>>1756240
I've only ever seen videos and that ui is so fucking hideous whatever slimy subclan of parajews designed it should be publicly hanged

>>1756240
Wait, it even came out? I was sure they've simply cancel it during dev.

>>1756240
There was a thread that just died from lack of posts today that you could have posted in. If you didn't have anything to say over the last week of its life, why bother to shitpost now?

>>1756340
Not op, but that's kind of the point of the thead
>Game gets hyped for half a year
>Eventually has a release
>Nobody even notices
>The handful of people that does notice find it terrible

>>1756340
>Implying the OP of that thread isn't the OP of this thread and is just trying to bait engagement through negativity

>>1756367
I am forgotten... until schizos bring it up again.
>>1756345
Honestly, a lot people say this was hyped, but was it? I go search for Paradox sometimes, but I genuinely don't remember this shit being advertised. In fact only heard about it in this place.

>>1756371
>but I genuinely don't remember this shit being advertised
That's just your dementia. The main problem this had was right at the announcement. It had a huge marketing campaign and build up from paradox where each of paradox's studios would publish a tweet about it and some cryptic image and everyone was discussion what it could possibly be. Eventually it got leaked that it was a civ competitor and that made people more hyped. Then it got announced and everyone had a very negative reaction because it's a very very low budget and very ugly indie title that Paradox picked up and tried to market as a big title. The game itself is fine and has some great ideas, but that negative initial reaction has stopped so many people trying it so it's dead in the water.

>>1756376
>tweet
Okay I don't go there as much, but it was literally just a half-a-year before release? Devs must of been rushed.

>>1756381
It's not that it was a rush I don't think, but possible. I think it's more a game PDX picked up while the devs were late in development. Happens all the time with publishers. See something promising, throw a bit of money their way and publish the game with the hope that it makes a great return.

>>1756384
Yeah, that's why the hype actually died, people saw it wasn't a new game but a game that was known to be in development already when people thought it was going to be a brand new game.

>>1756240
I feel this could've been a good game if it had like six to twelve months more in development. Their "roadmap" promises future updates for features that every respectable 4x game should have on release. The core gameplay is solid, the "ages" are an interesting concept at least, and it manages to strike a good balance between classic Civ-style 4X gameplay and new/unique features. It just misses too many points for basic shit.

>>1756457
I think it's just a shame that they saw how identityless nations worked for Humankind and still went ahead with it. It really did need a cash injection and another year to give it some personality.

>>1756240
game is decent but i already explored and replayed it multiple times and there's really no point to do it again until more content being released

>>1756457
>every respectable 4x game
was dogshit upon release and is only well remembered like two expansions later.

>>1756748
People used to actually make complete games. You don't know this because you weren't born yet at the time, but it's true.

>>1756751
No, people used to accept broken games as complete because it was more of a pain to get patches.

File: 1309675085400.png (244 KB, 342x334)

244 KB PNG

>https://www.reddit.com/r/millennia/comments/1bvjjrk/what_is_the_true_ending_and_how_to_achieve_it/

>>1756240
Next time, think more about the art style and maybe put some effort into it. Who TF wants to play mobile game looking ass game on a PC? The art style is everything

>>1756240
I'll play it again when an expansion or 2 come out

>>1760549
>muh artstyle
please nigga

>>1756376
>The game itself is fine
It really isn't. The balance is non-existing, the gameplay loop is a joke and it's so hyper-aggressive, it makes even regular PDX stuff look like peaceful building games.
And then there is the quality of the AI and the performance of the game written in spaghetti, as if any of the issues weren't bad enough

>>1756748
>>1756787
>t. zoomershit that started with Civ 5

>>1760513
Holy reddit tier writing

>>1761314
>Reddit post
>In reddit writing
Shocking!

>>1761557
He might just mean that whole hidden plotline within a 4x game told through mysterious notes thing's writing.

File: image5.png (75 KB, 1678x933)

75 KB PNG

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/update-3-public-beta.1680372/
next update on monday

>>1760738
Yes, in order to immerse yourself in the game it absolutely MUST look good

>>1756345
I stole it on release.
It certainly was more fun than Civ6 and even vanilla V.
But absolutely not worth the release price because
>graphics are just too shit compared to TBS from 15 years ago
>for the amount of copying done from Call to Power, they cut the most important part - wonders and their absolute best cinematics.

>>1765558
same... Game is a good alternative to the tired civ games but the price is too steep and they already have dlcs planned.

>cool feature to go into alternate ages if you're ahead
>but you have to go back to a normal one afterwards
if anything you should have been able to push things even further off the rails, I understand that's not realistic for budget reasons but they still shouldn't have shot the appeal in the foot by forcing you back to normality

>>1765683
yeah i really hate this. I avoid age of alchemy just to avoid the awful age of revolution random spam of revolutionaries.

>>1765558
>The only thing zoomer can focus on is muh graphics and muh presentation
>While being chickenshit about pirating
Said all that, the game is bad - due to how bad its actual mechanics are (rather than cool ideas behind them), how bugged it is and how it's effectively an indie dev Civ-clone with fitting level of competence and budget put into making it, except it got picked by PDX and hyped into a Civ killer in a campaign that cost more than making the game

>>1766342
doesn't help they wanted to make a spiritual sucessor to call to powers and zoomers have no idea wtf it is... God, i miss the OG call to power. Janky as fuck but so fresh

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/6487s8SdWqk
they are now advertising with tiktok songs

>>1756340
Thread originality police are more annoying, go bump all the threads in page 10 if you are that worried about them

This game made a death satellite boring.

>>1756240
They really undercut it's development, fucking Paradox wanting the cookies before they were done baking.

>>1771583
As long as they support it to completion, it'll be fine

>>1777102
>PDX
>completion
>supporting financial bombs
Pick one

>>1777804
I pick the last one then. I'm sick of people pretending 4x games were ever good on release and not after expansions and community patches.

>>1761557
Read the game materials screenshotted. They're atrocious. As is the game in general.

File: Sad man with cats.png (450 KB, 600x1084)

450 KB PNG

I was hoping this game would be good. Yes, I even know Paradox are kinda shit. I still hoped it'd be fun because the concept with the timelines sounded fun. Sad to hear it blew up.

>>1781207
Don't form opinions based solely on other people's opinions.

>>1781374
if you only believe your own eyes you end up with a very small and very surprising world

Already 4 updates in https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/millennia-update-4.1687595/
Is it good yet?

>>1784301
Not yet. The AI is still a major miss but its at least getting the shit it should've had at launch.

Man, the reviews for this game are still full of drooling retards. This game has issues but the ones they bring up are skill issues or failure to even play the game and spouting untruths.

I pissed away a lot of time a few months ago watching OneProudBavarian play the game and i thought i liked what i saw, at least a little.
He played Aztecs but spammed raiders in an aggressive momentum type build where he just razed everyone with self-reinforcing or self-reproducing raiders or some shit
It kind of irked me how meh the combat graphics were and how the raiders just looked like generic vikings and weren't adjusted to look like aztecs but i thought much of the roughness in the gameplay and graphics would have been adjusted past launch

>>1781207
it's a very decent game. I played a lot the first months but now i kinda burned. If you played the old "call to power" series you will like this one.

>>1785796
oh dude they nerfed raiders so much... Early builds you could go full world domination before medieval era ended.

the combat is extremely ugly why did they bother to put that in

>>1785796
Entertainers like OneProudBavarian are carefully selected by developers for their talent at making games seem more fun/interesting than they are.

>>1786010
>If you played series infamous for it's clunkiness, you are going to endure the twice as obtuse modern attempt at that format
Or you could just play a decent game for a change. There are Civs 2-4 (and 5 if you're below 30), there is SMAC, there is MoM and MoO2... Hell, there is even the AoW series, even if they are vastly different from typical 4X

>>1786657
>filtered

>>1756240
I was expecting another reddit take on religion like Humankind did but it seems they just gave up and didn't implement that mechanic at all.
Might as well play civ3 again.

>>1789723
What did humankind do with religion?

I think religion here has enough of an effect, giving you culture and sometimes arts and causing unrest, but I also think religious need should be removed and religions completely be in the arts category of things. I wish they'd like let you do different kinds of things, like have a religion that has a bunch of shrines around instead of big temples. Some of the age of heroes things let you do similar and give art so you can spam religious effects but you should be able to support your religion entirely on festivals and not need to make 10,000,000 bibles/sec to keep up.

>>1789734
you can completely ignore religion, i do it, because i don't feel like using paper for religious text.

aether should make mechs real.

I am amazed at how I still haven't had a single urge to play this again after enjoying it as much as I did on release.

>>1756371
Anon, you should always ignore what /v/tards say when it comes to
>Hype
>Shilling
>Numbers sold
>Woke/political
>Good/bad
There's no value in the ramblings of anonymous posters when it comes to emotional topics unless those are well expressed and substantiated somehow.

>>1794796
yeah i spent a lot of time playing it during the demo and release. It was cool but need a some really good dlcs

>>1796121
>>1796123
you were doing this in /co/ the other day, what's the matter with you?

I've tried the game for like 5 hours and my impression is that it needed at least another full year of development, maybe even more.
On a surface level, the UI sucks, the optimization is terrible, it's super unpolished, there are almost zero settings. You can't even choose where you put your first city despite city expansion taking forever. The AI is depressingly bad.

I'm also not really sold on the underlying mechanics, but I suppose I haven't played the game for long enough to be able to form a good opinion on it. The game feels very arcadey but maybe there's some merit to the mana systems.
The city building seems unbalanced and I don't understand their philosophy behind how improvements work. I got the impression that an optimized settlement (requiring both player experience and lucky resource / tile arrangements) would have yields like 3-5x as high as a settlement with randomly placed improvements. In Civ games that gap is much smaller and for good reason I think.
Overall it feels like an alpha for a game that could be good one day, but I highly doubt that it will ever happen now. It's much harder to finish a game once it's already been released.

In its current state I just did not find the game particularly captivating. It has a weird kind of complexity that feels more like tedium and memorization than strategy. I would rather play literally any other 4X game in existence. Honestly, the original call to power games would probably make for a better time.

>>1756292
You know they legit make degrees for UI design and it's the kind of thing you would assume is a scam until you play a PDX game and see how bad shit gets.
PDX is so cheap they won't spring to hire one of those dudes once and have him fix their UI.
>>1798624
>You can't even choose where you put your first city despite city expansion taking forever.
Isn't this pretty common to the genre and people can reroll until they get the start they like? I think there's often even a button for it.

>>1798625
You usually start with a settler and a combat unit so you can do a bit of exploration and then choose where to settle. That's the case in every Civ game and most other 4X games.

>>1798626
Except every space based one

>>1798624
>The game feels very arcadey
It encourages you to put in more money when you're losing and to go for a high score?

>>1799378
Yeah but in space 4X you don't have that many choices for where exactly you settle. With non-space 4X you have like 20-30 different tiles that are reachable within a single turn. In Millennia it really matters on which exact tile you put the city because there's super strong adjacency bonuses for a district thing which you can only place within your (1 radius) city borders or adjacent to it.

>>1799379
The game extensively uses this system where you have global resource pools of different categories and then you can click a button to spend these resources to instantly gain something.
Some examples:
>there are no workers, instead there is a global "improvement points" pool which you can spend to instantly put an improvement anywhere
>you don't build settlers, instead you can use a "government XP" ability to spawn one
>"warfare XP" which you can spend to instantly heal an army or spawn a new unit in any city of your choice
You get the idea. Obviously Civ and similar games are not realistic simulations either, but their systems are a lot less abstract.

Anyway, I don't have anything against these systems, although they seem quite unbalanced numerically. They definitely set the game apart from other entries in the genre.

I dunno if it's Civ-likes or just this game, but it's not interesting on a turn to turn basis. It doesn't feel like I can mash 10 turns without paying attention but it also doesn't feel like I'm doing anything significant each turn. I don't typically get this feeling in space or fantasy 4x.

The devs really think not being able to get key techs like steel smelting because you entered an alternative age is a good mechanic.

>>1805647
The only one I can think of that misses steel is Age of the old ones.