I haven't played the last beta and I'm excited for the release.

17 Augusti is the official release date so that is likely the next time you get to play it.

I suspect it will be delayed again.

I feel the game isn't yet ready.

Tygari wrote:

I suspect it will be delayed again.

I feel the game isn't yet ready.

Most likely it will.

It will be released, and any major improvements postponed until after release.

Tygari wrote:

I suspect it will be delayed again.

I feel the game isn't yet ready.

I think a sub-par release is more likely than that. Delaying a game is very tricky business-wise, even if artistically or creatively it would be better to delay it. It will depend on how much money they have to continue their business operations and on whether SEGA will loan them more money to continue developing Humankind... If it does get delayed again then I guess we will have another closed beta soon as a cashgrab because that way more people will preorder.

Personally I don't feel the game is so bad. I enjoyed it a lot and I wish I could be playing it right now tbh. Of course there are some balance tweaks to be made, but no major overhauling is necessary. I have seen some people disappointed because the level of complexity of Amplitude's previous titles is greater and Humankind feels bare-bones. Unfortunately, I have never in my life played 4xs before Humankind, so I can't speak on that, but I want us to keep in mind that a lot of games don't reach their full level of depth and complexity until a few years and dlc's after release. It could be the same case for Humankind, they already hinted they plan on releasing DLCs because they said the Incas would be in a future DLC, and I don't see why they can't expand on religion, trade or diplomacy in the DLCs. Idk I think Humankind will be a great game even if it is not at its full potential at the time of release.

Is the game really that unbalanced?

I believe HUMANKIND will follow the same strategy of Civ VI being refined with each update pack and in the end it will be a very well done game, which would be impossible to be sold with all DLCs from the beginning due to the price it would have and the long development

Araquinid wrote:

Is the game really that unbalanced?

I believe HUMANKIND will follow the same strategy of Civ VI being refined with each update pack and in the end it will be a very well done game, which would be impossible to be sold with all DLCs from the beginning due to the price it would have and the long development

I am not an expert, I play to have fun, not to abuse the meta and find exploits, but here's my opinion:

1. Stability needs a touch-up. It punished the player for being proactive (which is nood good in terms of enjoying your playthroughs) and the punishment was too much.
2. Something needs to be done about farmers and/or population food consumption. Right now farmers consume as much food as they produce which rends them useless until you can get to the Haudenosaunee LT.
3. Era progression is still too fast for a game meant to last 300 turns and, most importantly, technological progression is too slow.
4. Influence is scarce early game but late game it is very easy to accumulate, without anything meaningful to spend it on.
5. Ideologies, civics and narrative events are rather pointless at the moment. Most players will just choose the option that keeps them in the middle of the ideological axis to gain the +20 stability except in the cases where an option is clearly more beneficial (which ideally wouldn't happen as all the options would be more or less balanced).
6. The buyout option has been nerfed to the ground. There is a problem with the Carthaginian LT (-50% buyout cost) which results in the buyout being either balanced around them and then too expensive for everybody else or balanced for everyone and obscenely cheap for them.
7. The AI gets ridiculous bonuses early game and then around turn 80 it falls off, can't keep up and the game loses interest.
8. Some cultures are not balanced. Most cultures are nice, solid picks, but some cultures you would never choose if you had another option (i.e. Hittites vs Myceneans, the Myceneans are much better, Phoenicians are also bad) and some cultures are very easy to abuse ( off the top of my head Harappans, Huns, Khmer, Mughals, Joseon, Dutch, French and Germans, are the biggest offenders).

The devs have already identified these issues, have been tweaking the numbers for a long time and with every new build the game is more enjoyable. These problems are not game-breaking but they are of a serious nature. Luckily, they can be fixed by tweaking numbers and don't require a massive overhaul of a whole aspect of the game. these balancing issues can be solved in 6 weeks or with a quick patch after release, so I doubt the game will be delayed because of those.

Then another topic is the lost potential of the game or rather, the features that could have been much more complex and enjoyable and currently are okay but not mindblowing. Complaints about diplomacy, religion, war being too important, narrative events, storybuilding, civics and others would fall here. These improvements are probably outside the initial scope the devs had for Humankind and they are not necessary for the game to be playable. As I see it, the objective of these improvements would be to make the game more enjoyable and rich, but they are not game-breaking and can be added later via DLCs. I am sure if we get tons of ideas on how to expand features while playing, the devs have gotten twice as many ideas while working on Humankind. If they followed every single one of these ideas they would never finish the product and this is not sustainable from a creative standpoint but, most importantly, is not sustainable financially for the studio. That's why I think they won't delay the game, because it is not broken to the point it is not playable. Yes, probably the game would be amazing if the devs worked on it for another year and we would have to wait a decade to see another game like it, but these scenarios are not realistic in my opinion.

GlorySign wrote:

But is it a better strategy to release a sub par product after promising a great one and maybe get not that good reviews except maybe Sega`s in house reviewers comparing to waiting and making a refined good product and get great reviews from most that can also translate into better sales? Usually first impression matters a lot

Perhaps it is? After all, the more it is delayed, the more money is sunk into the product without really getting anything back immediately (there's preorders but they can only do so much, and every preorder is money you don't see on release.) The more you delay, the more copies you need to sell on release to break even, and humankind isn't exactly releasing for a super popular genre. It's risky.

Plus this is assuming the delay would lead to a great product. That's a leap of faith in itself. Sometimes games with very long development periods still end up like shit. And while previous amplitude games were good, whether they were great is debatable. Development time does not automatically lead to a better game so whether or not to spend the resources for what might be a better game isn't a straightforward decision. Especially if you've already granted the studio the resources for two more delays under that same reasoning.

Keep in mind the Poe version was not the newest version they had at the time.

Salterius wrote:

Tristeza meu amigo ;-;

I don't know if they will but the game definitely needs another go at a beta after they've implemented what ever change they feel it needs. But honestly it feels like they need another 6 months of development to get this to where it should be and where we want it. Unfortunately right now it's not just number crunching that the game needs. Some of the game mechanics (like culture) are totally broken.

I'm really surprised they didn't Early Access this like they did Endless Legend.

While speculating about another delay has little value, we can still do it. In that fashion I would find it rather strange if there is another delay. I am not sure that increasing sales by promising another closed beta (or something like that) would have much or any effect. These markting gimmicks wear themselves out quickly. As the last beta, and this forum, shows there is no need for further feeback given plenty has been circulated. By and large the core of a succesful product have been established to my mind. Some bugs can be fixed until August. Running the actual game will allow for more user customisation (of notifications, maps, opponents), which should also help to overcome some frustration that has been circulated regarding the opendev versions. In the end I would expect that the industry standard of patching and DLC will flesh out some of the underdeveloped areas to an acceptable standard. I am sure for some this does not feel right, but when precedence becomes habit the majority of society accepts these things without questions.