Humankind

The reviewers generally acknowledge Humankind’s strengths in offering a unique, player-driven approach to storytelling through its mechanics. Cultured Vultures highlights the game’s emergent storytelling, emphasizing how cultural evolution and random events create immersive, albeit non-traditional, narratives. IGN Portugal praises the game’s ability to let players “write their own history,” with each playthrough generating a distinct narrative based on cultural choices. The Games Machine similarly notes that the game’s focus on shaping humanity’s collective progress through strategic decisions allows for creative freedom, while The Games Machine and New Game Network appreciate the humor and commentary provided by the narrator, which adds personality to the experience. These positives underscore the game’s emphasis on player agency and its departure from linear storytelling. However, many critics point out significant shortcomings in narrative cohesion and depth. COGconnected criticizes the lack of a “coherent dramatic throughline,” arguing that the ability to switch cultures at each era undermines emotional investment. Gamer.nl and IGN France note that while cultural choices offer creative freedom, they result in disjointed historical progression, with some reviews (like PC Gamer’s) calling the narrative “utilitarian” compared to other strategy games. GameWatcher and New Game Network highlight episodic events that lack follow-ups, making it difficult to build a cohesive civilization story. Additionally, Jeuxvideo.com and Meristation mention repetition in later stages and limited exploration of themes like religion or commerce, further weakening the game’s narrative impact. These critiques collectively suggest that Humankind prioritizes mechanics over storytelling, leaving its narrative elements feeling underdeveloped. The overall consensus among critics is that Humankind succeeds as a gameplay-focused experience but falls short in delivering a compelling traditional story. While some praise its innovative approach to player-driven narratives (e.g., IGN Portugal and Cultured Vultures), the majority agree that the game’s lack of a central narrative structure or emotional depth detracts from its storytelling potential. COGconnected, PC Gamer, and GameWatcher all emphasize that the game’s mechanics—such as cultural transitions and random events—are more impactful than its narrative elements. Despite this, many acknowledge the game’s ambition in allowing players to shape history through choices, even if it doesn’t fully realize a cohesive story. This balance of creativity and structural limitations reflects a mixed reception, with critics divided between appreciating its originality and critiquing its narrative shortcomings.

The gameplay of Humankind is widely praised for its innovative mechanics and strategic depth, particularly its unique cultural progression system. Critics highlight the game’s ability to let players transition between historical cultures across eras, offering flexibility in strategies and playstyles (GameStar, PC Invasion). The Fame-based victory condition, era-specific mechanics, and dynamic cultural shifts are frequently cited as fresh takes on the 4X formula (New Game Network, IGN Portugal). Reviewers like Worth Playing commend the reduced micromanagement compared to traditional titles, while Vandal and The Games Machine note the adaptability of strategies through evolving civilizations. The game’s emphasis on resource management, diplomacy, and cultural evolution is seen as a standout feature, with Gameblog.fr praising its complexity and variety in victory conditions (military, economic, scientific). However, several critics point to persistent flaws that detract from the experience. Issues like clunky micro-management, inconsistent AI behavior, and repetitive late-game content are frequently mentioned (Finger Guns, GameGrin, Twinfinite). The combat system is criticized as simplistic or confusing, with NME and Meristation noting its lack of engagement. Balance problems also arise, such as certain cultures being overpowered (PC Invasion) or the AI’s passivity (Gamer.nl). Additionally, the game’s steep learning curve and underdeveloped systems—like diplomacy (COGconnected, Cultured Vultures) and religion (IGN)—are seen as barriers to accessibility. Some reviewers, like New Game Network and GamesBeat, also critique pacing issues, turn limits, and the War Score mechanic as frustrating or poorly implemented. Despite these criticisms, the overall consensus among critics is that Humankind offers a compelling and original 4X experience with significant strategic depth. While flaws in execution and balance are acknowledged, many praise its ambition and creativity. IGN and PC Invasion highlight the game’s ability to blend familiar 4X elements with innovative mechanics, while GameGrin and Eurogamer Italy note its potential for varied playstyles despite repetitive tendencies. The game is seen as a bold experiment that succeeds in reimagining civilization-building, even if it occasionally falters under the weight of its complexity. Critics like Games.cz and Worth Playing argue that the core systems are functional and rewarding, suggesting that Humankind represents a meaningful evolution of the genre despite its imperfections.

The graphics and visual design of Humankind received widespread acclaim for their vibrant aesthetics, detailed environments, and cultural diversity. Critics highlighted the game’s ability to evolve visually as players progress through civilizations, with cities and landscapes reflecting distinct architectural styles and dynamic changes over time. GameSpot praised the “lovely” map with its pristine landmass, while PC Invasion called it the “most visually appealing 4X strategy game,” noting immersive details like flowing rivers, lush forests, and towering mountains. The art style was frequently described as colorful and whimsical, with Gamer.no comparing it to Civilization VI but emphasizing a more refined, hand-drawn aesthetic for buildings and units. Cultured Vultures and GamesRadar+ lauded the “strong color direction” and evolving city designs, while GameGrin noted its similarity to Civilization VI in terms of visual appeal. The game’s ability to blend cartoonish and comic-inspired elements with a polished, immersive world was another standout feature, as highlighted by Eurogamer Italy and GamesRadar+. However, several critics pointed out significant drawbacks, particularly around technical execution and user interface (UI) design. Multiple reviewers, including Cultured Vultures and Everyeye.it, criticized the cluttered UI for obstructing map readability and creating a confusing experience, especially in late-game scenarios. GameWatcher and TierraGamer echoed these concerns, noting that late-game cities felt overly busy despite their aesthetic appeal. Graphical glitches also emerged as a recurring issue: GameStar mentioned districts and units failing to display properly, while IGN described problematic zoom levels with “gray voids” and “neon vomit.” Wccftech noted icon sticking and background code errors, and GameSkinny highlighted texture loading issues for avatars. Additionally, some critics found the art style unremarkable or derivative, with New Game Network calling it “generic” and PCGamesN noting a lack of personality compared to rival titles like Civilization VI. Overall, the consensus among critics leans positive but acknowledges notable flaws. While the game’s visual design is praised for its cultural diversity, vibrant aesthetics, and immersive environments, technical issues and UI shortcomings detract from the experience. Reviewers like GameSpot, PC Invasion, and GamesRadar+ celebrated its beauty and attention to detail, yet others such as IGN, GameStar, and Wccftech emphasized persistent graphical glitches that hindered immersion. The art style’s balance between charm and originality remains divisive, with some finding it refreshing (e.g., Gamer.no) and others calling it derivative (e.g., PCGamesN). Despite these criticisms, the majority of reviewers agree that Humankind offers a visually striking experience that successfully conveys its strategic depth through evolving landscapes and culturally rich visuals.

The critical reception of Humankind's sound design and music is overwhelmingly positive, with numerous reviewers highlighting its immersive qualities and artistic depth. Cultured Vultures praised the audio as "highly praised" and noted that the score rivals Civilization in quality, while Gameblog.fr celebrated the 520-minute musical score composed by Arnaud Roy with 63 musicians, calling it a "dlice audio-visuel" (audio-visual gem) and a key strength of the game. Similarly, Gamepressure and Gamer.no emphasized how cultural themes are tailored to each civilization, enhancing immersion through music that reflects historical and regional identities. IGN France lauded the soundtrack as "sublimes et fascinantes" (sublime and fascinating), while Jeuxvideo.com described it as "exquise" (exquisite). The ambient environments, such as waves crashing or choir singing mentioned by WellPlayed, further contribute to the game’s atmospheric depth, creating a cohesive and engaging auditory experience that complements its strategic gameplay. Despite these accolades, some critics noted limitations in the sound design’s originality and impact. GameWatcher pointed out that while the music offers "stylistic variety" from tribal chants to orchestral tracks, it lacks the standout quality of Amplitude’s earlier works like Amplitude. Movies Games and Tech criticized the audio as "flat" and less inspiring compared to Civilization, with sound effects described as "uninspiring" and lacking atmospheric depth. Softpedia also mentioned that the music was merely "adequate," leading them to mute the game after 10 hours in favor of classical tracks. Multiplayer.it noted the background score as "pleasant but not exceptional," suggesting it fails to leave a lasting impression. These critiques highlight a recurring concern about the sound design’s ability to innovate or differentiate itself from other strategy games, despite its technical and cultural strengths. Overall, the consensus among critics leans heavily toward appreciation for Humankind’s sound design and music, with most praising their immersive qualities, cultural specificity, and emotional resonance. While some reviewers, like GameWatcher and Movies Games and Tech, expressed reservations about originality or impact, the majority viewed the audio as a significant asset to the game’s experience. The combination of a sprawling musical score, culturally tailored themes, and atmospheric ambient elements created a cohesive auditory landscape that enhances exploration and strategic depth. Though not universally groundbreaking, the sound design is widely regarded as a strong component of Humankind, with its strengths in variety, immersion, and technical execution outweighing its minor shortcomings.

The voice acting in Humankind receives mixed praise, particularly for its narrative delivery and occasional charm. Critics like GameGrin highlight Sean Bean’s involvement, noting “smooth voice-over” that suggests competent performance quality, while PCGamesN praises a “honey-voiced narrator” whose whimsical observations add a “charming tone.” Similarly, Multiplayer.it appreciates the “friendly narrator voice” that lightens key moments, such as the founding of an empire, and IGN Italia notes the narrator’s “subtle, ironic commentary,” which adds depth to in-game events. These positive remarks focus on the narrative voice rather than character performances, emphasizing how the narration enhances the game’s atmosphere despite limited detail on individual vocal work. However, several critics criticize the voice acting for its lack of cultural authenticity and consistency. Checkpoint Gaming strongly points out that all voice actors use modern American accents, which feels jarring when portraying non-American characters, undermining immersion. COGconnected echoes this, calling the voice acting “competent but fails to capture the unique flavor of each culture,” resulting in a “bland experience.” Additionally, Eurogamer Italy highlights accessibility issues, noting the absence of Italian voice options, subtitles, and interface translations, which could alienate non-English speakers. While some praise the narrator’s tone, others like Softpedia describe the voice work as merely “adequate,” suggesting a lack of standout performances or emotional depth in character delivery. Overall, the consensus leans toward moderate reception, with critics acknowledging the narrative voice’s charm but questioning the broader execution of vocal performances. The positives—such as Sean Bean’s involvement and whimsical narration—are tempered by concerns about cultural insensitivity and technical shortcomings like limited localization. While GameGrin and PCGamesN offer glimmers of praise, the majority of critiques, including those from Checkpoint Gaming and COGconnected, emphasize that the voice acting fails to fully immerse players in the game’s diverse historical and cultural settings. This divide reflects a game with narrative potential but significant room for improvement in balancing authenticity, accessibility, and vocal diversity.

The technical performance of Humankind across platforms shows a mix of strengths and weaknesses. On PC, several reviewers highlighted positive aspects, such as MGG’s assertion that the game is “technically solid” with no major issues, while TierraGamer praised its smooth performance on mid-range hardware and consistent frame rates (88-89 FPS). Multiplayer.it also noted the game’s technical quality, attributing it to a long beta period that polished the final product. For Xbox Series X, TheXboxHub acknowledged the game’s overall polish despite technical hiccups, and Movies Games and Tech praised its “excellent” controls, though they hinted at potential console-specific limitations. On PS5, while no explicit positives were cited, Finger Guns noted that the game’s core mechanics remained functional despite clunky controls and interface issues. However, PC faced widespread criticism for technical flaws, including UI complexities (e.g., unclear empire icons per GameSpot), AI inconsistencies (Eurogamer Italy), and performance hiccups like long loading times (Cultured Vultures) or freezes during late-game scenarios (GameWatcher). Bugs such as incorrect war notifications (GamesRadar+) and environmental glitches (Games.cz) were frequently mentioned, with some critics like MMORPG.com reporting crashes requiring restarts. On Xbox Series X, GameGrin highlighted camera control problems and UI glitches, while TheXboxHub criticized a “camera bug” that forced auto-resolution during battles. For PS5, Finger Guns emphasized clunky controls and obscured tutorial pop-ups, suggesting the game’s technical execution lagged behind its PC counterpart. Overall, critics largely agreed that Humankind suffered from notable technical issues across all platforms, but these were often framed as polish problems rather than critical failures. While PC reviewers like Cultured Vultures and GameStar pointed to stability concerns, others such as MGG and TierraGamer acknowledged the game’s solid foundation. Console-specific challenges—particularly on Xbox and PS5—underscored the need for optimization, with critics like TheXboxHub and Finger Guns highlighting control and UI shortcomings. Despite these flaws, many reviewers (e.g., Multiplayer.it) recognized the game’s potential, suggesting that post-launch patches could address most technical hurdles while preserving its ambitious design.

The majority of reviewers highlight strong positive aspects of Humankind’s replay value, emphasizing its dynamic systems and variety. Critics like CGMagazine and Gameblog.fr praise the game’s "million combinations" through cultural blending, era transitions, and multiple victory paths (military, economic, scientific, diplomatic), which create a sense of endless experimentation. Eurogamer Italy and Everyeye.it note that the ability to explore different civilizations across seven eras, coupled with flexible strategies and unique playstyles (e.g., agrarian vs. scientific approaches), ensures each session feels distinct. GamesRadar+ and Wccftech also commend the game’s adaptability, allowing players to switch cultures, experiment with governance systems, and pursue varied objectives like "fame" or space races. These elements collectively suggest a robust foundation for replayability, particularly appealing to 4X fans seeking diversity in progression. However, several critics point to significant drawbacks that may limit long-term engagement. Cultured Vultures and Gamer.nl highlight balance issues and repetitive late-game mechanics, with the latter criticizing "deeds" as a hollow motivator. PC Gamer and Jeuxvideo.com note that the endgame becomes stale, with perfunctory additions like the space race failing to sustain interest. Twinfinite and Worth Playing also mention predictable narrative events and underdeveloped systems (e.g., religion), which reduce the game’s lasting charm. Additionally, GameGrin and Finger Guns point out a lack of new content and repetitive mechanics, even with multiplayer options, suggesting that some players may lose motivation after initial playthroughs. These critiques reveal that while the game’s systems are innovative, their execution sometimes falls short of maintaining sustained interest. Overall, the consensus among critics is that Humankind offers high replayability due to its cultural flexibility, strategic depth, and varied victory conditions, but this potential is tempered by repetitive mechanics and underdeveloped systems. While outlets like IGN, GamesGrind, and SpazioGames celebrate the game’s "millions of possibilities" and enduring appeal for 4X enthusiasts, others such as Cultured Vultures and PC Gamer caution that balance issues and pacing problems may deter long-term engagement. The game’s replay value ultimately hinges on players’ tolerance for its flaws and their ability to appreciate its experimental approach to civilization-building. Despite mixed feedback, the majority agree that Humankind succeeds in offering a unique and diverse experience, even if it requires updates or personal adaptation to fully realize its potential.