Why is this not Endless Legend 2?

[constantinople]

Can someone explain that to me?
Why make this utterly boring middle ground thing instead sitting between EL and Civ, fulfilling no demand whatsoever, copying a theme that was already worn out after Civ 4?
They have the AMAZING Endless IP right there and all the neat gameplay intricacies in Humankind wouldve fit it perfectly - and they make this instead..?

[Oaks]

I'll take historical over EL any day, but perhaps that's just me.

[constantinople]

Originally posted by Oaks:

I'll take historical over EL any day, but perhaps that's just me.

No, I understand, theres no point in discussing which of the two settings one prefers - I just dont understand why Amplitude chose the one that Civ has the market cornered on. Instead of the original IP they own themselves, which offers something different. Do they really just gamble on enough Civ fans being like, "sure, why not"?

[rabureta]

What baffles me is that instead of applying the strengths of the Endless series to the historical setting, Amplitude instead threw them out to make a less polished Civ.

Unit customization? Nope, your units are exactly the same as everybody else's, regardless of the amount or quality of resources you put into them.
Unique empires? Nope, just a schizophrenic mess that develops more or less the same way every match.
Storytelling? Not a quest in sight.
Meaningful choices? Here are two civic options with one line of flavor dialogue.

It's bizarre. Imagine getting to a new era and being given a rundown on how your culture evolved or fragmented and giving you the choice of which successor culture you wanted, instead of just "new era, pick whatever has the best stats lol," and now remember that what you get is the latter.

[The Former]

Originally posted by constantinople:

Can someone explain that to me?
Why make this utterly boring middle ground thing instead sitting between EL and Civ, fulfilling no demand whatsoever, copying a theme that was already worn out after Civ 4?
They have the AMAZING Endless IP right there and all the neat gameplay intricacies in Humankind wouldve fit it perfectly - and they make this instead..?

Because it's neither boring nor middle ground (it implements features neither game have, some of them central to the game's mechanics), and it has fulfilled the demand of at least 42,027 players who are playing the game at this very moment, contrasted to the 10,468 people who gave Endless Legend its peak numbers six years ago.

Although the short answer is, "Because this was the game they wanted to make."

[The Former]

Originally posted by rabureta:

Storytelling? Not a quest in sight.
Meaningful choices? Here are two civic options with one line of flavor dialogue..

Ignoring events as a mechanic. Nice.

[AdahnGorion]

Originally posted by constantinople:

Can someone explain that to me?
Why make this utterly boring middle ground thing instead sitting between EL and Civ, fulfilling no demand whatsoever, copying a theme that was already worn out after Civ 4?
They have the AMAZING Endless IP right there and all the neat gameplay intricacies in Humankind wouldve fit it perfectly - and they make this instead..?

Because this caters more to the avarage joe/judy segment and that audience is a lot larger, than the segment that wants to play EL2. So it makes good sense "economically" from their point of view

[constantinople]

Originally posted by Darkie:

Because this caters more to the avarage joe/judy segment and that audience is a lot larger, than the segment that wants to play EL2. So it makes good sense "economically" from their point of view

I guess..? The I suppose I just dont understand why people would buy this when they can play Civ 5. Guess it being shiny and slightly different is enough for them... I dunno, I just find it striking how uninspired this whole thing seems when EL was so unique and innovative. they tried ♥♥♥♥ in that game and experimented and did stuff differently. This one feels so much more pedestrian in every respect.

[AdahnGorion]

Originally posted by constantinople:

Originally posted by Darkie:

Because this caters more to the avarage joe/judy segment and that audience is a lot larger, than the segment that wants to play EL2. So it makes good sense "economically" from their point of view

I guess..? The I suppose I just dont understand why people would buy this when they can play Civ 5. Guess it being shiny and slightly different is enough for them... I dunno, I just find it striking how uninspired this whole thing seems when EL was so unique and innovative. they tried ♥♥♥♥ in that game and experimented and did stuff differently. This one feels so much more pedestrian in every respect.

Because it is new and shiny. It also caters to people that wanna play shift mechanics and just do silly stuff.. All in all, for what this is, it is a good game. It is just not for you.

[Spacesuit Spiff]

As fans of the genre, the devs may just have wanted to wake Firaxis up from its complacency. Maybe even be the "Civ Killer", which is honestly still on the table if the DLCs go well. I'd be down for that, if Firaxis gets dethroned that easily then they deserve to.

[AdahnGorion]

Originally posted by Ravoria:

As fans of the genre, the devs may just have wanted to wake Firaxis up from its complacency. Maybe even be the "Civ Killer", which is honestly still on the table if the DLCs go well. I'd be down for that, if Firaxis gets dethroned that easily then they deserve to.

Tbh there is no such thing as "dethrone" the big games in this genre have avarage joe/judy as the target audience and they are not loyal, they will pick the most hyped and the new shiny thing, everytime.. That is how it usually goes. The smaller games in the genre and even those that "take it into a sub genre" often have more loyal fans, but with a smaller target audience.

All in all.. competition is good however, but if the competition still focus on something I ie don´t care about, then it makes no reason for me to care much about it either way.. but it would be good for Avarage Joe and Judy tbh.

[Razorblade]

Originally posted by constantinople:

Originally posted by Oaks:

I'll take historical over EL any day, but perhaps that's just me.

No, I understand, theres no point in discussing which of the two settings one prefers - I just dont understand why Amplitude chose the one that Civ has the market cornered on. Instead of the original IP they own themselves, which offers something different. Do they really just gamble on enough Civ fans being like, "sure, why not"?

Civ only has the market cornered because no one else has tried to compete before now. With as contentious as new Civ games can be with their vast mechanical changes every entry, many Civ fans were rearing to defect to something new. Don't be mistaken, Humankind's hype came mostly from Civ fans, not from Endless fans.

[subX]

TC is right on the money. They should have done an EL2 instead. This game has basically run off the Amplitude fans away. They want to go full casual, cool. They should have told us that in the first place.

Originally posted by Ravoria:

As fans of the genre, the devs may just have wanted to wake Firaxis up from its complacency. Maybe even be the "Civ Killer", which is honestly still on the table if the DLCs go well. I'd be down for that, if Firaxis gets dethroned that easily then they deserve to.

This turd of a game won't dethrone anything ever. No one will be playing this game in 2 months from now. I've played enough games and especially 4x games in my life time to know when something is going to fail. I can't believe you actually want them to put out $20-$30 DLC that will do what? Add more pointless cultures to the game? What kind of DLC are you expecting? And more importantly why would you give them your money like that? The core game is broken and you want to pay for DLC? Like, what!?

[constantinople]

Originally posted by xsubtownerx:

TC is right on the money. They should have done an EL2 instead. This game has basically run off the Amplitude fans away. They want to go full casual, cool. They should have told us that in the first place.

Originally posted by Ravoria:

As fans of the genre, the devs may just have wanted to wake Firaxis up from its complacency. Maybe even be the "Civ Killer", which is honestly still on the table if the DLCs go well. I'd be down for that, if Firaxis gets dethroned that easily then they deserve to.

This turd of a game won't dethrone anything ever. No one will be playing this game in 2 months from now. I've played enough games and especially 4x games in my life time to know when something is going to fail. I can't believe you actually want them to put out $20-$30 DLC that will do what? Add more pointless cultures to the game? What kind of DLC are you expecting? And more importantly why would you give them your money like that? The core game is broken and you want to pay for DLC? Like, what!?

I largely agree. Id never have expected choosing cultures could be so lame, so DLC with more cultures would suck ass... And this type of Dlc-will-fix-it attitude thats willing to throw good money after bad doesnt make sense to me either.

[AmesNFire]

Originally posted by constantinople:

Originally posted by Oaks:

I'll take historical over EL any day, but perhaps that's just me.

No, I understand, theres no point in discussing which of the two settings one prefers - I just dont understand why Amplitude chose the one that Civ has the market cornered on. Instead of the original IP they own themselves, which offers something different. Do they really just gamble on enough Civ fans being like, "sure, why not"?

...are you advocating for monopolization of markets?

[asweknowit]

This is clearly an instance of a matter of opinion. I'm enjoying Humankind.