Well, Dagda and I are mostly griping about Multiplayer (which suffers from technical and stability issues so much so we can't get past the first turn). As for SP, BE works well enough, but beside Civ V it just looks like a half-finished mod. You can see the Chart here for BE: http://steamcharts.com/app/65980#All It peaked at roughly the same amount as Civ V (90k). But is now at about 4k. Meanwhile, Civ V has never dropped below 30k, and hasn't dropped below 45k or so since BNW. For a game with Sid Meier's name on it, and all the hype they put in suggesting it was a major release, I think 4k would be considered a small playerbase. Last I heard, Hearthstone has 200k concurrency, so it is kind of in a different ballpark altogether from anything outside of games like Crossfire, WOT, and League of Legends/DOTA 2.
I think the point stands though. because of the sid meier name BE will have a core following that will increase rather than decrease. BE isn't CiV6 from what ive read. its BE1. What will BE5 look like? Having the CiV series to compare it to leads me to optimism. but I can completely understand the negative review multiplayers are giving it. also respect to anyone who has the patience for 4x multiplayer. yikes.
Well, my point is the name got them an initial surge to the tune of Civ V (which, even when it was "bad" still managed to clip along at 30k concurrent), while the name hasn't carried BE much in comparison. It's a tough call now on them whether they want to spend the money to expand on BE.
well there has already been a patch and DLC. plus some vague references to a future tie in with Starships so it feels from my perspective that there is a long term potential there. but again, not enough to buy in at their current asking price.
I played it over the free weekend. I found the single player even more impenetrable than a typical Civ game. And I really just want Alpha Centauri 2, which BE is not. I'm holding out hope that they'll port Age of Wonders 3 to Mac (they claim it's in the works). I've also tried Endless Legends, which is okay except for the dreadful combat.
Combat in 4X is generally dreadful IMO, mostly because you are basically trying to cram a tactical game into an economy game. I actually liked Endless Legend's combat largely because of the ability to auto it so that it was more about who actually had a superior force rather than who manipulated the combat engine correctly. Again tho, MP perspective, and I do think the Civ style combat works for SP.
I do prefer to auto the battles in EL, but some of the neutral enemies require that you manually fight them in order to prevent inordinate, unacceptable losses. Demons, for one.
I really enjoyed Beyond Earth but only played one game all the way through. Doesn't seem to have the replayability Civ V has.
endless space looks pretty but im not sure im a fan of the combat system. are you guys old enough to remember the board game Broadsides and Boarding Parties? Anyway that used card based combat but it was a lttle more in depth. ES combats all seem to require the choice of 3 cards and that's it. most of the utubes iv seen just auto the combat. that's kind of a shame.
Combat is auto regardless of whether you auto in Endless Space. The only difference is you get to choose cards in reaction, rather than before. Combat is largely based on fleet compositions, tho the correct card at the right time can turn a close battle. It was expanded post launch to give you a bit more control as well, tho it is still largely about whose empire is better (assuming there isn't a huge "skill" discrepancy in ship building). It's actually the type of system I prefer in 4X, because what I care about is empire building, not a half-assed tactical game crammed into a 4X game.
id like to see each x in 4x. auto combat reminds me of those browser based empire games where you don't even see units and combat is simply a report sheet you get after you've sent an attack. bleh. the current system wouldn't bother me (the card system) if the battles required just a few more choices to make.
i like eu4's combat a lot, actually, but it's still difficult to reconcile it with multiplayer. either you run it at absurdly slow speed (which, since it's multiplayer, you're not too far off of annyhow) or you try to let everyone pause when they want to- neither of which are really good options
