Worth it in 2025?

[Dreamsurfer]

The discount is great but is it still worthwhile to buy now? I don't see many streamers play it, why is that? Even that Potato guy who says it is fantastic hasn't done anything in 11 months. Is it not suitable for streaming?

[CaptainSpacetime]

It's really good.

As to why it's not popular, my guess is that civ is just so incredibly dominant that there's no room for anything else.

And streamers gotta stream what's popular to get views so kindof a vicious cycle.

[Dreamsurfer]

Do they have any roadmap ahead or is it all about Old World 2?

Still. One would think that the streamers that talk it up could contribute a bit to the content, I would watch even I didn't own this. Game seems intriguing on many levels.

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by Dreamsurfer:

The discount is great but is it still worthwhile to buy now? I don't see many streamers play it, why is that? Even that Potato guy who says it is fantastic hasn't done anything in 11 months. Is it not suitable for streaming?

This game is already old. It was released for a year before on Epic before it came to Steam, and it was streamed a lot before release back in Early Access. That's how I found it - Quill18 playing it. However, a certain streamer did the dirty on the game and I dare say that his negativity turned away a few folks. I wouldn't say he was influential but folks tend to think negative is more honest and they'd probably watch it for a 'more honest' take than the folks who like it.

I wouldn't let the lack of up-to-date streaming worry you too much - it's just not as popular as 'shiny new game' and streamers get their bucks from their likes and subscribes.

[Mohawk_Solver]

I can say that we'll continue supporting the game in 2025 as well, there will be DLC and we'll also continue with our regular updates and patches, of which we had about a dozen this year.

As for streaming, the professional streamers are pretty beholden to what turns a profit. For someone who usually streams Civ with enough viewers to make money, streaming a smaller game means losing money so that's going to happen less. And we're probably not the kind of game that's inherently streamer-attractive. Old World does not look flashy and it doesn't play fast. It can be interesting to watch someone's decision making process in detail but that's not the kind of stream content that captures a large audience.

[TargetLost]

It is good if you like this type of games. Well worth the discount price. Bought it yesterday.

It is like civilisation the early ages but less polished flashy/shiny/movie/drama but more gameplay.

The characters ageing and generations mechanic is a plus. So no fix historic character although you start with a fix one.

It is intuitve enough to start playing without a tutorial game if you are the type of learning by doing gamers that dislike tutorials like me.

The 3 families/houses concept.. well I know where it comes from.. not reall my taste but it seems to be a significant part of the game if you want to be successfull.

It looks to me that it will become repetitive once you master it..but then that's with every such game the case.

The AI is certainly better than the CIV one.

What I miss are modern ages.

If there were no shiny CIV games I think this game would be a top one.

Overall I like it enough to have missed to go to bed in time yesterday. :/

[Dreamsurfer]

Well I should add that I am not a fanatic about graphics. I still play old school hex based games. And as for Civ. I am more about if it is different enough. Civ is a good game (any version) but if this Game feels different enough that alone could be worth it.

A bit like Humankind but I wonder if this isn't more to my taste. Not sure. That is why I hunt streamers to find out :).

[Dreamsurfer]

As for Modern Age. Would a Old World 2 that focuses on Mideaval be a potential hit? Or even up to rennaissance. Or would it make it too complex? I like focused eras concept. That means we can get more indepht look on the great Empires like Persia, Rome etc. In Civi they are gone in the blink of an eye it seems :).

[omnius]

Streamers are always chasing the next new thing and always do videos on games before they're finished, always in early access mode. I ignore them as irrelevant. I do a few videos on some game but they're always finished games well past early access.

[Dreamsurfer]

Still a nice way to learn about the game without buying it.

[Mohawk_Solver]

We have a demo available by the way, you can try the early game and get a feeling for it without buying the game.

[Gregorovitch]

Originally posted by Dreamsurfer:

I don't see many streamers play it, why is that? Is it not suitable for streaming?

I would totally concur with this answer:

Originally posted by Mohawk_Solver:

As for streaming, the professional streamers are pretty beholden to what turns a profit. For someone who usually streams Civ with enough viewers to make money, streaming a smaller game means losing money so that's going to happen less. And we're probably not the kind of game that's inherently streamer-attractive. Old World does not look flashy and it doesn't play fast. It can be interesting to watch someone's decision making process in detail but that's not the kind of stream content that captures a large audience.

Which directly leads to the questions you should ask yourself deciding whether you would enjoy diving into OW as opposed to firing up yet another game of Civ. Are you interested in playing a historical 4X game that:

1. has more complex mechanics than Civ and will take a fair bit of learning even if you've played a lot of Civ?

2. takes place over a more limited time frame, is a much "tighter" game and typically has a much more nail-biting end game?

3. has a much cleverer, nastier and more ruthless military AI than Civ that will almost certainly hand you your arse more than once before you get your act together?

4. has elements of CK-lite family and court management and intrigue about it?

If the answer to three or more of those questions is yes then do yourself a favour and grab it 'cos if you played a lot of Civ OW will seem like a breath of fresh air and an exiting new challenge. OW is criminally overlooked.

[Dreamsurfer]

Originally posted by Mohawk_Solver:

We have a demo available by the way, you can try the early game and get a feeling for it without buying the game.

How did I miss that :). Thanx.

[Dreamsurfer]

Originally posted by Gregorovitch:

Originally posted by Dreamsurfer:

I don't see many streamers play it, why is that? Is it not suitable for streaming?

I would totally concur with this answer:

Originally posted by Mohawk_Solver:

As for streaming, the professional streamers are pretty beholden to what turns a profit. For someone who usually streams Civ with enough viewers to make money, streaming a smaller game means losing money so that's going to happen less. And we're probably not the kind of game that's inherently streamer-attractive. Old World does not look flashy and it doesn't play fast. It can be interesting to watch someone's decision making process in detail but that's not the kind of stream content that captures a large audience.

Which directly leads to the questions you should ask yourself deciding whether you would enjoy diving into OW as opposed to firing up yet another game of Civ. Are you interested in playing a historical 4X game that:

1. has more complex mechanics than Civ and will take a fair bit of learning even if you've played a lot of Civ?

2. takes place over a more limited time frame, is a much "tighter" game and typically has a much more nail-biting end game?

3. has a much cleverer, nastier and more ruthless military AI than Civ that will almost certainly hand you your arse more than once before you get your act together?

4. has elements of CK-lite family and court management and intrigue about it?

If the answer to three or more of those questions is yes then do yourself a favour and grab it 'cos if you played a lot of Civ OW will seem like a breath of fresh air and an exiting new challenge. OW is criminally overlooked.

Well there are a couple of things I missed in CIV. I have played them all from version 1 but it always felt a bit off to play the same guy from 5k BC to modern times, but I accept that they went for the more light hearted approach. Crusader Kings and EU sseries had a lot of what I missed in the CIv series but I feel they both dropped the ball when they went for the more meme style games.

This looks like it has a more focused approach.

[Siontific]

Old World is honestly the best game in the genre right now; certainly one of them. With the direction of civ7 I don't see that changing any time soon. The streamers get money based off of views; civ playerbase sees 10s of thousands of people playing the game every day - It's cause for celebration if Old World manages to see 1,000 active players in a given day.

So you're not going to see a lot of content from the major creators since that's not how they make their money.

[Dreamsurfer]

I didn't see that there was a demo either. Will take a good look before the sale goes out :).