Is MILLENNIA Really That Bad? Gameplay Review

My Patreon: / icongaming
Here is my PayPal-Account Donations are very welcome: shorturl.at/opGOZ
Or Buy me a Coffee, if that's more your cup of tea: www.buymeacoffee.com/9T1PeXW
This is a gameplay review for Millenia.
My Twitch (streams happening regularly, follow me for notifications!): / justanic0n
Join my Discord, chat and miss no new episodes: / discord
Twitter (All Streams get posted here when they air): / gamingic0n

[@annekekramer3835]

I don't get people. Dated graphics, bad UI? I guess I'm more of an indy gamer then, or perhaps I'm old already? The gameplay is amazing, that matters the most! But then again, i also played Dwarf Fortress, so...

[@Ic0nGaming]

Most of the negative reception was due to the Multiplayer and the missing options to configure a new game session more deeply. These things are very much the standard of 2024. The graphics pissed off some, but those reviews had very few other viable points so I didn't take them too seriously. Game itself stands on a good foundation, but with such fundamentals being out of shape, it doesn't give me the feeling that the entire rest of the game is in top notch shape if you catch my drift. I feel like this game will over time reach it's full potential. Or at least I hope so, cause I genuinely enjoyed my time with it. I just don't see it as a finished game yet.

[@PaulRoneClarke]

I’m fine with the presentation ( also play DF since 2011 and captain ducks brilliant tutorials) I find this game buggy and repetitive. I can see where it’s trying to go, hopefully the devs and Paradox will support it to get there.

[@freddykoehlmann9931]

With the graphics it's not that they aren't acceptable but rather that its obvious the studio intended to choose a style that would be cheaper and easier to develop on. But at the same time its feel like the saved funds and dev time weren't put in to the features and polish the rest of the game is missing. For example why is there no search bar in the infopedia? And even if you are happy with the graphics there is also no option to play on a "tactical" or board game style map which can be an accessibility need for some and personality I much prefer playing my 4x games that way.

[@ezdelicades5554]

Dwarf fortress is good but the graphics is what makes it hard to get into its so difficult to immerse into it Until the steam release. Even KeeperRL which was inspired by dwarf fortress and Dungeon Keeper had better graphics and use of animations yet Dwarf Fortress is unmatched in simulation and worldbuilding mechanics. You can always tell that something is extremely dated to be able to play it with comfort to the eyes, "I just cant get myself to Play with ASCII, I want to see good decent textures because ive seen better mentality" is not really a wrong opinion to have , the main problem is when you get yourself a smartphone thats very updated to the time and has close to latest UI and by then itd be hard for u to get into a vintage phone older than what you have experienced with limited eyecandy. Because, you are used to a certain aesthetics, people have different aesthetics interest, People have different favorite colors, People just mainly prefer a game that way because they are more comfortable to the standards they appreciate.

[@ymirtheprimordial5453]

The thing that annoys me about it is that it is nowhere near as good as it should be. The concepts and mechanics are all good ideas, and it should be excellent. But it can't get out of its own way. I actually like the graphics, they are simple and functional, that isn't the problem. The UI is horrible, and it adds so much complexity that just doesn't do anything. So much of what it adds just doesn't contribute to the core concept. Remove sanitation from the game, it just gets better, roll it into housing. Why do we have improvement points when we already have no less than 8 spendable resources? Just buy them with Domain XP. It feels like a game that was on track to be extremely good, then management came in, rushed it out the door a six months early, and hacked it up to sell DLC later. It could be a great game, it SHOULD be a great game, but instead it is just an interesting, but deeply flawed game. Still fun, but not something that is likely to keep people.

[@davidsprenkle2641]

I wasn't going to buy this game until I played the free demo. At first I thought the dated graphics (especially the combat graphics, which are laughably bad) was the sign of a rushed or poor game. But once I actually started playing, I got hooked. The gameplay is surprisingly intricate. It's a well though-out game. By the way, it hardly matters if you're second to, say, Naturalists--just a small bonus you don't get. You should go for the national spirit which fits your aims and starting situation. Nothing is stopping you.

[@Ic0nGaming]

I feel more positive than negative about Millennia. I just feel like it really needed some more time to at least iron out the main menu issues. Being unable to go easy into Multiplayer and have no good configs on a new game start is really horribly bad for a full release priced on 40 bucks.

[@davidsprenkle2641]

@@Ic0nGaming I agree that there are major UI and configuration issues (I'm willing to put up with them). Hope they get those sorted soon. And yes, I was surprised they announced a release so early after the demo.

[@paxman192]

This is incorrect you should always go for Raiders lol

[@evankukalis9940]

My first game was going well and then out of nowhere I got attacked by an insane amount of aggressive armies with huge numbers! I was ill prepared. It was a great learning experience for me early on! Build up your army folks😂

[@bodean30371]

i killed 8 Armies about 20 turns in and still had 6 more sack my city and end the game. Crazy!

[@evankukalis9940]

@@bodean30371 I didn’t realize they could take a city so quick! Without opening the map using more scouts I didn’t realize the size of who was attacking me lol

[@TheWagonroast]

I don’t know about this game but in civ 5 and civ 6 i normally just focus on production 100%, so when a war comes i can train people, and i don’t have to worry about unit upkeep

[@Cruor34]

I feel exactly the same way. Good ideas, CAN be good later, is 1/2 baked now. The most unacceptable things to me are: 1) Can't raze "player" cities (one of the 8) only minor nations. Inanely annoying when an AI has jammed a city too close to another or put a city in a bad spot. 2) No setup options. I can't set game speed? Science speed? Number of barbs? Come on... 3) Too many tile improvements. Like wheat - flour - bread is cool but we need to be able to stack the mill and bakery for example. I have cities that just don't have the room to plop stuff down. My list is like 15 long but those are top 3. It WILL be a good game in a year, and a great game in 3 years IF they support it, but right now? Meh. Good ideas but just not nearly finished or tested. Sad. From what I have heard some people had access nearly a year ago. Who are these people. How does not being able to raze cities get past? Unreal. Civ 6 sucked, Humankind was like this - good ideas but 1/2 baked and too much dumb crap. (yes I have played the latest build) and this failed too. Old World has great ideas (set city location is amazing, love it) but you are stuck in one era. Ara, History Untold you are the only one left.... PLEASE don't fail us.

[@jackka82]

If Stellaris is any indication, Paradox will release ten expansions and dlc which will make the whole game a good game that costs 200 dollars or a 9.99 a month subscription. Basically Paradox likes to release early release games at full price and then charge extra piecemeal over the years as they refine the game. The end cost for the gamer is ridiculous.

[@obi0914]

Janky as first Impressions. I mean, jank in every nook and cranny, menu, UI, animations, etc etc etc. Then i sat down and played it, and i dont think i could go back to other civ games because this does a lot of things right

[@oooolah]

The core mechanics are excellent and I love how you kind of build up resourced based on your starting position. If we could take this mechanic into Civ, that would be a 10/10 game for sure. But it's fun to play, and to me that's all that really matters.

[@juani2929]

at this point if you buy a paradox game at release it's just an investment / vote of confidence to the company. every game has been released incomplete, you know what you're getting yourself into by buying at release. eventually they all get updated and DLCs and then it's good. it's just the way it is.

[@jackka82]

Don’t forget that all the expansions and dlc that make up core parts of the game will end up costing 200 dollars in the end. The base game which sells for full price is basically an early release demo. Paradox is scum.

[@juani2929]

@@jackka82 we still play so...

[@kayvee256]

I thought it was Paradox published, not Paradox developed?

[@juani2929]

@@kayvee256 same philosophy.

[@puttilepuffie]

Lol? ​@@juani2929 Difference between a developer and a publisher is high. C promt games made this game. Paradox is selling the game for C promt

[@chumley307]

Thanks for the honest review. Seems kinda cool and I'm intrigued. But I want them to fix some things and polish it a bit before I try it.

[@Ic0nGaming]

Yeah I think this is a proper approach =)

[@samosierra]

This game is from Paradox so what you expect? They have along history for selling basic game that has a bare minimum and then for years realising expensive dlcs, milking their playerbase along the way, that add new features to the game but honestly should be there from the very start to make game really good. This is Paradox monetization strategy. I always strongly advise not to buy their games at the start but wait at least year or two and wait for discounts for basic game and realeaded dlcs.

[@Ic0nGaming]

Well I don't expect anything in particular. But I feel like for that price Paradox can't complain about people being unhappy when you compare it to other games in a similar price range. If they'd sell their base games for 20 bucks and then all the DLC's on top of that with their same current pricing, people would complain way less.

[@stefanosias7422]

I wonder if the trailer graphics isn't doctored a bit, I mean there is a part in the gameplay trailer where you see a zoom in on the map while you travel across it, and I would swear it looks incredibly more detailed and pretty than when I watch all the gameplay streams. Is it because people have turned down gfx settings or is it simply not as pretty as the trailer shows in the "fly by"?

[@Ic0nGaming]

Most trailer footages from almost any game are edited to look a wee bit prettier. It's common practice in the gaming industry, so I guess it's been here the same.

[@shinydewott]

I think the issue with the ages could be remedied if the standard ages could be replaced by one of the special ages if the certain objective on it is completed. It would make these special ages more of a challenge to get, as you would need to stay behind in tech and not advance to complete the objectives but that’s acceptable to not being able to do it at all. It could also give immunity to those who’ve already entered the standard age from the negatives (and positives too!) of the special age and plung everyone left behind to the special age instead.

[@caintindal1671]

Not a bad game got to get use to it as it is not a simple game to master. My only regret will be the Maps as they need more variety and need a map of earth to get the idea on what the map should look like but it was the same for Civ maps. Lacks more players.

[@Ic0nGaming]

Yeah I'm with you. I liked the complexity of city building a lot. I really hope the devs can iron out the worst needs (better map customization, easier multiplayer access) to get rid of the bad first impression.

[@johnchance7836]

Listening to this review I keep thinking . . . So it's a paradox game? This seems to be how release day always is. The game is rushed out feeling unfinished or even buggy and then they put out constant free updates to finish it every few weeks and major free updates with every expansion that fleshes it out into a game that's worth the initial price you felt ripped off by. The only exception to this, for me, was Cities Skylines 2, which simply couldn't be played on my two year old PC. That one I refunded not because it was incomplete and rushed out, but because it was unplayable. But this stuff? It seems to just be what you buy into when you buy paradox games and the flip side is that the game stays viable over the course of ten years. Sure I really wanted regular hot seat right out the gate so I can play here at home with my best friend but that's the only point where I felt surprised. Graphics? Think about it how many graphics packs does EUIV try to sell me? I don't care about the graphics so I always skip but I wouldn't be surprised if ten tile sets were on the market next week. Ditto on the song packs. ROFL

[@The_CGA]

You can’t always get what you want. It’s a little bit on the deterministic side-you end up being the other things if someone gets there first. But it’s like Highlander says: “there can only be one”

[@chumley307]

Btw, are you a Warlock 2 player? And if so, have you ever played it with Renaissance Mod?

[@Ic0nGaming]

No, I'm not familiar with that one =)

[@averybaumann]

Warlock was a variation on master of magic, Renaissance mod fixed some things and added some variety and balance but there were some game killing design decisions where some late game Mostar would drop on your start and.waste an hour of game play where reloading is just useless, you start next to a dragon and you have zero chance- not affected by game settings, couldn't be molded out, this sure sounds much like that. As many have said this is a demo for the real game 10 years and 15 dlc and 400 dollars from now

[@Army1SGRetired]

It is curious that Paradox chose to actually move up and release this game early, the original release date was at least a month out if I recall. I will say, I do enjoy the game and especially some of the mechanics like Improvement points. True, the graphics are nothing to write home about and there are certainly things that need to be fixed like making Supply chains easier to understand. Overall there is a very good foundation to build upon and this game can be successful with some more polish

[@ninocelic7577]

I actually find it very interesting with lot of things happening, played civ 3,4,5,6, old world, humankind... graphics aside it's a fresh wind

[@artemmayboroda5217]

In my opinion game is so good and there’s so much of replayability. The only issue for me is lack of balance and map generation upgrade. Balance should be improved, some national focuses are way too powerful in comparison to others (For example I won game with raiders during the age of blood) Also it would be awesome, but I have no idea how hard it to imply is to make differentiation of ages for different countries. What I mean here is that divide age choosing depending on continent for example. In one continent it can be age of blood, while on other it’s age of heroes. And at specific age like after renaissance both continents will have the same age mechanic (would make sense since that the age when both continents start interacting with each other) About map generation I mean specific places like dessert, forests and farmlands, islands have to be somehow grouped up together, not divided on all card and be like different biomes. If you play on continents, for 6-8 players, it should be some unique place for each nation, so their bonuses and national focuses would play much more role. For one it should be a lot of islands nearby, for another a lot of deserts, for third hunting places, for forth mountains biome etc etc. In my opinion it should make it more interesting, because in almost all of my games everything was mixed up. Okay one more point is that there’s no tall gameplay. You can’t effect the world with one city, you don’t receive any additional bonuses for being a small country, the only way for domination is having many cities and vassals with feudal kingdom government. In my opinion it has to be reworked or have extra special mechanics for playing one city

[@Nozomivamp]

I’ve heard mostly positive reviews for the game, only played a few hours so far, I’m looking forward to really diving into it this weekend. Graphics have never been that big of an issue for me in strategy games, but I really don’t like civ like games combat, I don’t see the strategy in ‘my numbers are bigger, I win combat’ vs something like the total war games where you need to build your army properly and if you play right you can out maneuver a much stronger army

[@nicholaslarson3778]

Thanks for the overview. I haven't looked into this game at all yet, even though I like this type of game. I think I will wait on this and just stick to Age of Wonders 4.

[@guilfordstancill3456]

I'm definitely enjoying it. Surprised it popped up as mixed. With it only being 40$ I think its a great investment. The AI makes weird choices and the diplomacy could use some work.

[@ndbaker74]

Love it. Over 30 hours in so far in the 5 days it's been out. Love the experience points systems and the supply chain systems. Definitely happy with its direction rather then the simplicity from other Civ style games.

[@dach829]

thank you for the honest opion

[@MuffHam]

This game looks like wait for sale type game. It still looks interesting.

[@hiso9456]

Is this better than Civ 6?

[@DarthDaddy-cg6ro]

Thanks.

[@buckrodgers1162]

As someone who has been playing video games since the Atari 2600 era; The graphics look fine to me. The lack of map options though... Civ3 had more map options than this has. How did they even come close to thinking that was acceptable? But, I was on the fence about getting this game, but now I can see that it's a definite 'No go'. Map size, and type, and nothing else? That's just dumb.

[@bcmiller189]

I gave it a negative review on steam but I wished there was a mixed review option. I tend to agree with most of what you said. I actually don't care at all about the graphics but the game feels like a first draft. I feel it has a lot of good ideas that aren't fully fleshed out and made for an underwhelming experience. It means I couldn't in anyway recommend it because I wish I had waited rather than bought it. Maybe in 6 months it will be ok.

[@puttilepuffie]

*Laughs in Sid Meier's*

[@Ic0nGaming]

As much as I agree, sadly Civ 6 let me down with their visual style. I can't stand how it looks.

[@MrHellknightimp]

Paradox really, really needs to start releasing games as early access. So many of their games would be rated much better at release if they just gave those games the EA tag.

[@Ricky-jl1wf]

This comment section is full of people who didn't invite Stacey the unibrow girl to prom in highschool and missed out on the freaky badass sex after and instead went with Tiffany who won prom queen and got nothing when she went to Chad the quaterback and left them alone.

[@joeendel3614]

Might as well play Civ 4

[@PaulRoneClarke]

For me I’m fine with the presentation. It’s that half the game is flakey, a little bit repetitive, and like all Paradox games, for the first year from launch, full of bugs. Though the combat looks like sprite from a 1983 Commodore 64 game with bad collision detection.

[@foobarbazbaa5598]

I generally agree, it does feel like the game came out of the oven too early. The graphics, I don't really care, it's functional and certainly not ugly. And at 40 euros.. Well it's a little pricey but hardly a triple-A price point these days. It's going to need a lot of polish like most paradox games on release but I have a feeling it will get there. For the moment I'm just going to tell myself it's in early access, I'm enjoying it well enough for what it is for now.

[@John.._]

All I need to know is if the AI is better than Civ

[@BoydofZINJ]

i am enjoying it. The Combat is.... wonky. It took me a fe restarts to understand what i was missing. The tool tips are also lacking; outside of those two features its great!!!

[@Ic0nGaming]

Yeah it has a really good foundation! It just feels so darned unfinished and unpolished sadly.

[@Cruor34]

Give it more time. Almost everyone thinks the first 150 turns (although too fast paced IMO) is great. Then the land gets taken up and the AI will found a city between two of your cities and you can't raze it. Stuck there forever. You will find a whole host of other issues as you keep going. It WILL be a good game in like 1 year.

[@killmouseky4740]

I not winning but I really like the game.

[@stevespain6445]

Unless a 4x game starts pre-urban (~10,000BCE - 5,000BCE) I would love to find a dev group that stops with Terra Nullius, and actually innovate that. The graphics are not commensurate with the cost. The combat looks basic and uninteresting. I've stopped buying games on day one or earlier, and if they launch buggy or not feature complete, I'll check back in a year when it's on a major discount.

[@LostAeon]

Most negative comments i saw, were either calling it a civ clone (once again) or people being mad about no day 1 mod support or simultaneous multiplayer. Even though both have been announced to come later. And one person even straight up lied, claiming that they already put 50 hours in the game and it just kept being boring. Even though, steam showed that this person only played for 1 hour... Millennia is definitely a solid game, despite some shortcomings. But not sure why people chose those arguments when there actually reasonable criticism... It's like Humankind all over again.

[@markhosking1882]

I cannot understand the negative reviews. The game is wonderful. Most bad reviews seem to fall into two camps. Those who don't like the look of it. I call these the CoD or FIFA type of gamers, who like the shiny things and aren't bothered by the depth of the game. The other group are those who don't seem to understand how different the game is from Civ. It is not Civ. It is an excellent 4X. Of course there are some QoL issues but I cannot stop playing it. It's really fun and complex. I love it.

[@cfehunter]

Everything I've seen says to me that they should have probably released this in early access.

[@Ic0nGaming]

Yes, I feel very much the same. It would be an excellent Early Access! I'd be full of praise for the foundations. The way it is now I am concerned whether or not the devs will finish what's left to do on the game. Or if we just get an endless wave of DLC's that just milk our expectations and hopes.

[@Akronymus_]

It isn't early access? I honestly expected it to have been, it just has that look. Was gonna wait until full release, but, well, guess that aint gonna happen then

[@cfehunter]

@@Akronymus_ I guess if it survives it may be worth a look in a couple years when all of the DLC is being sold with it in a bundle?

[@jaywonkim667]

I have 2000hrs in both Civ 5 and Civ 6 This game is ok-ish but not worth its price

[@juliantheapostate8295]

Why wouldn't you just boot up Civ again?

[@Cruor34]

Because it sucks too. Civ 4 - WAS good for its TIME. AI is outdated, I won't write an Essay. Civ 5 is dated, unstacked cities is a really good idea and it doesn't have that. Civ 6 - Has some good ideas, but the AI is too stupid to understand 1 unit per tile (Civ 5 is too, but Civ 6 is even worse at it) and I despise the cartoony look. Humankind improves a lot of this but the AI once again, sucks and there are idiotic ideas like the council of Humankind that you are FORCED to be a member of, and if they vote against you (literally like England HAS TO give London to Germany, just because) you lose London. Period. Idiotic. We all love the IDEA behind these games, start ancient with nothing, build an empire over time. The execution of the idea just always falls short. We wait for the champion, maybe one day. Maybe Ara History Untold will do it. Likely not. We can dream.

[@nickschmidt453]

Paradox release an incomplete game and then fill it out with increasingly expensive DLCs.... never

[@johntrollinski8549]

10/10 would Hoe-farm again

[@AC-hj9tv]

Hoes be wildin

[@coolfunnyvideos4829]

it is a VERY VERY new game, give them a little bit of time, it has amazing potential, very similar to Civilization 6

[@Ic0nGaming]

Absolutely on your side. I still feel like 40 bucks are way too costy with the DLC plan already on the horizon. Given the roughness of the game it would've been a genius marketing move to make the base game way cheaper. People would complain WAY less.

[@AB-yu5pw]

By "time" you mean about 5 DLCs, each priced $19.95 (total ~$100), over the next 2 years

[@chrisadamec900]

Yeah Malenia is tough. Oh wait.....

[@eshandas3645]

i have stooped reading steam reviews longtime ago,

[@TrivedijiGames]

I actually like this game. But it's priced heavily. This game deserves half of price it's asking for. Other than that if we talk about actual gameplay I'm satisfied with it.

[@Ic0nGaming]

I strongly agree with this. Except for the price tag I like what I played. But Early Access would have been actually good for this game, I still believe.

[@oooolah]

I agree. I could see this game easily being a mobile game. And not in a bad way, it would be an awesome mobile game for sure.

[@Lord_Funk]

If you listen to the Paradox haters, yes it's so bad. If you listen to the paradox fanbois, no it's not so bad. If you listen to those that only wants simultanous turn multiplayer and not turnbased, yes it's bad (that might change once and if simultaneous turns is added, devs said it will be). If you just listen to the regular turnbased 4X gamer, it's an ok game. A bit more than ok. Some very nice ideas and quite fun, but nothing that will blow anyone out of the water. A nice alternative to Civ, Humankind and Old World. One more dish to chose from on the smorgasbord. If that is enough to keep the small studio "C Prompt Games" afloat I have no idea about? If Paradox will not suppport it since it's doesn't bring in enough revenues, I have no idea about? Is it perfect? No, but neither is Civ 6. In fact I still play Civ 5 rather than Civ 6. I rather play Millennia than Civ 6. I rather play Humankind and Old World than Civ 6 too, but each to ones own. None of those are totally "perfect" either of course. No game or person is in my opinion. Perfect I mean. All I know is that I am having fun playing Millennia. That's enough for me. It's a hobby. As long as I'm having fun, it's all good to me.

[@AlgaeNymph]

> people complaining about graphics not being Crysis-level AAA was a mistake.

[@aelix56]

It's not that it is bad it's mostly overpriced for how little content it offers.

[@user-wg4qr4wc3e]

I'm ready to give up on this one. All I do is fight barbarians. It's boring.

[@VoodooD0g]

Culture points is hardly something to mention where this game sets itself apart lol... Also, its two tall mountains, what different names do you want?_?

[@InternetMameluq]

Interesting review, but: 12:27: What the hell is up with civ 5 players and 'too many barbs'? Jesus, man we should be drowning in blood early game!

[@Ic0nGaming]

I'm just unhappy that there is no option to play it differently. That is all.

[@InternetMameluq]

@@Ic0nGaming Pretty sure that's not what oyu said, but I can agree with that... It's annoying that even Civ 6 didn't have the option to play with barbs off.

[@admiraljohan7152]

It’s a good game with a bad coat of paint.

[@WelshGuitarDude]

The barbarians are too much imo

[@zero_wing_]

Another sycophant

[@Ic0nGaming]

Another day, another random insult.

[@andrepinetable]

I'd give it about 5.5-6/10, it has some good ideas and solid foundation but there's too much that was rushed or just feels like a confusing mess

[@Ic0nGaming]

Yeah that sums um my first impression as well. Like I said, I kinda feel bad for the devs cause I'm sure they didn't want to release the game in this state.

[@Cruor34]

Agree, 6/10 for me. Yet another example of good ideas rushed out the door. 1/2 baked. I actually think the game and it's ideas work, whats killing it for me is you can't raze cities and the AI will rush any gap you have and found a city in-between two of yours just to be annoying. No game speed option, no setup options. Lame.

[@ogaburan]

Finally an honest review of this game

[@Gneeznow]

I never buy Paradox games, they release trash then put 200-300 euro of DLC on top of it. I genuinely don't know why people buy their games

[@comu6263]

Because you arent right

[@christopheryoung2874]

this is so true and has been for years, people should have expected it to be that way

[@MatijaVrtar]

its even worse, 500e dlcs not 200 @@comu6263

[@KeeganWitt]

Is that true even for games only published but not developed by Paradox?

[@Gneeznow]

@@KeeganWitt I can only give you one example, Surviving Mars which was a fantastic game then Paradox got their hands on it and pooped out the 2 worst DLC I have ever seen in my life. It's one of the few examples where the base game is better than the game + DLC

[@jackka82]

To say that the combat in this game feels like a mobile game is truly a massive insult to modern mobile games. It actually feels like what might have been shown in the 90’s as a demo for 3D graphics on Windows 95. Hell, I remember playing games from actually back then that looked a hundred times better than whatever this is. Combat from inside city walls is even more ridiculous. The models in the walls open the doors to come out and hit the enemy and go back in and close the doors, for every hit until the combat is over. Paradox literally would have had a better game by showing a 2D drawing still image of combat in place, instead of instantly teleporting us back to the early days of 3D graphics that would be more fitting as a child’s summer project. Can’t wait to see Paradox release ten DLC and expansions that might make this game good and charge 200 dollars for the whole game.

[@megaflux7144]

its trash that doesnt even deliver whats advertised on the store page. you cant lie about multiplayer and expect there to NOT be backlash! whats more its in no way as good as old world or civ 4-5-6.

[@Cruor34]

Whoa there... not as good as Civ 4/5 maybe. Civ 6 is trash tier, and it was even more trash tier the day of release. The AI couldn't even figure out a naval invasion.

[@megaflux7144]

@@Cruor34 debatable. on 1 hand civ 6 is absolute filth, but it had multiplayer.. and it had that awesome super hero mod (not that i count mods towards a games value). but on the other hand millennia aint shit either AND it doesnt have the multiplayer it advertised. it seriously seems to have some humankind mixed in with it meaning its just not fun, the pacing is off, and the combat is a fucking abomination. id rather stick to age of wonders frankly if i HAD to play a paradox 4x game. i have never even been able to play ANY of the civ 6 dlc's THAT I OWN because once they switched to that shitty launcher i could never get the game to run at proper resolution again because the cursor wasnt showing its true location.. and i spent DAYS trying to get it to work!

[@mstrmorgana]

it is bad. doesnt justify the price, bought and refund within 40 minutes

[@JBCreatieve]

what is wrong with you people ,you very demand,better you lives in poor place where you have nothing,maybe you happy to play it wen you come back. luxury people very anoying this days,complain about everything, it thing covid change people..

[@Cruor34]

Judging by how you typed that, you have an IQ of 80, so you would be very easy to please. Caveman get two rocks, caveman can bash rocks together! Caveman happy now!

[@koeyfoo1028]

Hate your review. You're repeating stuff again and again but you're also going back and forth. Script it out first next time please!

[@Ic0nGaming]

No. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[@neverever1270]

it looks awful. they could have done so much better on just the graphics. it's off-putting its so bad

[@dick8689]

how people are complaining about the graphics, there alot of videos of full game play, so what they didnt research and just blindly bought the game then complained about it? No i think people rate this game down cause they are all just angry people who only know how to complain.