For me I love playing these games in multiplayer but humankinds multiplayer was so outstandingly broken and unfair that it burnt me off it so hard. Every time we returned after a "Balance patch" we would find yet more unfun design choices that removed the element of skill and strategy and instead made it a game of rushing certain OP cultures and wonders. I hope it gets better but I MUCH prefer CIV 6 singleplayer and CIV 5 multiplayer
Indeed without extensive mods, Humankind is not fun in Multiplayer. But I do think the dev's have tried to fix it but they only did minor and small adjustments instead of big sweeping changes.
I never liked Humankind being labeled as “the civ killer” specifically because whenever a game is labeled as “the killer of X” nine times out of ten it never goes well, because people IMMEDIATELY start comparing them and refuse to stop. I specifically remember the devs themselves saying that they never wanted the game to be labeled as “the killer of civ”, cuz it was the internet as a whole that thrust that label onto Humankind Edit: one thing I forgot to mention is that a major issue with labeling a game as “the killer of X” is that it tends to cause the game to lose some of its identity with people. Like it’s uniqueness is completely sidelined in favor of describing it as “it’s X but with Y”
Yup, I don't think I've ever seen a "The X Killer" actually Kill the supposed target. at absolute best, it gets some fame and a cult following, but they never touch the popularity of what people claim it will replace.
Another nail in the coffin of a game is "It's X meets Y!" And if it's neither X nor Y, people shy away from it. Old World I think got done in by the CK3 meets Civ comparison, which really overlooked how it's not that, it's its own game and should be enjoyed as such.
I mostly agree with you there! I don’t love the phrase “Civ 6 killer”. I prefer to think that the two will coexist, but compete. Competition is good for all of us! To me the quip “X killer” is more expressing the idea that this game is a lot like another game, they share a lot of similarities and will appear to the same kind of players - can it be popular enough to dethrone the king?! (a bit wordy for a title). Also I should say incase anyone’s confused - I have HUGE respect for the Humankind team and a good working relationship with them. To your point about the devs framing though - I generally don’t think developers should be allowed to fully set the tone for how people perceive a game, or the language people might use to describe it. So why use the phrase? The goal is to express to the viewer that this video will (to a degree) compare and contrast those two very similar games. But this isn’t just another Civ 6 vs Humankind video. Because in combination with the hopefully simple and very clear thumbnail, I also aimed to express that this video is about Humankind’s journey - not just another patch update video. And all of that needed to be expressed in about 20 characters to fit the ideal title length. I’m open to alternatives. Thanks for coming to my TH-cam Ted Talk.
yea... and "together we rule" is kinda meeh. It's a shame as I love this game and play it, but it lucks something that would give new games something fresh and make them more unique.
@@andrewciliberto168 I also like that the nomadic phase is actually fun and not like Civ where you just try to settle a city in the first or second turn to not fall behind
Still sitting on my wishlist waiting for its turn to be purchased but it is really high on that list. Bigger studios unfortunately have the benefit of much bigger marketing budgets.
@@jamesbernadette6216while marketing budgets are a factor, the fact that Civilisation is a renowned series that has been pretty much continuously active for more than three decades by now, with a huge, already existing player base and brand recognition is by far more important factor. Even Humankind benefits from Amplitude having existing fans of the Endless games, if to a much lesser extent (both due to them being a much less well known game and Humankind not being a direct sequel).
@@HidingAllTheWay yes, that absolutely is the biggest factor, and why the thought of Humankind being a "civ killer" always felt like a ridiculous proposition to me. New and fresh upcomer just does not have what it takes to topple a beloved franchise that has decades of recognition behind it and still active player base + development. The last point is the crux, I believe, hence the often cited case where the upcomer did topple the reigning title: Cities Skylines over Sim City because EA failed to keep the title afloat so CO and Paradox managed to swoop in.
Old World is a far superior game in my opinion, although I only played maybe 4 hours of Humankind. I really hope development continues on Old World because I think eventually it could turn into a cult classic and actually grow in numbers. I think Old World is also a better game than Civ 6 in a lot of ways but I understand that the limited scope of it makes them hard to actually compare.
Humankind actually suffered from being called "the Civ 6 killer". Because it was no longer valued as a game itself, just seen as "something to destroy something else". It was a tool. And when everybody was done evaluating whether it would hold up to this claim or not, it seems the people forgot about playing the game for the entertainment's sake.
I enjoy both games, but I would argue that Civ has a broadly more recognizable brand than Humankind, which is likely to explain at least some of the disparity of player count.
Humankind just has a lot of problems. If it was truly a great game, it could make a way for itself. See all the indie games that have taken the gaming world by storm over the past decade that had no exposure beforehand (RimWorld, Stardew Valley, Celeste, Among Us, Terraria, Rocket League, even Minecraft) If Humankind had really been a "Civ-killer" and offered something truly great in the TBS genre, then it would be far more popular. Unfortunately a few good aspects are not enough to carry the game since it has some pretty glaring flaws.
UPDATE - Console Version out now, alongside anniversary updates (plus year three DLC) th-cam.com/video/_EgYnYQodTs/w-d-xo.html In August 2021, my channel had just over 3000 subscribers. Now we have 62000! Closest reply prediction for what it'll be when I make a 'Humankind Three Years Later' video wins a prize 😅
137000. And thank you. Just bought the game on the 2023 summer sale. I was really confused about game mechanics, cultures to pick and cultural wonders to choose but now I'm enjoying the game more with your help.
120,000. I just didn't get Humankind. I wanted to love it, but I didn't find it fun at all. I play more Endless Legend and Endless Space than Humankind
I started Humankind 2 months ago and haven't stopped playing since. I must have 60 hours of gameplay already and whenever I have free time, I spend it on the game. Thank you for contributing to the survival of this little gem, it's definitely a game that deserves a lot more recognition and a bigger community.
I started about a week ago and have those hours. I already played three whole games and I feel it is a bit samey, but 'm sure that I'll start another session soon.
@@beageler This is a game where strategy matters. Win by resources or by war, by diplomacy or by technology, vassalize your conquests or crush them, develop or quickly destroy your neighbor. I've played with the strongest and the weakest civilizations, and they all have their weaknesses, but also their strengths, depending on the map. It's a never-ending game for me, I just think it's a shame that the AI is too predictable in certain contexts, eg: I dominate the vast majority of my games in terms of ranking, and the weaker AI will all too often want to ally with me instead of forming coalitions to try and counter me.
@@lisalashesxxx absolutely! Despite the demands of my work/family schedule, I still find myself drawn to Humankind whenever I have a spare moment. It's been a refreshing change of pace from my usual gaming routine, especially as I've been consciously trying to shift my focus away from League of Legends. And although I haven't gotten around to purchasing the latest DLCs just yet, it's definitely on my to-do list. The game continues to offer an escape and excitement that I look forward to in my free time 🙂
Humankind has its own style. Your unique things. It wasn't developed to be the "Killer" of anything and that's how we should look at it. Not as a "replacement" or "the Civilization Killer", but as a game of the same genre but different.
Humankind is a tremendous game. I´m an old timer civ player. Started on civ1. Nowadays I find more fun playing Humankind, despite its flaws. I feel it needs more polish, and space for modding is what it needs most. The community can give us what the devs cannot. I´ll be playing humankind for many years to come.
Though I am a huge Civ fan, I recently started playing a lot of HK. I think Civ can learn from Humankind in terms of diplomacy, AI and combat. I find the diplomacy system and how the AI acts, significantly more reasonable in HK. It feels like the AI in Civ is always angry or irrational. The policy system also I think makes more sense than Civ 6 but isn't really perfect. The only thing is HK feels way less polished. Almost like they were onto something, but they didn't quite nail it. To be honest, I would rather Humankind devs just join Civ 7.
Nah I would personally prefer a Humankind 2 to correct its main flaws, than going back to Civ. I think HK combat system, territory system and the overall civ evolution mechanics (choosing strengths and goals at each new era, instead of a fixed civ, with fixed bonuses for whole game) more interesting than Civ, to the point that I now find Civ very generic despite being the most polished game (by far) of the two. The main issue for HK is how clunky it can be sometimes and atrocious balance between civs (even in singleplayer where usually most things pass with a bit of effort, some civs are basically broken, usually the ones revolving around industry, while others have bonus so specific it's even a waste of turns to even try to build their stuff). There are some weird mechanics around religion / culture propagation through trade also, to the point that I'm sometimes reluctant to trade because it always ends up with my port trade hubs being converted by foreigners, even when I spam religion or influence production, but I saw that in recent update I did not played they changed how trade worked so maybe it's less of an annoyance now ?
Having played thousands of hours of Civ, I find that I really like Humankind better in many respects. The combat is quite different, but I think the stories you can tell in Humankind are so much more interesting.
I just finished a 100-turn game (well 106 actually) where all 10 players spawned on the SAME tiny (tiny for 10 cultures...) island. Most crazy game I'd played. I got the Myceneans after seeing we're on an island and coulda' made it shorter still (normal speed)! Glad to see this video glad you didn't abandon it my friend!
The main gripe I had is that your opponents (and your own empire) had no identity. Celts turning into Chinese turning in Arabs etc, it made no sense. The civs just lost their identity and their culture was just a temporary coat of paint. I made them all feel samey samey
I have both games and prefer Civ 6 by far (looking forward to 7). Humankind was decent, there were some things it did well like combat. But I just didn't like the avatars and I didn't like switching to a different civ every era. I never felt like I was representing one particular civilization and it just had a generic feel to it with multiple playthroughs. I'm still playing Civ 6 (4,000+ hours logged). I don't plan on playing Humankind again.
I thought both games were great. Humankind on release was likely better than baseline Civ 6, but Civ 6 had some really fantastic expansions that really built upon the district system. Civ 6 is still probably my favourite 4x game. At current my top 3 are: 1) Civ 6 2) Stellaris 3) Age of Wonders 4 Age of Wonders 4 is a VERY promising entry. I think with enough updates it could definitely challenge Civ 6 as my current favourite 4x game.
@@Cashinn_Outt1754I mean, I understand this is your opinion, but this is literally what the game is known for, its the games speciality, so dont say that it was a huge miss, cause than you say the whole game plan was a miss, and its not really
I loved HK on launch. I'll admit it was not balanced what with the farming stars in the neolithic era to get a huge boost in the ancient era and science and production cultures being largely overtuned. But it was incredibly FUN. Imo the nerfs took away a lot of that fun and the devs should've buffed up the other types of cultures to the absurd levels of science and production. The QoL changes and event reworks were solid though. The changes to Independent People also looks good.
It's surprising hard to kill a game narrated by Sean Bean 😄 Civ is such a juggernaut in the genre that I think a popularity comparison with the previous games of Amplitude or other competitors like Old world would be more relevant
I can't believe it's already been two years. So much has changed in my life since then but I remember how excited I was when this game finally released. The in game music is absolutely beautiful and brings back such good memories :)
Civ 3-5 for me. Used to mod Civ 3 and Civ 4. Never got into Civ 6... too cartoon based and the district mechanic is a little too much for me as a Boomer. Games for me should be to the point and somewhat intuitive. Civ 6 is not that for me. Love Humankind and I am one of those steady players. I have been playing Civilization since Civ 1.
@@Smenkhaare I agree with Civ6 and the district thing being a pain- very micro-managing and while I LOVE that every game has it's unique flair and style... I still find that 4 is the one I understood best and enjoyed the most. I didn't find 6 very intuitive either and sadly didn't play a lot of it b/c of that. I, too, have played Civ since the first one- back on my Dad's PC growing up and later on my own 286 Tandy I bought in a yard sale for $20 in the mid-90's. It was a pizza-box machine with a CGA color monitor and my FIRST computer I owned with my own money. I played a TON of Civ 1 on that. :) I'll have to check out Humankind. I really like this genre- SimCity, Civ, etc.
Humankind is a bit different... and you get a much better idea on where you stand vs. the other civs than in Civilization 6, easily. You will know if you are in first, second, last place no issue. Even with early leads I had no idea where I stood in Civ 6, plus having every world leader mad at you for reasons. In Humankind you can repeatedly beat down a civ and have it call you daddy. In Civ 6, it seems when it is all said and done when you have a civ down, you have to eliminate it. I love 4x as well. Let me recommend to you Stellaris, Galactic Civilizations IV, Crusader Kings III, Europa Universalis, the old Total War games up to Attila Total War that is modded. Don't play vanilla Total War. Good 4X games are hard to come by and continue to enjoy them. All of the aforementioned titles are made so much better via free mods from modders. Enjoy them as well. Civ III to Civ V they really seemed to hit the sweet spots. Civ 6 is not my cup of tea for reasons listed here and other reasons left unsaid. Can't wait for Civ 7. I hope they go back to Civ 4 and Civ 5 mechanics, and ditch that busy work district system. The district system adds nothing to the game other than mind breaking decisions on where to place what. Instead of playing a game... you spend most of your time placing things. Loved the old world of computers mate, going back to early 80s for me. Used to love all of the Computer Shows (I am in New York City) that went extinct here circa 2013-2014. I used to find treasures there. Been cobbling together my own computers since 1995. Am writing this on a state of the art Acer Laptop with an AMD chip. I love the present and can't wait for the future in gaming and computers. Good fortune to you.@@WeyrleaderZor
I played Civ 6 since it came out but just picked up Humankind this summer on sale and I love it so far. As much as I love Civ 6 the AI on it is truly awful. It's more of a strategy game because you know how it will react and it's just about min/maxing everything to win. Humankind feels a bit more like a roleplay to me, could be because I have less experience but I've done about 5 play throughs now and they have all felt pretty unique.
I just bought with the steam sale. As a long time Civ player... So far I think it's beautiful but I can see that this game has a larger level of entry to get into and understand the mechanics of the game.
@@andrewciliberto168so far the only successful starts I've had were with picking Egypt. And I've learned to recognize when I've messed up or was unlucky in neolithic. Having fun so far. :). This looks like a good channel for watching vids to learn the ropes too.
@@jferares JumboPixel has some great videos to learn from. Egypt is my start 90% of the time just because it gets production started early. In the medieval try Swahili, can build massive cities without stability loss at all, ever, if playing on a coastal map type. I like to wait to build units until I need them (and build them fast) when needed to reduce gold waste. Wonders are also really important. Build trading ally's, even if you have to pay them to trade, and have them assist building wonders for you. Also can get there strong units and trade brings huge bonuses.
When you build buildings in Civ 6, it feels satisfying. Build a stable or a library, you can see them visually and notice the benefits. In Humankind, you build a bank or a school, there's nothing visually satisfying being built nor do I every really see the difference (besides very early game). There's no city states that vary up each run nor do I notice the difference in AI competitors. The natural wonders in Civ 6 are amazing to own where as in Humankind, who really cares? Every time I try to play Humankind, it just feels like a "next turn" simulator with tiny arbitrary numbers getting bigger.
I’m civ tho the building all look the same regardless of the civ, I would be right with ya if each civ had a culturally unique look. But once you’ve built one stable you’ve built them all.
The only part you are wrong about here is the wonder system, the wonders provide really good bonuses and i think its still a race to get the wonders, like in civ you have to build them faster than the others, and in Humankind you have to claim them faster
I bought it recently in the steam sales and as a civ fan I found the gameplay really refreshing. I particularly like how you can group armies from the start. And how you can enhance your yields through not only districts but buildings as well. Things I didn't like were how my cities would rebel even though I'm doing great and conquering other civs. Or how enemies can seemingly bring an army to your cities in one turn out of nowhere giving you no time to intercept with one of your own armies.
I still do not understand how this game hasn’t killed Civ. I’ve been playing civ since civ 2 (I’m 38 btw). I loved the civ games and never thought anyone can top them. Humankind is, in my humble opinion, a game changer. It’s better than any civ game I have ever seen, and I have played civ 4 and 5 ALOT; especially 5 (better than 6 imo). When I first installed HK, I couldn’t put it down for a whole month. Brilliant concept, creative battle system, genius dynamics, beautiful artwork and graphics, excellent music. I love everything about this game and I don’t know how anyone can top it. I really want the devs to succeed. Again, I don’t understand how this isn’t bigger than Civ. Note to Devs: please make a extra large world map, and enable the building canals (I.e. Suez..). Civ allowed ships to go through cities, which enabled a “canal-like” solution.
@@Nukestarmaster While there's aspects of Endless Legend I dislike, overall I enjoy that the game radically departs from the Civ formula, and not just by its setting.
Exactly. Humankind is an evolution in very many ways. Unfortunately, the brand name carries the well known games a lot and allows them to maintain a monopoly. The fact that the players of an old game are always extremely hostile to any deviation from what they got used to doesn't help. Any game that attempts to bring progress to the genre immediately faces a lot of unwarranted, irrational hate, just for being different.
(yes i know this is a copy and paste from my previous comment) I honestly prefer civ 5 . I feel like civ 5 brought together all of the aspects (faith, gold, science, culture, production, etc.) and made it intertwined so well that it feels like you must manage everything. I also like civ 5's far more serious approach. The atmosphere of that game is impeccable. I also feel like the culture path of civ 5, and how ideologies work alongside tourism, and how it can be used as a political weapon (and defense), and how even online you naturally want to form alliances (and enemies) off of those is one of the best game mechanics of any video game.
I picked it up during the Steam Summer Sale. It's not CIV, but I'm still enjoying myself. I also started playing Ozymandias, which is also an interesting game worth checking out.
For me, every time i tried to start a Civ 6 game, i played 40 turns and then switched to Humankind and stayed for an entire playthrough... The only thing i dont like about Humankind is the pacing from mid to late game where you snowball, its actually impossible to enjoy the cool modern era in Humankind.
We have to keep in mind Humankind is the first installation of the game and came out 2021 while Civilization had 6 installations (disregarding BE) and is stacking playerbase since 1991. This is 30 years of time to not only get players but also to improve and perfect the game. Theres also countless people who had the time to educate themselves into modding the game to a point where Firaxis doesnt even need to release new patches and updates as often because players are doing this job better and better Also we live in age where the so called influencers (as much as i hate this term) actually influence the playerbase of any game they promote or bash in their videos or playthroughs
Also keep in mind, Humankind has the lead set by others (eg Civ) already there to follow. There's no point emulating another game, only worse. I don't have Humankind, though I do have Endless Space 1& 2 and Endless Legend by the same developer. And the main problem is that they are not bad. But they are so derivative, add little new to the games they are inspired by. And Humankind looks similar. In this video, for example, I couldn't tell which was Civ 6 or Humankind most of the time!
Thank you for making this video and others on Humankind. This is a game I feel has a lot of potential. I love civ 6, but Humankind brought so many different ways to play a 4X game. The combat in this game is exponentially better than civ 6. I really hope this game continues to receive development and support.
So I have played Humankind recently, and I think it is really fun from a "power gamer" perspective of dynamically trying to come up with optimal builds to beat your rivals. It's a game I can easily sink time into, but I think if you aren't enjoying it on that "spike-johnny" level it won't hold much interest, as your civ identity gets so confused by the end it's kind of unengaging on a role playing level. This is why I have a hard time recommending the game to anyone who isn't really into 4x games and can enjoy the clever strategy bits as something different from Civ. Anyhow it's funny because Endless Legend is so rich with RP and fun "Timmy" bits to play with, but Humankind doesn't have that at all. Maybe Humankind suffered because it didn't deliver what the Endless fans expected. It's a very interesting case!
I'm a fan of Endless Legend myself and bought the game thinking it could be interesting based off the goodwill from that game. For me, it didn't click. I enjoy Endless Legend far more than my brief time with Humankind and maybe I shouldn't have expected a game on par with it from Humankind but I'm someone who likes baby's first 4x game, so the more like a Civ game it is, the less I want to engage with it. One thing I hope is appreciated from Endless Legend by those of you who like Civilisation and similar games is how different each faction was and that you couldn't easily switch a faction's playstyle (Morgawr rely upon water heavy maps, Clans can't start a war, Necrophage are near impossible to be diplomatic with, etc). I feel most 4x games don't really have something to hook people like me so it's disappointing as an Endless fan. I get that you're probably fine with not having many casuals in your games though so at least I won't be going around complaining about all the proper civilisation builders.
@@Japaneseanimeguy I don't really like Civ very much either. And I generally prefer Endless Legend over Humankind. I just think Humankind can also be fun if you approach it from a VERY different perspective than Endless Legend.
Just started playing this game a few days ago, I have to admit, it hooked me. I sunk hours into it without even realizing, much to my sleep schedule's dismay. I have hundreds of hours in Civ 5 and 6, I even tried out Civ Beyond Earth for a bit. While this game isn't as smooth and refined as Civ 6 or even 5, it's only the dev's first go at making this kind of game as far as I am aware. I enjoyed a bit of Civ Beyond Earth, but Humankind is actually much better than that Civ Spin-off, but for most that won't mean much. The game isn't perfect, but to me it's a nice refreshing 4X game to play instead of Civ for a while just to mix things up. The game's style is neat, the mechanics are different enough to be interesting, even if some of them don't land very well. It's worth giving it a shot if you can get it on a sale and love 4X games even if they're a bit mid, kinda like they say "even bad pizza is good pizza."
One of the things that also held people back from purchasing was the high minimum system requirements for playing Humankind. This prevented a lot of people with older model computers who would have loved to play the game from being able to do so in the first place. I was in this same position, hence why I spent an inordinate period of time watching Jumbo play and living vicariously through his adventures. Ahhhhh good times!
My old laptop had trouble playing two games which forced me to build a PC. The first was Hunt: Showdown, an extremely immersive and graphically detailed FPS shooter. The other was Humankind. Humankind requiring specs on par with major FPS releases just doesn’t feel right, no matter what the reasons are.
Just hit gamepass so that will bump the numbers, but will they hold? I tried it last night on cloud and it had a slow loading time due to large number of players at the time. I didnt have the time to learn the game last night though. I may try it this weekend after Tennocon.
One of the main reasons I don't play much Humankind compared to civ 6 is the difficulty, ever since the release of Humankind I played on higher difficulties compared to when I started playing civ and I started playing (and winning) way quicker on max difficulty compared to the time it took for me to reach that lvl in civ 6. And another reason why I play way more civ 6 is in Humankind I find myself not really playing other cultures than the ones I usually play since I originally developed my strat for what cultures to pick and with civ 6 I can pick almost any civ and have fun with their unique abilities compared to not really using any of a cultures ability in Humankind if I don't find it to be quite good and because of that not bothering to choose other than my 2-3 cultures I already planned to play as.
I want to love this game so badly because so much of it is amazing and innovative and then inevitably half my games get ruined by tribes doing unintuitive and illogical crap that locks me in somewhere.
I really like it. But it does need a little something to be the best. One thing that I know would be a game changer is letting the player build several avatars. From the moment I first laid my eyes on the game it's all I ever wanted
I actually like the game better than Civ 6, it's not a "Killer" but I think it's a breath of fresh air in the genera. I enjoy the combat much more, and the AI feels better when you make custom AIs to fight against. I really hope that Civilization will take note of the combat and how your Civilization changes over time. I always found it weird that your leader never changes over a few thousand years.
And I think that is much more important than to be some gerne defining monolith. We already have that, it's Civilization. I want competition to keep the games fresh. If you can just pump out the same game with minor stat updates, you're basically just an EA sports title and who wants to be that?
I haven't played all too much of Civ 5 and even less of Civ 6, but when I played Humankind I realized it was more my type of 4X game. I am a very casual player when it comes to this genre, so things like how the territory works in Humankind is more appealing to me, how you can choose a new culture each era, and itsdifferent approach to battles, all these are features that I didn't know I was wanting for until I played Humankind.
On the topic of the console release, it was being handled by Aspyr, not by themselves. Aspyr has been fumbling with a lot recently so I am almost entirely convinced that the indefinite delay on the console port was all on Aspyr. For example, the recent Star Wars KOTOR remake and KOTOR 2 update have been cancelled or delayed or switched to different studios, additionally the console ports of Civ 6 have been practically abandoned. The leader pass did not come to console for whatever reason, something that would be in the hands of Aspyr and not Firaxis.
I think one of the greatest problems with Humankind which has probably plagued it for a lot of people is it’s lack of polish in very particular areas, balance being the most significant. The game’s infrastructures vary wildly in utility from some being crucial to others being completely irrelevant at all times. Many of the cultures are comparatively broken, same for many of the tenants. Food is also borderline irrelevant if you optimize the game because of the baffling decision to not limit district construction by your pop count like Civ 6 or even Endless Legend did. And these balance issues being here since day one means anyone who gets good at the game is forced to play with mods if they want a balanced experience, which Civ 6 didn’t force on its player base. And while the devs have been very open about some things, we’ve had no significant game-wide changes to most of the worst balance issues.
I enjoyed this game for what it was, and I still love the look and feel of it, UI design is fine but I reallly love the presentation and art design. I'd happily buy another expansion.
does the game still break apart after 400 turns, making it unimpossible to end a run? i played it once, after 3 atomic bombs, even the sound shattered, the map started to disapear and than the game crashed. havent touched the game eversince, is it still an issue?
I really wanted to like Humankind, but it never clicked with me. I guess I have drifted closer and closer to Paradox and grand strategy, over plain strategy. I love the art of the game, but found the interface unpleasant and the jarring switching between essentially random cultures (French today, Japanese tomorrow) to be really arbitrary and strange. Whatever others may think of it as a design choice, it just doesn't work for me. Compare it to CK3, where your culture evolves in a way that completely makes sense to the story of your game - hybridizing, diverging, adapting to changing conditions. For me, Humankind can't even compete with the either the strategic or storytelling power of that system.
I didn't like the idea of every era having to pick a new culture. I know you don't have to but it is a big nerf if you don't. i couldn't get into radical culture changes it kept me from enjoying the game for myself. I would argue that seeing how the player drop was so great that other players don't like this principle feature.
humankind is when you want to play civ but you actually want to care about 4x mechanic and actually nation building instead of playing it like a board game. the diplomacy system is fantastic. war is great. strategy also really good on how the tiles and defense work. it actually feels like you play a real turn based 4x instead of settler of catan and call it 4x. yet it can be a bit bloated with mechanic and it took me 3 games to finally understand the basic concept of territory and how playing tall isnt just build a city and forget it. but you actually have no manage your border and build outpost to supply your keep growing starving tall city. as opposed to civ tall game where you just sit and do nothing. both is really great game for different kind of people. 1 for more casual board gamish feel like, while other actually a real 4x turn based
For me it died almost on arrival because it launched with a lot of bugs and severe balance issues, but also because the first DLC (culture pack) came superfast, before any much needed fixes. Made it clear that their self proclaimed "magnum opus" is mostly there to make money... I do hope Dungeon of the Endless will be better and less greedy
I preordered Humankind because I was so excited for a new historical 4x game! I remember being eager to customize my own leader and get into some AI games to learn the gameplay. I was confused, however, when I was not prompted to pick my civilization when starting a new game.. And I was then dismayed when I learned that every civilization is competing for what are essentially civilization archetypes that change every few eras into progressively more modern civilizations. While I'm sure others may think this gameplay choice is a fun new layer of strategy, it actually made me stop playing completely within the first week of launch. In Civ I can pick one of my top favorite civilizations before a game even begins and I don't have to worry about playing something I dislike. If I want to play as Germany I can pick that and it's secure. In Humankind, through no fault of my own, I could very well be locked out of playing what I want to play just because someone else got there first like founding a religion in Civ 6. To this day I have Civ 6 and all its content on PC and on the Switch. I'm happy with my choice and I'm not looking back at Humankind any time soon.
The thing that lets civilization 6 down immensely is how weak the AI is at war. The AI never poseS any real military threat and the best they can do is slow down the players destruction of their nation in a war. While in Civilization 4 other nations always posed a real military threat to the very existence of the players civilization.
I have played many hours of both games however i love the flexibility of the culture system in Humandkind and the combat is also more engaging that in Civ 6 and Civ 5, but i still feel like something is lacking when i play it, cant put my finger on it.
It truly doesn't feel like the game got significantly better after these 2 years (it's even crazy to think that it's been 2 years already), and their first expansion pack wasn't even that big if you compare to Rise and Fall, which is a bummer. I don't want it to be a replacement for Civ 6 but it just still feels bland.
I really like humankind, I can't compare it to Civ6 myself, as I haven't played it. But I can compare it to the other games From Aptitude. I've played Humankind for about 379 hours, Endless legends for 862 and space 861 (didn't realise it was so close). Humankind has the best combat I'd say of the three, moving your units and positioning matters alot, and I really like that. Although two things I don't like is the dig in mechanic, and the fact attacking first gives such a huge advance. It makes sense, although comparing to Legends where it's stat base which I like that aspect there more. I wish Humankind has something like quests, the other endless games were big on quests, which made things interesting and changed how you followed the game and the events on the way. I could go even more indepth about all the differences and what I like and don't like but it'd be abit much. Overall I think Humankind is great, on launch a lot of balance issues, and even now. Industry is wayy to strong still, the AI needs work, the only reason they're difficult is due to the extreme bonus they're given. Comparing it to the other games they've made, it's missing some things i preffered in the others like quests as I said before, the indepth mechanics that were in space, customising your classes stats which mixed up how I played the otheer games etc. I think It's the weakest out of the Between Space and Legends, I'd say Space II is still they're best work. I know it's difficult due to this game being historical, but if that's the case for me maybe I prefer the fantasy or scifi approach more. They can get more creative.
I highly recommend playing with the VIP modpack, which is the de-facto standard for many players. I don't remember the last time I picked a Builder culture, it is very viable to play without focusing on production, as it makes Infrastructures much more useful, including those that give Production based on the workers population, terrain types, etc. Also, in most battles I order my frontline units to defend instead of attacking first, as that gives them a very strong Combat Strength bonus and allows you to defeat stronger armies by better tactics and positioning.
You forgot to mention most important thing for popularity: HUMANKIND is in its FIRST installment, whil CIV had 5 GAMES OF PR AND MARKETING ahead of it.
I bought this in the beta. I loved endless legend and was really looking forward to Humankind. After a couple of games at release I was bored. It was a very lackluster game. I've not been motived to try it again since. I think the better 4x historical game like Civ is Old world. Highly recommend it to anyone looking for something similar to civ, but with some changes.
I liked Humankind in how they had the random historical events that would happen, and your choices would have random outcomes later in the game. Kept it more interesting that way. I also love the Combat and how it breaks down a battle, and you choice where you deploy units. If you have Naval Units close by you can bring them in as reinforcements and use them as Artillery against land units, not against other naval units. It can add a lot more engagement to battles. I was playing last night an one battle over one contested island lasted a good 30 minutes.
Two years already? I enjoy the game and I hope it gets more support in the years to come with many more expansions. It has the bones of a good historical 4X but I like how customizable it is compared to Civilization.
Humankind for me is a game of unfulfilled expectations. I played the beta and even preordered (something I never do) but barely played it after launch compared to Civ. I like the combat and cultures system, but everything else seemed so surface level and unfinished. Every balance change seemed to take fun out of the game for me, and they released paid DLC before fixing major bugs. Maybe I'll come back to it down the road but it needs a lot of dev work
I could never really get behind the idea that your civ's identity changes so radically through the ages. For a game that tries to be a "realistic" version of civ, the part where you go from Huns to Rome to Japan to France to Sweden, to USA just seems hard to swallow. I could never remember who any of my rival civs were either cause they were constantly changing. I mean I know there is a "problem" with Civ having USA and Netherlands at 4000 BC but they didn't have to go a completely stupid opposite extreme to fix that. Maybe if there were like 3 identities per civ throughout a full playthrough - with only some of the identities being compatible for a transition (not Khmer -> France for example) - I could respect it, but not this.
I'm still waiting to be able to make more than one AI personality and play in games with personalities I have made. But the devs refuse to make a feature that would massively improve the game, easily.
@@tenacity25 I agree. It would be cool to create Ghengis Khan, for example, and go against him. For now I'm stuck playing against @JumboPixel who never allies with me no matter what I do :-)
@@nathanwallis9936 I'm stuck playing against content creators or default characters, when I'd love to play against my own AI to see how it plays and make it more like myself than it may currently be, I'd like to play against avatars of my friends - whom don't play the game, and/or dont want to post their avatar on the publicly accessible website - or play against some historical leaders like gandhi, genghis khan, among others. Or heck, maybe even make some fictional characters too. Nothing against the content creators or default characters, I'm glad they're here, I just want MORE options.
Well Civ 6 did just add like six new leaders or variant leaders for certain civs. I play console and when I heard Humankind would be coming to console I was excited. Yet was only let down when their release date got pushed back indefinitely. It still has a page on the Xbox but there is no release date.
For me the issue was one that you never mentioned, but one that just makes me fundamentally never going to be interested in the game: the civilization advancement design philosophy of the game, where you jump from sumerians to mayans to the japanese or whatever. I get what they were going for, and I've heard explanations that make it make more sense. But for me it's just too all over the place, I really wish they at least made it so that civs evolved on the same continent or region. Otherwise I can't feel any connection to the civ I'm playing as because it's just a nonsensical hybrid soup of astoundingly different cultures. In Civ when you play as the same civ for their entire history, you really feel like you are leading the destiny of an entire group of people, I didn't have that feeling with Humankind. The gameplay and graphics were perfectly fine but I played maybe 4 hours on game pass before moving on.
I'm part of the waterslide Down. I bought it on release and hoped. I've played CIV since 1 well-over 30 years ago. While H/K is impressive, I just found it TOO complicated. Maybe just getting old but this game was more work than enjoyment. I wish someone would make a 'new' Humankind that is just easier to play, smoother, not quite as many decision points, and I bet more people WOULD play it.
It took me years to learn how to play civilization and I still learn new shit everyday lol jumping into Humankind was like jumping into a mandarin language class. Same with Total War. I seem to have no attention span to learn through the tutorials lmao
I tried to play Humankind but for some reason my computer couldn’t handle it or some glitch made it unplayable, I might try it again soon but it sucks that it never went past that
I really liked the mechanics. Hated the Dev's bias in balancing. 2/3 of each era's Civ choices were complete garbage. Certain Civ's the Frenchies didn't like did almost nothing. 1-2 civs each era were completely busted. In a few playthroughs I found that I played the exact same every time.
The game didn't wow me in my initial time with it and eventually got forgotten. I play Civ in waves where I'll put in a hundred hours then not play again for two years. Humankind just didn't give me that impact of - hey let me play this instead of Civ when I next get the itch. Thank you for the video because for better or worse it just reinforces that opinion for now.
For me what kept me from playing were the bugs. The game got into a pretty good state before the Diplomacy expansion, then it was buggy again, but after the latest patch its been much better. Otherwise, I think this game has more strategic depth and tactical immersion than Civ, plus the AI can put up a fight even into the late game, so it makes for a better single player experieince in my opinion.
Humankind needs a BIG DLC. Something that adds new game modes like catastrophy or rotating famine that would change the way you play. The game at it's base is way better than Civ6 for me - especially combat.
The early game yes. But late game in Humankind was really weak. The cities were so big with all the districts that everything was a siege battle. ICBMs had a really short range, AI was just annoying to deal with as it loved you and then hated you overnight.
I'm not a huge fan of Humankind, but the one thing it will always have over Civ 6 is that war never feels like a chore. In Civ 6 it feels like once you get to the gunpowder era, war is never worth it since cities are too durable.
For me I love playing these games in multiplayer but humankinds multiplayer was so outstandingly broken and unfair that it burnt me off it so hard. Every time we returned after a "Balance patch" we would find yet more unfun design choices that removed the element of skill and strategy and instead made it a game of rushing certain OP cultures and wonders.
I hope it gets better but I MUCH prefer CIV 6 singleplayer and CIV 5 multiplayer
Indeed without extensive mods, Humankind is not fun in Multiplayer. But I do think the dev's have tried to fix it but they only did minor and small adjustments instead of big sweeping changes.
A game too perfectly balanced for even the Spiffing Brit
Never thought I’d see the day
have you tried it with the expansion pack? they broke it even further with some game mechanics
I actually don't care about multiplayer in this type of game, but I can understand your problem.
civ5 multiplayer ftw
I never liked Humankind being labeled as “the civ killer” specifically because whenever a game is labeled as “the killer of X” nine times out of ten it never goes well, because people IMMEDIATELY start comparing them and refuse to stop. I specifically remember the devs themselves saying that they never wanted the game to be labeled as “the killer of civ”, cuz it was the internet as a whole that thrust that label onto Humankind
Edit: one thing I forgot to mention is that a major issue with labeling a game as “the killer of X” is that it tends to cause the game to lose some of its identity with people. Like it’s uniqueness is completely sidelined in favor of describing it as “it’s X but with Y”
Yup, I don't think I've ever seen a "The X Killer" actually Kill the supposed target. at absolute best, it gets some fame and a cult following, but they never touch the popularity of what people claim it will replace.
Absolutely. Last time I remember that was World War 3, the "Battlefield killer" which turned out to be a scam.
Another nail in the coffin of a game is "It's X meets Y!" And if it's neither X nor Y, people shy away from it. Old World I think got done in by the CK3 meets Civ comparison, which really overlooked how it's not that, it's its own game and should be enjoyed as such.
I mostly agree with you there! I don’t love the phrase “Civ 6 killer”. I prefer to think that the two will coexist, but compete. Competition is good for all of us!
To me the quip “X killer” is more expressing the idea that this game is a lot like another game, they share a lot of similarities and will appear to the same kind of players - can it be popular enough to dethrone the king?! (a bit wordy for a title).
Also I should say incase anyone’s confused - I have HUGE respect for the Humankind team and a good working relationship with them. To your point about the devs framing though - I generally don’t think developers should be allowed to fully set the tone for how people perceive a game, or the language people might use to describe it.
So why use the phrase?
The goal is to express to the viewer that this video will (to a degree) compare and contrast those two very similar games. But this isn’t just another Civ 6 vs Humankind video.
Because in combination with the hopefully simple and very clear thumbnail, I also aimed to express that this video is about Humankind’s journey - not just another patch update video.
And all of that needed to be expressed in about 20 characters to fit the ideal title length. I’m open to alternatives.
Thanks for coming to my TH-cam Ted Talk.
🤷♂️ Pokenar, we could ask this guy I guess th-cam.com/video/WC2pbLA4wMU/w-d-xo.html
Oh my god its been 2 years..... I have been waiting for a DLC on the level of Brave New World to pull me back in and I dont think that ever happened?
I couldn't believe it had been that long..! Together We Rule DLC is as close as it gets.
yea... and "together we rule" is kinda meeh.
It's a shame as I love this game and play it, but it lucks something that would give new games something fresh and make them more unique.
@@paweles5329 it is great on multiplayer tbh and I play with my group mostly multiplayer and game is great. I guess majority is playing single tho.
@@LevtNow Arguably it's worse for us in MP, of course we aren't sweatlords so maybe thats why.
@@CausticSpace hmm it actually makes our games more fun to counter sweatlords that rush science with congress things
My fav part of the game is by far the combat. And I love how different it is from Civ as far as the eras and evolution of your teritory goes.
The combat is just unmatched. Best part for me as well.
@@andrewciliberto168 I also like that the nomadic phase is actually fun and not like Civ where you just try to settle a city in the first or second turn to not fall behind
Yes! I used to stay up whole night for a long modern time war
The combat system is the reason why I don't like it 😅
@@Superszyga yeah it can be too complex for some people
Old World would love to have daily numbers like Humankind, and that's a game with overall very positive reviews.
Still sitting on my wishlist waiting for its turn to be purchased but it is really high on that list. Bigger studios unfortunately have the benefit of much bigger marketing budgets.
@@jamesbernadette6216while marketing budgets are a factor, the fact that Civilisation is a renowned series that has been pretty much continuously active for more than three decades by now, with a huge, already existing player base and brand recognition is by far more important factor. Even Humankind benefits from Amplitude having existing fans of the Endless games, if to a much lesser extent (both due to them being a much less well known game and Humankind not being a direct sequel).
@@jamesbernadette6216 you'll be in for a treat when you make that buy.
@@HidingAllTheWay yes, that absolutely is the biggest factor, and why the thought of Humankind being a "civ killer" always felt like a ridiculous proposition to me. New and fresh upcomer just does not have what it takes to topple a beloved franchise that has decades of recognition behind it and still active player base + development. The last point is the crux, I believe, hence the often cited case where the upcomer did topple the reigning title: Cities Skylines over Sim City because EA failed to keep the title afloat so CO and Paradox managed to swoop in.
Old World is a far superior game in my opinion, although I only played maybe 4 hours of Humankind. I really hope development continues on Old World because I think eventually it could turn into a cult classic and actually grow in numbers. I think Old World is also a better game than Civ 6 in a lot of ways but I understand that the limited scope of it makes them hard to actually compare.
Humankind actually suffered from being called "the Civ 6 killer". Because it was no longer valued as a game itself, just seen as "something to destroy something else". It was a tool. And when everybody was done evaluating whether it would hold up to this claim or not, it seems the people forgot about playing the game for the entertainment's sake.
I enjoy both games, but I would argue that Civ has a broadly more recognizable brand than Humankind, which is likely to explain at least some of the disparity of player count.
It's also much older
Humankind feels empty to me that's why I don't keep at it
Civ 6 also appeals more to the casual players rather than core players.
@@jaronmalone3945 Agree.
Humankind just has a lot of problems. If it was truly a great game, it could make a way for itself. See all the indie games that have taken the gaming world by storm over the past decade that had no exposure beforehand (RimWorld, Stardew Valley, Celeste, Among Us, Terraria, Rocket League, even Minecraft) If Humankind had really been a "Civ-killer" and offered something truly great in the TBS genre, then it would be far more popular. Unfortunately a few good aspects are not enough to carry the game since it has some pretty glaring flaws.
UPDATE - Console Version out now, alongside anniversary updates (plus year three DLC) th-cam.com/video/_EgYnYQodTs/w-d-xo.html
In August 2021, my channel had just over 3000 subscribers. Now we have 62000!
Closest reply prediction for what it'll be when I make a 'Humankind Three Years Later' video wins a prize 😅
I’ll say 200K
Great videos btw mate. I’m a fan of yours from Saudi Arabia.
There will be a million of us!
101000
137000. And thank you. Just bought the game on the 2023 summer sale. I was really confused about game mechanics, cultures to pick and cultural wonders to choose but now I'm enjoying the game more with your help.
120,000. I just didn't get Humankind. I wanted to love it, but I didn't find it fun at all. I play more Endless Legend and Endless Space than Humankind
I started Humankind 2 months ago and haven't stopped playing since. I must have 60 hours of gameplay already and whenever I have free time, I spend it on the game.
Thank you for contributing to the survival of this little gem, it's definitely a game that deserves a lot more recognition and a bigger community.
I started about a week ago and have those hours. I already played three whole games and I feel it is a bit samey, but 'm sure that I'll start another session soon.
@@beageler This is a game where strategy matters. Win by resources or by war, by diplomacy or by technology, vassalize your conquests or crush them, develop or quickly destroy your neighbor.
I've played with the strongest and the weakest civilizations, and they all have their weaknesses, but also their strengths, depending on the map.
It's a never-ending game for me, I just think it's a shame that the AI is too predictable in certain contexts, eg: I dominate the vast majority of my games in terms of ranking, and the weaker AI will all too often want to ally with me instead of forming coalitions to try and counter me.
Still playing?
@@lisalashesxxx absolutely! Despite the demands of my work/family schedule, I still find myself drawn to Humankind whenever I have a spare moment.
It's been a refreshing change of pace from my usual gaming routine, especially as I've been consciously trying to shift my focus away from League of Legends.
And although I haven't gotten around to purchasing the latest DLCs just yet, it's definitely on my to-do list. The game continues to offer an escape and excitement that I look forward to in my free time 🙂
@@ArrakeenHD why are you lying?
Humankind has its own style. Your unique things. It wasn't developed to be the "Killer" of anything and that's how we should look at it. Not as a "replacement" or "the Civilization Killer", but as a game of the same genre but different.
What's his style?
@@Beehive_miel Its own mechanics, its own gameplay. Is a different game. Same genre, but different game.
Humankind is a tremendous game. I´m an old timer civ player. Started on civ1. Nowadays I find more fun playing Humankind, despite its flaws. I feel it needs more polish, and space for modding is what it needs most. The community can give us what the devs cannot. I´ll be playing humankind for many years to come.
Though I am a huge Civ fan, I recently started playing a lot of HK. I think Civ can learn from Humankind in terms of diplomacy, AI and combat.
I find the diplomacy system and how the AI acts, significantly more reasonable in HK. It feels like the AI in Civ is always angry or irrational.
The policy system also I think makes more sense than Civ 6 but isn't really perfect. The only thing is HK feels way less polished. Almost like they were onto something, but they didn't quite nail it.
To be honest, I would rather Humankind devs just join Civ 7.
Never happen they have their endless games they make
Nah I would personally prefer a Humankind 2 to correct its main flaws, than going back to Civ. I think HK combat system, territory system and the overall civ evolution mechanics (choosing strengths and goals at each new era, instead of a fixed civ, with fixed bonuses for whole game) more interesting than Civ, to the point that I now find Civ very generic despite being the most polished game (by far) of the two. The main issue for HK is how clunky it can be sometimes and atrocious balance between civs (even in singleplayer where usually most things pass with a bit of effort, some civs are basically broken, usually the ones revolving around industry, while others have bonus so specific it's even a waste of turns to even try to build their stuff). There are some weird mechanics around religion / culture propagation through trade also, to the point that I'm sometimes reluctant to trade because it always ends up with my port trade hubs being converted by foreigners, even when I spam religion or influence production, but I saw that in recent update I did not played they changed how trade worked so maybe it's less of an annoyance now ?
If you enjoyed this game check out Endless Legend by the same devs as HK definitely an amazing 4X game
Having played thousands of hours of Civ, I find that I really like Humankind better in many respects. The combat is quite different, but I think the stories you can tell in Humankind are so much more interesting.
Great insight. Humankind is one of my favorite games and I desperately hope it keeps getting the love it needs!
I just finished a 100-turn game (well 106 actually) where all 10 players spawned on the SAME tiny (tiny for 10 cultures...) island. Most crazy game I'd played. I got the Myceneans after seeing we're on an island and coulda' made it shorter still (normal speed)! Glad to see this video glad you didn't abandon it my friend!
The main gripe I had is that your opponents (and your own empire) had no identity. Celts turning into Chinese turning in Arabs etc, it made no sense. The civs just lost their identity and their culture was just a temporary coat of paint. I made them all feel samey samey
I have both games and prefer Civ 6 by far (looking forward to 7). Humankind was decent, there were some things it did well like combat. But I just didn't like the avatars and I didn't like switching to a different civ every era. I never felt like I was representing one particular civilization and it just had a generic feel to it with multiple playthroughs. I'm still playing Civ 6 (4,000+ hours logged). I don't plan on playing Humankind again.
I am very much in the same boat. I think culture swapping and the avatars were a huge miss.
u summed it up pretty well
I thought both games were great. Humankind on release was likely better than baseline Civ 6, but Civ 6 had some really fantastic expansions that really built upon the district system. Civ 6 is still probably my favourite 4x game. At current my top 3 are:
1) Civ 6
2) Stellaris
3) Age of Wonders 4
Age of Wonders 4 is a VERY promising entry. I think with enough updates it could definitely challenge Civ 6 as my current favourite 4x game.
@@Cashinn_Outt1754I mean, I understand this is your opinion, but this is literally what the game is known for, its the games speciality, so dont say that it was a huge miss, cause than you say the whole game plan was a miss, and its not really
Heh guess you're not too happy with changes announced for civ 7 then eh?
I loved HK on launch. I'll admit it was not balanced what with the farming stars in the neolithic era to get a huge boost in the ancient era and science and production cultures being largely overtuned. But it was incredibly FUN. Imo the nerfs took away a lot of that fun and the devs should've buffed up the other types of cultures to the absurd levels of science and production. The QoL changes and event reworks were solid though. The changes to Independent People also looks good.
the only issue for me on launch was the somewhat unfair punishment of pollution
It's surprising hard to kill a game narrated by Sean Bean 😄
Civ is such a juggernaut in the genre that I think a popularity comparison with the previous games of Amplitude or other competitors like Old world would be more relevant
I can't believe it's already been two years. So much has changed in my life since then but I remember how excited I was when this game finally released. The in game music is absolutely beautiful and brings back such good memories :)
My fav is still Civ IV. IDK why, but it just was so engaging and not overly complicated.
My is V
Agreed Civ 4 is vastly superior to all others including the later Civs which are a pale shadow is comparison
Civ 3-5 for me. Used to mod Civ 3 and Civ 4. Never got into Civ 6... too cartoon based and the district mechanic is a little too much for me as a Boomer. Games for me should be to the point and somewhat intuitive. Civ 6 is not that for me. Love Humankind and I am one of those steady players. I have been playing Civilization since Civ 1.
@@Smenkhaare I agree with Civ6 and the district thing being a pain- very micro-managing and while I LOVE that every game has it's unique flair and style... I still find that 4 is the one I understood best and enjoyed the most.
I didn't find 6 very intuitive either and sadly didn't play a lot of it b/c of that.
I, too, have played Civ since the first one- back on my Dad's PC growing up and later on my own 286 Tandy I bought in a yard sale for $20 in the mid-90's. It was a pizza-box machine with a CGA color monitor and my FIRST computer I owned with my own money. I played a TON of Civ 1 on that. :)
I'll have to check out Humankind. I really like this genre- SimCity, Civ, etc.
Humankind is a bit different... and you get a much better idea on where you stand vs. the other civs than in Civilization 6, easily. You will know if you are in first, second, last place no issue. Even with early leads I had no idea where I stood in Civ 6, plus having every world leader mad at you for reasons. In Humankind you can repeatedly beat down a civ and have it call you daddy. In Civ 6, it seems when it is all said and done when you have a civ down, you have to eliminate it. I love 4x as well. Let me recommend to you Stellaris, Galactic Civilizations IV, Crusader Kings III, Europa Universalis, the old Total War games up to Attila Total War that is modded. Don't play vanilla Total War.
Good 4X games are hard to come by and continue to enjoy them. All of the aforementioned titles are made so much better via free mods from modders. Enjoy them as well. Civ III to Civ V they really seemed to hit the sweet spots. Civ 6 is not my cup of tea for reasons listed here and other reasons left unsaid. Can't wait for Civ 7. I hope they go back to Civ 4 and Civ 5 mechanics, and ditch that busy work district system. The district system adds nothing to the game other than mind breaking decisions on where to place what. Instead of playing a game... you spend most of your time placing things.
Loved the old world of computers mate, going back to early 80s for me. Used to love all of the Computer Shows (I am in New York City) that went extinct here circa 2013-2014. I used to find treasures there. Been cobbling together my own computers since 1995. Am writing this on a state of the art Acer Laptop with an AMD chip. I love the present and can't wait for the future in gaming and computers. Good fortune to you.@@WeyrleaderZor
I've gone back to it every 6 months or so and everytime the "infinite loading" bug happens and then I'm done for another 6 months.
Really appreciate your candor in this video. Thank you!
By the way if you Liked Humankind, has any of you ever tried Endless Legend? It's been made by the same creators
I played Civ 6 since it came out but just picked up Humankind this summer on sale and I love it so far. As much as I love Civ 6 the AI on it is truly awful. It's more of a strategy game because you know how it will react and it's just about min/maxing everything to win. Humankind feels a bit more like a roleplay to me, could be because I have less experience but I've done about 5 play throughs now and they have all felt pretty unique.
I just bought with the steam sale. As a long time Civ player... So far I think it's beautiful but I can see that this game has a larger level of entry to get into and understand the mechanics of the game.
Once you figure it all out, such an awesome game. The best thing to learn is what cultures to pick. So crucial for a successful game.
@@andrewciliberto168so far the only successful starts I've had were with picking Egypt. And I've learned to recognize when I've messed up or was unlucky in neolithic. Having fun so far. :). This looks like a good channel for watching vids to learn the ropes too.
@@jferares JumboPixel has some great videos to learn from. Egypt is my start 90% of the time just because it gets production started early. In the medieval try Swahili, can build massive cities without stability loss at all, ever, if playing on a coastal map type. I like to wait to build units until I need them (and build them fast) when needed to reduce gold waste. Wonders are also really important. Build trading ally's, even if you have to pay them to trade, and have them assist building wonders for you. Also can get there strong units and trade brings huge bonuses.
When you build buildings in Civ 6, it feels satisfying. Build a stable or a library, you can see them visually and notice the benefits. In Humankind, you build a bank or a school, there's nothing visually satisfying being built nor do I every really see the difference (besides very early game). There's no city states that vary up each run nor do I notice the difference in AI competitors. The natural wonders in Civ 6 are amazing to own where as in Humankind, who really cares? Every time I try to play Humankind, it just feels like a "next turn" simulator with tiny arbitrary numbers getting bigger.
I’m civ tho the building all look the same regardless of the civ, I would be right with ya if each civ had a culturally unique look. But once you’ve built one stable you’ve built them all.
The only part you are wrong about here is the wonder system, the wonders provide really good bonuses and i think its still a race to get the wonders, like in civ you have to build them faster than the others, and in Humankind you have to claim them faster
I bought it recently in the steam sales and as a civ fan I found the gameplay really refreshing. I particularly like how you can group armies from the start. And how you can enhance your yields through not only districts but buildings as well. Things I didn't like were how my cities would rebel even though I'm doing great and conquering other civs. Or how enemies can seemingly bring an army to your cities in one turn out of nowhere giving you no time to intercept with one of your own armies.
I still do not understand how this game hasn’t killed Civ. I’ve been playing civ since civ 2 (I’m 38 btw). I loved the civ games and never thought anyone can top them. Humankind is, in my humble opinion, a game changer. It’s better than any civ game I have ever seen, and I have played civ 4 and 5 ALOT; especially 5 (better than 6 imo). When I first installed HK, I couldn’t put it down for a whole month. Brilliant concept, creative battle system, genius dynamics, beautiful artwork and graphics, excellent music. I love everything about this game and I don’t know how anyone can top it. I really want the devs to succeed. Again, I don’t understand how this isn’t bigger than Civ.
Note to Devs: please make a extra large world map, and enable the building canals (I.e. Suez..). Civ allowed ships to go through cities, which enabled a “canal-like” solution.
Meh, I prefer Endless Legend, Civ 5 and even Civ BE to HK.
@@Nukestarmaster While there's aspects of Endless Legend I dislike, overall I enjoy that the game radically departs from the Civ formula, and not just by its setting.
Exactly. Humankind is an evolution in very many ways.
Unfortunately, the brand name carries the well known games a lot and allows them to maintain a monopoly.
The fact that the players of an old game are always extremely hostile to any deviation from what they got used to doesn't help. Any game that attempts to bring progress to the genre immediately faces a lot of unwarranted, irrational hate, just for being different.
(yes i know this is a copy and paste from my previous comment)
I honestly prefer civ 5 . I feel like civ 5 brought together all of the aspects (faith, gold, science, culture, production, etc.) and made it intertwined so well that it feels like you must manage everything. I also like civ 5's far more serious approach. The atmosphere of that game is impeccable. I also feel like the culture path of civ 5, and how ideologies work alongside tourism, and how it can be used as a political weapon (and defense), and how even online you naturally want to form alliances (and enemies) off of those is one of the best game mechanics of any video game.
I think it appeals most to people with experience playing lots of 4x games.
I picked it up during the Steam Summer Sale. It's not CIV, but I'm still enjoying myself.
I also started playing Ozymandias, which is also an interesting game worth checking out.
I'm loving Ozymandias, It's not hard to learn and such a chill time
Did people, who are mighty
Look upon your works
And despair?
@@koolunit Everyone looks upon my works and despairs, I really should pull my socks up!
For me, every time i tried to start a Civ 6 game, i played 40 turns and then switched to Humankind and stayed for an entire playthrough...
The only thing i dont like about Humankind is the pacing from mid to late game where you snowball, its actually impossible to enjoy the cool modern era in Humankind.
What are the chances I just start playing this game, find your videos and you make one! The world is crazy. New sub from me
thats called "mass data collection"
We have to keep in mind Humankind is the first installation of the game and came out 2021 while Civilization had 6 installations (disregarding BE) and is stacking playerbase since 1991. This is 30 years of time to not only get players but also to improve and perfect the game. Theres also countless people who had the time to educate themselves into modding the game to a point where Firaxis doesnt even need to release new patches and updates as often because players are doing this job better and better
Also we live in age where the so called influencers (as much as i hate this term) actually influence the playerbase of any game they promote or bash in their videos or playthroughs
Also keep in mind, Humankind has the lead set by others (eg Civ) already there to follow. There's no point emulating another game, only worse. I don't have Humankind, though I do have Endless Space 1& 2 and Endless Legend by the same developer. And the main problem is that they are not bad. But they are so derivative, add little new to the games they are inspired by. And Humankind looks similar. In this video, for example, I couldn't tell which was Civ 6 or Humankind most of the time!
Thank you for making this video and others on Humankind. This is a game I feel has a lot of potential. I love civ 6, but Humankind brought so many different ways to play a 4X game. The combat in this game is exponentially better than civ 6. I really hope this game continues to receive development and support.
Hey Jumbo, have you got an update on "Ara: History Untold"?
So I have played Humankind recently, and I think it is really fun from a "power gamer" perspective of dynamically trying to come up with optimal builds to beat your rivals. It's a game I can easily sink time into, but I think if you aren't enjoying it on that "spike-johnny" level it won't hold much interest, as your civ identity gets so confused by the end it's kind of unengaging on a role playing level. This is why I have a hard time recommending the game to anyone who isn't really into 4x games and can enjoy the clever strategy bits as something different from Civ. Anyhow it's funny because Endless Legend is so rich with RP and fun "Timmy" bits to play with, but Humankind doesn't have that at all. Maybe Humankind suffered because it didn't deliver what the Endless fans expected. It's a very interesting case!
I'm a fan of Endless Legend myself and bought the game thinking it could be interesting based off the goodwill from that game. For me, it didn't click. I enjoy Endless Legend far more than my brief time with Humankind and maybe I shouldn't have expected a game on par with it from Humankind but I'm someone who likes baby's first 4x game, so the more like a Civ game it is, the less I want to engage with it. One thing I hope is appreciated from Endless Legend by those of you who like Civilisation and similar games is how different each faction was and that you couldn't easily switch a faction's playstyle (Morgawr rely upon water heavy maps, Clans can't start a war, Necrophage are near impossible to be diplomatic with, etc). I feel most 4x games don't really have something to hook people like me so it's disappointing as an Endless fan. I get that you're probably fine with not having many casuals in your games though so at least I won't be going around complaining about all the proper civilisation builders.
@@Japaneseanimeguy I don't really like Civ very much either. And I generally prefer Endless Legend over Humankind. I just think Humankind can also be fun if you approach it from a VERY different perspective than Endless Legend.
Just started playing this game a few days ago, I have to admit, it hooked me. I sunk hours into it without even realizing, much to my sleep schedule's dismay. I have hundreds of hours in Civ 5 and 6, I even tried out Civ Beyond Earth for a bit. While this game isn't as smooth and refined as Civ 6 or even 5, it's only the dev's first go at making this kind of game as far as I am aware. I enjoyed a bit of Civ Beyond Earth, but Humankind is actually much better than that Civ Spin-off, but for most that won't mean much. The game isn't perfect, but to me it's a nice refreshing 4X game to play instead of Civ for a while just to mix things up. The game's style is neat, the mechanics are different enough to be interesting, even if some of them don't land very well. It's worth giving it a shot if you can get it on a sale and love 4X games even if they're a bit mid, kinda like they say "even bad pizza is good pizza."
One of the things that also held people back from purchasing was the high minimum system requirements for playing Humankind. This prevented a lot of people with older model computers who would have loved to play the game from being able to do so in the first place. I was in this same position, hence why I spent an inordinate period of time watching Jumbo play and living vicariously through his adventures. Ahhhhh good times!
My old laptop had trouble playing two games which forced me to build a PC. The first was Hunt: Showdown, an extremely immersive and graphically detailed FPS shooter. The other was Humankind. Humankind requiring specs on par with major FPS releases just doesn’t feel right, no matter what the reasons are.
That is also one reason why console versions are hard. Civ6 is a console game so it was easy to convert PC version.
Appreciating the time and effort you put into videos like this. For the algorithm!
This video reminded me how much I've loved Civ ever since starting with the third game way back ... will be installing Civ 6 again later today.
Just hit gamepass so that will bump the numbers, but will they hold? I tried it last night on cloud and it had a slow loading time due to large number of players at the time. I didnt have the time to learn the game last night though. I may try it this weekend after Tennocon.
people need to learn that there doesnt exist anything like a game killer, a game can die of only if it kills itself
One of the main reasons I don't play much Humankind compared to civ 6 is the difficulty, ever since the release of Humankind I played on higher difficulties compared to when I started playing civ and I started playing (and winning) way quicker on max difficulty compared to the time it took for me to reach that lvl in civ 6.
And another reason why I play way more civ 6 is in Humankind I find myself not really playing other cultures than the ones I usually play since I originally developed my strat for what cultures to pick and with civ 6 I can pick almost any civ and have fun with their unique abilities compared to not really using any of a cultures ability in Humankind if I don't find it to be quite good and because of that not bothering to choose other than my 2-3 cultures I already planned to play as.
Amplitude studios should have stayed with the Endless ip and made Endless legends 2, but we got humankind..
I want to love this game so badly because so much of it is amazing and innovative and then inevitably half my games get ruined by tribes doing unintuitive and illogical crap that locks me in somewhere.
I've love CIV since CIV 1 to CIV6. I've stopped playing CIV6 since its just too damn easy. I've never even heard of Humankind until right now.
I really like it. But it does need a little something to be the best.
One thing that I know would be a game changer is letting the player build several avatars. From the moment I first laid my eyes on the game it's all I ever wanted
I actually like the game better than Civ 6, it's not a "Killer" but I think it's a breath of fresh air in the genera. I enjoy the combat much more, and the AI feels better when you make custom AIs to fight against.
I really hope that Civilization will take note of the combat and how your Civilization changes over time.
I always found it weird that your leader never changes over a few thousand years.
And I think that is much more important than to be some gerne defining monolith. We already have that, it's Civilization. I want competition to keep the games fresh. If you can just pump out the same game with minor stat updates, you're basically just an EA sports title and who wants to be that?
I have both, but in this lull before the release of Starfield, it's CIV6 that made eyes at me.
That paradox reference is so accurate. Just thinking of the most recent lamplighters league
I haven't played all too much of Civ 5 and even less of Civ 6, but when I played Humankind I realized it was more my type of 4X game. I am a very casual player when it comes to this genre, so things like how the territory works in Humankind is more appealing to me, how you can choose a new culture each era, and itsdifferent approach to battles, all these are features that I didn't know I was wanting for until I played Humankind.
On the topic of the console release, it was being handled by Aspyr, not by themselves. Aspyr has been fumbling with a lot recently so I am almost entirely convinced that the indefinite delay on the console port was all on Aspyr. For example, the recent Star Wars KOTOR remake and KOTOR 2 update have been cancelled or delayed or switched to different studios, additionally the console ports of Civ 6 have been practically abandoned. The leader pass did not come to console for whatever reason, something that would be in the hands of Aspyr and not Firaxis.
is this worth it or skip it n
I think one of the greatest problems with Humankind which has probably plagued it for a lot of people is it’s lack of polish in very particular areas, balance being the most significant. The game’s infrastructures vary wildly in utility from some being crucial to others being completely irrelevant at all times. Many of the cultures are comparatively broken, same for many of the tenants. Food is also borderline irrelevant if you optimize the game because of the baffling decision to not limit district construction by your pop count like Civ 6 or even Endless Legend did. And these balance issues being here since day one means anyone who gets good at the game is forced to play with mods if they want a balanced experience, which Civ 6 didn’t force on its player base. And while the devs have been very open about some things, we’ve had no significant game-wide changes to most of the worst balance issues.
I enjoyed this game for what it was, and I still love the look and feel of it, UI design is fine but I reallly love the presentation and art design. I'd happily buy another expansion.
does the game still break apart after 400 turns, making it unimpossible to end a run? i played it once, after 3 atomic bombs, even the sound shattered, the map started to disapear and than the game crashed. havent touched the game eversince, is it still an issue?
I really wanted to like Humankind, but it never clicked with me. I guess I have drifted closer and closer to Paradox and grand strategy, over plain strategy. I love the art of the game, but found the interface unpleasant and the jarring switching between essentially random cultures (French today, Japanese tomorrow) to be really arbitrary and strange. Whatever others may think of it as a design choice, it just doesn't work for me. Compare it to CK3, where your culture evolves in a way that completely makes sense to the story of your game - hybridizing, diverging, adapting to changing conditions. For me, Humankind can't even compete with the either the strategic or storytelling power of that system.
I didn't like the idea of every era having to pick a new culture. I know you don't have to but it is a big nerf if you don't. i couldn't get into radical culture changes it kept me from enjoying the game for myself. I would argue that seeing how the player drop was so great that other players don't like this principle feature.
humankind is when you want to play civ but you actually want to care about 4x mechanic and actually nation building instead of playing it like a board game. the diplomacy system is fantastic. war is great. strategy also really good on how the tiles and defense work. it actually feels like you play a real turn based 4x instead of settler of catan and call it 4x. yet it can be a bit bloated with mechanic and it took me 3 games to finally understand the basic concept of territory and how playing tall isnt just build a city and forget it. but you actually have no manage your border and build outpost to supply your keep growing starving tall city. as opposed to civ tall game where you just sit and do nothing. both is really great game for different kind of people. 1 for more casual board gamish feel like, while other actually a real 4x turn based
For me it died almost on arrival because it launched with a lot of bugs and severe balance issues, but also because the first DLC (culture pack) came superfast, before any much needed fixes. Made it clear that their self proclaimed "magnum opus" is mostly there to make money...
I do hope Dungeon of the Endless will be better and less greedy
It actually did a slow kill on Civ... by influencing Civ7 in the wrongest direction possible.
I preordered Humankind because I was so excited for a new historical 4x game! I remember being eager to customize my own leader and get into some AI games to learn the gameplay. I was confused, however, when I was not prompted to pick my civilization when starting a new game.. And I was then dismayed when I learned that every civilization is competing for what are essentially civilization archetypes that change every few eras into progressively more modern civilizations. While I'm sure others may think this gameplay choice is a fun new layer of strategy, it actually made me stop playing completely within the first week of launch. In Civ I can pick one of my top favorite civilizations before a game even begins and I don't have to worry about playing something I dislike. If I want to play as Germany I can pick that and it's secure. In Humankind, through no fault of my own, I could very well be locked out of playing what I want to play just because someone else got there first like founding a religion in Civ 6.
To this day I have Civ 6 and all its content on PC and on the Switch. I'm happy with my choice and I'm not looking back at Humankind any time soon.
The thing that lets civilization 6 down immensely is how weak the AI is at war.
The AI never poseS any real military threat and the best they can do is slow down the players destruction of their nation in a war.
While in Civilization 4 other nations always posed a real military threat to the very existence of the players civilization.
I have played many hours of both games however i love the flexibility of the culture system in Humandkind and the combat is also more engaging that in Civ 6 and Civ 5, but i still feel like something is lacking when i play it, cant put my finger on it.
Game reverted my main save from 561 turns to 112 turns
It truly doesn't feel like the game got significantly better after these 2 years (it's even crazy to think that it's been 2 years already), and their first expansion pack wasn't even that big if you compare to Rise and Fall, which is a bummer. I don't want it to be a replacement for Civ 6 but it just still feels bland.
I really like humankind, I can't compare it to Civ6 myself, as I haven't played it. But I can compare it to the other games From Aptitude.
I've played Humankind for about 379 hours, Endless legends for 862 and space 861 (didn't realise it was so close).
Humankind has the best combat I'd say of the three, moving your units and positioning matters alot, and I really like that. Although two things I don't like is the dig in mechanic, and the fact attacking first gives such a huge advance. It makes sense, although comparing to Legends where it's stat base which I like that aspect there more.
I wish Humankind has something like quests, the other endless games were big on quests, which made things interesting and changed how you followed the game and the events on the way.
I could go even more indepth about all the differences and what I like and don't like but it'd be abit much.
Overall I think Humankind is great, on launch a lot of balance issues, and even now. Industry is wayy to strong still, the AI needs work, the only reason they're difficult is due to the extreme bonus they're given. Comparing it to the other games they've made, it's missing some things i preffered in the others like quests as I said before, the indepth mechanics that were in space, customising your classes stats which mixed up how I played the otheer games etc.
I think It's the weakest out of the Between Space and Legends, I'd say Space II is still they're best work. I know it's difficult due to this game being historical, but if that's the case for me maybe I prefer the fantasy or scifi approach more. They can get more creative.
I highly recommend playing with the VIP modpack, which is the de-facto standard for many players.
I don't remember the last time I picked a Builder culture, it is very viable to play without focusing on production, as it makes Infrastructures much more useful, including those that give Production based on the workers population, terrain types, etc.
Also, in most battles I order my frontline units to defend instead of attacking first, as that gives them a very strong Combat Strength bonus and allows you to defeat stronger armies by better tactics and positioning.
You forgot to mention most important thing for popularity: HUMANKIND is in its FIRST installment, whil CIV had 5 GAMES OF PR AND MARKETING ahead of it.
the sad part is civ 6 isn’t updated on ps5. this is. and so is age of wonders 4. so they won.
I bought this in the beta. I loved endless legend and was really looking forward to Humankind. After a couple of games at release I was bored. It was a very lackluster game. I've not been motived to try it again since.
I think the better 4x historical game like Civ is Old world. Highly recommend it to anyone looking for something similar to civ, but with some changes.
I liked Humankind in how they had the random historical events that would happen, and your choices would have random outcomes later in the game.
Kept it more interesting that way.
I also love the Combat and how it breaks down a battle, and you choice where you deploy units. If you have Naval Units close by you can bring them in as reinforcements and use them as Artillery against land units, not against other naval units. It can add a lot more engagement to battles.
I was playing last night an one battle over one contested island lasted a good 30 minutes.
Two years already? I enjoy the game and I hope it gets more support in the years to come with many more expansions. It has the bones of a good historical 4X but I like how customizable it is compared to Civilization.
My fav civ killer was call to power,shame it never happened
0:10 Civil-Hization?!
the biggest thing for me is the graphics on HK. So well done.
Humankind for me is a game of unfulfilled expectations. I played the beta and even preordered (something I never do) but barely played it after launch compared to Civ. I like the combat and cultures system, but everything else seemed so surface level and unfinished. Every balance change seemed to take fun out of the game for me, and they released paid DLC before fixing major bugs. Maybe I'll come back to it down the road but it needs a lot of dev work
I had looked forward to this, but it never came out for Xbox did it?
Ara and Old World are the only 4X Games I play belongside Civ6. The Genre is getting better and better!
I could never really get behind the idea that your civ's identity changes so radically through the ages. For a game that tries to be a "realistic" version of civ, the part where you go from Huns to Rome to Japan to France to Sweden, to USA just seems hard to swallow. I could never remember who any of my rival civs were either cause they were constantly changing.
I mean I know there is a "problem" with Civ having USA and Netherlands at 4000 BC but they didn't have to go a completely stupid opposite extreme to fix that. Maybe if there were like 3 identities per civ throughout a full playthrough - with only some of the identities being compatible for a transition (not Khmer -> France for example) - I could respect it, but not this.
I'm still waiting to be able to make more than one AI personality and play in games with personalities I have made.
But the devs refuse to make a feature that would massively improve the game, easily.
I agree. I wish we could play as our avatar! It would be so easy to implement.
@@nathanwallis9936 Also, as you would be able to make more, you could add a lot more variety to games through adding more AI to the random AI pool.
@@tenacity25 I agree. It would be cool to create Ghengis Khan, for example, and go against him. For now I'm stuck playing against @JumboPixel who never allies with me no matter what I do :-)
@@nathanwallis9936 I'm stuck playing against content creators or default characters, when I'd love to play against my own AI to see how it plays and make it more like myself than it may currently be, I'd like to play against avatars of my friends - whom don't play the game, and/or dont want to post their avatar on the publicly accessible website - or play against some historical leaders like gandhi, genghis khan, among others. Or heck, maybe even make some fictional characters too.
Nothing against the content creators or default characters, I'm glad they're here, I just want MORE options.
Really didnt like the customizable leaders in Humankind. Having specific countries with leaders who are iconic is way better
4:03 Considering the amount of people playing mw2 and GTAO in 2023... Player count doesn't mean much...
Has Humankind dropped an update or DLC recently?
Well Civ 6 did just add like six new leaders or variant leaders for certain civs. I play console and when I heard Humankind would be coming to console I was excited. Yet was only let down when their release date got pushed back indefinitely. It still has a page on the Xbox but there is no release date.
It was just released if you didn’t already know.
For me the issue was one that you never mentioned, but one that just makes me fundamentally never going to be interested in the game: the civilization advancement design philosophy of the game, where you jump from sumerians to mayans to the japanese or whatever. I get what they were going for, and I've heard explanations that make it make more sense. But for me it's just too all over the place, I really wish they at least made it so that civs evolved on the same continent or region. Otherwise I can't feel any connection to the civ I'm playing as because it's just a nonsensical hybrid soup of astoundingly different cultures. In Civ when you play as the same civ for their entire history, you really feel like you are leading the destiny of an entire group of people, I didn't have that feeling with Humankind. The gameplay and graphics were perfectly fine but I played maybe 4 hours on game pass before moving on.
Nice retrospective thanks
I'm part of the waterslide Down. I bought it on release and hoped. I've played CIV since 1 well-over 30 years ago. While H/K is impressive, I just found it TOO complicated. Maybe just getting old but this game was more work than enjoyment. I wish someone would make a 'new' Humankind that is just easier to play, smoother, not quite as many decision points, and I bet more people WOULD play it.
It took me years to learn how to play civilization and I still learn new shit everyday lol jumping into Humankind was like jumping into a mandarin language class.
Same with Total War. I seem to have no attention span to learn through the tutorials lmao
I tried to play Humankind but for some reason my computer couldn’t handle it or some glitch made it unplayable, I might try it again soon but it sucks that it never went past that
In the end, oldworld was the real civkiller in terms of mechanichs.
For some reason today it randomly launched on console lol
Is Civ 6 still bugged and crashes after 100 turns?
I really liked the mechanics. Hated the Dev's bias in balancing. 2/3 of each era's Civ choices were complete garbage. Certain Civ's the Frenchies didn't like did almost nothing. 1-2 civs each era were completely busted. In a few playthroughs I found that I played the exact same every time.
The game didn't wow me in my initial time with it and eventually got forgotten. I play Civ in waves where I'll put in a hundred hours then not play again for two years. Humankind just didn't give me that impact of - hey let me play this instead of Civ when I next get the itch. Thank you for the video because for better or worse it just reinforces that opinion for now.
For me what kept me from playing were the bugs. The game got into a pretty good state before the Diplomacy expansion, then it was buggy again, but after the latest patch its been much better. Otherwise, I think this game has more strategic depth and tactical immersion than Civ, plus the AI can put up a fight even into the late game, so it makes for a better single player experieince in my opinion.
Can you play with a controller?
Humankind needs a BIG DLC. Something that adds new game modes like catastrophy or rotating famine that would change the way you play. The game at it's base is way better than Civ6 for me - especially combat.
The early game yes. But late game in Humankind was really weak. The cities were so big with all the districts that everything was a siege battle. ICBMs had a really short range, AI was just annoying to deal with as it loved you and then hated you overnight.
@@jeffreyschnedar8020 yes the late game could use some love. But it's not perfect in Civ6 either (usually just skipping turns to win)
I'm not a huge fan of Humankind, but the one thing it will always have over Civ 6 is that war never feels like a chore. In Civ 6 it feels like once you get to the gunpowder era, war is never worth it since cities are too durable.
For me, Humankind is a fresh air in the genre. I'm liking it more than Civ 6 :X
It was a huge bummer they didnt ever give us an earth map. But look at what civ 7 is... a ciopy of Humankind, that will actually work on console.