Review of Old World

[Emergent]

Foreword
To assist in consolidating my comprehensive review of Old World, I have prepared the following with adequate formatting so I can also more easily link to it as a reference. (Steam reviews have a character limit, but here I can post my full review without restrictions)

Introduction
I've noticed a frequent complaint and framing regarding "what does Old World have that Civ doesn't?" and "why should I play OW instead of Civ?". Frequently the framing is around: what does it do differently?

I do not see Old World bringing many revolutionary things to the table, or many outrageously unique innovations. Pretty much most of what it does, has been done elsewhere. But that shouldn't be a detractor!! The greatest (and most popular) things are seldom the first version or the prototype, and more often a derivative released years later, once all the elements have been tweaked considerably. For example, the iPad, Microsoft Windows, Toyota Corolla, the Star Wars franchise, etc... none of these were the first to do what they did; but they were perhaps the first to do it right, or to do it best (and let's set aside what our personal opinions may be on any particular one of these products; it is inescapable that they were indeed successful, which is the point here).

I believe Old World is like that, but pertaining to a turn-based strategy game of empire building. What it excels at is exactly taking things that have already been "invented", taking things that already exist in other games, and changing and combining them in ways to achieve the ideal balance of game mechanics and design. I'd like to go through a few to highlight how Old World "recycles" a lot of game content and why that is not a problem, but something to be valued and celebrated, especially in the way it's delivered within the game.

Hex Tiles
Arguably people will think that this was invented or at least popularized with Civ5, and everyone else who does it is just copying. But the fact of the matter is that it's the ideal tile layout to deal with distance units. Civ4 type layout of square grids doesn't work for diagonal movement, it complexifies the matter needlessly.

Adjacency Bonuses to Building
This has been done before. For example, Civ6 grants adjacency bonuses for districts. For another example, the Galactic Civilizations games (2 and 3) grants adjacency bonuses for building hexes on a planet. So this is nothing new.

However, in Old World you get more and better chances to take advantage of adjacencies. In Civ6, it's generally just districts, and they're hyper-permanent; once it's down you can never get rid of it or tweak your layout. In GC3, the tiles are prepopulated on the planet and often there are too few to really take advantage of opportunities. In OW, adjacency bonuses can apply to all manner of improvements, and you can change them around if you wish to optimize differently later. It can provide a source of fun to tweak your improvements strategy taking this into account.

Global Resource Management
One enjoyable element of Old World is that it incorporates the concept of your empire having a stockpile of needed resources, such as iron, stone, wood, etc. Typically these are abstracted in certain other games, like the Civilization series (which abstracts production on a per-city basis), but it can indeed be enjoyable and slightly more immersive to use and manage realistic resources such as this. This also lends far greater relevance to the terrain types and the ways terrain can be exploited to yield such resources. But neither are you restricted from progressing with your plans, because you can buy the (basic) resources you need via gold (and sell excess of others; there's also a bit of a market economy to the buying and selling of these resources).

Local Resource Management
Arguably one of the somewhat unique things Old World does is the manner in which it resolves city resource generation. Each city generates a number of resources such as growth, civics, and military training. By default, those resources contribute to their respective areas. For example, growth increases the population / number of citizens to a city (and I appreciate the unique separation between growth and food). Meanwhile, civics and military training contribute to the global stockpile thereof (allowing for global-based usage, such as enacting laws). However, this default allocation is intercepted and reallocated towards city production depending on what the city is working on.

For example, if the city is working on a city civic such as building a forum, then it will contribute no civics to the global stockpile, and instead will use its civics generation to contribute to what it's building / working on. First of all, this adds a unique dynamic component to managing resources: on the local level vs. global needs. But most importantly, it more appropriately reflects production speed based on the city's capacity in that regard. Thus, a city focused on generating larger amounts of military training per turn produces military units much faster. This helps both immersion, as well as augments the strategic dynamic, for example whether to use civics to further improve a city with civic-based projects, or to instead have the city build something else so that the civics contribute to the global stockpile.

1 Unit per Tile
Arguably people will think that this was invented or at least popularized with Civ5. There are also realism considerations. But despite all of that, having 1 unit per tile is just more fun for tactical play. Old World has latched onto this innovation and uses it to make for fun gameplay. Furthermore, OW has leaned into this further by allowing units to cause all manner of extra/splash damage, like the spearman hitting for minor damage the unit directly behind its target. This allows the player to arrange all manner of fun tactical exploits.

Historical Realism
Games are always at odds with historical realism and realism in general. Like the 1UPT which may be unrealistic, and certain ahistorical elements being introduced which improve player enjoyment. Like most things in life, it's a spectrum. The most realistic extreme is simply watching a history documentary. The most player agency ahistorical extreme is a pen and a blank piece of paper where a player writes whatever they want. Games are obviously somewhere in the middle, where players have agency to make choices and enjoy the game in a particular way, with some realism and historical limitations (the extent of which is subject to balancing the game design).

Incorporating historical realism is nothing new, so that's another thing Old World does that other games have already done. What's the right balance, is a matter of player preference, but I'd argue that they've struck an excellent balance here because there are plenty of historical aspects that are sufficiently immersive while nevertheless allowing the player to roleplay and make their own choices. Furthermore, OW has leaned into this further, by providing links to events so that inquisitive players can learn more about a particular historical context. You can learn about history while you play!

Settling Cities
Obviously being a civilization game with the ability to settle new cities is nothing new. Likewise, having restrictions on where cities can be placed, and outright restrictions of exclusive city locations, is likely not new either. OW strikes the balance here of restricting city site locations, with some minor tweaking (you can settle on the site or any of its attached urban tiles).

In my opinion, this is an excellent design choice because it eliminates the extremely large degrees of freedom to making decisions regarding where to place cities, or strategizing thereon. Now you just need to choose which city site to go for, and which tile of them you wish to settle (which then highlights what the borders would be).

Furthermore, OW leans into this further by allowing city borders to expand indefinitely. This again removes non-value-added player analysis and agonizing over individual tile details by allowing just about any resource to be reachable with some work. (Unlike in Civ where you might agonize over the dynamic changes to how you might settle 3-5 cities in an area to optimize capturing all the resources, perhaps with not too much wasteful tile overlap, and other such considerations)

[Emergent]

Dynastic Components and Relationships
As it's well-known, the game Crusader Kings is focused heavily on building your dynasty and on maintaining relationships with the various nobility around you. In fact, CK does this much better if that's the only set of game elements that interests you.

But what OW does is that it still produces these elements in an immersive way - you get to roleplay as your leader, you get to roleplay your nation better (as opposed to Civ where you're some immortal ghost ruler telling all the people what to do), and it's more historically immersive (nobility was in charge back then)... yet OW does this without making the system as incredibly complicated as CK2. Obviously from a meta-development perspective, they shouldn't, because CK2 has already done it. And from a personal gaming perspective, if this is what you seek, you can just play CK2.

What OW brings to the table is a lighter version of that so that you get most of those benefits (e.g. roleplaying and immersion), while precluding inordinate complexity.

Heroes and Leaders
Having a group of special characters or "heroes" to take command of a unit or become ruler of a city is again nothing new. Endless Space 2 has this with its "heroes", which can be assigned to command fleets, or command a star system; thereby yielding bonuses accordingly, and an opportunity to upgrade them to your designs. But this is very fun! So it's great that OW has this! Furthermore, OW leans into it by giving you the ability to have interactions with these characters and influence them, also factoring in religions and families. Your interactions can have an impact, improving immersion and positive feelings of player agency, since characters/heroes that are pleased with you (the ruler) will perform better at their jobs.

Orders
Arguably one of the genuinely novel things OW brings to the table is the concept of "orders" being limitations to how much you can control all your units. The purpose behind this design choice is present elsewhere - preventing the player from being overwhelmed with the amount of available command decisions by creating limitations such as "supply limits" (think in StarCraft where you need more Supply Depots to build more units, and even then there's a hard max).

Like the limited city sites, this at first sounds like something that isn't that great for the player, but it turns out to be fantastic. It prevents the player from being incentivized to build such enormous amounts of units that they become bogged down with decision fatigue and so overwhelmed it starts to feel like a chore. And it does it in a way that is manageable and allows the player to improve upon as the game goes on (i.e. you can increase how many orders you get per turn through your various player choices).

Undo Functionality
With the introduction of such an orders system, the game incorporates an "undo" button, allowing you to take back any orders you issue. I see this undo feature as emergent from the orders system; with limited capacity to issue orders, it is only natural that one may fall short of one's grand designs for a turn, and may wish to undo some orders and do certain things differently (there is even an option to undo an entire turn). This does open the door to potential exploits, but it is the player's choice as to whether to use this feature or not. The feature can even be disabled permanently for a game within the game setup options.

However, this undo functionality reveals a quality-of-life feature that is so invaluable, it's difficult to return to other games that lack it. Sometimes we misclick, or remember a plan that would have needed a different sequence of orders, or have just plain changed our minds regarding what we want to accomplish in a turn. This will occur in all manner of turn-based strategy games and will be difficult to address. To have the ability to undo is extremely helpful and enjoyable, allowing players to correct those mistakes or change those actions without having to reload a previous save.

The presence of plenty of reminders further helps in managing orders, or undoing enough orders to get the orders needed to do something important like tutor a child. Reminders will cover key decisions so there's a lower chance of you going through the turns without having done something as important as assigning a chancellor or sending your ambassador on a mission (if you have the civics to spare).

AI
Many players have noted how the AI is so much smarter and better at fighting wars. I don't know what sort of back-end innovations and efforts went into it, but this is certainly the case. Compared to other similar games, the AI is indeed quite potent at defending its territory and waging war. You will feel like you're actually fighting a war against the computer players, rather than simply sidestepping a predictable opponent.

Events and Randomness
A key aspect that keeps a game fresh and enjoyable is some element of randomness. This ensures that each game you undertake will play out differently. And it also ensures that you don't reach a point where you have such thorough understanding and control over the nature of the game that you don't even need to play it anymore (i.e. boring since you know exactly what will happen). In Old World, there is still excitement and organic evolution to a game as it progresses, in perhaps unpredictable ways. While some of this randomness may be off-putting to some players (and there exist options to limit and reduce this), the randomness found in Old World is certainly enjoyable and will ensure each game feels different from the last.

Customizable Game Setup
Thankfully if there is a feature that a player does not like as much, this can be addressed through advanced game setup. Don't like the dynastic elements and characters? They can be turned off (though I wouldn't recommend it, they're very fun). Too much randomness? Scale down the events or use the "competitive" preset. Really enjoy having one leader live for a very long time? Increase character lifespans (and switch to semesters). You can even customize what kind of benefits/handicaps the computer players receive to increase the difficulty of the game (as well as customizing the player benefits/handicaps). Whether a bigger starting bonus and/or an inherently stronger economy (as well as aggression levels for tribes/barbarians and major nations).

Developer Commitment
The developers are actively engaged in the community, receive player feedback, and are continuously updating and improving the game. Anywhere from rebalancing game mechanics, to supporting the modding and the multiplayer communities in various ways. If there is something wrong with the game, it will eventually get fixed. This kind of commitment is a bit more rare to see, but it is nevertheless very helpful and appreciated!

In Closing
I could probably go on and on about all the things Old World does that are nothing new, and that have been done elsewhere, and in some cases, done better. But as you peer into what makes OW so enjoyable, you feel it's almost like the game designers of OW have looked into "what is it that players enjoy when playing a game", picking those out and including them; and also looked into "what is something tedious or unfun that players are stuck having to do in such games", picking those out and finding ways to remove them from the game. For example the tedium of multi-factor dynamic city site selection (eliminated via select city sites). For another example, managing countless units (eliminated via limited orders).

What OW brings to gaming is tying in all these game mechanics and elements in a way that optimizes player enjoyment based on its game design choices. While that's ultimately a subjective assessment, for players like myself, I think it's pretty much the perfect balance of having good mechanics that are enjoyable while excluding tedious and otherwise uninteresting elements.

[eddieballgame]

Now this is a review.
It is rare when a pc game delivers on so many levels, to include stability.
Combine this with a multiplayer option that surpasses expectations (imho)...for fans of 4x civ like games, this is a must have.

[mk11]

Agree with all that. Makes it a great game.

One thing you don't mention is the juggling of 3 families and 5 religions to try and decide who to keep happy and that the happiness has a direct, but minor, impact on your troops and cities.

[4X-Fan]

Excellent written review by OP hitting the nail about why the game is so good.

[Drakonious]

Thanks for that review, well explained and most informative, I am looking forward to playing and enjoying OW when my current CK3 game ends, so comparisons for me were very valid, also the section on ai looked most encouraging. This review gives me an excellent overview of what to expect, much appreciated.

[DoktorFar]

Awesome review, I agree with it all. The game is, in my humble opinion, a near masterpiece. Im just gauging this from how enthralled I am at everything it has to offer. I love details and complexity and options and this game certainly has it en masse, but not needlessly, it all makes sense once you understand (of course in the beginning you know nothing ;) ) and it all offers a myriad of options for the player.

And I honestly dont think I have seen a strategy game mastering each of it's components as well as Old World. The character management is so interesting, there's so much to investigate and think about and plan, the way it connects with expansion and management of your empire is incredible, it never gets dull.

This game is the opposite of dumbing down, it's... for lack of a better phrase... "smarting up" lol.

Something I would like to add is the incredible soundtrack, it's just really really good. So much culture, very varied and very inspiring.

[jotwebe]

Pretty much agree on everything. My only nitpick is that I think you attribute several "innovations" to Civ titles which weren't that: Hexes, one unit per tile, global stockpiles, and such have existed in various forms in war and strategy games even before Civ I came along, so it's not like the Civ titles that first introduced them into the series invented them.

It's more like the game designers choose between alternative mechanics in a way very similar to how we choose laws in Old World - each choice has its benefits and often drawbacks, some have synergies, some don't, and ultimately what is best is down to your vision/strategy. For example, one unit per tile has problems when there are too many units around: carpets of doom that are a chore to move because units get in each others' way. In Old World, the orders system and the high mobility units have if they have sufficient orders mitigates this problem. The drawback is that it is harder to evaluate what the opponent will do on their turn, which I believe is a cause for a large portion of the negative reviews, together with the strong position the AI is in due to the asymmetric start.

Which reminds me: the (per default) asymmetric start might be worth a mention, since it isn't made super obvious and I believe the assumption is a symmetric start like in the Civ series.

[Emergent]

Thanks so much for the replies, everyone!!

Originally posted by mk11:

One thing you don't mention is the juggling of 3 families and 5 religions to try and decide who to keep happy and that the happiness has a direct, but minor, impact on your troops and cities.

True! That makes the dynastic and relationship management more engaging and in my opinion, more immersive as well.

Originally posted by DoktorFar:

Something I would like to add is the incredible soundtrack, it's just really really good. So much culture, very varied and very inspiring.

I very much agree and feel the same. I intentionally didn't put the soundtrack in my review because it's such an extremely subjective thing. However, I do agree and believe that the soundtrack from Old World is special and unique. It feels so diverse and culturally enriching, and is a stark contrast from music typically used in other such games. It also fits very effectively into the aesthetic and overall feel for the game.

Originally posted by jotwebe:

My only nitpick is that I think you attribute several "innovations" to Civ titles which weren't that: Hexes, one unit per tile, global stockpiles, and such have existed in various forms in war and strategy games even before Civ I came along, so it's not like the Civ titles that first introduced them into the series invented them.

You are correct, and I should have perhaps clarified that these weren't "invented" by Civ necessarily. My review frames the discussion towards those players I've seen who have such a Civ-centric view that they may feel like Civ innovated on these items. Well, my point is that even if Civ did invent these (which as you say, it didn't), that doesn't mean someone else couldn't use them in better ways (just like the iPad wasn't the first tablet). In fact, I think developers should try and take the best from all the games that have already been released (and discard the bad), while ensuring to incorporate them effectively into the game design. I feel this is the biggest thing that OW does really well.

---

Thanks for all the comments everyone! I agree with all the ways you've highlighted how Old World excels at making an engaging and compelling gaming experience.

[Return of Nizar]

That was an amazing review! I really appreciate all the effort you put into it. It is clear that you put your heart and soul into this and it really shows. I noticed that we share a similar interest in the 4X genre! If you are ever thinking about playing online, either co-op or versus, I would be very glad to join!

[krabdr]

Nice review, I really enjoyed it.

[Emergent]

Thank you everyone for the nice comments!

And a special thank you for all the awards, I very much appreciate them!! I did indeed put a lot of effort into this review, and I'm glad so many found it helpful.

If you agree with my review and think it might be helpful for others considering the game too, please consider rating my review as helpful on the Steam store as well, so more people might perhaps find it:

https://steamcommunity.com/id/Emergent47/recommended/597180/

I wanted to ensure there was a space for meaningful dialogue regarding the game, best accomplished through these forums here. However, perhaps new and potential players are more likely to just see reviews on the Steam store rather than investigate further on the Steam forums (here).

[Tommy]

It might sound silly, but one of the biggest selling points for me is the art, especially portraits of game's characters (I know some of them are based on devs). God knows how many times I made a mistake trusting some suspicious lady just because I found her attractive. I believe there should be some kind of a poll for the best portraits in the game. I wonder which one would win.

[Denito]

I also really like the art of this game, be it the character portraits or the event images. It might not be a AAA-production but Old World's presentation is really coherent which I appreciate a lot while playing this game

[DoktorFar]

Originally posted by Tommy:

It might sound silly, but one of the biggest selling points for me is the art, especially portraits of game's characters (I know some of them are based on devs). God knows how many times I made a mistake trusting some suspicious lady just because I found her attractive. I believe there should be some kind of a poll for the best portraits in the game. I wonder which one would win.

Actually not that silly :) I find the amazing portrait art really fitting in perfectly with how important characters are. One time I actually felt a bit of sadness when my faction leader died, she had been queen from when she was like in her 20'es until like in the 70'ies, and when she died I suddenly recall her portrait when she was but a baby... that realization that someone would never rise to be quite like her again.

[Emergent]

Originally posted by DoktorFar:

Something I would like to add is the incredible soundtrack, it's just really really good. So much culture, very varied and very inspiring.

Originally posted by Emily:

I very much agree and feel the same. I intentionally didn't put the soundtrack in my review because it's such an extremely subjective thing. However, I do agree and believe that the soundtrack from Old World is special and unique. It feels so diverse and culturally enriching, and is a stark contrast from music typically used in other such games. It also fits very effectively into the aesthetic and overall feel for the game.

I wanted to come back to this because apparently it's not just us and maybe not just a subjective assessment of its quality. That is, the Old World soundtrack has been nominated for a grammy!!!

https://www.grammy.com/news/best-musica-urbana-album-2023-grammy-nominations-65th-awards

See #66.

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/597180/view/3516777336834227703

Also, to really help it along, consider nominating it for Best Soundtrack for the Steam awards!!