The shareholders and company suits must spend half of every day laughing. They have a horrendously predatory marketing strategy, which must be thoroughly enjoyable for them, and they know that no matter how much people complain all the nerds who are addicted to their games will keep lining their pockets regardless. They don't have it as good as EA, but they still get to take Easy Street wherever they want to go. I compromise - I buy the base games and any DLCs that reviews indicate aren't blatant rip-offs, then torrent the latest FitGirl repack with *all* the DLC and play their games that way.
I hear this a lot and honestly is not that bad. Paradox games take a long time to develop, so they release a game that could be 3 years in development, but is a good game. Over those 3 years, they improve the game, balance it, and release new features. At the same time paid dlc includes new and cool features to support the game development. You can, today, play eu4 and hoi4 without dlc and play a superb game, that was only made possible by the continuous support of the game for 11 years, not many games can boast of that. And .ost of the dlc is options, buy the good ones, skip the bad ones. And you can play multiplayer without them and you get access to them. I find a hard financial model that can help support a game for 10 years that is better than paradox, as long as, they don't start releasing unfinished games like they did with city skylines 2
@odioaleman You mean games like Cities Skylines 2, Rome Imperator, Victoria 3 and Crusader Kings 3. Supporting your games is one thing. Releasing them with a fraction of content because you want to sell dlc every three months is another.
I hope Firaxis doesn't fall into that kind of marketing. A game spewing out too much dlc is bad enough, but a game that makes (what would be otherwise) normal updates as paid DLC is even worse.
Millennia taught me that I indeed care about graphics. I thought I didn't because i don't especially care for the newest greatest 3D features and often play older games. But I do care. I care if the game has an art-style, it needs to be cozy, draw me in or in some way make me feel invested in their game world. Millennia feels like a bunch of randomly selected stock images that got thrown together in the least appealing way.
While I don’t mind the graphic too much, I wish it has a better art direction. One that feels more inspired and has more character. But the main issue for me is the game felt like it need more polishing and more QoL. It was released without rebindable keys, it’s added now, but why a modern 4X was released without that? I enjoyed the production chain tho. I just love logistic lol. This makes me feel they are trying something different.
Yeah, I don't care about graphics in the sense of "must be realistic, super HD", but in the sense of "coherent art direction that works for what it's trying to do". Pixel art works, stylized 2d works, stylized 3d works, fully rendered works...mixing styles can be really cool but is best done with care and purpose (a certain boss in Undertale immediately comes to mind). This definitely feels like the graphics aren't so much low quality as they are an afterthought.
I really want to see a vast variety of ages and some secret ages that require you to go through specific ages. Something like a special age if you go through both the heroic age and the ether age would get you a crazy end game age of magic like effects.
I think the thing that bugs me the most about this game is the lack of personality for the AI nations. They are all identical, just different city names. Millennia made me realise just how much the different personalities each Leader/Civ have in the Civilization games actually add to the feel of the game.
this, its, at best, a side grade from some version of Civ VI that doesnt include all of the expansions/dlc's - and its got that typical Paradox jank and monetization. Civ VII was just announced for next year, and I can take a year before I get back into a Civ thing that I need to be different enough from the last one.
I think they went for a great vibe with the civilizations are build over time by the choices made. And I love it, but I think the AI should change behaviours, get special traits, when they get a new government, etc
That's kinda funny... I've played earlier Civs but stopped because of lack of differences between AI/repetitiveness. Got myself hooked into EU4... Only to leave due to overabundance of DLC
I hate micromanaging a lot of cities. So being able to only worry about one city, and have the rest be vassals, was big for me. It was like playing Venice in Civ V all over again.
I love Millennia (and Humankind) so much. But I completely agree with everything you said. On the graphics, case and point was the map in the video, it seemed so flat / bland. But what really disappointed me was the alt-eras. I LOVE them so much, but esp. the ones like Age of Aether where you had steam-punk techs, when you progress out of that era it's as if the world just completely forgets it ever existed which I think is a BIG shame. I'd love to see esp. unique resources/units/buildings have some sort of continuity in future eras (Aether-charged tanks etc?) so it feels like my decision to go into those alt-eras has a lasting impact on my empire and the world beyond it was cool, it was unique or it just helped me win etc I totally get why they didn't, because esp. for earlier-eras the more alt-eras you have like that, the more branching occurs and exponentially adds a LOT more work for the devs. And tbh it may not be necessary for all eras, earlier ones are fine I think like Age of Blood, but where special resources or gameplay is added like Age of Aether I think some sort of continuity would be REALLY amazing I'd love to see aether-enhanced fighter jets if I go through the age of aether...gives even more of a (meta) reason to take those eras
The problem is that the game won't let you get 2 alt eras in a row. So any alt era is immediately forgotten as history effectively resets to default. It's a shame, and I'd love for the devs to make those branches last more than a single era.
The alternative ages is the best part of the game but the ai just always beelines through the tech tree and goes strait for the next normal age. On lower dufficulties you can just snowball ahead of the ai and pick which ages you want to play in but on higher difficulties the ai will always be ahead of you and will always go for a normal age.
@@Tetragramix That more a side effect from them ignoring the mechanics of the age because they were beeling to the next age. They sometimes get close but they almost always reach the next age before the crisis counter fills up. The only age they reliably reach is blood because the ai is super agro.
Millennia became my main game since its launch. Just recently switched back to AoW4 in preparation for its Cthulhu DLC so I'm letting Millennia rest for a while now. To me, Millennia should have been labeled Early Access when it launched. Just looking at the updates made, it's clear it was far from finished. I'm guessing that would also have saved them a lot of negative reviews. It's a game that clearly has potential and it'll be interesting to see where it goes with future updates.
Yes but it needs more. It needs more map variety. But it REALLY needs a bit more nation variety - not number of nations but distinct features for each nation. Because the only substantive difference between nations right now is personality (default bonus can be changed), games can quickly start to feel the same despite the different government and domain combos.
Yes! Right now, I don't feel that much difference in gameplay once you get past ancient era. You have to force yourself to change your domain/government if you want to try something different, but over a few game, you will tend to 1 direction. It would be nice if each nation has a long lasting ability that changes gameplay style
Millennia is probably the first game I’ve ever liked and said: “I’ll check in when the DLCs come out” Because man, the late game slowdown is agonizing. I’m the future I want a few things. Let us chain Special and Turmoil ages, maybe even just a game option. Fix the end game agony. I agree that Millenia doesn’t look great but idk if an art overhaul can even happen. Potato you’re looking for the AA category.
Just got the game and love it. Been having a blast with it and really do enjoy the different take on ages. Also update 4 is out on open beta. Been noticing some issues with naval combat not counting if that makes sense. Ill attack with naval bombardment and then attack with a scout and their back to full health. Among a few minor issues.
One thing I also have a major issue with is if you are allied with two nations, and one goes to war with the other, you are automatically pulled into their war and forced to break your alliance with the other
I would like to see a game that gave me the option to potentially play thru only doing variant ages, or crisis, or a mix. Also wish they would lean into ages having more of an impact in follow up ages
With stream reviews i treat any thing at 60-65% review score as "its good, just has issues or improvements that can be made", i really wanted to like Millenia, while i was playing it i really wanted to like it and i could tell there was something real good there, it just needed improving on, so hopefully these patches do that
I feel like Millennia is difficult to say yes to right now. I see the potential and the good, but the game needs more love, which to be fair the devs are delivering. Having said that I have a hard time setting down Old World to play Millenia right now. 2025? Civ VII. It’s possible I’ll forget about both Old World and Millenia when the next big installment of Civ comes out.
Hey, I was just playing. I was boxed into the large forest area. Was unable to make large use of improvements until clear cut. naturalist helped me survive until gunpowder. I managed to make a huge comeback with careful use of high tier leaders and the unkillable davinci tank innovation unit
Writing this before I watch. This Video will decide wether I buy the game or not. I really like it, but I am not sure, if I will actually play this for a significant amount of time. Civ7 is already anounced, and I am currently playing a lot of Civ6 with friends, since it has become way cheaper.
Now that I watched it: I am propably going to buy it. I really don't like the typical Paradox move with the DLCs but the game seems quite good so far. And as you said, the updates are definetively going in the right direction.
@@roemischer To be honest, Civ 6 went pretty hard into the Paradox DLC route itself. Honestly? I suspect you're gunna see more games like civ/paradox games going that route to keep it going.
@@stormblind1654 Yeah it's just an unfortunate necessity for games that have long-term support. You just can't keep development going on base game sales alone. The alternative is things like micro-transactions or subscriptions, which people arguably hate more
Yeah the Alliance Status thing was a godsend as I'd get a message from some new civilization like "We want an Alliance" and realize only after clicking it that they were at war with EVERYONE. All in all... I realy did like Update 3. The stuff that was nerfed like Old Guard Grenadiers are still good. They carried my continental unification war in a run pretty hard despite the nerf. The stuff that was buffed or kind of Sidegraded feels more workable. The only real complaint I've had in Update 3, and it sounds silly... there's something with the map generation for me lately. In that all of my games in Update 3 have basically been primordial forest worlds. Like 80% of the landmasses are just covered in Forest/Jungle/Deep Forest. Like all 10 of them have been like that. I'm not sure why or what odd statistical quirk that is but it's honestly quite a slog. It does make the National Spirit "Naturalists" better since they get a bunch of Unimproved Forest buffs and Innovation Events, which I think they kind of could use (I find if I wasn't on some Forested Hell World that they were pretty weak as there's not really a good reason to NOT improve tiles if you could and having your Forest be like +1 Housing, +2 Food, +1 Production is... well it's nice when you can't improve it and lack points to do anything... but it's not enough that I'd want to actually consider not improving it. I think they kind of need something almost like the Preserve District in Civ 6 for that. Where there's some tangible benefit (even if it's not optimal, but more than Naturalists provide right now) to not developing land. I get what you mean about the rough around the edges feel. For me it's mostly in the aesthetics which look... kind of behind the times. Whil they're not quite the same gameplay wise and such I can't help but think of games like Victoria 3 where even though it was "just a map game" I'd marvel at actually watching the world. All the little cities and towns and industrial plots and buildings, traffic and skyscrapers and lights going on at night, etc. It's a beautiful game. And Millennia, for me, that's its biggest weakness. It's kind of... not ugly but it feels like they didn't put effort into it. Though plenty to like about it. I like how... I'm always retooling my nation in the game. It's not like Civilization games and such typically where once I build whatever development/improvement/building it's kind of fire and forget for the rest of the game. it's there and I don't really interact with it. I'm constantly through the ages and unlocked tech trying to find where I can streamline things, improve production with new chains, manage new needs and resources, etc. It makes the latter game for me feel less like I'm going through the motions on the path to victory. There's always something there to work on and it's kind of satisfying in the same sense to see your ancient city no longer digging clay and hunting wild game but buildings cars and data centers and interlocking the trade of resources to mutually prosper, etc. It's an interesting game. And honestly I hope that 4X designers in general look at it and go '... that's a good idea, I can totally borrow that!". Another weakness for me, and at least one they're working on, is the maps. I kind of don't like how "Continents" for instance always splits the world in two equal masses with equal number of players on there. Wouldn't mind something in between "Continents" and "Everyone gets the own island domain". Diplomatic AI could do with some work because Power Score still reigns dominant and I'm... not entirely sure how they calculate that. Like I've had situations where I outnumber the enemy with Deathball Armies that they can't even touch just taking like a Region from them every turn. And they still were going "I don't want peace, I'm stronger than you!" despite their complete inability to put up a fight. And it's kind of frustrating, though I do accept it to an extent as "Industry Standard" that when you check diplomacy modifiers they'll have something like "-50 Settlements too close" when they PUT THE SETTLEMENT NEXT TO MINE. "I moved in next door to you, I hate you for being next door to me." It's just asinine to deal with. Maybe they need an AI script where they won't settle within X of another player so basically the only way they could get that is if a player did forward settle on them? And possibly stop the weird tendency they have to do things like spam outposts in the middle of your nation? Maybe it only bothers me. The AI in Millennia seems a bit too.. settlement happy. So many games I find out they created settlements that basically are the Region Capital and 6 hexes because it's literally hemmed in on all sides. By the next few Regions that are barely any bigger. Though the Outpost changes in Patch 2 or whatever that saddened me but I accepted as logical. used to be when I had a Castle Outpost I could put abbeys down... in water. So I'd have underwater coastal abbeys. Can't do that anymore, sadly. Makes those tiny micro islands on various maps less interesting.
What is the origin of the music you use at the end of almost all your videos? There's something about it - I react to it like an alarm clock, I have to stop everything and click another video or at least pause it. It's not that it's a bad sound, it's just that something about it makes me feel like "stop!"
I might be splitting hairs, but I don't really have an issue with the UI. I do have issue with the UX. I will have turns where I have "resources" to spend, but forget to spend them. This is probably partly due to the variety of resources in the game: improvement points, warfare, culture, gold, etc. But I also think its because the game do enough to remind me that I have resources to spend. Although I think that is party fixed with some slight UX improvement. I would also like a better in game manual. Every time I select a building/unit for more information, I am treated to flavor text (which I enjoy) but no mechanical explanation. For the record, I am enjoying the game!
I have no issues with the graphics or the gameplay, the deal breaker for me is simultaneous comng soon... I rarely play games single player and after attempting a multiplayer game with what you can manage currently I quickly stopped playing. I'm disappointed it isnt even on the road map, yet marked as coming soon?
Unfortunately the overwhelming majority of 4X players play single-player only so its understandable why simultaneous multiplayer is a bit lower priority right now
I posted about this on the forum but the trade system is very lackluster. Right now a city can only export reaources to one other city and resources can't be exported from vassals. The lack of more robust trade options cuts against many interesting decisions Millenia makes regarding cities.
I'm enjoying the heck out of this game, but like everyone else mentions, the graphics are brutal. Love how I just tried the Explorers national spirit, and was blown away by how much knowledge that generated - zoomed right through the Age. Hate the fact that for the life of me, I can't tell the difference between the Trash Heap, Foundry or pretty much anything else it could possibly be. But llike PotatoMcWhiskey says, it's quite fun despite all that.
One thing I’m hoping to see with the Q4 expansion is the age of Kaiju. What I want to see is more difficulty options, master is a pushover and Grandmaster is a massive spike. The other thing I want to see is expanded diplomacy.
And not but 2 days after this video did Update 4 come out. What timing. I would jokingly say when is the Update 4 analysis coming but that would just be mean. Short sum of the changes/additions that don't include balancing: -Added South Korea as a new Nation. -Added Challenge Mode as a Game Rule, modifying the Crisis Ages and making Chaos even more difficult to deal with. -Game Speed has been added, Faster (Normalized) 350 Turns, Faster 250 Turns, Standard 500 Turns, Slower 900 Turns. -Added the Three Continents map. -New Event art for Barbarian Camps, Expeditions, Quests, Landmarks, Unrest, and Tribal Camps. -Added new Starting Bonuses for Ages I and II. UI changes for Quests in the Age of Heroes and to the UI for entering into a new Age. -Added map models for Capital Cities for the Bots from Age of Singularity. -Added Hotkeys for switching between Regions while in Region Display.
This game would have benefitted from going in the mechanic direction of old world since it's fairly flat. I still wish that game would be blown up into a world forex. The choices and meaningful social system is the evocative layer that a top forex contender would run away with if they implemented it. Maybe not the same complicated level of royal lineages, but definitely room for advisors and sub leaders to have more map interaction. Millennia, at this point, still feels like someone hit a shuffle button on forex mechanics. The things that millennia does bring feel like they're so minimal they don't justify the price. I sort of wish the developer to give it the rest of the year, pull the plug, and go right into a "Millennia 2". The experience they would carry forward would be great, especially if they concentrated on style, both visual and mechanic.
Fucking thank you for for mentioning that Paradox only published the game. I feel like that gets forgotten in all of the foibles of the game. I agree with your closing statement too - Also feel like there should be follow-up ages to variant/crisis ages as well. For example, Age of Visitors - Humanity fights off an invading alien force and then... nah we're back to our regular ol' victory ages.
Im surprised they havent nerfed feudal monarchy a bit, it is objectively a great move in high dificulty games to just stick to it instead of changing to any advance goverment
Hi potato, do you really feel "ok" with how diplomatic system work? I mean, there are a few options and ther are not deep enough in my opinion. Is the aspect of the game i most hate. What do you think about this?
I think this game has a lot more potential than most civ like games. From the ages to the variety of improvements/resources, it’s a ton of fun to play. The visuals don’t do it justice
Things I would like to see from Millenium: 1. As stated, the UI needs to be improved. 2. It needs to capitalize on its system of taking different paths. Currently there is a meta of how to play, they need to adjust the game to focus the systems to better support taking scattered route to your victory. 3. Steam multi-player that isn't hot-seat.
Every update definitely made the game better. A very important change was nerfing the Forced March/ Reinforcement spam, by having the affected army temporarily drop 20% combat strength. Still, Warfare is just too damn strong in this game. For all of the alternative winning conditions, none of them really works without some major world domination first, and by that time you might as well carry on the momentum. Also, some balancing is in order, especially when some events are meaningless while some can be insanely damaging (the UFO invasion is crazy, they easily had more military strength than over 10x the entire world just to crush my strong, expansive nation that easily dominated the Adept AI).
One thing that bugs me after playing a bit of millennia myself is that the graphics are a little hexy. I think Civ 6 did a relatively good job rendering organic terrain that still felt like it obeyed the hex grid. When you have a boundary between terrain types in Millennia, you can clearly see each face of the hexagon. It makes it feel like a board game instead of a map of a real world which, in my opinion, sort of dispels the illusion of the game. Another thing is improvements are very blobby. I think in Civ 6, tile improvements really filled the space of their tile but if you look at the clay pit in Millennia there's so much empty space on the edges and when you have a ring of clay pits, it just looks like 6 blobs with almost as much space between each pit as the width of the pit itself, instead of a sprawling mass of clay-producing infrastructure. Firaxis's graphics team put a lot of work into how adjacent tiles interact visually but I feel like Millennia's team has largely ignored this. Millennia's tile improvements look like they leave a lot of wasted space, like it's an image of the idea of the improvement rather than the improvement actually existing in the physical world.
It's wierd the things different people like and dislike. I have no problems with the graphics. Alliances forcing you into war i don't like. I like the special ages, i kind of think every one should have something to do to achieve/trigger them(in the 3 tech type time frame) or a normal default age only happens after all sciences. The ages are the game's point of difference but higher difficulty takes the variability out of the equation and narrows decision making completely.
I wonder if Milennia will get good enough and stable enough to compete on Civ 7's level when it comes out. It looks like they are moving in the right direction to be ahead of Civ 7 for a while after it releases. Hopefully it won't follow Humankind.
I love this game. It has much more depth than Civ6 but not too much, like in EUIV and the game guides you through all the new stuff when they introduce it through the ages. Only downside compared to Civ are the empires themselves. You would think that a game with so much depth would give that also to the empires you play, but no.
Did they add Multiplayer Yet ? (No HotSeat is not Multiplayer. HotSeat basicly is when several People pass around the controller for a Singleplayer Game) Otherwise I really dont care.
I haven't played a ton of millennia, but the one major issue I have with it (other than its shit multiplayer functionality) is that you loose all the bonuses from your government as soon as you level it up - which just feels really shitty, especially if you are relying on the bonuses for your strategy (e.g. kingdom's vassal buffs). It would feel so much better even just getting a legacy trait when you change governments that kept some vestige of the bonuses, and having the government stick around like national spirits wouldn't be much of an issue in my opinion.
I want them to get rid of the resource icon once I put down an improvement on it. They are so ugly late game. Also - it's super hard to tell one improvement from another unless it's a farm, plantation, or pasture. And I want to see my towns look different based on their specialization.
I'd really like to see another Potato Millennia campaign. Don't get me wrong, AoW4 is amazing, but I tend to prefere Empire Builders with a stronger emphasis on building than on warfare. And Millennia is just so much right for me.
I agree that the best way to develop strategy games is to give it to the players to get feedback, but maybe don't release it at full price if that's the case.
I know they can be turned off now but the combat graphics are still killing me. They would have been considered clunky 20 years ago. Today they just tell me that this is not a serious effort of making a game.
Yep. paradox burned a lot of dough on marketing for the game launch. But they really shouldn't have released the demo, people knew better than to buy it after it.
They really need to do something about the minimap being so useless and map generation, lots of map options and good map scripts really help make the game fun.
I have the same problem with Milennia that I do with Humankind. The idea of build your own civilization is cool but in practice, it leaves me feeling directionless and the AI feeling like cardboard. Map seed is obviously going to always have some influence on play style but as the primary driver, it doesn't work for me. Different nations that get access to a smaller pool of options in each age would provide more guidance for the player and make the AI feel more coherent.
The UI is kind of odd. Parts of it work fine--good, even. Then you have screens like the "tiles being worked" screen for cities and it's like, who came up with this? It's just so weird and unintuitive and really feels like it would have been better as a toggle-able overlay on the main map. That said, I actually think the Civ VI UI isn't particularly great, either. I'm so used to it that it's pretty easy to navigate at this point, but a lot of Civ VI's UI screens are just a hot, disorganized mess.
These days you don't need to be a Triple-A game studio to produce a stunning looking game. Just look at Manor Lords initially designed by a solo developer (not even a company, just a one guy and few of his friends helping him) which looks absolutely amazing and really immersive. Yes, 4X games never were famous for a beautiful graphics, but in 2024 when most of GPUs can handle a good level graphics without breaking a sweat it becomes one of the aspects of the gameplay which ether drags you into the game or pushing you away. For example, Humankind looks amazing, and I've enjoyed playing it (and still playing from time to time) despite of some of the game mechanics flaws. But man, despite of enjoying Millenia gameplay in general, I can't force myself playing it because it looks so ugly. TBH, I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw battle previews for the first time... It might sound harsh, but it looks like someone who just started to learn 3d and motion graphics made a raw draft of their first test project. There is no excuse to have such poor quality in 2024 no matter how small your developer's team is.
I don't find Millenia visually attractive to me, good mechanics and gameplay in all its glory, but I will be using my eyes for hundreds of hours so I expect to be visually pleased.
I have to say graphic and ui is fine for me - but the gameplay with the eras is far to shallow… After 3 playthroughs even on hardest difficulty I lost my Motivation in the game… I hoped for far more complexity in the ressource system but got utterly dissapointed 😢
Millennia is a good game bordering on great but probably not quite there. I do really enjoy it but I have to admit it feels less exciting and less balanced than Civ 6. One standout piece is Civ 6 really makes you feel like you are playing a unique civ. In Millenia, I conquered India, but honestly I have no idea what civilization I'm destroying. Maybe I'll notice all the samurai slowing down my attack, but I'd never notice that I killed the Olympians turned to inventors. In that sense you play a unique custom chosen civ in Millennia but it feels and looks generic which disconnects people from the game. That's one the big problems and I'm not sure if there is a fix for it.
You know where the game is going ? Right to the sales bin. They have to release the 2 DLC people buyed to avoid trouble. Then they would be able to totally drop this useless poj nobody ever asked them for. With Civ 7 incoming in a few years we have more important things to wait for than insignificant minor updates to a deeply flawed game.
I don't mind the game, but it is definitely Early Access. The roadmap alone is enough to make that claim. These are features that you would see in an EA roadmap. Personally, I find the largest issues to be the lack of AI awareness and the diplomacy. AI awareness seems non-existent. They will forward settle you in rubbish lands, settle seemingly terrible cities, stack cities together which is a big no-no for the mechanics of Millenia. incredibly frustrating. On the diplo side, there is no rhyme nor reason to why the AI might make a diplo change. And the alliance system is dogshit. I DO NOT want to be forced into an ongoing war just because I allied with one side. That should still be a choice. Overall I feel like I wasted my money and at the moment I have no compulsion to start up another game of Millenia. On the DLC front both CIv5 and Civ6 felt a bit weak without their DLCs, so I don't think spending on the DLC is limited to Paradox.
It looks poor, like old graphics poor. It’s is also the jankiest, of janky, UIs. Poor UI is a Paradox standard (excluding Stellaris). Also, Paradox is grand strategy and they do it well. Stick to what you know in this case.
Millennia has some good ideas. It has potential, but with PDX 's policy of slow content addition through dlc and lack of brand name it will be an uphill battle to remain relevant, especially when civ 7 stuff start getting revealed. The game should have cooked for half to a year more, but PDX. They can't release a finished product anymore.
Hahahaha every streamer pushing this before launch, then stopped streaming it...yeah, I guess it says a lot. Just be honest in reviews. New nations? Doesn't matter. It's just a placeholder. Game sucks. It plays like a Tencent mobile game. The ideas of different ages are nice, but it isn't implemented well. Everything about what sets this game apart from other 4x is beyond broken.
The Number one thing this game needs to fix is the AI having control over the ages. That needs to be removed *completely*. The best solution is to make all of the ages individual to the nations, rather than being global phenomenon. There is nothing more frustrating than playing this game, trying to experience something, and then getting shunted into the Age of Plague and watching your game get toilet-flushed, because the AI cheats on every single resource and doesn't care about sanitation, while you lose pops every two seconds to it. With individualized nation-ages, you get a wonderful mishmash of the world cultures, power, etc. The number 2 thing that needs to be fixed is the AI's diplomacy algorithm, which is way, way, way too aggresssive or submissive depending on a vague power level.
I’m afraid you are to deep in the pockets of Paradox. This game has interesting elements but is a total flop. Hope Firaxis will take some of the interesting elements and build them in to Civ
This game really just looks like a Civ6 knockoff. Unlike Humankind, or some of the other games in the genre which have distinct visual styles and gameplay. If I want to play Civ, I just play Civ...
Don't complain about the graphics. graphics are so expensive. When a game has amazing graphics that is probably several features that were not implemented. pls don't perpetuate the pixel tax.
How do you feel about the impact of picked ages have on a game, and how important it is to be nr1 in tech so that you get to be the one picking ages? Seems like it narrows down the number of feasible play styles - if you play to win.
![The perfect start location doesn't exist... [Spits out Cereal] - Civ 6 Russia GIGA Start](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Gwfo1x9jqI8/mqdefault.jpg)
![The perfect start location doesn't exist... [Spits out Cereal] - Civ 6 Russia GIGA Start](/img/tr.png)
It can't be paradox game without 2 DLCs planned before even game gets released
The shareholders and company suits must spend half of every day laughing. They have a horrendously predatory marketing strategy, which must be thoroughly enjoyable for them, and they know that no matter how much people complain all the nerds who are addicted to their games will keep lining their pockets regardless. They don't have it as good as EA, but they still get to take Easy Street wherever they want to go.
I compromise - I buy the base games and any DLCs that reviews indicate aren't blatant rip-offs, then torrent the latest FitGirl repack with *all* the DLC and play their games that way.
I hear this a lot and honestly is not that bad. Paradox games take a long time to develop, so they release a game that could be 3 years in development, but is a good game. Over those 3 years, they improve the game, balance it, and release new features. At the same time paid dlc includes new and cool features to support the game development.
You can, today, play eu4 and hoi4 without dlc and play a superb game, that was only made possible by the continuous support of the game for 11 years, not many games can boast of that.
And .ost of the dlc is options, buy the good ones, skip the bad ones. And you can play multiplayer without them and you get access to them.
I find a hard financial model that can help support a game for 10 years that is better than paradox, as long as, they don't start releasing unfinished games like they did with city skylines 2
@odioaleman
You mean games like Cities Skylines 2, Rome Imperator, Victoria 3 and Crusader Kings 3.
Supporting your games is one thing. Releasing them with a fraction of content because you want to sell dlc every three months is another.
I hope Firaxis doesn't fall into that kind of marketing. A game spewing out too much dlc is bad enough, but a game that makes (what would be otherwise) normal updates as paid DLC is even worse.
@@Peatingtuneyou have discord?
Millennia taught me that I indeed care about graphics. I thought I didn't because i don't especially care for the newest greatest 3D features and often play older games. But I do care. I care if the game has an art-style, it needs to be cozy, draw me in or in some way make me feel invested in their game world. Millennia feels like a bunch of randomly selected stock images that got thrown together in the least appealing way.
While I don’t mind the graphic too much, I wish it has a better art direction. One that feels more inspired and has more character. But the main issue for me is the game felt like it need more polishing and more QoL. It was released without rebindable keys, it’s added now, but why a modern 4X was released without that?
I enjoyed the production chain tho. I just love logistic lol. This makes me feel they are trying something different.
Yeah, I don't care about graphics in the sense of "must be realistic, super HD", but in the sense of "coherent art direction that works for what it's trying to do". Pixel art works, stylized 2d works, stylized 3d works, fully rendered works...mixing styles can be really cool but is best done with care and purpose (a certain boss in Undertale immediately comes to mind).
This definitely feels like the graphics aren't so much low quality as they are an afterthought.
I really want to see a vast variety of ages and some secret ages that require you to go through specific ages. Something like a special age if you go through both the heroic age and the ether age would get you a crazy end game age of magic like effects.
There is some precedent for this with age of old ones already requiring some very specific conditions.
I think the thing that bugs me the most about this game is the lack of personality for the AI nations. They are all identical, just different city names.
Millennia made me realise just how much the different personalities each Leader/Civ have in the Civilization games actually add to the feel of the game.
this, its, at best, a side grade from some version of Civ VI that doesnt include all of the expansions/dlc's - and its got that typical Paradox jank and monetization. Civ VII was just announced for next year, and I can take a year before I get back into a Civ thing that I need to be different enough from the last one.
I think they went for a great vibe with the civilizations are build over time by the choices made. And I love it, but I think the AI should change behaviours, get special traits, when they get a new government, etc
They do have a tactical personality stated in their diplo screen, but that's about it.
That's kinda funny... I've played earlier Civs but stopped because of lack of differences between AI/repetitiveness.
Got myself hooked into EU4... Only to leave due to overabundance of DLC
there is *some* personality but needs more
I hate micromanaging a lot of cities. So being able to only worry about one city, and have the rest be vassals, was big for me. It was like playing Venice in Civ V all over again.
I love Millennia (and Humankind) so much. But I completely agree with everything you said. On the graphics, case and point was the map in the video, it seemed so flat / bland.
But what really disappointed me was the alt-eras. I LOVE them so much, but esp. the ones like Age of Aether where you had steam-punk techs, when you progress out of that era it's as if the world just completely forgets it ever existed which I think is a BIG shame. I'd love to see esp. unique resources/units/buildings have some sort of continuity in future eras (Aether-charged tanks etc?) so it feels like my decision to go into those alt-eras has a lasting impact on my empire and the world beyond it was cool, it was unique or it just helped me win etc
I totally get why they didn't, because esp. for earlier-eras the more alt-eras you have like that, the more branching occurs and exponentially adds a LOT more work for the devs. And tbh it may not be necessary for all eras, earlier ones are fine I think like Age of Blood, but where special resources or gameplay is added like Age of Aether I think some sort of continuity would be REALLY amazing
I'd love to see aether-enhanced fighter jets if I go through the age of aether...gives even more of a (meta) reason to take those eras
The problem is that the game won't let you get 2 alt eras in a row. So any alt era is immediately forgotten as history effectively resets to default. It's a shame, and I'd love for the devs to make those branches last more than a single era.
The alternative ages is the best part of the game but the ai just always beelines through the tech tree and goes strait for the next normal age. On lower dufficulties you can just snowball ahead of the ai and pick which ages you want to play in but on higher difficulties the ai will always be ahead of you and will always go for a normal age.
No. They always go for a Crisis age. I rarely see them beeline for normal ages.
@@Tetragramix That more a side effect from them ignoring the mechanics of the age because they were beeling to the next age. They sometimes get close but they almost always reach the next age before the crisis counter fills up.
The only age they reliably reach is blood because the ai is super agro.
Millennia became my main game since its launch. Just recently switched back to AoW4 in preparation for its Cthulhu DLC so I'm letting Millennia rest for a while now.
To me, Millennia should have been labeled Early Access when it launched. Just looking at the updates made, it's clear it was far from finished. I'm guessing that would also have saved them a lot of negative reviews. It's a game that clearly has potential and it'll be interesting to see where it goes with future updates.
Yes but it needs more. It needs more map variety. But it REALLY needs a bit more nation variety - not number of nations but distinct features for each nation. Because the only substantive difference between nations right now is personality (default bonus can be changed), games can quickly start to feel the same despite the different government and domain combos.
Yes! Right now, I don't feel that much difference in gameplay once you get past ancient era. You have to force yourself to change your domain/government if you want to try something different, but over a few game, you will tend to 1 direction.
It would be nice if each nation has a long lasting ability that changes gameplay style
Millennia is probably the first game I’ve ever liked and said: “I’ll check in when the DLCs come out” Because man, the late game slowdown is agonizing.
I’m the future I want a few things. Let us chain Special and Turmoil ages, maybe even just a game option. Fix the end game agony. I agree that Millenia doesn’t look great but idk if an art overhaul can even happen.
Potato you’re looking for the AA category.
C Prompt Games is totally an indie company, it has 11-50 people working for it. I would argue that AA game studios are 50-100 employees
Just got the game and love it. Been having a blast with it and really do enjoy the different take on ages.
Also update 4 is out on open beta. Been noticing some issues with naval combat not counting if that makes sense. Ill attack with naval bombardment and then attack with a scout and their back to full health. Among a few minor issues.
One thing I also have a major issue with is if you are allied with two nations, and one goes to war with the other, you are automatically pulled into their war and forced to break your alliance with the other
I would like to see a game that gave me the option to potentially play thru only doing variant ages, or crisis, or a mix. Also wish they would lean into ages having more of an impact in follow up ages
With stream reviews i treat any thing at 60-65% review score as "its good, just has issues or improvements that can be made", i really wanted to like Millenia, while i was playing it i really wanted to like it and i could tell there was something real good there, it just needed improving on, so hopefully these patches do that
I feel like Millennia is difficult to say yes to right now. I see the potential and the good, but the game needs more love, which to be fair the devs are delivering. Having said that I have a hard time setting down Old World to play Millenia right now. 2025? Civ VII. It’s possible I’ll forget about both Old World and Millenia when the next big installment of Civ comes out.
I did one playthru and not sure I'll go back. I got bored very quickly late on.
All I could thought about French ambassador:
"Ah, the negotiater"
Hey, I was just playing. I was boxed into the large forest area. Was unable to make large use of improvements until clear cut. naturalist helped me survive until gunpowder. I managed to make a huge comeback with careful use of high tier leaders and the unkillable davinci tank innovation unit
Millennia is very close to being an incredible game
It's already incredibly bland and dull...
Writing this before I watch.
This Video will decide wether I buy the game or not. I really like it, but I am not sure, if I will actually play this for a significant amount of time. Civ7 is already anounced, and I am currently playing a lot of Civ6 with friends, since it has become way cheaper.
Now that I watched it: I am propably going to buy it. I really don't like the typical Paradox move with the DLCs but the game seems quite good so far. And as you said, the updates are definetively going in the right direction.
@@roemischer To be honest, Civ 6 went pretty hard into the Paradox DLC route itself. Honestly? I suspect you're gunna see more games like civ/paradox games going that route to keep it going.
@@stormblind1654 Yeah it's just an unfortunate necessity for games that have long-term support. You just can't keep development going on base game sales alone. The alternative is things like micro-transactions or subscriptions, which people arguably hate more
Yeah the Alliance Status thing was a godsend as I'd get a message from some new civilization like "We want an Alliance" and realize only after clicking it that they were at war with EVERYONE.
All in all... I realy did like Update 3. The stuff that was nerfed like Old Guard Grenadiers are still good. They carried my continental unification war in a run pretty hard despite the nerf. The stuff that was buffed or kind of Sidegraded feels more workable.
The only real complaint I've had in Update 3, and it sounds silly... there's something with the map generation for me lately. In that all of my games in Update 3 have basically been primordial forest worlds. Like 80% of the landmasses are just covered in Forest/Jungle/Deep Forest. Like all 10 of them have been like that. I'm not sure why or what odd statistical quirk that is but it's honestly quite a slog.
It does make the National Spirit "Naturalists" better since they get a bunch of Unimproved Forest buffs and Innovation Events, which I think they kind of could use (I find if I wasn't on some Forested Hell World that they were pretty weak as there's not really a good reason to NOT improve tiles if you could and having your Forest be like +1 Housing, +2 Food, +1 Production is... well it's nice when you can't improve it and lack points to do anything... but it's not enough that I'd want to actually consider not improving it.
I think they kind of need something almost like the Preserve District in Civ 6 for that. Where there's some tangible benefit (even if it's not optimal, but more than Naturalists provide right now) to not developing land.
I get what you mean about the rough around the edges feel. For me it's mostly in the aesthetics which look... kind of behind the times. Whil they're not quite the same gameplay wise and such I can't help but think of games like Victoria 3 where even though it was "just a map game" I'd marvel at actually watching the world. All the little cities and towns and industrial plots and buildings, traffic and skyscrapers and lights going on at night, etc. It's a beautiful game. And Millennia, for me, that's its biggest weakness. It's kind of... not ugly but it feels like they didn't put effort into it.
Though plenty to like about it. I like how... I'm always retooling my nation in the game. It's not like Civilization games and such typically where once I build whatever development/improvement/building it's kind of fire and forget for the rest of the game. it's there and I don't really interact with it. I'm constantly through the ages and unlocked tech trying to find where I can streamline things, improve production with new chains, manage new needs and resources, etc. It makes the latter game for me feel less like I'm going through the motions on the path to victory. There's always something there to work on and it's kind of satisfying in the same sense to see your ancient city no longer digging clay and hunting wild game but buildings cars and data centers and interlocking the trade of resources to mutually prosper, etc.
It's an interesting game. And honestly I hope that 4X designers in general look at it and go '... that's a good idea, I can totally borrow that!".
Another weakness for me, and at least one they're working on, is the maps. I kind of don't like how "Continents" for instance always splits the world in two equal masses with equal number of players on there. Wouldn't mind something in between "Continents" and "Everyone gets the own island domain".
Diplomatic AI could do with some work because Power Score still reigns dominant and I'm... not entirely sure how they calculate that. Like I've had situations where I outnumber the enemy with Deathball Armies that they can't even touch just taking like a Region from them every turn. And they still were going "I don't want peace, I'm stronger than you!" despite their complete inability to put up a fight.
And it's kind of frustrating, though I do accept it to an extent as "Industry Standard" that when you check diplomacy modifiers they'll have something like "-50 Settlements too close" when they PUT THE SETTLEMENT NEXT TO MINE. "I moved in next door to you, I hate you for being next door to me." It's just asinine to deal with. Maybe they need an AI script where they won't settle within X of another player so basically the only way they could get that is if a player did forward settle on them? And possibly stop the weird tendency they have to do things like spam outposts in the middle of your nation? Maybe it only bothers me. The AI in Millennia seems a bit too.. settlement happy. So many games I find out they created settlements that basically are the Region Capital and 6 hexes because it's literally hemmed in on all sides. By the next few Regions that are barely any bigger.
Though the Outpost changes in Patch 2 or whatever that saddened me but I accepted as logical. used to be when I had a Castle Outpost I could put abbeys down... in water. So I'd have underwater coastal abbeys. Can't do that anymore, sadly. Makes those tiny micro islands on various maps less interesting.
What is the origin of the music you use at the end of almost all your videos? There's something about it - I react to it like an alarm clock, I have to stop everything and click another video or at least pause it. It's not that it's a bad sound, it's just that something about it makes me feel like "stop!"
I want a new difficulty between master and grandmaster
Domain pt accumulation rate per turn needs to be displayed on the left tab without needing to hover over the domain bar
I might be splitting hairs, but I don't really have an issue with the UI. I do have issue with the UX. I will have turns where I have "resources" to spend, but forget to spend them. This is probably partly due to the variety of resources in the game: improvement points, warfare, culture, gold, etc. But I also think its because the game do enough to remind me that I have resources to spend. Although I think that is party fixed with some slight UX improvement. I would also like a better in game manual. Every time I select a building/unit for more information, I am treated to flavor text (which I enjoy) but no mechanical explanation. For the record, I am enjoying the game!
I know its off topic but will you ever go back to Age of Wonders? would be curious to see how you manage the newer stuff. Thanks .. Stay amazing.
Wait wait wait. The keymapping, you are telling me that AZERTY users where still on WASD and not on ZQSD???????
Wasn't this the game with the mobile-game level autobattler combat?
I have no issues with the graphics or the gameplay, the deal breaker for me is simultaneous comng soon... I rarely play games single player and after attempting a multiplayer game with what you can manage currently I quickly stopped playing. I'm disappointed it isnt even on the road map, yet marked as coming soon?
Unfortunately the overwhelming majority of 4X players play single-player only so its understandable why simultaneous multiplayer is a bit lower priority right now
I posted about this on the forum but the trade system is very lackluster. Right now a city can only export reaources to one other city and resources can't be exported from vassals. The lack of more robust trade options cuts against many interesting decisions Millenia makes regarding cities.
I'm enjoying the heck out of this game, but like everyone else mentions, the graphics are brutal. Love how I just tried the Explorers national spirit, and was blown away by how much knowledge that generated - zoomed right through the Age. Hate the fact that for the life of me, I can't tell the difference between the Trash Heap, Foundry or pretty much anything else it could possibly be. But llike PotatoMcWhiskey says, it's quite fun despite all that.
One thing I’m hoping to see with the Q4 expansion is the age of Kaiju. What I want to see is more difficulty options, master is a pushover and Grandmaster is a massive spike. The other thing I want to see is expanded diplomacy.
And not but 2 days after this video did Update 4 come out. What timing. I would jokingly say when is the Update 4 analysis coming but that would just be mean. Short sum of the changes/additions that don't include balancing:
-Added South Korea as a new Nation.
-Added Challenge Mode as a Game Rule, modifying the Crisis Ages and making Chaos even more difficult to deal with.
-Game Speed has been added, Faster (Normalized) 350 Turns, Faster 250 Turns, Standard 500 Turns, Slower 900 Turns.
-Added the Three Continents map.
-New Event art for Barbarian Camps, Expeditions, Quests, Landmarks, Unrest, and Tribal Camps.
-Added new Starting Bonuses for Ages I and II. UI changes for Quests in the Age of Heroes and to the UI for entering into a new Age.
-Added map models for Capital Cities for the Bots from Age of Singularity.
-Added Hotkeys for switching between Regions while in Region Display.
I feel a bit bad, as the very FIRST community img uploaded on steam... was my Shrek meme complaining about the Ai always causing Age of Plague
This game would have benefitted from going in the mechanic direction of old world since it's fairly flat. I still wish that game would be blown up into a world forex. The choices and meaningful social system is the evocative layer that a top forex contender would run away with if they implemented it. Maybe not the same complicated level of royal lineages, but definitely room for advisors and sub leaders to have more map interaction. Millennia, at this point, still feels like someone hit a shuffle button on forex mechanics. The things that millennia does bring feel like they're so minimal they don't justify the price. I sort of wish the developer to give it the rest of the year, pull the plug, and go right into a "Millennia 2". The experience they would carry forward would be great, especially if they concentrated on style, both visual and mechanic.
Fucking thank you for for mentioning that Paradox only published the game. I feel like that gets forgotten in all of the foibles of the game. I agree with your closing statement too - Also feel like there should be follow-up ages to variant/crisis ages as well. For example, Age of Visitors - Humanity fights off an invading alien force and then... nah we're back to our regular ol' victory ages.
Not hard to fight off visitors. They'll take some dollars and leave.
Im surprised they havent nerfed feudal monarchy a bit, it is objectively a great move in high dificulty games to just stick to it instead of changing to any advance goverment
Hi potato, do you really feel "ok" with how diplomatic system work? I mean, there are a few options and ther are not deep enough in my opinion. Is the aspect of the game i most hate. What do you think about this?
I think this game has a lot more potential than most civ like games. From the ages to the variety of improvements/resources, it’s a ton of fun to play. The visuals don’t do it justice
Things I would like to see from Millenium:
1. As stated, the UI needs to be improved.
2. It needs to capitalize on its system of taking different paths. Currently there is a meta of how to play, they need to adjust the game to focus the systems to better support taking scattered route to your victory.
3. Steam multi-player that isn't hot-seat.
Every update definitely made the game better. A very important change was nerfing the Forced March/ Reinforcement spam, by having the affected army temporarily drop 20% combat strength. Still, Warfare is just too damn strong in this game. For all of the alternative winning conditions, none of them really works without some major world domination first, and by that time you might as well carry on the momentum.
Also, some balancing is in order, especially when some events are meaningless while some can be insanely damaging (the UFO invasion is crazy, they easily had more military strength than over 10x the entire world just to crush my strong, expansive nation that easily dominated the Adept AI).
One thing that bugs me after playing a bit of millennia myself is that the graphics are a little hexy. I think Civ 6 did a relatively good job rendering organic terrain that still felt like it obeyed the hex grid. When you have a boundary between terrain types in Millennia, you can clearly see each face of the hexagon. It makes it feel like a board game instead of a map of a real world which, in my opinion, sort of dispels the illusion of the game.
Another thing is improvements are very blobby. I think in Civ 6, tile improvements really filled the space of their tile but if you look at the clay pit in Millennia there's so much empty space on the edges and when you have a ring of clay pits, it just looks like 6 blobs with almost as much space between each pit as the width of the pit itself, instead of a sprawling mass of clay-producing infrastructure. Firaxis's graphics team put a lot of work into how adjacent tiles interact visually but I feel like Millennia's team has largely ignored this.
Millennia's tile improvements look like they leave a lot of wasted space, like it's an image of the idea of the improvement rather than the improvement actually existing in the physical world.
It's wierd the things different people like and dislike. I have no problems with the graphics.
Alliances forcing you into war i don't like. I like the special ages, i kind of think every one should have something to do to achieve/trigger them(in the 3 tech type time frame) or a normal default age only happens after all sciences. The ages are the game's point of difference but higher difficulty takes the variability out of the equation and narrows decision making completely.
Is this better than Civ 6?
Yes.
I don't how their graphic is worse than Civ 6 or Humankind but still makes your PC lag. And if it made yours lag, mine is as good as dead.
I like the game - just having trouble liking it more than Civ lol
I wonder if Milennia will get good enough and stable enough to compete on Civ 7's level when it comes out. It looks like they are moving in the right direction to be ahead of Civ 7 for a while after it releases. Hopefully it won't follow Humankind.
Whatever happened to Humankind? The one thing I liked about it was the nomadic gameplay.
Combat Viewer: Zoom in ++ on the units. Place them closer to each other. Do not have them walk at all.
I love this game. It has much more depth than Civ6 but not too much, like in EUIV and the game guides you through all the new stuff when they introduce it through the ages. Only downside compared to Civ are the empires themselves. You would think that a game with so much depth would give that also to the empires you play, but no.
Did they add Multiplayer Yet ? (No HotSeat is not Multiplayer. HotSeat basicly is when several People pass around the controller for a Singleplayer Game)
Otherwise I really dont care.
I haven't played a ton of millennia, but the one major issue I have with it (other than its shit multiplayer functionality) is that you loose all the bonuses from your government as soon as you level it up - which just feels really shitty, especially if you are relying on the bonuses for your strategy (e.g. kingdom's vassal buffs). It would feel so much better even just getting a legacy trait when you change governments that kept some vestige of the bonuses, and having the government stick around like national spirits wouldn't be much of an issue in my opinion.
If this game just calmed down the AI always forcing you into the age of plague then that would be great.
It would be nice if diplomatic treaties gave the stated amount of wealth, knowledge or culture rather than nothing.
Update 3? Surely you mean Update 4. It literally just came out.
I want them to get rid of the resource icon once I put down an improvement on it. They are so ugly late game. Also - it's super hard to tell one improvement from another unless it's a farm, plantation, or pasture. And I want to see my towns look different based on their specialization.
I'd really like to see another Potato Millennia campaign. Don't get me wrong, AoW4 is amazing, but I tend to prefere Empire Builders with a stronger emphasis on building than on warfare. And Millennia is just so much right for me.
I agree that the best way to develop strategy games is to give it to the players to get feedback, but maybe don't release it at full price if that's the case.
I know they can be turned off now but the combat graphics are still killing me. They would have been considered clunky 20 years ago. Today they just tell me that this is not a serious effort of making a game.
I'm old enough to remember when RUclipsrs said this game was great and that they were playing waaaay more of this than civ 6
Yep. paradox burned a lot of dough on marketing for the game launch. But they really shouldn't have released the demo, people knew better than to buy it after it.
Pitty its not bad copy of civ but its from paradox so big No
Looks like Civ.
How do we get potato to play more old world…
Voltaic got buffed? I still remember having to become a bootleg america and invade people for voltaic pile
New nation is a flag, a name tag and a city names list... They can keep announcing new nations as much as they want that's meaningless...
They really need to do something about the minimap being so useless and map generation, lots of map options and good map scripts really help make the game fun.
I have the same problem with Milennia that I do with Humankind. The idea of build your own civilization is cool but in practice, it leaves me feeling directionless and the AI feeling like cardboard. Map seed is obviously going to always have some influence on play style but as the primary driver, it doesn't work for me. Different nations that get access to a smaller pool of options in each age would provide more guidance for the player and make the AI feel more coherent.
Of course they release Update 4 a day after your update 3 video...
The UI is kind of odd. Parts of it work fine--good, even. Then you have screens like the "tiles being worked" screen for cities and it's like, who came up with this? It's just so weird and unintuitive and really feels like it would have been better as a toggle-able overlay on the main map. That said, I actually think the Civ VI UI isn't particularly great, either. I'm so used to it that it's pretty easy to navigate at this point, but a lot of Civ VI's UI screens are just a hot, disorganized mess.
I like the game a lot, though, and think it has a bunch of neat ideas that mostly work quite well. I wish it had higher review scores on Steam.
Idk, something about the game always feels off
we need more milennia playthrough
Paradox developers only keep games up to date if they get to sell DLC.
Once they cant sell DLC anymore they stop squashing bugs.
Hey look. It's another Civ killer.
These days you don't need to be a Triple-A game studio to produce a stunning looking game. Just look at Manor Lords initially designed by a solo developer (not even a company, just a one guy and few of his friends helping him) which looks absolutely amazing and really immersive. Yes, 4X games never were famous for a beautiful graphics, but in 2024 when most of GPUs can handle a good level graphics without breaking a sweat it becomes one of the aspects of the gameplay which ether drags you into the game or pushing you away.
For example, Humankind looks amazing, and I've enjoyed playing it (and still playing from time to time) despite of some of the game mechanics flaws. But man, despite of enjoying Millenia gameplay in general, I can't force myself playing it because it looks so ugly. TBH, I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw battle previews for the first time... It might sound harsh, but it looks like someone who just started to learn 3d and motion graphics made a raw draft of their first test project. There is no excuse to have such poor quality in 2024 no matter how small your developer's team is.
I don't find Millenia visually attractive to me, good mechanics and gameplay in all its glory, but I will be using my eyes for hundreds of hours so I expect to be visually pleased.
Turn the lights off when you play.
I like the resource management, different cool ages. But man, i really don't like playing this game.
I have to say graphic and ui is fine for me - but the gameplay with the eras is far to shallow… After 3 playthroughs even on hardest difficulty I lost my Motivation in the game… I hoped for far more complexity in the ressource system but got utterly dissapointed 😢
Millennia is a good game bordering on great but probably not quite there. I do really enjoy it but I have to admit it feels less exciting and less balanced than Civ 6. One standout piece is Civ 6 really makes you feel like you are playing a unique civ. In Millenia, I conquered India, but honestly I have no idea what civilization I'm destroying. Maybe I'll notice all the samurai slowing down my attack, but I'd never notice that I killed the Olympians turned to inventors. In that sense you play a unique custom chosen civ in Millennia but it feels and looks generic which disconnects people from the game. That's one the big problems and I'm not sure if there is a fix for it.
The game launched? I genuinely didn’t know it came out lmfao, must be EXCEPTIONALLY bad 😂
You know where the game is going ? Right to the sales bin. They have to release the 2 DLC people buyed to avoid trouble. Then they would be able to totally drop this useless poj nobody ever asked them for. With Civ 7 incoming in a few years we have more important things to wait for than insignificant minor updates to a deeply flawed game.
I don't mind the game, but it is definitely Early Access.
The roadmap alone is enough to make that claim. These are features that you would see in an EA roadmap.
Personally, I find the largest issues to be the lack of AI awareness and the diplomacy.
AI awareness seems non-existent. They will forward settle you in rubbish lands, settle seemingly terrible cities, stack cities together which is a big no-no for the mechanics of Millenia. incredibly frustrating.
On the diplo side, there is no rhyme nor reason to why the AI might make a diplo change. And the alliance system is dogshit. I DO NOT want to be forced into an ongoing war just because I allied with one side. That should still be a choice.
Overall I feel like I wasted my money and at the moment I have no compulsion to start up another game of Millenia.
On the DLC front both CIv5 and Civ6 felt a bit weak without their DLCs, so I don't think spending on the DLC is limited to Paradox.
It looks poor, like old graphics poor.
It’s is also the jankiest, of janky, UIs.
Poor UI is a Paradox standard (excluding Stellaris).
Also, Paradox is grand strategy and they do it well. Stick to what you know in this case.
Millennia has some good ideas. It has potential, but with PDX 's policy of slow content addition through dlc and lack of brand name it will be an uphill battle to remain relevant, especially when civ 7 stuff start getting revealed.
The game should have cooked for half to a year more, but PDX. They can't release a finished product anymore.
Why is this game so disliked ?
Civ elitists who are tired of Civ, but simultaneously hate anything that tries to occupy the same space.
The window for these Civ clones to be successful is rapidly closing now that Civ 7 is on the horizon.
Hahahaha every streamer pushing this before launch, then stopped streaming it...yeah, I guess it says a lot. Just be honest in reviews. New nations? Doesn't matter. It's just a placeholder. Game sucks. It plays like a Tencent mobile game.
The ideas of different ages are nice, but it isn't implemented well. Everything about what sets this game apart from other 4x is beyond broken.
First 🎉
"I'm 69% confident in the developers"
Nice
The Number one thing this game needs to fix is the AI having control over the ages. That needs to be removed *completely*. The best solution is to make all of the ages individual to the nations, rather than being global phenomenon.
There is nothing more frustrating than playing this game, trying to experience something, and then getting shunted into the Age of Plague and watching your game get toilet-flushed, because the AI cheats on every single resource and doesn't care about sanitation, while you lose pops every two seconds to it. With individualized nation-ages, you get a wonderful mishmash of the world cultures, power, etc.
The number 2 thing that needs to be fixed is the AI's diplomacy algorithm, which is way, way, way too aggresssive or submissive depending on a vague power level.
first comment... pog!
My friends won't be interested in trying this game until there's asynchronous multiplayer.
I’m afraid you are to deep in the pockets of Paradox. This game has interesting elements but is a total flop. Hope Firaxis will take some of the interesting elements and build them in to Civ
This game really just looks like a Civ6 knockoff. Unlike Humankind, or some of the other games in the genre which have distinct visual styles and gameplay. If I want to play Civ, I just play Civ...
Paradox needs to hire them a better artist for their key art. Their logo and non-model art just look like any other tiny Steam dev.
Trans rights are human rights 🏳️⚧️🏳️🌈 Protect trans kids🏳️⚧️🏳️🌈
Nah dead game
I was so hyped for this game but it was a massive disappointment.
Don't complain about the graphics. graphics are so expensive. When a game has amazing graphics that is probably several features that were not implemented. pls don't perpetuate the pixel tax.
its a poor attempt to clone Civ and throw in a few other games with it. Do not care for it.
Hey potato, can i join your discord?
How do you feel about the impact of picked ages have on a game, and how important it is to be nr1 in tech so that you get to be the one picking ages? Seems like it narrows down the number of feasible play styles - if you play to win.