So is Civ Beyond Earth a flop?

Angry Joe review - 6/10

Metacritic: critic score 81 / User score 5.9

So, theres hardly any PC hype threads on this forum...we can all speculate as to why and throw around insults....truth is....thats not the point. So there was little to no hype for this game...yet, it's a flagship game on PC.

Usually these games are recieved well from gamers....but this one is not.

Take what metacritic looks at: Critics are giving it decent scores it seems....but gamers are giving it shit scores.

So...is it a flop?

Sure.

Yes. Super flop.

looking metacritic user score is hardly any indication how good a game is. Having said that the game is indeed a flop ( still good game though ) but i have no doubt after a couple of major expansions it will be up to the standards of previous Civ games.

The game has some shortcomings that truly hold it from been great ( atrocious trade route system that ends up been a chore , some bad UI choices and lack of content ). Those though are thinks that can easily get fixed with patches and updates and hopefully ( and most likely ) that will be the case ( i do hope though this time Firaxis wont charge 30euros for the expansions )

Civ games are always a slow burn. They launch and are pretty good, but after expansions become great. Civ5 was amazing post expansion. 81 meta seems about right

Nope. Not according to the SW game.

Yup, don't know if it had a hype thread, but hype was certainly above A. (Metacritic has nothing to do with SW flops)

yes but it's still great

i mean, its still a good game and firaxis is pretty good at supporting a game and improving it with expansions.

Not in SW land

I don't recall seeing a hype thread.

Steam Activity on the first day/second day of the game showed it's peak at 85,000+ people playing, now its peak is only at 33,000+ people playing, even less than Civ 5 which has 45,000+ people playing at it's peak. People are abandoning this game fast.

Source: Civ Beyond Earth Steam Activity

I bought this game first day and I regret buying it, played it for only 17 hours and I'm done with it.

It's basically just a reskin of Civ 5, with the same AI mechanics and dialogue (exactly the same, they didn't even bother to change the dialogue up and to create personalities for AIs). It has bland environments and wonders, bland building/unit/wonder artworks, a complicated tech tree, and an unrewarding victory(all you get is a picture saying that you won, and that's it, even though Civ 5 is like this, I thought they would have at least improved and changed the flaws of Civ 5, but they haven't).

It is Civ 5 without Civ 5's charm and the content is definitely lacking and is a lot less compared to Civ 5(they didn't even bother to add a sh*tload of content at launch and will most probably release it at a later date, this reinforces my resolve to not purchase a civ game at launch in the future).

The game is fun and all, but it definitely does not warrant a purchase if one is looking for more content or something different.

All in all, the game is a disappointment and I'm going back to playing Civ 5.

Unfortunately, it looks like it is

Well Firaxis never said this is a new Alpha centauri . Its just people assumed that . I actually like it that is more of a civ V in space .

As for the lack of content that was the case with Civ V so i'm sure that will be fixed .

As for enviroments imo i liked them and did like the tech tree as well ( and is easy to know what to research next as long as you follow 1 affinity and dont try and do all 3 )

Of course having said that i also stoped the game after 25 hours and i dont see me getting back at least after the first major expansion and hopefully a few fixes ( my main gripes are trade routes and some UI fixes such as minimap )

It has lived up to the hype, imo. Some things need to be fixed/re-balanced, but overall the game is quite good. I wonder how much more time and effort Firaxis will put into this game, however, as it is an offshoot of their main franchise.

Keep grasping at straws Huggles.

I care not at all, I'm enjoying it and as far as I'm concerned that's all that matters. It plays well, is easy to get into, like most civ games, but will take time to master.

At least it isn't a broken mess like Drive Club or stripped to the bare essentials like Destiny.

Well for System War Standards. What was the Hype and what did Gamespot give it?

@LegatoSkyheart:

Hype = None.

Gamespot = 7.

According to Huggles logic that's a super flop.

The main reason there was never a hype thread is due to the fact that theses devs are committed to civilization. The game today will be completely different within mere months.

Destiny in the other hand has shown the lack of inconpetence the bungie team has in creating games. 20$ for a DLC that contains less content than 1/3rd of the base game? (Considering there was no content to begin with in the base game.) Lol.

PC had a better year than consoles by far. Wii U is the only one that came close. Obvious DC is obvious.

That said, yes Civ: BE was a flop unofficially. Lots of people were expecting at least AA from this franchise, and said as much in other threads.

So....there was no hype...but yet one person even said "it lived up to the hype."

Then....I ask a question....and according to the geniuses on this board....that means I'm making a statement.

There were like 20 posts....and the usual suspects came in and made this about me.

This thread was going so pleasantly.

@mr_huggles_dog: See the problem is, you are asking if it's a flop and using metacritc. In SW's the score that only matters is gamespots and there must have been an official hype thread that hyped a score higher than a 7. You should have known this.

Less than one page in and Mr_Huggles_Troll is already resorting to namecalling and moving the goal posts. At least nothing has changed since...yesterday.

So let me get this straight, you are complaining that a a game with "Civilization" in the title on a space colony plays like civ5 with space colony stuff.... wow... who would of thought. Did you expect a different game? I sure didn't. I knew what i was getting into and that is a fun civ game. I love tbs strategy and this game is great! Will they add more, sure they always do, it's civ and the base game is fun. If this game wasn't called "CIV" beyond earth, than I would expected something different, xcom was different, but this game is CIV... Why would you expect it to be totally different?

No hype = no flop. it's a good game, not great, but it's fun

fixed

btw, why doen't Cranler wanna talk about Legend of Grimlock 2 getting a 9 on GS, and 86 on MC?

Don't you know this by now, "indie trash" and RTS/mobas/strategy games don't count.

dont forget " if there is no ad on tv then it doesnt count "

I played one game of it so far. I liked it. Not blown away by it or anything but it's more civ and at the difficulty and skill level that I play at it works well.
I'm disappointed by the lack of victory conditions. You may think there are quite a few but most are ruled out within the first quarter of a game because they are specific to the affinities.

It got 7/10 from gamespot which isn't bad score in most cases but for a Civilization game , it is a bad score . I think it'll become a true 9/10 game after a major expansion pack . Hopefully Total War : Attila won't end up like this . I'm extremely pumped for that game .

Agreed . However , I don't think there was a hype thread for Civ : Beyond Earth (so not a flop by SW standards) . That said, I expected it to score AAA and sadly that didn't happen. I think they reserved a lot of stuff for expansion pack (terrible new tradition of game industry) . I'm currently back on playing Divinity : Original Sin and that game alone is better than anything I've seen or played this year so far. The only thing that comes close is Black Flag but it is 2013 game, that I played this year. So yeah , this year was best for PC and then there is Wii U .

Guess they needed to lock it at 30fps, with mandatory black bars, and QTE events. You know, for that cinematic feel consoles are so fond of.

I never said that I was expecting something totally different from Civ 5. Improving upon past games substantially and adding fresh content is essential if any game series ever wants to move forward, else it will suffer from stagnation and lack of innovation.

Having something that offers something interestingly unique and satisfyingly different from a past game is important, else why purchase the game when you can just buy the same game with more content, minus the space setting, building/unit/wonder/victory reskins made for space? If one is really into the space setting, then good, but if not, then the game generally has limited new content aside from affinities(military,unit, and resource upgrades), covert ops(spying with more options), quests(diplomacy made easier), and aliens(tougher reskinned barbarians). Making it to me; and many others not worth a $50 purchase.

The game is fun and all, but it definitely does not warrant a purchase if one is looking for more content or something different. This game is not different enough from Civ 5 to warrant a $50 purchase, in fact, buying Civ 5 now is better because it has more content. But hey, maybe the content is good enough for you and you found the purchase worth your money.

All in all, your opinion is your opinion. As I have said, the game is fun, but it does not offer anything substantially unique to warrant a purchase for me.

This didn't get a hype thread? SWs used to be a lot more popular and chaotic before the site change.