That's over 14 Concords!
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
57 points (96.7% liked)
Games
16679 readers
780 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Hahaha is this the new unit of measure for game sales? π
boom!
Never played the first one, but I've put a solid 15 hours in this one so far. A bit of a learning curve but man it's a solid city builder.
The first one is still great too. They went from micro to macro so it's still a unique game too
Some people aren't happy with the changes but it's really just going to the macro view. There are still very important buildings and hubs though. My only two critiques are they don't really tell you about the hubs doing more than extra storage. (There's a heat one and the storage ones can reduce workforce requirements) So just like in the first game there's a benefit to building in patterns. Some districts can even go to zero heat required under normal conditions. My other problem is the end game isn't properly explained. But if you check your damaged districts you will find new options for dealing with them in the last chapter.
Other than that it's a new format, a new story, and the same long lead crisis simulation. By the time you realize you're screwed, the mistake was hours ago. Expect to fail until you see where the resources interact with each other and figure out a sustainable research/build order. It's not just a city builder, it's a survival city builder. But there is a utopia mode if you just want to make pretty cities.
Any point in playing the first one beforehand? Or is this just an improvement on a formula?
I think itβs worth playing the first because itβs a much smaller scale and sets up the world. This one is set 30 years later so the society from the first game has significantly grown and expanded, with a lot of the evolutions in gameplay stemming from that. You probably could jump right into the second, but you may feel like youβre missing something at the start.
This is a major change in formula. You could absolutely play the first one without feeling like it's the same game. The story in the second doesn't require you to play the first one though.
I've not played the second, only the first but it didn't really have a set story as far as I'm aware, so should be fine
I figure that it's like CIV in that regard