Aquila SPQR
King
Conclusion:
Full article:
cdaction.pl
Civilization VII commits the biggest sin of games of this type – it quickly becomes boring. A few changes to the formula have been good for the series, but this is the time for either a bigger revolution or for cultivating what worked in the "six" – not half-measures.
Full article:
Sid Meier's Civilization 7 – recenzja. Mam złą wiadomość: to najgorsza „Civka” w historii – CD-Action
Cywilizacja to niemalże synonim hasła „jeszcze jedna tura”. Przemyślana i wciągająca seria nieustannie ewoluuje, próbując zainteresować nowe pokolenia i jednocześnie zadowalając starych wyjadaczy i wyjadaczki. Do tej pory ta ewolucja działała całkiem nieźle. No właśnie… do tej pory.
Civilization is almost synonymous with the slogan "one more turn". A well-thought-out and engaging series is constantly evolving, trying to interest new generations while satisfying old hands. So far, this evolution has worked quite well. Well... so far
I won't beat around the bush, the seventh "Civ" is unfortunately the worst iteration of a well-known brand. It's one step forward and two back, and a clear signal that even such a seemingly solid formula will not last more than three decades. Okay, but what else will we find in it?
Catherine the Great, Tsarina... of the Mayans
The most important change affected the selection of the titular civilization. Now we separately choose the leader of our people and the nation we will lead. However, there is a method to this madness. This distinctiveness allows for the creation of interesting combinations that allow for an optimal approach to the goals set for ourselves (a maximum of four, and achieving one of them ends with our victory). We can win on the path of culture, economy, war or science. There is no diplomacy or religion known from previous installments, which does not mean that these are absent as elements of the game - more on that later.
What's more, we will change civilizations during the game. How? The course of the gameplay is divided into three eras: antiquity, discovery and modern. When moving between them, there will be a moment of switching to another nation, which will of course affect the repertoire of technologies, bonuses, units or buildings. Which civilizations will be available when changing depends not only on the faction we chose at the beginning, but also on whether we have met the specific requirements to unlock the appropriate cultures.
The new era also means a "soft reset" for the world. Some cities change, some resources disappear and others appear, some units advance and others are lost, and progress in turn is somehow reset. The latter means that we can theoretically fall behind in the first two eras, but still win in the last one. In practice, however, the better we do, the more passive bonuses we can unlock in the next era, thus getting closer to victory.
All these changes were supposed to stop the "snowball effect", which is that a civilization that was developing in one direction was unstoppable, and also to "portion" the game for people who never finished their games. It works... well. I really have the impression that it not only diversifies the fun, but also allows you to change your approach very easily. In one of the games, I was struggling to gain cultural advantage. After changing the era, I decided to follow the scientific path and in an extremely easy way reversed my situation. I felt that I did not have to pay for the mistakes I made 100 turns earlier for another hundred rounds.
For better, worse and bland
As for the other novelties, they are not so revolutionary. For example, there are no barbarians, and their function is performed by independent forces (something between barbarians and civilizations), and buildings are now built completely by themselves. Diplomacy has also changed a bit, because – as I mentioned – you can no longer win by following its path. Alliances and wars are dictated by the passively acquired resource of “influence points”, which we spend either on cooperation in various projects (providing us and the other side with some bonuses), or on espionage and related actions, weakening the enemy's forces.
In practice, however, it looks different. We spend these points (it is extremely easy to overdo them) on a large scale to please other nations and gain resources, and then we can still lose the alliance because our neighbor built himself too close and, on top of that, introduced a different system than us. Diplomacy also allows us to gain an advantage in a conflict, and this works quite well, although it is a pity that the system itself is quite simple, even simplistic. Well, real diplomacy only begins in multiplayer.
In the single-player game, the weak AI and bugs do not help. More than once or twice I have had to "loop" some foreign leader in the fact that he offers me an alliance, I accept the offer, then he asks me for help in the war, I do not agree, the alliance automatically ends, and in the next turn... he asks for an alliance again and so on and so forth! There are more of these types of minor annoyances, and on lower difficulty levels the AI makes stupid mistakes. Other times, however, independent forces develop their troops very quickly and within the first few dozen turns they knock on the gates with hostile intentions. What I also did not like in the context of these independent "polises" is the fact that you cannot militarily take over these fields. We can destroy the indicated city or follow the path of alliance (by spending influence points, of course), striving for vassalage.
Since I've already touched on military issues, I have to complain about how combat looks in Civilization VII. The combat interface is awful... or rather, it's almost non-existent. The way combat plays out is completely unintuitive. It's incredibly difficult to keep track of what, when, to whom and where the Ziazi is doing, from managing the actions of the soldiers, through controlling their health points (you can barely see the enemy ones), to establishing some sensible tactics. We do have command units that can gather an army and move faster with it or focus fire on a specific opponent - theoretically this unlocks certain strategic possibilities, but in practice it works clumsily. Religion also turns out to be clumsy, as strange as it sounds - it involves sending a missionary to a rival area, clicking a button... and that's it. Then the opponent can do the same and so on and so forth. A perfect simulation of shouting over whose faith is better.
A Spoonful of Honey
But let's not be all bad, I like a lot about the new Firaxis game. For example, the system of cities and towns. The latter are created after each second and subsequent settlement is founded and are characterized not only by rapid growth, but also by the inability to produce buildings or units within them, which can only be purchased for gold. At some point, however, we can decide whether we want to transform the town into a full-fledged city, retain its feature of rapid growth and expansion, or give it a different specialization, here called "focus". A trading post will increase happiness for each trade route, a fishing town will give a large bonus to food production, and the urban center will provide a bonus to culture and science. This really opens up many options and requires careful consideration, but with a good strategy it provides a lot of benefits.
The entry into the era of discovery also deserves great praise. It allows for safe travel to other continents - previously raging storms can easily destroy our fleet. This gives the feeling that even quite late in the game we still have a lot to see. New cities to establish, new civilizations to meet, and new opportunities to use. Occasional side quests also provide a nice change. Some are time-limited and involve training specific units, while others give us time but require us to focus on specific goals – but these are usually worth taking on. Add to this natural disasters, rebellions or narrative events, and we get quite a lot of variety… at least for the first 10-15 hours. Then, unfortunately, the game becomes increasingly repetitive. Despite all this variety, no Civilization bored me that much.
In “four” or “six”, I eagerly awaited the next turn, waiting for the completion of a new technology that would allow me to do something interesting, discovering new fields and their secrets, observing the development of conflicts, etc. In “seven”, I simply wanted to click through all my games as quickly as possible, especially in the last era. There were times when almost nothing happened for dozens of turns, and I – waiting for the research to be completed – had no reason to do anything more than patiently watch the next rounds pass by. The division into eras and their reset effect helped to stimulate my curiosity and enthusiasm a little, but after only a dozen or so hours of play I realized that there were few things here that could particularly surprise me.
The weakening echo of drums
Let's move on to the technical issues now. The interface cries out to heaven for vengeance. The series has never been known for its perfect UI, but here it is really difficult to read the necessary information. Everything gets mixed up in the eyes, there is a lack of contrast in the fonts, and various menus are hidden in strange places. The game itself looks really beautiful, I like the style at the level of the map, buildings and units, but it clearly stands out from the side of the tables, HUD, etc. Not everyone will like the leader models – they are supposedly less cartoonish than before, but still with a certain caricature-like edge. The leaders themselves are unfortunately empty puppets, mostly mumbling and waving their hands – that's how much character they have.
I liked the soundtrack – I admit, it's quite monotonous, but in most cases catchy – and the sounds of cities, battles and the world. There's nothing extraordinary here, but it helps to convey the spirit of specific eras and make the game more enjoyable. When it comes to the fluidity of the gameplay, I didn't experience any problems, although I did get crashed to the desktop once. In addition, the early version had a lot of minor bugs that were patched over time, but I have the impression that the balance of the game needs to undergo major changes – both due to potential exploits and differences between leaders/civilizations.
So we got a title that didn't encourage me to switch from "six" in any way. Many people asked before the premiere whether the new Civilization is a full product or whether we'll have to wait for one (like last time). Well... I have the impression that "seven" is supposed to be a "full game" by Firaxis, but we would like to get much more. More mechanics, more complexity, more novelties. A few DLCs have already been announced, but they will mainly introduce new civilizations, leaders or natural wonders - there is nothing on the horizon on the level of e.g. Gathering Storm, which does not mean that we won't see such additions. We'll see.
We played Sid Meier's Civilization VII on PC.
