. Started playing this again and it whetted my Civ craving.

They're outperforming CKII, which has the ability to put out 1.99$ texture packs that outsell everything on steam.

I really wanted to like it, I just don't.  Hoping for an expansion to make it right.

The more I play this the more I hate it.  It's just so bland, the tech is boring, the units are boring, even the alien world is boring.  I don't feel any joy in building up my empire and the diplomacy is horrible.  It would take a lot to save this game.

Yeah, they really fucked this up - and I enjoyed vanilla civ 5.

AI is totally worthless, the planet is boring, the storyline is alpha-centauri "light", the aliens toothless, the colour scheme eye-poppingly bad and the trade system so stupidly overpowered you cannot but wonder how it got out of the door. The fact that every faction is so stupifyingly dull is the icing on the cake.

Waiting for a patch before I play any more of this I think. I can't get the motivation to finish the last 150 turns or so of my Apollo game; too boring. I think the game is salvageable but it's going to be several patches, maybe an expansion from now I think.

If it matters for comparison purposes, I thought Civ V at release was already good.

I got this for free with my graphics card and i feel like they really should have paid me to take it.

I've given it a really good try. And it sort of engages me and then I think, "Oh, who cares" at a certain point in each game I've started.

I think it's because:

a) factions just totally lack personality
b) aliens are meh
c) the Wonders seem absolutely totally dull, the game barely gives a shit that one got built, they have no unique or interesting effects really
d) the maps generally don't create tension or drama that way Civ normally does
e) the equivalent of city-states barely matter; most of the time I find they're dead by turn 100 from aliens
f) the really interesting units are often barely in play before the game ends
g) there's just no bells and whistles here at all, and the writing such as it is feels like what some adolescents put together ten minutes before the final build was due
h) there's not enough visual and narrative distance between the different pathways to victory

This is going to take a bigger patch/expansion than what Civ V eventually got to be the game it could be.

To top it off, if you do happen to finish a game you get probably the least satisfying end for a CIV game yet (and that's saying something). The absolute bare minimum, most dull, made in MS Paint looking box saying 'you win WOOOooooo'.
No demographics, or even a small run-through of your 'meaningful' choices compared to the AI, not even an end-score.

It's not my biggest gripe with the game, but it brings home how half-assed the whole thing feels.

Yes, the end stuff is just ridiculously cheap. What, it was too hard even to write a textual description of the different victories?

Pretty sure there actually is a description, it's just in the "victories" summary screen IIRC so you can't actually read it unless you "One More Turn..." it.  :why_so_serious:

http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=65980q8930&from=0

Civ BE has pretty much failed. Given how heavily it launched it has probably burnt up a bit of the goodwill that the Civ 5 expansions and XCOM built up for Firaxis too.

Pretty much for me, yeah. This just screams "we let the interns work on this one in their spare time and thought we'd coast off the good feelings that we'd created with other releases". Which would be one thing if it was just some game, but it's another if you're not only messing with your most storied franchise BUT ALSO messing with very, very fond memories of Alpha Centauri.

Even one or two improvements in a key area would make this a lot more palatable. Factions that were closer to Alpha Centauri's in terms of having distinctive character, goals, etc.   Aliens that were more interesting. Maps that created more interesting situations. Events that really shook things up in interesting ways. Better Wonders. Anything.

Sounds like this pretty much went that way. They tried to invoke AC, slapped some shitty Civ 5 elements in it, and let the interns do the coding.

Sums up my feelings as well.  I've won the two games I played but the game is dull and the wonders are hilariously impotent.  For instance the New Terran Myth.  A mid-game 'wonder' that for 750 hammers gives you 4 culture.  Four.  FOUR.

This game isn't very good.  It's in better shape than Civ V was at release, but this is the gaming disappointment of the year for me.

First patch is out: http://www.civilization.com/en/news/2014-12--civilization-beyond-earth-fall-update-now-live/


Some important changes, nothing done about the bland flavor but I am not sure that ever gets fixed, at least not in a regular patch.

This is on sale on Steam until Feb 1.  Cheap enough I'm going to try it out.

This deal is much better

https://www.humblebundle.com/

So any thoughts on whether or not The Rising Tide DLC "fixed" the game? That and the Exoplanet pack are on sale for thirty dollars including the base game.

I so much want to buy this and like it, but I'm going to be disappointed aren't I?

Yes

Reading the pages of gameplay in this thread and remembering the reviews last year, you'd be disappointed at $5. It's just not good.

If you own CiV V there's just no reason to get this.
On paper there's a few improvements that could have been cool, but in practice it's just not better in any way and the space flavour is still about as bland as a rice cracker.
I went back to the occasional CiV V/VI game when that itch needs to be scratched.

A lot of folks say the expansion actually fucked up some things worse--pretty much anything that got better, something else got broke.

Yay, this thread saved me some money!