As such, the core of the pitch of Humankind is this: If Civilization has become to enamored with long-term planning, with an endgame focus, with dividing into good plans versus bad plans; then Humankind is an attempt to muddy those waters. It is an attempt to make a game about all of human history that’s about making the most about the position players are in at any given time — about reacting and adapting instead of merely executing.

At the macro level, Humankind dives into the gray areas with its victory conditions. Or rather, that it doesn’t have express “conditions” for a variety of victories. Instead, it keeps score via “fame” — a marker that’s hidden throughout the game, and one that the developers said “might surprise you” when you win. Fame comes from being the biggest or best or smartest at key points. A conceptual example Amplitude gave me was how the Mongols had the largest contiguous land empire in human history, conquering most of settled Eurasia except for the peninsulas of Indochina, India, Arabia, and Western Europe. That sort of “fame” could get the Mongols closer to victory, even if their empire didn’t last for long beyond that era.

Pas de condition de victoire prédéfinie comme dans Civ, mais des points de "gloire" pouvant contribuer à la victoire.
Il me tente bien ce nouveau jeu d'Amplitude :)
(surtout que je n'ai pas vraiment accroché à Civ VI)

Est-ce que la sortie prochaine de ce nouveau jeu signe la fin de la série des Endless ? Je vois en-effet mal comment deux licences pourraient cohabiter sur un thème aussi proche. A moins qu'ils ne tablent sur le fait que les joueurs continuent à acheter les DLC Endless, tout en découvrant Humankind.