Haven’t played Humankind yet, but I amazed by OLD WORLD’s attention to detail, RPG aspects, and complexity. It’s everything I wish CIV VI would’ve had and quite a gem of a strategy game.
@@marfin4325 Humankinds graphics are amazing but it can be frustrating trying to learn things. Old World...well looks like an old game graphic wise but I think it locks down in immersion with the RPG elements like family succession and so on but there are things I dont like also. For instance when the AI parks a unit on a city site across the damn map from their empire and just sits there forcing you to go to war to get them off. I have a current game where as Rome the only city site in a peninsula at the back of my empire with no access to anything because I surround it all and cant claim it to seal off my borders...because the Egyptians have parked a melee unit on it even though the Egyptians are halfway across the map with me and the Gauls etc in between.
I really like Old World combat. It makes wars feel bloody, dynamic tactical and not ultimately one-sided. Scouting is important, to be aware whether your enemy is going to bring new reserves. Thinking ahead is important, organizing supplies of new troops, fortifying units long beforehand, giving the required promotions and generals which can turn the tide of the war. Units special abilities are important, they dictate the optimal ways to place your troops and can lead to dramatic victories even against larger forces like locking a group of enemies between two balistas and then killing them all by a single mounted unit with routing. But even if you do everything the right way, you are most likely still going to loose some units. Even when you win the war, AI is good enough to make suffer a couple of losses. Your economy will suffer to a degree, because you'll be busy with managing your army and won't have spare orders for workers. Wars have their costs - quite realistic ones.
Haven't got Humankind yet so can't judge. But have just finished my first full game of Old World and I absolutely loved it. The family dynasty and events aspect makes it feel very different to the other 4x games i've played and therefore feels like a new experience to me. I think it will be my main game for quite some time.
Played both but I am more into Old World. Humankind doesn`t click with me somehow (like the other Amplitude's titels even they all have an interesting premise).
I recently tried Old World, I had a blast ... but found it easy on a normal setting ... I literally won my very first game and did not even go into a war with any other nation, won just by completing my legacies /ambitions and building wonders... Love that you can win peacefully !!! I played with the season settings rather than turn being a year ... I think having more time with people in your court is more interesting and give you loads of time to develop your characters and get to know them! The game is very good at simulating Events but some events felt too random, out of blue, and a bit unfair, your character can die out of the blue for no particular reason ... you would suddenly get a message your son has just died even though you don't think you have done anything wrong!!! Then My king ended up being kidnapped, due to accepting an invitation to someone's chambers ... this felt fairer.... but no way out of it unless you have that one specific skill required to rescue yourself... you would think why on earth accept this invitation for a love affair... because if the queen does not give you a Hair to the throne even an illegitimate son would stop you from losing the game ... I found the game a lots of fun but wish some of these events had more logic to them and more ways to get out of the bad situations...
Thanks ! I rarely rarely rarely enjoy reviews. this was very entertaining and informative. I love both CIV & CK and when I tried OldWorld I fall in love right away, I can't explain how it brings the best of both CIV & CK, especially the old era, it's my favorite era in CIV (Tried so many mods to extend it as much as possible) I didn't knew Humankind existed at all, it seems very very promising, if I'm tired of ancient people I'll definitely give it a try. Edit: I forgot to mention the MUSIC on old world, never ever seen a better music in ANY game... it was actually one of the things that kept me going through those tough hours of learning at the beginning. + the CTRL+Z, Amazing feature, + the new concept of Orders, + families, + ambition type of victory
After five or six runs on both : humankind seems to be a "clicker" game where player's engagement don't exceed the tactical side of a 4X (like boardgames in fact : all the civs are just make up on different gameplays), in other hand old world presents a deeper experience and more challenging by far where the player IS a leader (into an emotional way).
I haven't had as much fun with a 4x as Humankind since around Civ 5 / Endless Space came out when I was younger. Can't wait for multiplayer and new maps!
No comparison for me. Hands down Old World is the best civ style game, or just beat game I’ve ever played. That being said, I’ll compare a bit. If you don’t care about family lineage and just want to fight stuff, human kind might be better for you. Spoilers ahead: The amount of detail they put into Old World is amazing. I had the option to have my pet monkey assassinate a foreign queen that I didn’t like. In that same game, I was talking to an eccentric commoner taking about a new style of warfare and I gave him money to go off and try stuff. The battle chickens didn’t do to well…. Amazing writing.
@@syv5013which is why it doesn't sound all that neat. I don't want to be in one time period it kills the concept of sequence of events and playing the long game to attain victory.
@@jsm530i like the concept of old world actually, I'm a HOI4 player and i enjoy how in-depth it can be, but the timeframe is a little short, so it's hard to do sandboxy stuff. Old world focuses on pre- Renaissance civilization, so it can add depth to the systems. I hope they do something similar but starting in the Renaissance era and going to the contemporary period, that'd be great.
Old world was great, really love the early part of the game and exploration gives a huge bonus. I love that I can focus on one period, however late game, I was unable to conquer anyone even tho I had over 60 soldiers attacking weaker enemies. I only took like one or two HP and they took 50% of mine. I captured all fortresses and citadels and still wasn't able to conquer them. Diplomacy is kinda nonexisten so the RPG aspect is kinda pointless as characters can't do really much compared to crusader. Some features were better than civ 6 however too much text and too much micromanagement of 100 units was a bit exhausting. Also too much text
Humankind on Google Stadia is kind of fun, it isn't updated I was kind of shocked when I tried it on a free weekend (I have Stadia Pro because of some offer I got suckered into lol) and yeah, vanilla as vanilla could be! I loved it, I could finally beat a game without digging my nails into my computer desk xD. Playing Old World, I call it a Civ 5 mod with CK elements and orders system.
which of the two has a steeper learning curve? from the looks of it, I'd presume Humankind would have a lower entry level, thus have an easier adaptability appeal. end game seems to be more open and fluid in old world as compared to humankind as the snow-balling effect of resources in most, if not all, 4X games (including Civs, Stellaris etc) due to the longer and wider cross-section seen in the latter, making late game maneuvers less likely to effect the results. I'd still wait for Old World to be available on Steam though and have already pre-ordered Humankind. Now, about Age of Empires IV ........
I'd agree - Old World isn't necessarily a confusing game, but because it incorporates those Crusader Kings lite features with family dynasties, skills and traits, etc. it likely has a steer learning curve. Particularly as many people will be coming from/ experienced with Civ - so Humankind is a better fit for them. Oh man, Age of Empires 4 this year too. My wallet, my poor, poor wallet.
Easy: I'll buy the one that will be available on Steam and the ones that aren't made by Amplitude. So I'll have to wait until next year. Still have to play the untouched Total Wars anyways
I hated (and still hate) the clunky mess that is Humankind. My test run was 10 minutes too long to have it refunded by Steam. Old World is nice, but I didn't like that it's confined to the Classic era.
Any idea what multiplayer matches are like? What annoys me about Civ 6 is that there is no turn order with attacks (at least not from my experience in 3 player matches), so it ended up being a race to see who could initiate their troops first etc, while everyone else is frantically pressing units and wondering why nothing is happening. As for these games I really like the look of both :D I'm very fond of the 'orders' mechanic from Old World and could only wish it was an option in Humankind/Civ! However, I'm not a fan of Old World's restricted city placement system :/ hopefully it's more fun than it looks though.
Humankind handles combat in a really interesting way by creating a sort of ‘mini arena’ for the battle, drawing boundaries and offering each player 3 alternating attacking/ defending rounds. I’m not sure how that plays out in multiplayer, but I’d wage it’s more fair and less a race against the host.
@@JumboPixel Great to hear :) that's the one thing that bugs me with Civ in multiplayer. I also tried Age of Wonders III last night and the way they do battles is cool and Humankind seems similar.
Even if Old World turns out to be 5 times better than Humankind no one will care cause very few people gonna know that game existed its an epic exclusive what a great loss of community...
never heard of Old World and thought it was odd then to realize why its only on Epic Games so now I wont play it until it comes to steam no contest Humankind wins for now
@@JumboPixel sure i think they decided to make humankind after fraxis stole their disctrict style game concept from endless series so I watched their gameplay and that game is no better than any civ game but old world looks fantastic even in its early access status
Man, we should think about games as the MCU thinks of their films. So mods would not be necessary to import save files from one game in timeperiod that end at a specific time to another game overlapping that time, but at the start. Like the first game is purely nomadic. Hours and hours of gameplay with their own kind trails and tribulations. At the type of victory points in culture, research, war and such will be a boosted at the start of the next game. Also the least invested victory point type will be a weakness. And also put in a nemesis system. That put Ai experience with you at rivaling strength. I mean that if you conquer a Ai. They might rebel against you in the second game supported by your rival. And barberians have the ability to start their own nations. Gauls become Francelike. Scythians become mongollike ai player. And they get like bonusses for starting as barbarian faction. They make peace with one or two ai players who support them. Making playing a game more of choosing what kind of meltingpot cultures you can manage. And the families you have to manage actually have a reason to have a different sets of bonuses and weaknesses. For example. You start as a research type nomadic faction. You conquered a warlike tribe. Now you habe to manage two cultures within your own faction. Because killing all barberians once you conquered their camp doesn't make sense to me. They could make great laborers at first and after that a warlike culture tribe a part of your own culture led by a family you have to compete with and control. Or choose to lead them to make your starting culture a secondary one.
It seems like Old World is far superior than Humankind. What really bothers me is this 200 years = 20 turns stuff. Why? This is so ridiculous and schematic. Times of the Ancient world were way more then pathetic 200 years. Only the history of the ancient Egypt is more then THREE THOUSAND YEARS! But they give us just 200 years. That’s ridiculous…
Don't really like how much emphasis Old World puts on dynasties. I don't care about family drama, I want to develop my nation! Oh and the fact you're limited with where you can place your cities also is a big problem for me. Game, my city being placed in the middle of Antarctica with no food around is my problem, not yours! Stop babysitting me!
The only problem being that Civ3, Civ4, Civ5 and Civ6 all wiped the floor with Humankind. Though partly it could be that 4x genre in general has just run out of ideas after so many years.
my personal opinion is that humankind is the superior game because it's closer to civ, but i'm upset that it had denuvo. even if it's removed now, i'm angry they even had it in the first place. i like the mid and late game civ experience more than the early game. i respect old world as an artform though!
I was genuinely upset and was going to get Humankind because of Denuvo, but seeing as it’s now gone I’ll probably get it again because I’d be lying if I said it didn’t look really cool
Haven’t played Humankind yet, but I amazed by OLD WORLD’s attention to detail, RPG aspects, and complexity. It’s everything I wish CIV VI would’ve had and quite a gem of a strategy game.
Very well put 🙂
Far better than humankind.
Humankind has a lot of interesting surface level mechanics, but they are unsatisfying after 100 hours. I am looking forward to trying Old World.
@@marfin4325 Humankinds graphics are amazing but it can be frustrating trying to learn things. Old World...well looks like an old game graphic wise but I think it locks down in immersion with the RPG elements like family succession and so on but there are things I dont like also. For instance when the AI parks a unit on a city site across the damn map from their empire and just sits there forcing you to go to war to get them off. I have a current game where as Rome the only city site in a peninsula at the back of my empire with no access to anything because I surround it all and cant claim it to seal off my borders...because the Egyptians have parked a melee unit on it even though the Egyptians are halfway across the map with me and the Gauls etc in between.
I really like Old World combat. It makes wars feel bloody, dynamic tactical and not ultimately one-sided.
Scouting is important, to be aware whether your enemy is going to bring new reserves. Thinking ahead is important, organizing supplies of new troops, fortifying units long beforehand, giving the required promotions and generals which can turn the tide of the war. Units special abilities are important, they dictate the optimal ways to place your troops and can lead to dramatic victories even against larger forces like locking a group of enemies between two balistas and then killing them all by a single mounted unit with routing.
But even if you do everything the right way, you are most likely still going to loose some units. Even when you win the war, AI is good enough to make suffer a couple of losses. Your economy will suffer to a degree, because you'll be busy with managing your army and won't have spare orders for workers. Wars have their costs - quite realistic ones.
Haven't got Humankind yet so can't judge. But have just finished my first full game of Old World and I absolutely loved it. The family dynasty and events aspect makes it feel very different to the other 4x games i've played and therefore feels like a new experience to me. I think it will be my main game for quite some time.
Awesome! I had a lot of fun with my first play through too - it was very CK3, but that’s not a bad thing
Played both but I am more into Old World. Humankind doesn`t click with me somehow (like the other Amplitude's titels even they all have an interesting premise).
I recently tried Old World, I had a blast ... but found it easy on a normal setting ... I literally won my very first game and did not even go into a war with any other nation, won just by completing my legacies /ambitions and building wonders... Love that you can win peacefully !!! I played with the season settings rather than turn being a year ... I think having more time with people in your court is more interesting and give you loads of time to develop your characters and get to know them! The game is very good at simulating Events but some events felt too random, out of blue, and a bit unfair, your character can die out of the blue for no particular reason ... you would suddenly get a message your son has just died even though you don't think you have done anything wrong!!! Then My king ended up being kidnapped, due to accepting an invitation to someone's chambers ... this felt fairer.... but no way out of it unless you have that one specific skill required to rescue yourself... you would think why on earth accept this invitation for a love affair... because if the queen does not give you a Hair to the throne even an illegitimate son would stop you from losing the game ... I found the game a lots of fun but wish some of these events had more logic to them and more ways to get out of the bad situations...
Thanks ! I rarely rarely rarely enjoy reviews.
this was very entertaining and informative.
I love both CIV & CK and when I tried OldWorld I fall in love right away, I can't explain how it brings the best of both CIV & CK, especially the old era, it's my favorite era in CIV (Tried so many mods to extend it as much as possible)
I didn't knew Humankind existed at all, it seems very very promising, if I'm tired of ancient people I'll definitely give it a try.
Edit: I forgot to mention the MUSIC on old world, never ever seen a better music in ANY game... it was actually one of the things that kept me going through those tough hours of learning at the beginning. + the CTRL+Z, Amazing feature, + the new concept of Orders, + families, + ambition type of victory
After five or six runs on both : humankind seems to be a "clicker" game where player's engagement don't exceed the tactical side of a 4X (like boardgames in fact : all the civs are just make up on different gameplays), in other hand old world presents a deeper experience and more challenging by far where the player IS a leader (into an emotional way).
does Humankind has mods on Steam?
@@rollercoaster478 yes, there is even an official mod where you can meet ancient alien
@@randomblacktemplar738 hmm ok good
Old World looks fun, but I will be waiting for the Steam release if I decide to buy it.
Fair!
Same here 😊
Tencent store is really total trash compare to even Origin ^^"
I haven't had as much fun with a 4x as Humankind since around Civ 5 / Endless Space came out when I was younger.
Can't wait for multiplayer and new maps!
I’m very curious to see what multiplayer is like - it’s always tricky to make a good, reliable multiplayer mode in a complicated 4X game!
LOL
Not many people online on multiplayer and it's very buggy/slowdowns in turns.
I feel the tactical aspects of combat in Humankind where overshadowed in this review, and deserved it's spot as one of the highlights.
As an American. Our economy is my strategy game of 2021.
Great video though!
😂😂
No comparison for me. Hands down Old World is the best civ style game, or just beat game I’ve ever played.
That being said, I’ll compare a bit. If you don’t care about family lineage and just want to fight stuff, human kind might be better for you.
Spoilers ahead: The amount of detail they put into Old World is amazing. I had the option to have my pet monkey assassinate a foreign queen that I didn’t like. In that same game, I was talking to an eccentric commoner taking about a new style of warfare and I gave him money to go off and try stuff. The battle chickens didn’t do to well…. Amazing writing.
Is the Old World have Modern -> Future Era?
@@syv5013 no
@@syv5013which is why it doesn't sound all that neat. I don't want to be in one time period it kills the concept of sequence of events and playing the long game to attain victory.
@@jsm530i like the concept of old world actually, I'm a HOI4 player and i enjoy how in-depth it can be, but the timeframe is a little short, so it's hard to do sandboxy stuff. Old world focuses on pre- Renaissance civilization, so it can add depth to the systems. I hope they do something similar but starting in the Renaissance era and going to the contemporary period, that'd be great.
Old world was great, really love the early part of the game and exploration gives a huge bonus. I love that I can focus on one period, however late game, I was unable to conquer anyone even tho I had over 60 soldiers attacking weaker enemies. I only took like one or two HP and they took 50% of mine. I captured all fortresses and citadels and still wasn't able to conquer them. Diplomacy is kinda nonexisten so the RPG aspect is kinda pointless as characters can't do really much compared to crusader. Some features were better than civ 6 however too much text and too much micromanagement of 100 units was a bit exhausting. Also too much text
Soren Johnson > Amplitude.
He certainly has a lot of fans!
Humankind on Google Stadia is kind of fun, it isn't updated I was kind of shocked when I tried it on a free weekend (I have Stadia Pro because of some offer I got suckered into lol) and yeah, vanilla as vanilla could be! I loved it, I could finally beat a game without digging my nails into my computer desk xD. Playing Old World, I call it a Civ 5 mod with CK elements and orders system.
which of the two has a steeper learning curve?
from the looks of it, I'd presume Humankind would have a lower entry level, thus have an easier adaptability appeal.
end game seems to be more open and fluid in old world as compared to humankind as the snow-balling effect of resources in most, if not all, 4X games (including Civs, Stellaris etc) due to the longer and wider cross-section seen in the latter, making late game maneuvers less likely to effect the results.
I'd still wait for Old World to be available on Steam though and have already pre-ordered Humankind.
Now, about Age of Empires IV ........
I'd agree - Old World isn't necessarily a confusing game, but because it incorporates those Crusader Kings lite features with family dynasties, skills and traits, etc. it likely has a steer learning curve. Particularly as many people will be coming from/ experienced with Civ - so Humankind is a better fit for them.
Oh man, Age of Empires 4 this year too. My wallet, my poor, poor wallet.
Easy: I'll buy the one that will be available on Steam and the ones that aren't made by Amplitude. So I'll have to wait until next year. Still have to play the untouched Total Wars anyways
Oh man I have some untouched total war games to get through too!
What's the issue with Amplitude?
If it's from the guys that made Offworld Trading Company, it can't be that bad.
I hated (and still hate) the clunky mess that is Humankind. My test run was 10 minutes too long to have it refunded by Steam.
Old World is nice, but I didn't like that it's confined to the Classic era.
And only 200 years! Why!?
Any idea what multiplayer matches are like? What annoys me about Civ 6 is that there is no turn order with attacks (at least not from my experience in 3 player matches), so it ended up being a race to see who could initiate their troops first etc, while everyone else is frantically pressing units and wondering why nothing is happening.
As for these games I really like the look of both :D I'm very fond of the 'orders' mechanic from Old World and could only wish it was an option in Humankind/Civ! However, I'm not a fan of Old World's restricted city placement system :/ hopefully it's more fun than it looks though.
Humankind handles combat in a really interesting way by creating a sort of ‘mini arena’ for the battle, drawing boundaries and offering each player 3 alternating attacking/ defending rounds. I’m not sure how that plays out in multiplayer, but I’d wage it’s more fair and less a race against the host.
@@JumboPixel Great to hear :) that's the one thing that bugs me with Civ in multiplayer. I also tried Age of Wonders III last night and the way they do battles is cool and Humankind seems similar.
didnt know about Old World, prob due to EGS exclusive. the more story focused experience sounds nice.
EGS exclusivity really ruins games for me. I just forget they exist since I refuse to buy them anywhere else but steam.
11:13 bitter or better?
Batter
Anything is better than humankind.
I couldn't even finish the tutorial of Old World. It just felt so slow and janky to me.
Great video
Bought Humankind yesterday, I already have 50 hours on it. Help
Pls send help
Humankind is on sale for $4.99 on Steam. I have never played a Civ style game. How is the learning curve?
Even if Old World turns out to be 5 times better than Humankind no one will care cause very few people gonna know that game existed its an epic exclusive what a great loss of community...
Apparently it's only got a 12 month exclusivity period!
It really makes a difference. I didn't even know that Total War Saga Troy existed until I read an article.
Old world is better
this game looks quite cool.
Tnks!
Thanks for watching 😎
never heard of Old World and thought it was odd then to realize why its only on Epic Games so now I wont play it until it comes to steam no contest Humankind wins for now
old world is far better
It's so interesting to see the levels of support for Old World in the comments here too!
@@JumboPixel sure i think they decided to make humankind after fraxis stole their disctrict style game concept from endless series so I watched their gameplay and that game is no better than any civ game but old world looks fantastic even in its early access status
Humankind is obviously the greater, but I really do like Old World (I'd even call it one of my all time fav).
Awesome!
Man, we should think about games as the MCU thinks of their films. So mods would not be necessary to import save files from one game in timeperiod that end at a specific time to another game overlapping that time, but at the start. Like the first game is purely nomadic. Hours and hours of gameplay with their own kind trails and tribulations. At the type of victory points in culture, research, war and such will be a boosted at the start of the next game. Also the least invested victory point type will be a weakness. And also put in a nemesis system. That put Ai experience with you at rivaling strength. I mean that if you conquer a Ai. They might rebel against you in the second game supported by your rival. And barberians have the ability to start their own nations. Gauls become Francelike. Scythians become mongollike ai player. And they get like bonusses for starting as barbarian faction. They make peace with one or two ai players who support them. Making playing a game more of choosing what kind of meltingpot cultures you can manage. And the families you have to manage actually have a reason to have a different sets of bonuses and weaknesses. For example. You start as a research type nomadic faction. You conquered a warlike tribe. Now you habe to manage two cultures within your own faction. Because killing all barberians once you conquered their camp doesn't make sense to me. They could make great laborers at first and after that a warlike culture tribe a part of your own culture led by a family you have to compete with and control. Or choose to lead them to make your starting culture a secondary one.
It seems like Old World is far superior than Humankind. What really bothers me is this 200 years = 20 turns stuff. Why? This is so ridiculous and schematic. Times of the Ancient world were way more then pathetic 200 years. Only the history of the ancient Egypt is more then THREE THOUSAND YEARS! But they give us just 200 years. That’s ridiculous…
old world is better in ever way im afraid. gave humankind a chance tho
every 4x game is better than Humankind and the civ swap flop
i dont know about you bros but I PREFER CIV 5 XD I PLAYED MORE HOURS OF IT THAN HUMANKIND, CIV 6 AND OLD WORLD COMBINED
Your audio is so low...
:(
There is an easy fix.
Nice
Thanks for watching! 🙂
Don't really like how much emphasis Old World puts on dynasties. I don't care about family drama, I want to develop my nation! Oh and the fact you're limited with where you can place your cities also is a big problem for me. Game, my city being placed in the middle of Antarctica with no food around is my problem, not yours! Stop babysitting me!
Fair enough!
video starts at 2:24
Even the Humankind beta wiped the floor with old world.
It was a solid beta
got'em
The only problem being that Civ3, Civ4, Civ5 and Civ6 all wiped the floor with Humankind. Though partly it could be that 4x genre in general has just run out of ideas after so many years.
No captions? come on....
?? No idea why. Don’t assume it’s on purpose. I don’t think auto captions worked the same *years* ago when I made this
i will never play old world because i don't use epic games but i am looking forward to humankind
Epic has a 12 months exclusive. I'm hanging out for the steam release
I'll set an alarm!
for me Humankind , old world could be good but this graphic, no thank you wont buy or play it
my personal opinion is that humankind is the superior game because it's closer to civ, but i'm upset that it had denuvo. even if it's removed now, i'm angry they even had it in the first place.
i like the mid and late game civ experience more than the early game. i respect old world as an artform though!
I was genuinely upset and was going to get Humankind because of Denuvo, but seeing as it’s now gone I’ll probably get it again because I’d be lying if I said it didn’t look really cool
So fair. I’m really pleased they ditched it!
BIG HOLE OF WATER
I’m a creative
ohh only on epic games.... nice way to block me from playing it. Fuck EPIC!
What´s wrong with Epic? They´re very generous with giving away games every week.
@@apheirox chinese spyware