Humankind

 PC
User Score
6.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 157 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 82 out of 157
  2. Mixed: 35 out of 157
  3. Negative: 40 out of 157

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. LordTrafficCone
    Sep 3, 2023
    4
    Dictionary definition of missed potential.

    The game starts in a way most 4x games don't where you have to establish yourself from nothing which is a breath of fresh air. Sadly this was the only breath of fresh air the entire game. If you are not at war and have already built around 2-3 cities then there is literally NOTHING to do. Unlike Civilization, religion is a completely passive    Dictionary definition of missed potential.

    The game starts in a way most 4x games don't where you have to establish yourself from nothing which is a breath of fresh air. Sadly this was the only breath of fresh air the entire game. If you are not at war and have already built around 2-3 cities then there is literally NOTHING to do. Unlike Civilization, religion is a completely passive mechanic that is sometimes slightly influenced by minor events. Religion spreads automatically so the AIs will get angry at you for preaching to them which let me remind you again you have NO control over so be prepared to be declared war on for no reason what so ever (which isn't really that bad considering war is the only part of the game that is mildly entertaining)    … Expand
  2. AbysmalX
    Aug 23, 2023
    1
    Simple put, while I enjoy games like CIV. This is a terrible take on an otherwise enjoyable genre. It's far too complex to make any coherent sense. If you want your game to have replay ability. Make it fun, instead of arbitrarily making it complex for no justifiable reason. I honestly feel like the developers of this game, wanted to toss in as many "mechanics" as possible with absolutelySimple put, while I enjoy games like CIV. This is a terrible take on an otherwise enjoyable genre. It's far too complex to make any coherent sense. If you want your game to have replay ability. Make it fun, instead of arbitrarily making it complex for no justifiable reason. I honestly feel like the developers of this game, wanted to toss in as many "mechanics" as possible with absolutely no foresight into how fun having to deal with a million different things at once would be. Hint: It's not.… Expand
  3. Giero
    Jul 3, 2023
    7
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  4. toxyk
    Feb 16, 2023
    6
    El juego tiene ideas interesantes pero en lineas generales es un X4 bastante mediocre. Cabe destacar que tiene unos fallos de balanceo de juego bastante importantes, y hay veces que sientes que te encuentras antes situaciones injustas por culpa de esto.

    Solo lo recomendaría a gente que le encantan los X4, o a un precio muy reducido.
  5. Max552
    Dec 31, 2022
    0
    Can't say I was a fan. Played and found it too easy and quite boring. I really don't see the fuss about these games.
  6. TheOldestOak
    Nov 14, 2022
    10
    Brilliant x4 strategy game. Better than Civ 6 which was a total joke. Highly recommended!
  7. Sashi_K
    Sep 3, 2022
    5
    While I enjoyed the game itself, the lack of a robust tutorial and amount of systems that are implemented makes this more of a "this will be on the history exam" game rather than a game you can open up and relax with which is the case for other turn based strategy games. This game has by far the biggest learning curve I have ever seen in gaming and it throws new players off a cliff.
  8. kaczan3
    Jul 11, 2022
    0
    This game is a crippled and unfun Civilization with "current year" politics crammed in, which you can immediately tell, even starting with the title or the cover art.
  9. Blickwinkel145
    Jul 6, 2022
    5
    I loved both the Endless space and Legend games, and so I tried to give this one a chance again and again, but every time I just give up. I've tried many 4x and GSG titles, but never before have I seen so many absurd and nonsensical systems and mechanics in one game. Most of the game is so bizzare and such a chore I honestly believe it was constructed towards being unique and differentI loved both the Endless space and Legend games, and so I tried to give this one a chance again and again, but every time I just give up. I've tried many 4x and GSG titles, but never before have I seen so many absurd and nonsensical systems and mechanics in one game. Most of the game is so bizzare and such a chore I honestly believe it was constructed towards being unique and different rather than being enjoyable to play.… Expand
  10. maximusoverdriv
    May 23, 2022
    0
    Very terrible A.I., no real political management system. Barely functioning religious system. Do not ever choose auto-resolve for battles or you will certainly lose more units than you ever should. CIV has done everything this does better. Oh and did they use a text-to-speech program for the "leader" characters? Jesus the dialogue is cringe, uninspired, and merely a placeholder for whatVery terrible A.I., no real political management system. Barely functioning religious system. Do not ever choose auto-resolve for battles or you will certainly lose more units than you ever should. CIV has done everything this does better. Oh and did they use a text-to-speech program for the "leader" characters? Jesus the dialogue is cringe, uninspired, and merely a placeholder for what should have been much more.… Expand
  11. soul2591
    May 8, 2022
    9
    I think people are pissed because somebody has tried to add something new to the strategy genre. Which has been moving nowhere for the past decade or so. The game has so many fun interesting mechanics! And I'd say 80-90% of them are successfully implemented
  12. rinshun
    May 3, 2022
    4
    Too complex for it's own good: Like Civilization games, humankind has lots of systems and subsystems that are interdependent, which creates a very steep learning curve. The main problem is that each of those systems are super shallow and uninteresting. The best games manage to make a simple to understand but hard to master gameplay.

    Lacks originality. There is nothing new to this game    Too complex for it's own good: Like Civilization games, humankind has lots of systems and subsystems that are interdependent, which creates a very steep learning curve. The main problem is that each of those systems are super shallow and uninteresting. The best games manage to make a simple to understand but hard to master gameplay.

    Lacks originality. There is nothing new to this game we haven't seen before.    … Expand
  13. Randomdude64
    Apr 12, 2022
    5
    cultural evolution? more like cultural whiplash!

    It doesn't even do it's main theme correctly and the rest is at best mediocre.
  14. Ongkachat
    Apr 7, 2022
    9
    9 For now But if you fix all UI bug i will give you 10.

    The gameplay is very amazing y'all should try this.
  15. Losiu
    Jan 8, 2022
    8
    Great game! I think I like it even more than the civ series. Hope there will be more updates.
  16. EviltoastSA
    Jan 6, 2022
    4
    Not all bad, pretty aesthetics, but buggy, unpolished and unbalanced. Too many complex systems weakly executed. 6 months after release the game still has game ending bugs.
  17. Nerdchieftain
    Nov 29, 2021
    8
    I am a long time Civilization fan. My impression of Humankind is that they wanted to fix the core problems in Civ, but keep it similar. Overall, they achieved this, but I wish it felt more fresh. I find myself asking, is this a breath of fresh air or what Civ 4 Should have been? When you make a “clone” of a game you can’t win with fans by making game similar enough or different enough toI am a long time Civilization fan. My impression of Humankind is that they wanted to fix the core problems in Civ, but keep it similar. Overall, they achieved this, but I wish it felt more fresh. I find myself asking, is this a breath of fresh air or what Civ 4 Should have been? When you make a “clone” of a game you can’t win with fans by making game similar enough or different enough to suit them. So it still feels like Civ. So it passes the similarity check. But what sets it apart? It seems many layers of subtlety.

    If there is something fresh here, it’s the culture system. Every phase of history, you get to choose a new civilization and get new special unit, building, and special ability. This gives lots of flexibility and many big choices. At the end of the day, they have taken Civ game mechanics and shaken it up, but there isn’t anything really new here at the top level gameplay. To be fair, I felt like mechanics were deep and I didn’t understand them that well. It’s a big shake up on the mechanics side. It might be unfair to say there is not a lot new here. There are clearly lots details to sort through, and for those of us who love figuring out the mechanics, there is lots of replay to be had.

    I was frustrated because despite having twice the religious faith building of my neighbor across the ocean, they were able to influence one city to switch faiths. This is one example of where I could go deeper.

    How they addressed problems.
    Stupid AI. There is now a system for justifying wars. In the end, diplomacy is very simple and so a rogue AI can’t really break it. You get points for having valid complaints and winning battles. However, the pendulum seems to have swing a little too far. Without events beyond your control to create grievances, you can’t truly win a war with superior tech. The ultimate goal would be to vassalize a strong enemy. But first you must win a war, take half their territory, then start another. And then they aren’ta strong vassal. Tech race. Still technology is king because you get big weapons. That’s mitigated by war being less powerful. Also, other mechanics play a bigger role. For example your society mechanics provides you with wonders and prestige, as well as other achievements. Score determines the winner. There are more paths to win with culture, science, and economics. Making the game about transparent score that is not biased towards empire size and science may just mean there is more than one way to win. Proliferation of units and unit management. It would be hard to be 4x without military units you move around the map. Still, it feels like a little much in kate game. So much unit management. But a nice balance is achieved by making armies of 4-5 troops (5 with tech). This gives miniature strategy game for combat. So there are much less military units running around. 5-10 good units is all you need to win a war.    … Expand
  18. JackPaladin
    Nov 26, 2021
    8
    Released with a bunch of imbalances and bugs, but now it plays smoothly with lots of patches and updates in 100 days. I am now having WAY more fun than I ever did with Civ 6. So many improvements over the civs#; amazing art and narration; great combat; a nice breath of fresh air for the 4x genre. It would get a 9 if multiplayer worked better.
  19. Sqd
    Oct 11, 2021
    10
    Everything you wanted for civ series. There is plenty of room for improvement. I would absolutely buy the add ons
  20. FabriceCPR
    Oct 6, 2021
    4
    Bugged, unbalanced, boring, overrated.
    Wait for patches and dlc before purchasing.
  21. elsalvadon
    Sep 30, 2021
    10
    The best 4X game that I have played so far (I started playing Civ1 on a Macintosh probably around 1993 and have played every Civilization title since then). Anyway, talking about Humankind: The music is awesome, the artwork is so nice. The game has a very unique and awesome look and feel.

    Combat and military conquest is among the best. But also peaceful expansion is possible focusing on    The best 4X game that I have played so far (I started playing Civ1 on a Macintosh probably around 1993 and have played every Civilization title since then). Anyway, talking about Humankind: The music is awesome, the artwork is so nice. The game has a very unique and awesome look and feel.

    Combat and military conquest is among the best. But also peaceful expansion is possible focusing on wonders, and empire growth. Sieges work in a way that are much distinct from Civilization and combat in general is very refreshing. It's a good mix between 1upt and stack of doom. I also like the way trade and diplomacy works.

    The only problem with the game is that it isn't as balanced when it was released. Snowballing is a problem, however, the early game provides a lot of challenges and is very fun to play. Especially, the addition of the neolithic era is a great addition to this genre that otherwise always starts with putting the first city down exactly where the map generation algorithms have put you. The end game can be interesting I suppose if you don't give up on a bad early start and try to recover even from lost wars.

    There are some things absent, that are very much present in Civ such as the form of government (monarchy, feudalism), but it is i replaced with a set of civic choices and a 4-dimensional ideology system that provides various bonuses. I like this system very much as it is more gradual and the choices are clear. The stability system is nice in theory, but practically requires more balance in upcoming patches. Still, it does give you a challenge.

    The way cities grow through districts is much more enjoyable and also the fortifications are much more omnipresent than e.g. in the civilization series where this is just a number next to the city name.

    The culture per era is much more interesting than choosing one culture in the very beginning and keeping it. The different traits (scientific, economic, artistic, expansionist, militaristic, agrarian and builder) provide interesting choices. However, overall, there's probably a bit too much bonus applied. In any case, the replay-ability is awesome with so many different combinations. It's not just some 20 civilizations, but 1.000.000 combinations of cultures per era.

    Also, the AI is able to provide a challenge (at least in the first game half). It does make mistakes, but so do I. One can have allies for a whole game and one can have strong opponents. Some cultures/players are really tough and hard to compete against.

    Overall, this is a total win for the genre and for all players.    … Expand
  22. samsara_mmdx
    Sep 22, 2021
    5
    Les voy a contar mi historia, yo llevaba mas de 6 años con una amistad con una persona de Colombia pero unas cuantas partidas de este juego hicieron que esa amistad de años pereciera en ese mismo momento, pasamos de hablar diarios a tener un mes sin hablar, y todo porque este juego mal hecho saca lo peor de cada persona, estaba yo expandiendo mis fronteras para poder tener un flujo viableLes voy a contar mi historia, yo llevaba mas de 6 años con una amistad con una persona de Colombia pero unas cuantas partidas de este juego hicieron que esa amistad de años pereciera en ese mismo momento, pasamos de hablar diarios a tener un mes sin hablar, y todo porque este juego mal hecho saca lo peor de cada persona, estaba yo expandiendo mis fronteras para poder tener un flujo viable de recursos para poder llegar a la siguiente era, pero en uno de esos momentos el que era mi amigo se vio influenciado por la codicia de querer todo y bajo fuerzas militares se hizo de mi ciudad, la habia llamado "OwO", pero owo no vio mas de unos pocos turnos antes de volverse "sebaus ciudad", y ahi no para, tras dejar pasar eso me puse a trabajar arduamente en la construcción de barcos para desbloquear los colonos e irme al nuevo mundo y tener un nuevo comienzo, pero no sirvio de nada, el aprovecho un grupo de islotes donde había agua bajas para llegar al nuevo continente, cuando tuve mis colonos ya el nuevo continente estaba totalmente colonizado, y me quede estancando con 2 ciudades, sin comida y viendo a mi pueblo morir lentamente, lo cual me rompió como líder.

    lo que mas me duele es que el que era mi amigo nunca pidió perdón, pues el creía que hacia lo correcto.    … Expand
  23. reviewtimeman
    Sep 17, 2021
    2
    TLDR: This game is unfinished, broken, and hobbled together from the better parts of better games.

    When you start this game, you're going to be provided with an incredibly barebones character-creator, a couple of odd insignias to assign your civilization, a couple colors, and a list of Youtube Video Tutorials. I'm gonna be honest with you. I skipped the 5-hour tutorials. I've played 4x    TLDR: This game is unfinished, broken, and hobbled together from the better parts of better games.

    When you start this game, you're going to be provided with an incredibly barebones character-creator, a couple of odd insignias to assign your civilization, a couple colors, and a list of Youtube Video Tutorials.
    I'm gonna be honest with you. I skipped the 5-hour tutorials. I've played 4x strat before. I figured I'd get my ass kicked, hard, learn from it, and do a fun playthrough afterwards.

    There's no challenge here. The AI will constantly roll over for you. No loss feels large enough to matter. The only challenge presented, ever, is working around hollow, half-baked, mechanics or bugs to try to play the game.

    You start off as a small tribe. Hunting. Gathering. You build up to a city, get some money/culture, and select from a list of Civilizations. You do this, more or less, the same for every era.
    Cities can only be made by spending culture. Cities can absorb smaller settlements, so that you can collect resources from those annoying spots. (I'm looking at your barren tundra oil wastelands, Civilization.)
    Money is more-or-less useless in this game. The game will occasionally give you a choice. For Example: You have a rat infestation. Do you bring in cats or ferrets? Each choice provides a moral alignment for your civ somehow, and may affect how other civilizations feel about you. The correct answer is whatever spends the most money. Don't worry, you probably won't run out. I had 15k gold in my treasury, but even at the wildest moments, nothing cost more than 600 gold. (or if there was something good, it was conveniently out of sight.)

    There's more choices like this, that have more drastic measures, but you spend Culture on them. It's a useful resource.

    Building anything but war-based establishments will create instability in your realm. You have to build forts to keep it up. Never ran into a problem with this. Always stacked out with stability. Maybe it's really fascinating and interesting, but the game never showed it.

    This game plays like Checkers. The AI constantly hands you wins, the battle system gives you constantly favorable results if you just hit the "skip battle" button, and you can endlessly queue up production items. I ignored all of my cities for the majority of my playthrough, outside of occasional management per every couple thousand years (or to set up a specialty fighting unit.)

    The game acts like it doesn't want you to play it. Every change that happens on screen will give you a phone-like notification in the bottom right corner. Some of these include up to 10 paragraphs of text. I can't imagine trying to play this with other people or online. Unless all of your friends are speed-readers, it's going to be a pain. These notifications are constant, too. Given the longer ones are rarer, but this is every time a civilization changes their opinion on you, production is complete, science is complete, if a warrior has another move left. Normal 4x strat stuff. If any of it was fun, it wouldn't feel like the chore that it is.

    City names are chosen by what Civilization you're currently being, and your character will wear clothing matching your current life. You'll get some boosts, specific military classes, and usually a specialty district per civilization. Wonders are chosen, paid for with culture (before building) at the start of every era. If you get left behind early, every good civilization/wonder will be chosen. It pays to be ahead in this game. I went from early ancient Chinese culture, to English, to Goths at one point, the Japanese. If you want to watch a man cosplay as every culture on Earth, while somehow feeling completely devoid and empty of what makes these civilizations special, this is it. None of the specialty units are interesting. None of the districts provide anything unique. It's always a simple boost to production, gold, faith, or culture.

    Religion isn't worth mentioning. None of it affected anything in my 10 hr playthrough. Just a different reason to have different random decisions appear. Do you want eunuchs? Sure? You won't hear about them again and it doesn't have any real effect. Cats? Cool. It feels like playing a Buzzfeed personality test in the middle of a game.

    None of the game mechanics flow with one another, or truly affect one another. The AI is useless (not to mention constantly swapping names every era), the gameplay so watered-down a toddler could wing it (and probably win, on accident, I mean, I did), and it's painfully boring. The voice acting is so atrocious. I don't think they hired a writer for this poor dude. He inanely rambles when you unlock or achieve anything. This game has a mandatory achievement system, as well, with random star rankings. Doesn't matter.

    This is not a One More Turn situation. It is a "Maybe This Will Be a Subpar, Finished, Game in a Couple of Years (but by then, will anyone care?)    … Expand
  24. GrosBof
    Sep 14, 2021
    3
    Some good, some really bad. Merging cities, great. Combat system, bad. Diplomatic interface, better. animations speed is horrible. District system is incomplete. The whole game is incomplete. Where is the minimap. Released at least a 1 year too early.
  25. SebastiedJuan
    Sep 8, 2021
    9
    This is a great game for many reasons.
    Graphic is excellent, the best of all competitors. Same for the audio.
    Ui is clear and well made but ned some improvments (es when a Civ die is not clearly visible by the panel and stuff like that). Gameplay: here we have some great things and some things that needs to be improved but they are not the core of the game, so the gameplay is    This is a great game for many reasons.
    Graphic is excellent, the best of all competitors. Same for the audio.
    Ui is clear and well made but ned some improvments (es when a Civ die is not clearly visible by the panel and stuff like that).
    Gameplay: here we have some great things and some things that needs to be improved but they are not the core of the game, so the gameplay is structurally and basically great.
    The gameplay of this game deserve other words.
    Gameplay in general is amazing cause it give to the game a great rhythm and pace. And on this point the game outclasses Civ6 (in graphic and interface too, but lets concede that those aspects of the game are minority in a strategy game). Where Civ is SLOW this game is fast and give you, EACH TURN an aim, a thing that you can choice, can do that improve your impact in the development of the progression. A.I. is not idiot as in Civ6 and this is another fact. And all this is the CORE of the game, and is excellent (the idea of changing culture is amazing and give you for each game different solutions and approach to the game, not based on fantasy but on the real needs that that particvular game, strategically, needs). Oh, the fight are very good (but i'm sure u have read this everywhere cause who reviews a strategic game it is not capable of more in-depth analysis than this)
    Than we have the defects. Religion is not so important (but it has a value and realistically this value gets weakened over the time, as it happens in real life over the centurys now religion has almost a 0 value) and needs a little bit of improvement. Diplomacy needs improvements: too easy to find alliances that grant big bonuses with some cultural choice and wonders and warmongers doesn't have a lot of penalty (just the loss of those bonuses aniway), and some other little stuff. MAYBE, the last era, contemporary, need to be more calibrated, to last more time.
    So why Humankind takes 79 metacritic and Civ6 takes 88!?
    Because who reviews a strategic game it is not capable of more in-depth analysis.
    And in the case of Civ 6, when it comes out (and for a guy that plays a lot Civ before was clearly a big step back from the past fantastic game that ti was) he was THE ONLY 4x grandstrategy, historical game, so they where too lazy to open a critics to a brand that is the only one and people, especially the new public, doesn't have terms of comparison.
    And now why they doesn't give Humankind a 90 (and if Humankind is 90 Civ6 should be 80)?
    For the same reason: they can't judge a game that needs toons of hopurs of game, and they cannot do for a small audience that will agree, when the majority of audience can only play a game like that for 20 hours and say: the fights are good, religion is useless, diplomacy same, Civ 6 is a great brand and other idiots idea like that.
    So they take the negative aspect, that everyone can see, and don't have valued the great essencial things that the game has, cause that essencial things are the core of the game, but the game is a pure strategical game and not everyone care or can really understand in deep what great strategy game this is, even them with a review that take em 50 hours of play.    … Expand
  26. bladex
    Sep 6, 2021
    1
    game is exactly like civilization VI meaning it will CTD at the drop of a hat. You can't even play it properly living in fear that it will crash at any second.
  27. SRKNZ
    Sep 5, 2021
    2
    I'll start by saying I love Civilisation so I might be a little biased. That said, I ask myself why I like Civilisation and it becomes easier for me to say why I don't like Humankind.

    Civilisation puts you in control from the get go and compels you to make pressured decisions that are meaningful. There's modesty of choice which in turn creates a certain efficiency, that has a real    I'll start by saying I love Civilisation so I might be a little biased. That said, I ask myself why I like Civilisation and it becomes easier for me to say why I don't like Humankind.

    Civilisation puts you in control from the get go and compels you to make pressured decisions that are meaningful. There's modesty of choice which in turn creates a certain efficiency, that has a real impact on the direction your civilisation goes in and lets you stay in control.

    Humankind to me has a broader ambition that does not play out well in practice. It offers a more diverse range of choices but in doing so waters down any sense that you have control over the experience or the outcomes. There's simply too much going on and as a result choices seem to matter less and create the sensation that you are a viewer rather than participant in the society you are vested with creating.

    This is not helped at all by the lack of an interactive tutorial which has instead been replaced by a list of video's I doubt anyone will want to watch. People want to get their boots wet and dive in, Humankind for some reason doesn't appear to appreciate this.

    All in all not one I'll be playing nor can recommend which is a shame as we need more civilisation building games.    … Expand
  28. slutch94
    Sep 3, 2021
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. With bugs like my save files of 14 hours just gone like that I cannot recommend this game at this time if they don't at least fix basic problems like that.

    The game itself works smoothly and I like a lot of the mechanics. The war and unit management is a joy to play and the beginning of the game is different and enjoyable, also the pop up scenarios was great (but became less interesting as the game went on however) and the star system too gave this game a unique feel to it.

    However everything else seems a bit bleak and not impactful enough like the faith, diplomatics, civics, some stuff didn't matter at all. It all feels mushed together and does not change that much through the eras. I don't feel like I have a clear goal or strategy, just achievement hunting towards another star.

    I am torn of the idea with the whole changing cultures through the eras, its cool, but you don't feel that connected to the civs you choose. To me it just felt like I more chose the civilization cause of its perks when I needed certain boosts like food/work/gold/science. This made the certain civ less important to me, which put a bad taste in my mouth as you want to feel at least a little connected when you choose to play with a civilization

    Game: 5/10 (Pretty ok game)
    Overall with the major bugs 3/10    … Expand
  29. GRUShalashaska
    Sep 2, 2021
    8
    Humankind offers a good basic package, but it lacks a bit of fine-tuning. While the AI ​​is doing well to very well, the graphics are fabulous and the diplomatic possibilities are also convincing, the only thing that bothers me so far is the way the game runs far too quickly (research and cultural progress run far too quickly) and some balancing problems.

    With the upcoming mod support,    Humankind offers a good basic package, but it lacks a bit of fine-tuning. While the AI ​​is doing well to very well, the graphics are fabulous and the diplomatic possibilities are also convincing, the only thing that bothers me so far is the way the game runs far too quickly (research and cultural progress run far too quickly) and some balancing problems.

    With the upcoming mod support, some patches and DLC, I am confident that "Humankind" will be one of the big round strategy games in 1-2 years.

    DEUTSCH:
    Humankind bietet ein gutes Basispaket, dem aber noch etwas Feinschliff fehlt. Während sich die KI gut bis sehr gut schlägt, die Grafik fabelhaft ist und die diplomatischen Möglichkeiten auch überzeugen können, stören mich bisher nur der viel zu schnelle Spielablauf (Forschung und kultureller Fortschritt laufen viel zu schnell ab) und einige Balancing-Probleme.

    Mit aufkommendem Modsupport, einigen Patches und DLC, bin ich zuversichtlich, das Humankind in 1-2 Jahren zu den ganz großen Rundenstrategiespieln gehören wird.    … Expand
  30. nonameguy
    Aug 30, 2021
    0
    Why one of my favorite developers have done this... The game is full of SJW propaganda with retarded Soviets and great space conquerors US.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

39
#39 Most Discussed PC Game of 2021

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 55 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 42 out of 55
  2. Mixed: 13 out of 55
  3. Negative: 0 out of 55
  1. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Feb 17, 2022
    60
    Humankind is different than other games and that's fine. It builds on the authors' experiences with the genre, but may differ too much for the massive success of the brand and the studio. It's an interesting title that will find countless players and fans, but it does too little for big success.
  2. CD-Action
    Nov 15, 2021
    85
    Humankind features some revolutionary mechanics, but fails to use their potential to the fullest. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the game is simply very enjoyable and Sid Meier’s Civilization now has a major rival. [11/2021, p.78]
  3. Game World Navigator Magazine
    Oct 22, 2021
    76
    Humankind offers a fresh take on historical 4X strategy genre, with a lot of creativity thrown in, but the team sorely lacks a lead designer who could tie everything together. So even though each innovation is really cool on its own, the whole turned out to be less than the sum of its parts. [Issue#255, p.40]
See all critic reviews »