Pandora: First Contact PC

Metascore
68

Mixed or average reviews - based on 12 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 12
  2. Negative: 1 out of 12
  1. 80
    Pandora offers a stiff challenge, and will keep space-faring strategists happy until Civilization: Beyond Earth breaches the event horizon later this year.
  2. Jan 21, 2014
    80
    Pandora: First Contact does a good job in reviving the classic Alpha Centauri, though it lacks some personality to reach the same level.
  3. Pelit (Finland)
    Feb 13, 2014
    78
    Pandora: First Contact delivers very decent spiritual successor to Alpha Centauri, but it unfortunately falls short on some aspects. It needs more focus on the story, diplomacy and the endgame in general. [Jan 2014]
  4. Dec 12, 2013
    75
    Pandora is a good game in its own right, but falls short of recreating the philosophical implications and sheer depth of Alpha Centauri.
  5. Jan 10, 2014
    73
    Developed by a small indie-studio, Pandora: First Contact lives the spirit of classic 4x-games, namely Sid Meier’s Alpha Centauri. The gameplay is fluid, the mechanics well done. Though it’s not that epic and complex like Civilization, it’s fun to play. Overall it’s solid, but not a real long-time-challenging game, because there is a lack of variety concerning the six factions and the small tactical possibilities during the battles.
  6. Feb 5, 2014
    70
    Despite of its bad balancing and badly-arranged gameplay Pandora: First Contact is manna from heaven for gamers longing for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri 4X's successor. However, this sci-fi strategy game lacks in balancing along with user's comfort to be truly excellent.
  7. PC PowerPlay
    Feb 3, 2014
    70
    A space diamond in the rough, Pandora may not get everything right but exceptional combat and city management shines through. [Feb 2014, p.86]
  8. Nov 27, 2013
    70
    A solid, fresh and addictive empire builder that is well worth playing for fans of the genre. But it needs more life and dynamic events, especially towards the end.
  9. Apr 27, 2014
    68
    Inspired by the classic Alpha Centauri, it looks like a modern version at first glance, but lacks the depth and long term motivation.
  10. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Jan 23, 2014
    60
    A solid modernization of the classic Alpha Centauri that honors its tradition and brings it to new life. Sadly, the AI is a tragedy. [Issue#238]
  11. Jan 15, 2014
    60
    They say that something is better than nothing, and Pandora is not a bad game. It’s just nowhere near the source of its inspiration – the still brilliant Sid Meier’s Alpha Centauri.
  12. Jan 21, 2014
    40
    There are a lot of neat ideas here, but none of them pan out. The game's creators clearly adore 4X strategy games in general, and Alpha Centauri specifically, is clear here, but Pandora: First Contact is not a proper tribute. I want to love Pandora, I really do, but nostalgia can't fix a game that doesn't work even at the most basic level.
User Score
7.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 50 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 14
  2. Negative: 3 out of 14
  1. Jan 25, 2014
    9
    As a long term strategy fan I've bought the game around Christmas and played it quite extensively over the last weeks. I've to admit the gameAs a long term strategy fan I've bought the game around Christmas and played it quite extensively over the last weeks. I've to admit the game has really grown on me, not only does it seem very polished, but the devs (a small indie team) also post a lot and keep releasing updates based on player feedback.

    While there are a lot of similarities to Alpha Centauri (one of my all-time favorites), it's definitely not a copy since quite a few mechanics work differently (random research tree, operations, global resource pool, etc.). What I miss the most from SMAC are the awesome secret project videos (anyone remember The Ascetic Virtues?) which brought the faction leaders to life and made it truly epic. However, considering this is an indie production I guess it's kinda expected, and at least the Pandora leaders have long background stories and dialogue.

    I also had some pretty cool matches in multi-player against my brother, even on large maps with several AIs the turns go surprisingly fast compared to Civ 5 (not sure what's the reason for that). The AI seems fairly competent compared to other games (it does some flanking/hidden attacks and uses operations), but nothing special. Especially later in the game you can do some really evil things with operations (e.g. drop units and bombard cities), and I remember a funny moment where I was racing against my brother for a Leviathan kill (massive alien unit that provides a combat bonus to all your units when killed) and I snatched it away with a nuke which had recharged just in time.

    Anyway, overall I'd say the game isn't as good as it could have been, but I definitely had a good time and can recommend it to other strategy fans. If the devs keep working on it, it can become one of my favorites.
    Full Review »
  2. Dec 22, 2013
    3
    Pandora FC has the shallowest gameplay of any 4x TBS game I have ever played, and I have pretty much played them all. Both the tech tree andPandora FC has the shallowest gameplay of any 4x TBS game I have ever played, and I have pretty much played them all. Both the tech tree and city development options are the sparsest I have seen in any 4x TBS game, and there is no depth to any of the areas of Pandora FC that you'd normally expect to find depth in 4x TBS games. Yes you can design your own units, but again the variety of building-block options are limited to the extreme.

    For example in the Civ series you can take the decision to invest time and effort into building a wonder in the hope your investment will bring rewards later in the game. There is nothing like that in Pandora FC. NOTHING.

    This is the only 4x TBS game I have played where it is literally pointless thinking ahead as it is just a needless waste of effort. There is nothing to think about because the player simply isn't given any options to think about because the amount of meaningful decisions you can make are pitiful. Plus there are no decisions to take that require any sort of forward planning.

    As another example (there are many I could choose from) at some point the planet's lifeforms start attacking you, but you don't need to amass a sizeable force to deal with this in advance because you are literally given a warning before it happens, and then you simply amass a sizable force in preparation for "the day the plaent attacks you". I mean just how stupid is that? And don't think you need a sizeable force on hand to defend against the other factions because in the dozen games I played they can't offer you non-aggression facts fast enough. I only built a normal number (2) of defenders for each city and apparently I had far and away the most powerful military force on the planet that had the other factions begging for my friendship.

    It's not a total exaggeration to say that Pandora FC is close to being a linear game that has about as much strategic depth as your average platformer.

    If you are a fan of 4x TBS games then please avoid Pandora FC. And if you are a fan of SMAC then please AVOID Pandora FC at all costs. You will get no any enjoyment out of Pandora FC and you will only wish you had played SMAC instead. And as an added bonus you won't be left with the horrible memory of having played Pandora FC that I now have.

    So my advice is to save your money and if you want to play a 4x TBS game then just play one of your favourite 4x TBS games instead, because you will have far more fun by doing that and I know this to be true because this is exactly what I wish I had done instead of buying and playing Pandora FC for 20+ hours, and I only played it that long in a desperate attempt to find something to like abut the game (and to try in vane to get my monies worth before chucking it forever).

    tl;dr Pandora FC is a genuine candidate for the worst 4x TBS game ever. it might look nice and is pretty stable (and that's why I rated it a 3 rather than a 1), but the gameplay is incredibly shallow and simplistic, and gameplay is the single most important part of any TBS game, so if you don't get that right then the whole game suffers as a result (and Pandora FC got it very wrong)

    (comments based on v.1.1.2)
    Full Review »
  3. Jun 3, 2014
    9
    Is it SMAC? No. Does that really matter? Not at all.

    As its own game, this is an enjoyable TBS. Its different from SMAC and Civ5, and
    Is it SMAC? No. Does that really matter? Not at all.

    As its own game, this is an enjoyable TBS. Its different from SMAC and Civ5, and that's the only real reason it gets down-voted. It looks good, plays well, has its own mechanics and works flawlessly on several platforms straight out of the box.

    Its actually an all round good game and easily worth its average price tag.
    Full Review »