I would tend to agree that the game is not ready for a release in two months. It would need to compete with games like Civ6, Stellaris and even Endless Legends, and at the moment it doesn't look that good. Graphics and looks are great, but the game mechanics need more work in my humble opinion. It looks like the devs getting plenty of feedback via open dev and I think it would be good to continue with that for a while longer.

Hence why i made this topic to begin with, a bit of a compromise so that we can give the developers the upmost feedback if they remove the day limitations of the game, and make scenario base of the previous and current testing field so they know what to do in terms of feedback given to them.

+1 Although I think the game will be good enough to release if the developers can fix the game pacing.

mqpiffle wrote:

Let's start with the inability to load saved games, then move down the list of disappointments from there.

I think it's because of the way these scenarios are design, you got a term limit of 100 turns on opendev victor, and now have 200 terms in opendev. What's the point of saving your game when there is a small limited amount of time? you basically spend 4-6 hours in one scenario alone.

darkedone02 wrote:

mqpiffle wrote:

Let's start with the inability to load saved games, then move down the list of disappointments from there.

I think it's because of the way these scenarios are design, you got a term limit of 100 turns on opendev victor, and now have 200 terms in opendev. What's the point of saving your game when there is a small limited amount of time? you basically spend 4-6 hours in one scenario alone.

Who tf has 4-6 hours to play at a time?? Not me, I got work to do.

CristataC wrote:

The open dev should not be extended. There's already been so much feedback, and as someone who has been following the beta forums closely, the feedback is starting to get repetitive. I'm sure they have enough data and constructive criticism to make the final balancing and feature changes for day 1.

Also I don't think its valid to compare the day 1, base version of Humankind with other games in the genre which have been out for over 5 years and have had multiple major expansions of material added. It's not reasonable to expect the same amount of depth between games at the start and end of their content cycles.

I played about 24 hours of this open beta, provided lots of feedback, have had some irritating bugs/imbalances, and found a few features that are just poorly thought out. I've also had tons of fun with what we already have, and can see myself getting hundreds of hours of gameplay just with these base game mechanics.

Quick Day 1 Civ 5 story: My friend and I have played all the Civ games together starting with 3. In my first solo games, I found mounted units were so incredibly, insanely over powered. He came over a few days later and I let him play his first game of 5. When he was controlling the game and tried to build something like city buildings, my reply was "No. Just build horseman." I repeated that comment so many times that day, its stuck as our personal civ meme. Horses were nerfed some months later, but looking back it was still fun to experience the imbalanced, low on features/base game Civ 5.

What I'm getting at is, come August, Humankind should be released. It won't be perfectly balanced, as I would so no 4x really ever is. It won't have the same amount of depth as Civ6/Stellaris/Gal Civ/EU4 with their years of expansions. It has enough unique gameplay already at is base to give plenty of hour of enjoyment.

Honestly it's all based on how other people think about the state of the game. You might agree with the status quo at the moment, while others requesting/demanding a change of whatever that's going on at the time.

Yes, your right that this game is not going to be as balanced and strong when the game comes out, that's alot of releases that happen with strategy games when people finding a certain meta to follow, till it's get rebalanced. That's quite obvious for people who follow strategy games similar to this, (although i don't care much for civ 5 and future series due to the lack of a giant modding scene similar to civ 4 for longevity purposes, but the games are great to play but very easy to drop entirely after playing a few campaigns cause you witness and played almost everything).

I just wish to have more time to play these opendev's.

mqpiffle wrote:

darkedone02 wrote:

mqpiffle wrote:

Let's start with the inability to load saved games, then move down the list of disappointments from there.

I think it's because of the way these scenarios are design, you got a term limit of 100 turns on opendev victor, and now have 200 terms in opendev. What's the point of saving your game when there is a small limited amount of time? you basically spend 4-6 hours in one scenario alone.

Who tf has 4-6 hours to play at a time?? Not me, I got work to do.

That's understandable but these kinda games are aimed for people who do have times on their hands. Strategy games always aimed for that audience (i mean did you not heard of that one-more-turn group from civiilization?)

It's not easy to properly balance a 4X game and there is plenty of feedback. I don't think it's reasonable to expect the devs to crunch for the next six weeks and get it all in. They can keep extending the open dev beta for people like you who already have fun playing the game. Others will inevitable compare Humankind to existing games with the same price point and in its current form I fear that comparison won't be good for Humankind. Asking someone who is used to CIv6 to switch will be a hard sell.

The biggest red flag for me is that Humankind does not compare well to the 2014 (!) game Endless Legends in term of game mechanics. There are just too many things which don't make sense, are unbalanced, or just don't feel right.

Danvil wrote:

It's not easy to properly balance a 4X game and there is plenty of feedback. I don't think it's reasonable to expect the devs to crunch for the next six weeks and get it all in. They can keep extending the open dev beta for people like you who already have fun playing the game. Others will inevitable compare Humankind to existing games with the same price point and in its current form I fear that comparison won't be good for Humankind. Asking someone who is used to CIv6 to switch will be a hard sell.

The biggest red flag for me is that Humankind does not compare well to the 2014 (!) game Endless Legends in term of game mechanics. There are just too many things which don't make sense, are unbalanced, or just don't feel right.

I'm luckly enjoying the game lot because it remind me so much of civilization 4, and what I wish civ 5 kinda was. MY only grips so far would be the stability system and how hard it is to manage such things when i am an expansionist kinda person, compared to someone who play civ 4, trying to combat against unhappiness and sickness on the cities, and dreading the industrial age due to many pollution mechanics in a mod that I enjoyed playing more then based vanilla civ 4, while trying to conquer the entire continent that I am on.

Well, I do think that the current build is in such a bad shape that it will be hard to balance and fix the pacing before release. Furthermore, it's a bit sad that Amplitude will spend all summer trying to fix the game.

I don't think keeping the closed beta running will make any good, as there are already so many good feedbacks to analyse and hopefully implement.

However, why not release the game as Early Access on August 17th, instead of full release? I know it will never happen, but hey this would save a lot of frustration. 

I agree, push back release to until you're ready (no specific date).

Until then, have a really open dev. Not just for a week or so, just continuously until release. From time to time, updates can be made to the open dev to reflect the new direction the game is going in after feedback.

We all want this game to be the best it can be, and currently it is far from it.

Releasing in two months would be a big mistake!

I'd like playing game in august and eventually waiting patch for improvments.

Come on, there were released game in a worst status than this closed beta (aka Paradox) and fans, like me, are going on to play with it!

It depends what the devs want/can afford to get.

If they want an ok game, that works and people will enjoy. They have to fix the pacing, some balance and bugs. I think this could be done prior to august.

If they want a very good game that will compete with other released 4x, then they will have to push back. There are so many systems that I think they should redo from the ground up.

mqpiffle wrote:

Let's start with the inability to load saved games, then move down the list of disappointments from there.  

I was able to load save games. In fact, during one session, I had to *keep* loading save games because of an infinite end turn bug. If I saved *after* the infinite end turn bug occurred, exited the game entirely, and reloaded the save from a fresh run, the game would continue on with the new turn. Of course, it was wash, rinse, repeat for that turn too. Got too tedious and I eventually stopped. I was on turn 193 and a clear winner anyway. *shrug*

Was there some kind of issue that prevented you from loading them?

Delay will not solve anything as the issues with the game are baked into its foundation, it saddens me to say.

 I noticed in the first few times through I was struggling to keep science anywhere near the current era. I tried a few different approaches until I noticed that its all about delaying the first era. Finishing up one run where I've been delaying the eras until an AI get close and keeping civic policies balanced for stability. I have about 25 turns left and have most of the world claimed, Its ridiculous.