Logo Platform
logo amplifiers simplified

Hi guys, what's Going On with Humankind?

Reply
Copied to clipboard!
3 years ago
Jan 15, 2022, 4:17:47 PM

I was wondering what's going on with Humankind. I saw that the negative steam score (reception) of the game is pretty mixed, there are people who love, and "hate" human-kind, some say it is pretty unbalanced and has lots of glaring gameplay issues... So, I was just asking here, what's really going on with the game? What is it's perception, and the peoples perception of the game? Is it good, is it bad...? Why the people are giving it negative mixed steam reviews? Why some people are skeptical about Humankind (i've seen someone- A Vodianny, commenting he is 'skeptical' about the game) and why there are so many negative, mixed reviews about humankind? There is even one negative steam review i've seen like "Tl:dr, Do not buy. Half baked" And then he points out to the fact there are some "cool" features and ideas for the game (humankind) but he did point out that the devs didn't point out to the fact they didn't and or haven't thought about some of the glaring issues that may arise by implementing some of it's core-feature mechanics. I looked on that review and said "Hell, that's a nice review. It's not really a gameplay-wise mechanic review of the game, which is important, but it quite reminds me that this is an important aspect of the game that did, or do, have to be thought out more true. There are a lot of thing's in game that i've seen that haven't been really thought out.) But the problem was, these "features" or "glaring issues" that haven't been thought out, When I saw them for my first eye of glance, I was really worried, albeit, shocked. These glaring issues this man was pointing where not simple, ordinary things like "Oh, you do this and X will happen" It's more like "Guys, if you do this, and you implement X game mechanic, it will prolly come in conflict with Y game mechanic and you guys in order to fix this issue need to basically cut off either one or other game MECHANIC since there is absolutely NO FIX for neither X or Y. For example, how can you prevent a BOT from acting faster than a player in SIMULTANEOUS TURNS if you can't prevent him from **NOT READING** through all the screen crap players have to read?

Anyway... It's a really difficult thing and topic.

I was reading thorugh all these things, and I was just nodging my head and thinking, "Well, this is no easy fix." "This too." "This too". "Omg... Is the game doomed?" Then the guy written up up to 7000 characters long text and about 7-8 glaring issues the devs didn't thought about and I was like "Yup, Yup yup... Quite sure... Lol" anyway... :(

I don't have humankind so that's why I am asking, lol.

I haven't bought it as a preoder because I was like meeeeh I'm to lazy to buy things RN but then when the reviews came it went mixed some guys/most guys said it was 'half-baked' I was like, wut? Wutf? What's going on?

Then I came here in these steam/g2g forums to ask you guys about it, lol, lawl xD

So what's going on with humankind? =) What are your thoughts?

0Send private message
0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 15, 2022, 8:36:15 PM

Basically a number of contributing factors (such as The scoring system, lack of interactive mechanics outside of war, the fact that the most interesting thing about most cultures is their unit, poor balance of stability and expansion mechanics) lead to limited variability in the game. In the endless games, each faction plays very different, but in HK even mixing factions together, it often feels like each game is the exact same as the last. On top of that, once the early game is done, there is very little for a player to interact with besides war. City building feels tedious as maximizinh district yields is a simple matter of just tiling similar districts near each other, and religious and cultural expansion, while seemingly being peaceful mechanics, really only impacts the way the player interacts with the game by allowing empires to go to war. Game design and balance always just point the player to the same conclusion game after game, and unfortunately cultures are mostly boring stay buffs that don't do enough to mix the game up and make it interesting

0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 16, 2022, 12:08:43 AM
Velorace wrote:

Do not buy. Half baked" And then he points out to the fact there are some "cool" features and ideas for the game (humankind) but he did point out that the devs didn't point out to the fact they didn't and or haven't thought about some of the glaring issues that may arise by implementing some of it's core-feature mechanics.

TBH, this is a very accurate description of the game. It has some really unique, great ideas for the genre. For instance, the tribe phase at the start of the game is fantastic. The way Wonders are a national project is awesome. Having the ability to alter you civ's identity throughout the game is a great idea. Returning tactical battles to a strategy game is genius.


Sadly though, the implementation of these great ideas are often poorly done, or conflict severely with other parts of the game. Let me give you some examples.


- Culture swapping.

The idea that your civ can absorb and alter it's cultural identity throughout the game is fantastic. The original idea was sold on the premise of being able to morph your civ by taking on the unique abilities of other cultures throughout the game to create a multi-cultural civ by modern times. Sounds great eh?

The implementation is that at the start of an era, you choose a civ from a small list of civs, with an even smaller set of civ traits shared (and duplicated) through those civs, to become. It's a hard line that when you choose that new civ, you become that civ. The reality is you start as civ A, become civ B, then civ C, then civ D. All the other players (and AI's) are doing the same thing. So one turn you're next to Babylon, Assyria and China, then next turn you're next to Ottomans, England and America. WTF? There is absolutely ZERO identity with the civs in game. The only stable thing is the player's colours, so you don't battle against civs, you battle against colours. And in a civ game that is horrendous!


- Tactical battles.

Tactical battles have returned to a civ strategy game. This is one area that's needed revamping for a long time and HK tried to do it. Call to Power 2 was the last civ style game to do tactical battles in some form, back in early 2000's.

But again, there are issues with the implementation of this idea. When a tactical battle occurs, it locks out a portion of the map. Any units/armies in that area are locked down until the battle is complete. This happens for civs involved in the battle, PLUS any other civ that's in the area even if they are not involved. And since sieges occur over a number of turns you end up with a result that you as an irrelevant third party can lose control of your army for as long as that battle takes to resolve. Even though you are not involved in the war you are locked into it. There have been reports of battles between AI's lasting many many turns (think 50-100) because the AI just does siege after siege on a city. You lose control of your army/s for that long.

And then there is the surrender mechanic. There is a war support score for each side in a war. If one side reaches 0 war support they are force surrendered. When force surrender occurs you are taken to war resolution based on a "score". This would be the WORST mechanic of the entire game. You can only claim territories and cities up to the value of your "score". The score is something like the difference between their war support and yours. Picture this. You conquer every city, every territory, defeat every army of a civ. Literally wipe them from the board. They force surrender and due to this resolution score mechanic you have to give 3/4's of it back. It's insane! The only war around it is to raze every outpost and city you come across for the territory to go neutral again so you can reclaim it with your own outpost.


Anyways, TL:DR. Take some rump steak, chocolate, zucchini, Twisties, pink icing doughnut, and half a can of coke. Put in a baking tray and bake on 160C for 10 minutes. What you'll get is Humankind.

Some amazing ideas thrown together and half baked. They do not interact well at all and lead to an extremely frustrating game. I recommend not buying it.

Updated 3 years ago.
0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 16, 2022, 1:16:42 AM

I'M GLAD Endless Space and Humankind didn't exist beforehand, lol xD

0Send private message
0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 16, 2022, 2:02:31 AM

For how long things have been like that in Humankind?

How long it took until players notice the glaring issues within the game?

How has Amplitude since been?

0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 16, 2022, 2:13:37 AM
Dale_K wrote:
Velorace wrote:

Do not buy. Half baked" And then he points out to the fact there are some "cool" features and ideas for the game (humankind) but he did point out that the devs didn't point out to the fact they didn't and or haven't thought about some of the glaring issues that may arise by implementing some of it's core-feature mechanics.


- Culture swapping.


[...]So one turn you're next to Babylon, Assyria and China, then next turn you're next to Ottomans, England and America. WTF? There is absolutely ZERO identity with the civs in game. The only stable thing is the player's colours, so you don't battle against civs, you battle against colours. And in a civ game that is horrendous!


Can't the civilizations in the Humankind have a general "country" they originate, like "cultures of... BRAZIL (I don't know, indegenas (indegenous, then "Rio-de Janeiros"...???? I dunno???) and then something like "INDEGENAS OF BRAZIL or INDIGENAS (BRAZIL)" Instead of just INDEGENAS, EUROPEANS... ESCANDINAVIANS... ???

I mean, if the cultures don't have a single country of origin, then it might be hard to indentify that culture really. Maybe having a single country of origin helps with that...?

But I think the game is really done for, tbh...

0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 16, 2022, 2:20:53 AM
Velorace wrote:
Dale_K wrote:
Velorace wrote:

Do not buy. Half baked" And then he points out to the fact there are some "cool" features and ideas for the game (humankind) but he did point out that the devs didn't point out to the fact they didn't and or haven't thought about some of the glaring issues that may arise by implementing some of it's core-feature mechanics.


- Culture swapping.


[...]So one turn you're next to Babylon, Assyria and China, then next turn you're next to Ottomans, England and America. WTF? There is absolutely ZERO identity with the civs in game. The only stable thing is the player's colours, so you don't battle against civs, you battle against colours. And in a civ game that is horrendous!


Can't the civilizations in the Humankind have a general "country" they originate, like "cultures of... BRAZIL (I don't know, indegenas (indegenous, then "Rio-de Janeiros"...???? I dunno???) and then something like "INDEGENAS OF BRAZIL or INDIGENAS (BRAZIL)" Instead of just INDEGENAS, EUROPEANS... ESCANDINAVIANS... ???

I mean, if the cultures don't have a single country of origin, then it might be hard to indentify that culture really. Maybe having a single country of origin helps with that...?

But I think the game is really done for, tbh...

Seriously, don't just take my word for it.


There are 7 people who still love and play this game. Eventually one of them will come along and tell you why they love the game. :)

0Send private message
0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 16, 2022, 2:51:25 AM
Dale_K wrote:

Anyways, TL:DR. Take some rump steak, chocolate, zucchini, Twisties, pink icing doughnut, and half a can of coke. Put in a baking tray and bake on 160C for 10 minutes. What you'll get is Humankind.


Some amazing ideas thrown together and half baked. They do not interact well at all and lead to an extremely frustrating game. I recommend not buying it.

Lol. This description is so funny, and, yet, sadly so perfect. Add in a group of chefs who didn't try it before they served it and seem incapable of grasping why others are unwilling to eat the resulting mess, and you've got the whole picture.

0Send private message
0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 16, 2022, 2:52:06 PM

To put it in a simple way, if you want to play humankind for max 20 hours, it's fine, go for it. Lots of new unseen features, some fun, and another opportunity to conquer the world.

If you are looking for a game where you can spend hundreds of hours, then you better wait 1 or 2 years until this game is fixed (if that is possible...not sure), as you will realize it is effectively half-baked...some would even say unbaked.



0Send private message
0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 16, 2022, 9:20:50 PM

Sadly, right now, it's just been almost nothing but mistake after mistake for Humankind, a lot of the good will Amplitude had made and received the past few years has been lost due to their handling of this game and the dlc being announced is probably one of if not the nail in the coffin for this game. The most optimistic outcome is that while the game may be polished in the near future, its full potential will never be discovered, and most likely Amplitude will have it on life support while they go back and stick to the endless franchise.

Updated 3 years ago.
0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 17, 2022, 4:55:32 AM

:) Reviews like this makes me proud of my newest Idea...

I believe there is hope, not for Humankind...

But for the Future of Amplitude, after All... =)

Updated 3 years ago.
0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 17, 2022, 5:30:47 PM

What? A developer has followed me? I better post out my idea! Wow! :D It's so amaaaazing *-* ♥

0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 17, 2022, 10:16:15 PM

I was going to post a longer comment but Dale_K basically covered the two main reasons I bought it but haven't been playing it. Recapping anyway:


Culture mixing: I think Amplitude failed to realize that players need at least some kind of persistent identity for the faction they're playing. The "choose a culture" mechanic just puts everything into a blender, with confusing name shifts from your neighbors and no strong identity for your own faction. There isn't much incentive to start another game because it will feel the same. I guess we were spoiled by the creatively designed and very different factions in Endless Space and Legend. This is such a core feature of the game that I don't know how they'll fix it, but I'm willing to keep an eye on it to see if it can be improved.


The other thing is the war mechanic with forced peace, where the game slaps your wrist for winning a war. It's similar to how warfare works in Paradox games but it's very poorly implemented here. It's just not fun. Maybe this can be fixed. If you don't want to buy the game right now, it could be worth taking another look at in a few months or a year from now.

0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 17, 2022, 11:06:06 PM

I have played 200h on Humankind and still enjoy many of the features but Dale_K and Zenicitus pin down the two glaring issues perfectly:-


1. Lack of coherent identity for the different "players" so that only the team colour persists as an opponent:- confusing and lacking in immersion. This could be addressed in part by having better integration between map and diplo screens and identiying cities and units on the map with the player identity (Lucy, Ancestor etc) rather than the culture they currently adopt. 

2. War support and surrender:- returning most of your war spoils to a thoroughly beaten opponent is bizarre. The final war score needed to secure Liege status is too high. 

0Send private message
3 years ago
Jan 17, 2022, 11:09:37 PM

Valid criticisms but its not a bad game either and have still enjoyed it. I feel Humankind is in a lot better place than civ 5 vanilla ever was which was missing entire systems that are now considered staple.


As long as the team keep looking back at humankinds flaws like they did with civ in the first place it will reach a good place.

0Send private message
?

Click here to login

Reply
Comment