Sid Meier's Civilization: Beyond Earth

 PC
User Score
5.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1084 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 343 out of 1084
  2. Mixed: 374 out of 1084
  3. Negative: 367 out of 1084
Buy Now
Buy on

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. IJustWorkHere
    Nov 17, 2021
    5
    I am a huge fan of Civilization IV, V, and VI so I purchased Beyond earth hoping it would be a good continuation of the series. In the end I view it as a soulless cash-grab hoping to capitalize on the success of the other, better games in the franchise. As much as I love the other Civs I would advise people to pass on this one.
  2. OldManGamerOMG
    Dec 4, 2020
    7
    Beyond Earth is a well made game. I had no technical issues, having the graphics at their maximum settings. I do feel that the UI (User Interface) is incredibly difficult to read. There were times that I would have to pull up information on my second monitor, to be able to read all of the information that was too small to read on an 85 inch display in 4k resolution. However, once you haveBeyond Earth is a well made game. I had no technical issues, having the graphics at their maximum settings. I do feel that the UI (User Interface) is incredibly difficult to read. There were times that I would have to pull up information on my second monitor, to be able to read all of the information that was too small to read on an 85 inch display in 4k resolution. However, once you have learned the game and understand what everything is, this is not something to worry about.

    I can recommend this game for those that like turn based strategy games. I prefer the classic style of Civilization on Earth, but this game was very well made and a fun twist to that concept.    … Expand
  3. Parik
    Apr 7, 2020
    7
    This game isn't a really NEW Civilization, but it can give you a few dozens hours of fun while you are waiting for discount for Civilization 6. I like the idea with poisoned hexes and alien nests. Different ways of your progress make every game a bit unpredictable and you can't say what direction would be better before you land on a planet.
    I find new tech web is fuzzy, but on the other    This game isn't a really NEW Civilization, but it can give you a few dozens hours of fun while you are waiting for discount for Civilization 6. I like the idea with poisoned hexes and alien nests. Different ways of your progress make every game a bit unpredictable and you can't say what direction would be better before you land on a planet.
    I find new tech web is fuzzy, but on the other hand it gives much more freedom to your scientists.    … Expand
  4. Sandro86
    Apr 27, 2019
    7
    I honestly enjoyed this game but I understand well why many didn't liked it that much.
  5. Fany000
    Feb 22, 2019
    5
    At the first look game seems to be very tempting, space version of great civilization V. But the whole game feels like a not completed piece. This should stay as a DLC for Civ V and then it would be considered as a masterpiece, but somebody has decided to make it a full game and that is the biggest problem of Beyond Earth.

    First, if you look at the game it's just reskin for Civ V, then    At the first look game seems to be very tempting, space version of great civilization V. But the whole game feels like a not completed piece. This should stay as a DLC for Civ V and then it would be considered as a masterpiece, but somebody has decided to make it a full game and that is the biggest problem of Beyond Earth.

    First, if you look at the game it's just reskin for Civ V, then you find out that many other things are just taken from Civ V and simplified. For someone it is a plus, but for me it was a little bit dissapointing. After 2-3 hours a stereotype appears as you do always same things and ways to develope your civilization are very trimmed. The thing I found out to be the most irritating about game is attitude of AI towards aliens lifeforms, all of them just seem to love them and if you start a proper war with them, your earth "comrades" always scold you. I think there should be more variety among nations in this attitude.

    Another minus is the missing campaing, it would be really nice to play this in some story mode. There is only sandbox mode and multiplayer a small amount of content for the full game, pity. Otherwise I really apreciate the idea of sci-fi Civilization, but it could be done better to be the honest part of Civilization family.

    Pros:
    All the good stuff from Civ V is preserved
    Nic graphics
    Wide range of ways how to develop your nations
    Proper Civ gameplay

    Cons:
    Predictible behaviour of AI
    Sterotype comes very quickly
    Missing campaign
    Classic Civ is still more funny and satisfying
    A lot of things could be done better

    Good but average game, there is plenty of better turn-based strategies than this.
    Time spent playing: 20 hours.    … Expand
  6. Vorpal_SF
    Jan 15, 2018
    5
    I came into the game with high expectations. I've been a Civ fanboy since the very beginning and Alpha Centauri was, in many ways, my favorite Civ experience. So, I was very hopeful. Maybe that was my first mistake.

    Beyond Earth and Rising Tide feel like they were designed someone who played enough Civ to like it, but never understood how and why it worked as a game. So, there are the    I came into the game with high expectations. I've been a Civ fanboy since the very beginning and Alpha Centauri was, in many ways, my favorite Civ experience. So, I was very hopeful. Maybe that was my first mistake.

    Beyond Earth and Rising Tide feel like they were designed someone who played enough Civ to like it, but never understood how and why it worked as a game. So, there are the clearly referential moments and common elements of design. But very little of the game balance or structured experience that made Civ really worth it. For one thing, the difficulty level is pretty flat. I started on the second difficulty level, got bored in a half hour, tried again on 3, got bored in half an hour and then finally played through on Gemini, the fourth level ("hard" per the game's description text) and got pretty bored. Unlike every other Civ game, no other Civilization attacked me until I already had an insumountable advantage, without even really spending any effort building a military. Being jumped on by other Civs is the check against people like me, whose tendency is to focus on making hyper-developed cities and building a tech advantage. I spent the last third of the game basically just wanting to beat it once, for personal satisfaction, but desperately bored and wanting the game to end.

    Besides the difficulty curve problems, which who knows, may have been solved if I went up to a higher level, the design just shows an ignorance of pacing and balance. One of the great hidden mechanics in the Civ series is how the different types of movement constrain you to a small, but ever-growing chunk of the map. When you start, you're on your island or continent, so you spend a lot of time focusing on the metrics of land conquest, expansion and road-building. Then you start exploring but your early ships are either limited to the coastline, or have a tiny capacity, so building transport networks or moving invasion fleets takes time, effort and planning.

    Nope, says Beyond Earth, everything can embark on its own boat, right from the start. Land and water might as well be the same thing. No mechanism to force you to concentrate on certain things before broadening your horizon. No mechanism that makes early game feel fundamentally different from late game. It's all the same, the numbers just get bigger.

    In most Civs, the tech tree does branch, but it stays in a fairly narrow wedge. No one can get too far ahead or behind unless they're massively dumping points into science and praying they stay alive long enough to benefit.

    Nope, says Beyond Earth. This hyper-branched stem-and-leaf approach means that if you want, you can run for endgame techs whenever you want and deploy a massively overpowered unit early.

    On and on, it goes like this. Rather than the carefully balanced, limited slate of buildings, Beyond Earth just throws in twice as many, all of which do really similar things and mostly just increase numbers. Units get some powers designed to make combat a little more interesting, but since you can get to endgame techs much faster than a computer (since the computer doesn't just min/max and run for an endgame tech) you can just walk over them with a unit 1-2 generations advanced.

    So, yeah. I really wished that they gave this project so someone with a better sense of game design, who could take the time to figure out a mechanic that added something to the experience, rather than just throwing in more units and more buildings which did basically the same thing: slightly changed large numbers in ways that made no appreciable difference.

    Man I hope Civ 6 is better than this.    … Expand
  7. AlexanderDM
    Oct 30, 2017
    6
    Not an objectively bad title; the gameplay is balanced and the tech 'web' is excellent. But nothing about the experience elevated it over Civ V in any meaningful way, and I found myself backing off after only two or three games. I admit I'm at a loss for definite suggestions aside from novelty - in all, this game really didn't need to be made.
  8. BadIdeas
    Jun 1, 2017
    6
    This game is said to be the spiritual successor to to Alpha Centauri. That is a fair assessment, because in order for Beyond Earth to be a true successor it would need to be more than a ghost of Alpha Centauri.

    Let us compare it to Alpha Centauri, a game released 15 years before it by the same studio. What BE has that SMAC lacks: Hex tiles instead of square tiles Much better    This game is said to be the spiritual successor to to Alpha Centauri. That is a fair assessment, because in order for Beyond Earth to be a true successor it would need to be more than a ghost of Alpha Centauri.

    Let us compare it to Alpha Centauri, a game released 15 years before it by the same studio.

    What BE has that SMAC lacks:

    Hex tiles instead of square tiles
    Much better graphics
    Visible research web instead of more linear hidden research web
    Better artifact system
    Marginally better AI?

    I think that is it.

    Now let us look at what SMAC had that was better than BE:

    Better story line, what little there was in each
    Much better factions/faction distinction
    Voice overs from all faction leaders, not just one generic voice reading quotes
    Unit customization, that gave a few dozen core designs, hundreds of specialized designs, and literally hundreds of thousands of possible variants.
    Wonder videos, not just panning over a blueprint.
    Terraforming, as in raising/lowering terrain, and the sea level as a whole.
    A chart in the UI that tracked your relative strength.
    Atrocities such as planet busters, nerve stapling, and nerve gas.
    The ability to manage social policies as actual policies you could change

    That is just off the top of my head. That is what we get after 15 years, a watered down Civ 5/SMAC hybrid, that dumbs down, or completely removes some of the best aspects of SMAC. The only reason to play this instead of SMAC, is you may have played SMAC a million billion times, and want something new, even if it is the kiddy version with limited depth.    … Expand
  9. ultraviper
    Apr 26, 2016
    5
    Some people claim this is a re-skin of Civ 5, but it's not. It's worse than that. Almost everything about this game is worse than previous games. The military units have been reduced to a small handful that automatically upgrade as your tech level rises. The tech web is confusing and hard to navigate. Aliens (the new barbarians) cover the entire map and go from being a danger early game toSome people claim this is a re-skin of Civ 5, but it's not. It's worse than that. Almost everything about this game is worse than previous games. The military units have been reduced to a small handful that automatically upgrade as your tech level rises. The tech web is confusing and hard to navigate. Aliens (the new barbarians) cover the entire map and go from being a danger early game to a frusration late game where they are STILL all over the map but pose no real threat. Trade routes are mandatory because of how powerful they are, yet they are implemented in a very annoying way that makes you choose trade destinations way too often. Health (the new happniess) is badly balanced and from what I've found it's impossible to keep it in the positive numbers if you have more than one city, until late game when your virtue tree bonuses can bring it back up. And playing with just one city in games like this is just not fun. Skip this one, play Civ 4 or 5 instead.… Expand
  10. Greywolf2001ca
    Feb 10, 2016
    7
    A good game that upgrades the Alpha Centauri and bring it into the 21st century.

    But like all civilization games, it does have a limited replayability albeit a bigger one than the usual crap that has been released since the year 2000. Unlike other civilization games, computer controled factions do not declare war on you for no reason although there is one exception that I have    A good game that upgrades the Alpha Centauri and bring it into the 21st century.

    But like all civilization games, it does have a limited replayability albeit a bigger one than the usual crap that has been released since the year 2000.

    Unlike other civilization games, computer controled factions do not declare war on you for no reason although there is one exception that I have noticed. Sometimes, at average difficulty level, a faction declares war on you for no reason and that faction is like a quarter of your size!!! makes no sense, maybe if he had allies, but he is alone. I had three times the number of cities he had and same for units. Why would the faction declare war on me? No point, he will be obliterated within 25 turns!

    So the AI needs some tweaking still.

    The game is also heavy for no reason. They have spent too much time on graphics and not enough on the game itself, resulting in questionable AI and AI decisions.

    Albeit this, it is still a good game, but try it first, do not buy blind, way too expensive for that. I suggest no paying more than 25$ for everything.    … Expand
  11. ZeroWaitState
    Oct 24, 2015
    5
    This game came out about the same time as Interstellar. The backstory has the same vibe as that movie. Don't be fooled, though. The box says "Sid Meier's Civilization" is small letters and "BEYOND EARTH" in huge letters. The box has it backwards. This is a reskinned standard Civ game, and it has absolutely nothing to do with survival on an alien planet in terms of actual gameplay.This game came out about the same time as Interstellar. The backstory has the same vibe as that movie. Don't be fooled, though. The box says "Sid Meier's Civilization" is small letters and "BEYOND EARTH" in huge letters. The box has it backwards. This is a reskinned standard Civ game, and it has absolutely nothing to do with survival on an alien planet in terms of actual gameplay. Standard Civ game concepts like caravans, culture, wonders, etc. are translated into this game even though they make no sense contextually.

    Also, the graphics performance is terrible, with texture pop-in galore.    … Expand
  12. sbuenger
    Aug 15, 2015
    5
    It hurts to rate a game poorly in a series I enjoy so much, but I wouldn't recommend this game if you're a returning Civilization fan. Below I'll list the bad and the good.

    THE BAD 1. The game feels like a skin/mod for Civilization V. It felt all too familiar too soon. I was especially disappointed that the same strategies for Cvilization IV and V still apply to Beyond Earth. This is    It hurts to rate a game poorly in a series I enjoy so much, but I wouldn't recommend this game if you're a returning Civilization fan. Below I'll list the bad and the good.

    THE BAD

    1. The game feels like a skin/mod for Civilization V. It felt all too familiar too soon. I was especially disappointed that the same strategies for Cvilization IV and V still apply to Beyond Earth. This is the core flaw in the game, as it gets boring quickly and thus has no staying power.

    2. The maps are boring. Nothing unique in the alien world, just different names for the same tiles.

    3. The DLC adds components to the game that should have been included at launch.

    THE GOOD

    1. The affinity points are a fresh addition; however, the amount of units are still limited.

    2. The new tech tree provides a more engaging visual when teching up

    BOTTOM LINE: Don't buy this unless you catch it on sale. Newcomers to the series may enjoy it, but veterans beware.    … Expand
  13. Violett
    Jun 14, 2015
    5
    Really nothing new. Though I'm a big fan of Civ series this game is EXACTLY the same as Civ5, just under another sauce. Though fans of old Alpha Centauri might find it intriguing.
  14. Rastrelly
    May 27, 2015
    5
    This game on every level Alpha Centauri succeeds. But its main problem is lack of atmosphere. Faction leaders are not interesting, there is no cool story about the Planet and humans, units feel not that entertaining, as well as ending scenarios. Game requires too much boring micromanagement which should've been easily automatizeable. Tech web is an interesting concept though. Better go getThis game on every level Alpha Centauri succeeds. But its main problem is lack of atmosphere. Faction leaders are not interesting, there is no cool story about the Planet and humans, units feel not that entertaining, as well as ending scenarios. Game requires too much boring micromanagement which should've been easily automatizeable. Tech web is an interesting concept though. Better go get Alpha Centauri - it's a much better experience.… Expand
  15. 123456
    May 25, 2015
    5
    I started playing Civ 5 again a couple of months ago (mid 2015) without any expansions, and whilst shopping for those I saw a deal on this and thought I would give it a try. For reference I played Civ 2-5 but not Alpha Centauri and I'm reviewing version 1.0.2.666

    The first thing I noticed was the game engine, it's exactly the same as Civ 5. That is not necessarily a bad thing but I did    I started playing Civ 5 again a couple of months ago (mid 2015) without any expansions, and whilst shopping for those I saw a deal on this and thought I would give it a try. For reference I played Civ 2-5 but not Alpha Centauri and I'm reviewing version 1.0.2.666

    The first thing I noticed was the game engine, it's exactly the same as Civ 5. That is not necessarily a bad thing but I did expect more than a reskin of a 5 year old game. Where happiness was, now we have health, and gold has become energy, among other rebrandings.

    Gameplay wise, the technology structure going from tree to web is a nice touch, giving a more open ended narrative compared to the history of human science. Things like borders and exploring remain from Civ 5, although they do not make much sense when you have so much technology that you can launch satellites and the planet is uninhabited by intelligent life, but you can forgive this as a game principle.

    The AI is quite unforgivable though. If you get an idea of how to play the AI will never attack you. The difficulty settings, like Civ 5, are based on giving the AI cheats instead of making it more tactically effective. It will attack other nations or independent stations (which you have no diplomacy option to complain about) or beg you for resources with the offer of favours, which are quite worthless.

    When war does finally break out, you end up being heavily penalised in Health (should you take an enemy city) or in reduced trade routes, which are extremely valuable throughout the game. If you set up your armies correctly you can rarely lose a unit to the rather incompetent AI. In fact, after entering into a war with several nations, and barely even a laser beam fired, I am offered a peace treaty and one of their cities! Not only is the AI incompetent, it actually wants you to win with as little fuss as possible.

    The affinity system is the basis for your new societies beliefs, or whatever. In actuality, it represents what upgrades your units get, and much like Leonardo's Workshop in Civ II, all your units are upgraded automatically. It also turns your cities a different colour. The levels for this are linked to the tech web, meaning science heavily outweighs culture in this game. This is also because most of the victory conditions rely on research. Whilst there are cultural borders and virtues provide buffs, there is no cultural victory (but military domination remains).

    The early game with explorers and aliens is quite fun as you try and dodge their nests and find relics and escape pods that aren't covered in poisonous gas, much like the early game of Civ 5 is enjoyable for finding city states and ruins whilst dodging barbarians. Quickly though the game becomes a grind, mostly due to the weak AI and the build more research more repeat actions, followed by the all too familiar "Next Turn" button spam.

    One of the most disappointing things is the lack of visual stimulation with regard to the tech and wonders. When you build a wonder you receive a pop-up screen with an image of a futuristic blueprint that basically looks like nothing at all, a quote which means very little out of context, and the buff it gives you. These are supposed to be world shaping discoveries but outside of the civilopedia the game offers you nothing. This was fine in Civ 5, it's Earth. But this is the unknown fiction.

    Beyond Earth is not a bad game but it feels very undercooked. With the first expansion coming later this year I hope, unlike the Earth the game leaves behind, Firaxis are more about looking back to what needs to be fixed before looking forward to new challenges to explore.    … Expand
  16. ptrayal
    Apr 16, 2015
    6
    Well, this was the first Civ game I've bought since Civ 2 or 3 and I was a big fan of SMAC back in the day (with the wonderful alien expansion). This though, is nothing like SMAC. I really want it to be, but it's not.

    Pro's: Nice graphics (though from what I've heard, the tiles are similar to Civ V), decent tech tree/branch/leaf thing, I like affinities and virtues, seeding is a neat    Well, this was the first Civ game I've bought since Civ 2 or 3 and I was a big fan of SMAC back in the day (with the wonderful alien expansion). This though, is nothing like SMAC. I really want it to be, but it's not.

    Pro's: Nice graphics (though from what I've heard, the tiles are similar to Civ V), decent tech tree/branch/leaf thing, I like affinities and virtues, seeding is a neat feature.

    Con's: No faction editor, factions are pretty bland and have nothing to do with you after you land, the AI is pretty bad, aliens are nice but not very smart, no unique geographic features/landmarks (give me my Pholus Ridge).

    It's not a bad game, but I definitely do not think it is the "spiritual successor" to SMAC. Maybe a distant cousin, but no successor. Which is a shame, because I really want it to be.    … Expand
  17. HungryHippo123
    Apr 14, 2015
    5
    They added some new elements but its really just the last one and copy and pasted on and they changed a few things and that's all really, and i felt i always did the same thing over and over
  18. Nightioz
    Feb 17, 2015
    5
    I'm sad to say that this game really makes me wanting to go back and play the old Alpha Centauri game, instead of this one. Only thing this does better is the new updated graphics. The rest is just way too dull designed.

    Too bad, since I have been dreaming of a new Alpha Centauri game since I completed that the first time years back.
  19. iseeall
    Jan 14, 2015
    5
    What do you expect... Brian Reynolds who was the designer behind Alpha Centauri and Civ 2 left Firaxis long ago. AC is my favorite game of all time, and I still play it. Yes, AC has some minor flaws (like, poorly tested endgame, and some minor bugs with happiness display and predicted outcomes of worms vs fusion powered units) which could be fixed with 1-2 patches, but in general AC is aWhat do you expect... Brian Reynolds who was the designer behind Alpha Centauri and Civ 2 left Firaxis long ago. AC is my favorite game of all time, and I still play it. Yes, AC has some minor flaws (like, poorly tested endgame, and some minor bugs with happiness display and predicted outcomes of worms vs fusion powered units) which could be fixed with 1-2 patches, but in general AC is a perfect game. It corrected all the flaws of Civ 2 and expanded many of its features. AC could easily be the last game in the series. Yet, to keep monetizing the franchise, they made the awful Civ 3, then Civ 4 (which I also didn't like due to absence of collateral damage) and Civ 5 (which I bought on a crazy Steam sale with all expansions for just 1.5 euros or so) - I tried hard to like Civ 5 and played it maybe 8 times but no, I still failed to like it really. Civ 5 was an ok game but so far from AC. Now comes this game, which is mostly a reskin of Civ 5, with many features removed and without even a proper tutorial (?). It's definitely worse than Civ 5 and undoubtedly worse than AC. Good thing I tried a demo first. The demo crashed after 20 mins of play. The worst thing about Civ: BE (which other reviewers didn't mention, or I didn't see it) - is that the terrain tiles are just a mess of gray and violet colors. It's very hard to tell where miasma is, and where hills are. Even in Civ 5 I wouldn't usually be able to see the terrain types and even the units (!) properly, if not the icons hovering over them. But here it's just nonsense. The bad design decisions which I didn't like in Civ 5 stay here too: "unlockable" civics which stay with you forever (instead of selectable ones like in AC), crippled diplomacy system, too abstract and too simplified espionage system, 1-unit-per-tile rule. Now, here they removed the unit editor, the water bases, terrain up/down, and the psy combat. The small improvements (like, more interesting tech system and the quests) don't really save the situation. It will be funny if no one ever reaches the level of Alpha Centauri :) It's similar to what happened to Jagged Alliance 2. So many remakes, and all were a disappointment to the fans.… Expand
  20. ScireActus
    Jan 14, 2015
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What this game should be: Alpha Centauri remake
    What this game should is: A average mod from CIV 5

    This game is simple a reflection of 2014's games... disappointing, engine reused, RUSHED, unbalanced, and lack of care for the franchise ideology.
    What is more frustrating is that they already have lots of good ideas that them can had used even from the original alpha centauri , of civ 3 , civ 4 .... but no... it´s civ 5 engine.

    Ideas that work:
    Affinities are great... by the end of the game, they change what resources are most important to you, the way you have to fight , and the way diplomacy works

    Units are simple to understand, and they upgrade as you upgrade

    Ideas that didn’t work:
    Aliens... are there to be killed or ignored. most of the time, killed ... all that "they are a new level of strategy" , just forget that

    Orbital layer: must of the time is useless buff

    Tech web: that one is actually a good idea, just need some fix. to became more affinity centric

    World Map and Resources: Man...... this is were you fell the lack of commitment. its just civ 5 , copy and paste... change the resource name and that is it. A rock planet , fungi , desert, water, earth like.... all look and play the same way.    … Expand
  21. overkoell
    Jan 12, 2015
    6
    The biggest problem of this game is certainly the extremely high reputation of its predecessor.
    The truth is Civilization Beyond Earth is simply not as good as Civilization V. Its just not.
    But that doesn't mean that its not worth a look. The fact that it is much simpler than Civ 5 can also be a plus for people new to the series. And the Sci-Fi setting is interesting too. Civ 5 wasn't    The biggest problem of this game is certainly the extremely high reputation of its predecessor.
    The truth is Civilization Beyond Earth is simply not as good as Civilization V. Its just not.
    But that doesn't mean that its not worth a look.
    The fact that it is much simpler than Civ 5 can also be a plus for people new to the series.
    And the Sci-Fi setting is interesting too.
    Civ 5 wasn't as great on release either. The addons made it what it is today - one of the best Strategy games ever. Maybe 2K will give this game one or two addons that will also greatly improve it.

    Beyond Earth is a good strategy game. But it is not nearly as good as Civilization V... yet.    … Expand
  22. Robobob
    Jan 4, 2015
    5
    I got Civilization: Beyond Earth for Christmas and finally got around to playing it. I have been a long time Civilization fan, starting with the first one from the early 90's. I've never played Alpha Centauri, though so I cannot compare. Looking at the User Score.. a 5 is about accurate. It's an OK game, not terrible, not great.

    I'll start with some of the pros. I like the Affinity    I got Civilization: Beyond Earth for Christmas and finally got around to playing it. I have been a long time Civilization fan, starting with the first one from the early 90's. I've never played Alpha Centauri, though so I cannot compare. Looking at the User Score.. a 5 is about accurate. It's an OK game, not terrible, not great.

    I'll start with some of the pros. I like the Affinity system: researching certain technologies to increase my level with a certain affinity. These increases in affininty can automatically upgrade my units, which is another great plus. No need to rebuild units or return to base to upgrade. The units upgrade immediately with a great increase in Power. That is nice.

    Another pro: The Quest system gives you little missions with bonuses to achieve when completed. Though, there weren't nearly enough of them in the mid to late game to keep things interesting. Also, when new buildings are built for the first time you can choose a bonus to add to that building. That is nice.

    Another pro: There is a huge technology tree with tons of things to research, which leaves tons of buildings to build. This actually leads to a con: There are so many buildings to build and it's very easy to very quickly have huge cities with high production and "energy" (or gold) output. But it is impossible to keep up with the Health stat. My entire civ takes a penalty if it is "unhealthy" so I'm constantly scouring the huge and confusing tech web to find anything to help improve my health. And there isn't much. As a perfectionist, I found it annoying that I couldn't improve this stat at even easy difficulty.

    The next big con: The game is dull. The Civilization games are a great race to build that awesome Wonder you need, or research that next big tech to give you the big edge on the battlefield. I didn't feel that at all on this game. Every Wonder just gave you more production, energy, food bonuses, etc. No techs really stuck out and were kind of confusing. I chased after a couple techs to increase my Affinity, but other than that my research was mostly random.

    Games like this have to realize that they need to keep me interested by throwing something at me to keep me fishing for the next tech or Wonder. One that changes up the game or give me something more than just a production bonus. Or give me a cool cutscene to show my patience and strategy paid off. Otherwise it feels like a slow grind to.. nothing.    … Expand
  23. MoreBokeh
    Dec 23, 2014
    6
    Although I played Civ 5 to death (have beaten Deity and share strats online), I've always been a larger SMAC fan. However, this game is a disappointment as it's just a Civ5 reskin and not a spiritual successor. It seems most of the budget was spent on 3D artists but even the new assets aren't that great (in terms of style and quality).
  24. Deathwafflez
    Dec 22, 2014
    7
    it is good but not great aliens the replacements for barbarians are everywhere and no naval units are safe at all and auto explore sadly now translates to *kill off this unit without any reward*

    "the npc people sort of lack personality" is what people say but is not true it has just the same amount of substance maybe it is just because these people do not exist but it is true something    it is good but not great aliens the replacements for barbarians are everywhere and no naval units are safe at all and auto explore sadly now translates to *kill off this unit without any reward*

    "the npc people sort of lack personality" is what people say but is not true it has just the same amount of substance maybe it is just because these people do not exist but it is true something is just sort of...off about them

    there are a lot of resources in the first part of the game and when you see them you cannot do anything with them until a certain era and in a civ game it just does not make sense

    at this point you might think how is this good all I mentioned was the cons and well yes that is true all the pros are the same as civ 5 pretty much

    and finally the tech tree it is not the traditional one as it is in a radio type set up in the original you could only go so far without one tech in this one however you could be all over one side and never touch the other

    7/10    … Expand
  25. Scottar
    Dec 19, 2014
    7
    The game is good but needs some enhancements to make it more enjoyable and less confusing. I accomplished my first victory and found it disappointing as with some other negatives.

    One thing I hate about this game is the loading. First it goes through the credits which I can’t bypass. Then a graphic screen appears with no loading indicator, I thought the game got hung during the first    The game is good but needs some enhancements to make it more enjoyable and less confusing. I accomplished my first victory and found it disappointing as with some other negatives.

    One thing I hate about this game is the loading. First it goes through the credits which I can’t bypass. Then a graphic screen appears with no loading indicator, I thought the game got hung during the first run and I have an SSD. Then it goes to the first menu of single or multiplayer or setup. Then in single player i select the saved game section and i goes to another graphic screen with no loading indicator.

    In my first victory I contacted the aliens, I was expecting advance technologies or insights from them along with an invite to their world. Perhaps even a harmonious path to existence on their planet. But instead I got a little scene that opens up- You have made contact, you are victorious, not even good fanfare. The game needs a better scheme, more adventure, better interface.

    There are some things about the game that seen dysfunctional.

    1) The Diplomacy Interaction seemed limited on Trade options along with diplomacy dialog. Why not have options on working alliance agreements like mutual wonder developments by sharing resources and technologies.

    2) On the manuals, instead of the tacky poster why didn’t they have graphical trees on Virtues, Units, and Tech developments. This would help in determining which way to proceed in desired development.

    3) More control over unit upgrades, it’s too canned.

    4) On spy ops, why couldn’t they have been more flexible in how it would proceed on advancement. Suppose I wanted to spy on an ally, why do I have to go through siphoning energy first for advancement? It too canned! And why could their be spy satellites to observe development.

    5) Some things require too much maintenance like some Orbital unites and trade caravans and just makes the game more tedious.

    6) Quests should involve 1st person adventure and puzzles. If I want to upgrade something in technology then the quests should be the mode to achieve them for some exclusive advantages. You search for alien technology for upgrades. Explorer unit should have the ability for armament upgrades and Lev capabilities. They also should have sensor enhancement upgrades for finding alien technology.

    7) On many off- shore resources there didn’t seem to be a way to harvest the bounty of the sea. I acquired one city that had an offshore drilling platform but I was unable to repair it after I pillaged it.

    8) I don’t quite like the cities growth patterns, I think there should be better options on where you want the city to grow such as toward strategic resources.

    9) There’s a city defense called a Tacjet. It’s very annoying to maintain so I put it to sleep. But then when I needed it I could not awaken it. May be a game bug.

    There were other negatives I can’t get into in the limited space.

    Here’s what I think should have happened. The alien bio life would evolve to threaten the colonists, that is why the original inhabitants left. The aliens would offer technology to prevent that via a certain development path. After developing that technology the victor would offer alliances to help defeat or subdue the life. Based on what was found that is what I would expect. Or it could have been the sun going supernova or some other impending disaster. Or the aliens would give the victor the technology for a warp driven space ship to another habitable planet.

    If an emancipation gate was constructed then the offer would be a return to earth.

    There are so much better outcomes then the canned programed one. Or how about a quest for alien technology to construct a ship to a better planet and then construct a gate to get a number of Earth inhabitants over.

    Maybe what this game needs is a strategy guide, I didn’t care much for the AI assistance. And the extended manual needs some better coverage on some things like Covert Ops. I could never get them past 4 level.

    I would also like to see mini game add-ons of first person scenarios such as 1st person video games of certain quests where you interact on a virtual world level instead of an icon strategy level. Just more money for you Civilization developers. ;>)

    I would like to also see a pre-game where the civilizations have to develop the technology for space travel. I think it would involve more then just rocket launches into space since you have to travel for years to the destination.

    I don’t much under stand the harmony approach, unless your some dye in the wool enviro, boring.

    I think this game needs a whole do-over, it’s too haphazard.

    I see there is already an upgrade that I have not had time to check out.    … Expand
  26. Shane_IL
    Dec 16, 2014
    5
    I was very excited for a new civ game with a different spin, but my excitement was short lived. This game is basically Civ 5 in space. They really could have done some great stuff with this concept, but nope, you're pitted up against other human civilizations with pretty much the same graphics, game-play mechanics and development trees as previous title, just in space.
  27. FelipeAlbrecht
    Dec 14, 2014
    5
    My first impression when I started a march: It does look like a Civ5 Mod. I really do not know whay I paid 40 euros for this "mod". The game is not so bad. The "civs" are interesting, but they strongly look like normal civs from Civ5 but with another names and futurist clothes.

    The technology tree is interesting, but *very* confusing. You know which path to follow when do you play    My first impression when I started a march: It does look like a Civ5 Mod. I really do not know whay I paid 40 euros for this "mod". The game is not so bad. The "civs" are interesting, but they strongly look like normal civs from Civ5 but with another names and futurist clothes.

    The technology tree is interesting, but *very* confusing. You know which path to follow when do you play vanilla Civilization, but it was impossible in Beyond Earth. What I did? I focused in one of three colours that are: I am a pure human, I am human but I like aliens too, and I am a machine. These specs are interesting, because you got new units from them. But again, it was really hard to follow a strategy.

    Besides, why strategy? The IA is to dumb that will lost for the IA from first civilisation running on a old DOS. It is sad to see how a Sid Meier's game can have so horrible IA.

    After all, the game is... okay. The aliens are interesting, but repetitive. The technologies are interesting., but confusing.

    My conclusion: Wait a few more months or some promotion, buy the game for 15-20 bucks and spend an evening playing. It does not worth more than this.    … Expand
  28. Fjonk
    Dec 4, 2014
    6
    I am a loyal fan of the Civilization serie, having played more than 45 days of Civilization V on a pirated copy only to buy it on steam in order to show my support to the brand, allowing me to play an additional 45 days. However, Beyond Earth has caused major turbulence to my dedication of the brand.

    Firaxis wanted, of course, to continue the Civilization serie, but also to evolve the    I am a loyal fan of the Civilization serie, having played more than 45 days of Civilization V on a pirated copy only to buy it on steam in order to show my support to the brand, allowing me to play an additional 45 days. However, Beyond Earth has caused major turbulence to my dedication of the brand.

    Firaxis wanted, of course, to continue the Civilization serie, but also to evolve the brand. The outcome was Beyond Earth. For those who are aware of its prequel, Civilization V, Beyond Earth is simply Firaxis take on a Sci-Fi based Civilization V. Now, the strength of Civilization V was its historical accuracy and description, which Firaxis managed to bring forward beautifully. After Firaxis announced Beyond Earth and its Sci-Fi theme I was already hesitant. I don't believe that I hold a grudge against Sci-Fi based strategy games, but I would never favour it over the historical narrative Civilization V had. Regardless of the theme and setting, I admired the thought that Firaxis could and would meet my expectations, and then exceed them.

    It saddens me, however, to say that Beyond Earth fell short. I feel that given the new setting Firaxis managed to distract itself, and drift away from what previously had made the brand so special. Beyond Earth had very few new features or unique development, that could possibly suprise and intice experienced players. Instead, Firaxis completely revamped Civilization V into Sci-fi Beyond Earth.

    I would be furious if Beyond Earth was Firaxis' panic move, in order to continue the serie. As if there was no more future for development to the setting seen in Civilization V. Civilization V proved itself worthy due to its unique setting. Beyond Earth, however, is just another game with the Sci-fi theme.    … Expand
  29. stephale000
    Nov 26, 2014
    5
    I have been a longtime fan of the Civilization series, with Civilization 4 being one of the all time best RTS games I've ever played. That being said, I was hopelessly confused when I started my first game. I selected the New to Beyond Earth option but the tutorial person didn't explain very much of what I needed to do. The map was completely overwhelming with tons of strange new resourcesI have been a longtime fan of the Civilization series, with Civilization 4 being one of the all time best RTS games I've ever played. That being said, I was hopelessly confused when I started my first game. I selected the New to Beyond Earth option but the tutorial person didn't explain very much of what I needed to do. The map was completely overwhelming with tons of strange new resources which weren't explained at all. All of that being said, I'm going to continue to play and try and figure out everything that is going on because the potential for this game is off the charts.… Expand
  30. Jingo
    Nov 22, 2014
    6
    I tend to play each Civ game for around 400 hours. Might not with Beyond Earth. It's a downgraded version of Gods and Kings with space flavour added. Nice change at first, but then you realise it's the same game with less content. They'll fix that, I'm sure, but you'll have to pay $50 for each expansion. Overall it's still a playable game, but not quite as good as the most recentI tend to play each Civ game for around 400 hours. Might not with Beyond Earth. It's a downgraded version of Gods and Kings with space flavour added. Nice change at first, but then you realise it's the same game with less content. They'll fix that, I'm sure, but you'll have to pay $50 for each expansion. Overall it's still a playable game, but not quite as good as the most recent predecessor. And unlike those people who gave DA3 a 0 rating because they didn't like one thing, I'm mature enough to understand a 0-10 rating system...… Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

57
#57 Best PC Game of 2014
21
#21 Most Discussed PC Game of 2014
4
#4 Most Shared PC Game of 2014

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 78 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 65 out of 78
  2. Mixed: 12 out of 78
  3. Negative: 1 out of 78
  1. CD-Action
    Jan 9, 2015
    90
    Cancel all your plans and fill up the fridge, because once you launch Beyond Earth you will not want to leave your home. [13/2014, p.46]
  2. Worth Playing
    Dec 23, 2014
    85
    Passive AI and lackluster online support from the community isn't enough to make Civilization: Beyond Earth a total wash. If you've enjoyed the series over the years, you'll likely spend many hours with this entry as well.
    Read full review
  3. Games Master UK
    Dec 21, 2014
    80
    Prepare for tech tree troubles, but the amount to discover and overall quality wins out. [Christmas 2014, p.64]
See all critic reviews »