The occasionally thrilling Beyond Earth can't quite get beyond Civilization V

6. every time Tom Chick uses the word "tedium" in his review. :D

Started a new company, apparently working on a prehistoric 4x.

http://www.secretnewco.com/

Thanks for the thorough and well written review.

The game is getting a lot of negative comments about the UI - icons too small, no contrast, hard to see things (like miasma) on tiles. For now I'm saving my money and sticking with Civ V.

I think it likely BE will see only minor improvements with Firaxis turning its resources to Civ VI.

Gosh! Right you are!

The problem with one-unit-per-tile isn't the system; it's that the AI doesn't understand it which really invalidates the single player experience.

When I first heard about the new system, during the civ5 pre-release hype, I was excited for the change because I agree - stacks of doom are bullshit. However their solution is even worse because it leaves us with an AI that can't play the war game.

That's not really some subjective opinion on the system, so I don't think you can put reviewers into camps and use that to color your interpretation of their review.

Except that I think the one-unit-per-tile system is a huge improvement. In Civ IV I consistently got my ass handed to me while playing. Stacks would prioritize whatever unit was the best against the attacker, so good army composition meant having a bit of everything with an emphasis on whatever countered the enemy's favored unit, and either way you needed to have a significant numerical advantage. I could never balance that with my preferred playstyle--I'm a builder--and still win the game. Civ V and Beyond Earth might not have the most aggressive or smartest AI (although frankly I've yet to play a game where the tactical AI was especially brilliant) but they are very much AIs that can be dealt with by those of us who don't have the capacity and/or inclination to pick up on their relatively brain-dead routines.

Thanks for this Tom. Always a comfort to find I am not the only one who gets bored with games that have been declared by the internet to be factually good.

You see it as a huge improvement because it's created braindead AI that is easy to defeat? That's silly.

I think what's most disappointing is that people are reading only this review and think it's fair. It's not. It's clear the reviewer didn't spend that much time with the game and didn't know what the hell they were doing. Every decision you make matters. Just because the reviewer couldn't wrap their head around the consequences of their decisions doesn't mean there were none.

Terrible, terrible review. Go check out the metacritic for this game and you'll see this is the ONLY bad review. That's not a coincidence.

I don't find it easy to defeat, I find it possible to defeat. I forfeited many a game of Civ IV early on because I bungled the unit-to-anything-else ratio. I've lost games of Civ V, but I've never felt like I was steamrolled or unable to respond to the military angle. Stacks of doom aren't something that only the player has access to.

I'm not saying you're wrong for disliking it. I'm just saying that I think this is one point where a review's worth to the reader can turn on a single mechanic.

Other than that I would give it 3.5 stars due to the sheer fun-factor, I could have written this review. I didn't get into much combat on my 5 playthroughs I've done over this past weekend. As he says, the AI is pretty passive. Had 1 civ do a backstab war declaration on me and then send her troops in 1 at a time to my grinder, then sue for peace and give me the city I was about to attack in my counter-push to sweeten the deal. And I've started some wars myself so I could get a domination victory in there, but mostly it's been combat free other than occasional alien attacks.

For all that they say "5 different victory type" there are really only 2 -- either military domination, or "build a wonder an wait" for the other 4. 2 of the affinities requires some minimal interaction after you build the wonder, but the final affinity and the "contact" victory both are quite literally "build the wonder and wait for 20 turns."

The tech web really isn't a web either, it's just laid out to look like one. It's really just 4 linear trees arranged outward from the center, rather than left-to-right like in Civ5.

Still and all..... that 1.... more..... turn.... addiction is in full force with it, so I must be having fun.

First part of your wish appears to have been granted..
http://www.polygon.com/2014/10...
Second part... well.

Many reviewers seems to disagree with you the game is getting many 8 out of 10 scores

Wait for more expansions and patches

When it comes to Favors it seems they are mainly meant for countering enemy spy activity, settling cities close to yours etc. Like when I caught and killed a spy in one of my cities for the 2nd time, I told the leader not to spy on me anymore, which he refused to follow, at that point I could counter-counter demand him using previously earned favors, in which he accepted and agreed not to spy on me anymore. BUT I have no idea if it really worked in practice.

Oh yeah everyone thinks Beyond Earth is the the best thing since slice bread. Which is why the game's user score is at a healthy 5.9.

Terrible review

Looks like a lot of the user reviews on metacritic are hitting the same issues raised in Tom's review. I think I will wait for a price drop and some more content.

Cannot complete with Alpha Centauri? When was that, 1998? What is going on? This was an application lauded by Intel for multi thread processing (but maybe only in the graphics, I'm not sure)

As a civ gamer from CIV 1 (like you), I sure hope the civ concept doesn't die.
My first play on this version confirms my Civ 5 experience ....that the series continues to diverge from its (admittedly loose) board game roots.
Hence the xx% bonuses, which I don't absorb well as a board gamer.