Historicity: Florence
- Justin Matheson
- Jan 30
- 4 min read
There’s a certain kind of game that makes you feel clever, not because it flatters you, but because it gives you systems that actually deserve your attention. Historicity: Florence is in that category. It is not flashy in the “look at my particle effects” way. It is flashy in the “I made it through winter without anybody dying” way.
The best thing, for anyone who cares about learning design, is that the game’s historical layer is not just wallpaper. The history shows up as legitimate constraints, tradeoffs, and prioritization choices.
Historicity: Florence gameplay, in one sentence
As a player, you have to juggle interlocking resources, spend them to upgrade systems, and chase a surprisingly satisfying loop of planning, producing, and improving, while the game keeps nudging you to think like someone living inside a real historical context. I found myself beginning to dread the change of the seasons the more I played the game which, I feel, is probably pretty accurate.
What makes the resource management feel unique
A lot of resource management games are basically spreadsheet optimization with pretty icons. This one feels different, because the resources are not just “money, wood, stone” in a vacuum. The decisions feel like they are attached to a place and a period.
Here’s what stood out to me in the first hour:
The resources create meaningful bottlenecks. You are not just collecting everything all the time. You are constantly prioritizing, reflecting, panicking, re-prioritizing, panicking, etc.
Tradeoffs are legible. Even when I did not know the “best” move, I could usually tell what I was sacrificing, and that is a big deal.
With all the mistakes I made in my first playthrough, I couldn’t wait to start over and try a new placement for my lumberyard, a better design for my additional housing section, and a shorter route from my wells to my pasture. It was humbling to have to start over again so quickly, but it wasn’t so punishing that I didn’t want to immediately play again. And again.
The upgrade system is, honestly, creative
I am not going to claim this upgrade structure is completely unheard of, the genre is huge and I haven't played every game out there. Someone will immediately reply “actually, game X did that in 2017.” Fine.
What I can say, based on this demo, is that the upgrade system feels novel because it changes how you plan. It is not just “bigger numbers.” It is more like unlocking new ways to solve problems, and for me, that was refreshing.
If you are looking at this from a learning lens, an upgrade system like this is interesting because it:
Rewards understanding, not grinding. You get more out of the system when you actually see the relationships.
Creates a natural difficulty ramp. Complexity increases through capability, not through random punishment.
Invites experimentation. Try a path, see what breaks, pivot (if you can).
Why the gameplay is so satisfying
Some games are satisfying because they are chaotic. Others are satisfying because they are clean. Historicity: Florence is intended to be closer to the "clean" side even though my playthrough became very chaotic. It gives you a problem, gives you tools, and then lets you feel the consequences.
In practice, that satisfaction comes from:
Clear feedback loops. You do a thing, the system responds, you learn.
Visible progress. Even small improvements feel like they matter. Clearing the all the debris and fixing up buildings in the early game was chef’s kiss.
Low friction iteration. You can cycle decisions quickly, which makes the “fail forward” part feel fun instead of exhausting.
The educational/training angle
If you have ever taught history (or designed learning about history), you’re familiar with the fact that we often turn the past into trivia. Names, dates, a few famous moments, and then a multiple choice quiz. This is a memory game, not fully sharing the nuances of life in the past.
What Historicity: Florence hints at, even in a short demo, is a better approach, which is history as constraint-based decision making.
Strong historical learning often asks learners to practice:
Contextual reasoning: “What options even existed in this situation?”
Causality: “If I choose this, what ripples out from it?”
Tradeoffs: “What am I giving up, and why?”
Systems thinking: “How do these pieces influence each other over time?”
I am not claiming the game is a curriculum. But I am saying it creates practice conditions that many classrooms struggle to create without serious effort.
What this means for game-based learning (GBL)
If you want to use commercial games (COTS games, meaning off-the-shelf entertainment titles) for learning, Historicity: Florence is a good reminder that you do not need a game that screams “EDUCATIONAL” to be educational.
You need a game that creates the situations you want your learners to be in.
Based on this demo, the clearest learning levers are:
Resource management as prioritization practice
Why: You get their mental model, not just their outcome.
Upgrades as hypothesis testing
Why: Prediction makes learning visible.
Historical context as constraint mapping
Why: This is a great doorway into critical thinking about models and simulations.
Conclusion
Based on the demo alone, it clearly practices prioritization, planning under constraints, and adaptive problem solving. The mechanics and attention to detail were fantastic. I’m the kind of gamer who finds beauty in most, if not all, games. You’ll rarely hear me speak negatively about a game (except Roblox), but that doesn’t mean i don’t have some games that stand out from the rest.
Historicity: Florence is one of the coolest city-builders I’ve ever played and it is one of only a handful of games that has made me stop mid-game to search up a name, event, or place to cross-reference the accuracy of the content.
I think this would be a great tool for a team that wants to practice prioritization and problem-solving. That’s only what I pulled from the short demo though. Anything beyond that needs more play time.
Comments