All Quiet on the Civ Front

[Weraptor]

I'd say the community here was split in half regarding post-R&F DLCs. I personally didn't think there would be any.

 

[Gedemon]

I'm not DENYING a 2nd xpac. But it's definitely not confirmed and shouldn't be assumed. On this forum we were all "reasonably sure" that there would be post-R+F DLC and it definitely didn't materialize.

In addition, while sales seem to have been strong they don't seem to have been explosively great. So I'll stick with "Likely but not certain".

I don't remember that.

 

[Deliverator]

I'm not DENYING a 2nd xpac. But it's definitely not confirmed and shouldn't be assumed. On this forum we were all "reasonably sure" that there would be post-R+F DLC and it definitely didn't materialize.

I'm not sure that's true. I think that post-R&F DLC was always unlikely, given the problem of whether you make the DLC Civ only available to R&F owners so it can use R&F Features or not. Also there is no precedent since there was no Civ V DLC after Gods and Kings aside from map packs. So personally I think that DLC after R&F was always highly unlikely and I know that this was the view of others as well.

If Expansion 2 isn't confirmed by the end of 2018 I'll eat my shoes.

 

[bite]

I'm not DENYING a 2nd xpac. But it's definitely not confirmed and shouldn't be assumed. On this forum we were all "reasonably sure" that there would be post-R+F DLC and it definitely didn't materialize.

In addition, while sales seem to have been strong they don't seem to have been explosively great. So I'll stick with "Likely but not certain".

I can tell you there is something more Civ related coming, for the simple fact that if there was not, they would not be spending any money on marketing, but the Civ social media team still keeps plugging along

 

[Vandlys]

I'm not sure that's true. I think that post-R&F DLC was always unlikely, given the problem of whether you make the DLC Civ only available to R&F owners so it can use R&F Features or not. Also there is no precedent since there was no Civ V DLC after Gods and Kings aside from map packs. So personally I think that DLC after R&F was always highly unlikely and I know that this was the view of others as well.

If Expansion 2 isn't confirmed by the end of 2018 I'll eat my shoes.

Brave New World?

 

[Haig]

In addition, while sales seem to have been strong they don't seem to have been explosively great. So I'll stick with "Likely but not certain".

I disagree.
From 2016-2018 Civ 6 has been a "Steam Platinum certificated", meaning a group of top twelve best selling games in those years.

Also there are sales from ipad version that we can add on top of Steam ones.

Its selling damn good and is popular.

I'm sure theres a 2nd expansion. Not sure about additional smaller dlc.

 

[shaglio]

Brave New World?

Brave New World was a full Expansion Pack. When we refer to DLC, it's usually smaller scope things like stand alone Civs, Natural Wonder packs, Map packs, etc.

 

[Xur]

I disagree.
From 2016-2018 Civ 6 has been a "Steam Platinum certificated", meaning a group of top twelve best selling games in those years.

Also there are sales from ipad version that we can add on top of Steam ones.

Its selling damn good and is popular.

I'm sure theres a 2nd expansion. Not sure about additional smaller dlc.

That the game is a best seller says more about expectations of the franchise than the game. The franchise is popular, and would sell great no matter how the crappy the gameplay turned out to be. I’m sure civ7 will also be a best seller.

civ6 went for quantity over quality to make sure we didn’t get another “vanilla” experience like we had when going from civ4BTS to bare bones civ5. We got most of the previous features in civ6, none of them were any fun in my opinion.

This version has hurt the franchise in my opinion, so in some weird way I wish we get a more bare bones civ7 and that Firaxis takes some more time to nail down gameplay. Gameplay used to be king in this franchise. You had to excuse the graphics with great gameplay. Now we got it the other way round. Graphics with no gameplay... and it sells... sad really...

Moderator Action: Changed an inappropriate word without changing your meaning. leif

 

[Duuk]

I think my comments are being parsed very weirdly.

I'm fairly confident there will be a 2nd xpac. Really, I am. But I don't want to take it as a given. And "Civ is still active on social media" is meaningless because Firaxis could be doing literally anything with the Civ social media team. Remember that Civ5: Beyond Earth would have been something that would have appeared on the Civ social media, too and kept them "alive".

So while I'm about 87.256% (parse THAT, nerds!) sure that there will be a 2nd xpac, and yes, there was a preponderance (50% + 1 or more) of people thought there would be post-RF DLC (Ottoman/Byz was the most commonly held belief), I'm not willing to stake my life on it.

Hence why I am the Doom-Sayer!

DOOOOOOOOOM.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

I can tell you there is something more Civ related coming, for the simple fact that if there was not, they would not be spending any money on marketing, but the Civ social media team still keeps plugging along

Civ 6 is still available for sale and social media campaigns don't cost much money, so I'm not sure that's proof, but I get your take.

That the game is a best seller says more about expectations of the franchise than the game. The franchise is popular, and would sell great no matter how the crappy the gameplay turned out to be. I’m sure civ7 will also be a best seller.

civ6 went for quantity over quality to make sure we didn’t get another “vanilla” experience like we had when going from civ4BTS to bare bones civ5. We got most of the previous features in civ6, none of them were any fun in my opinion.

This version has hurt the franchise in my opinion, so in some weird way I wish we get a more bare bones civ7 and that Firaxis takes some more time to nail down gameplay. Gameplay used to be king in this franchise. You had to excuse the graphics with great gameplay. Now we got it the other way round. Graphics with no gameplay... and it sells... sad really...

I think I'm about as disappointed with the direction that Civ 6 is taking as anyone, but Civ 6 has a lot of people who enjoy playing it. It's not Civ 5, it's not Civ 4 (its certainly not Civ 2 - nostalgia love! ). It's its own game, and it appeals to its own audience of players. The in game graphics are amazing, you can play it in a huge variety of different ways and still win, etc. etc.

In other words, while it doesn't appeal to me - I'm with you in hoping for a Civ 7 that strips away the disconnected mechanisms jumbled up in Civ 6 to focus on more internally consistent systems that offer interesting and challenging gameplay - Civ 6 can be a success and appeal to lots of gamers who are looking for a different experience than I am.

 

[Disgustipated]

but Civ 6 has a lot of people who enjoy playing it.

points to self. I still love this game. Even if it's a bit "gamey". I wouldn't mind seeing Civilization move in a more realistic direction and less things that offer good gameplay, but aren't particularly realistic (governors and districts spanning out hundreds of kilometers from your city center). For the moment, I'm not done with this game by a long shot. As it's the only game I am playing right now, I'm bored with everything else because other games are too long.

 

[Leathaface]

I would be very, very suprised if there wasn't a second expansion, i'm close to 100% it will happen.

 

[Vandlys]

Brave New World was a full Expansion Pack. When we refer to DLC, it's usually smaller scope things like stand alone Civs, Natural Wonder packs, Map packs, etc.

I've heard them being called DLC or Xpacs. Same goes for R&F. I get you, truly, but in all actuality it feels rather silly to make a distinction when DLC is just the medium the content is used in, and says nothing about the size. But hey, if that's the vernacular I will try to keep up. Still if they are being used willy nilly it's hard for me not to get confused and bungle it up myself.
Then, just for sake of argument, there is the fact that the part I quoted says "apart from map packs". So the one big DLC gets ignored because it's too large, and thus falls under Expansion Packs, and the other one is ignored because it is mentioned. So yeah, we didn't get DLC, aside from two kinds of DLC : P Sorry, had to argue, don't take it too seriously : )

 

[Leyrann]

I've heard them being called DLC or Xpacs. Same goes for R&F. I get you, truly, but in all actuality it feels rather silly to make a distinction when DLC is just the medium the content is used in, and says nothing about the size. But hey, if that's the vernacular I will try to keep up. Still if they are being used willy nilly it's hard for me not to get confused and bungle it up myself.
Then, just for sake of argument, there is the fact that the part I quoted says "apart from map packs". So the one big DLC gets ignored because it's too large, and thus falls under Expansion Packs, and the other one is ignored because it is mentioned. So yeah, we didn't get DLC, aside from two kinds of DLC : P Sorry, had to argue, don't take it too seriously : )

I suppose it comes from the time before a DLC was a thing, and all you ever had were Expansion Packs. Nowadays I'd say a simple way to keep them apart is: Expansion Packs add new civilizations, mechanics, etc and come with their own intro video, while DLCs come with one or two civs and maybe a scenario. Also Expansion Packs are in the price range of a third to half of the new game, while DLCs are in the price range of 5-15 euros.

 

[Vandlys]

I suppose it comes from the time before a DLC was a thing, and all you ever had were Expansion Packs. Nowadays I'd say a simple way to keep them apart is: Expansion Packs add new civilizations, mechanics, etc and come with their own intro video, while DLCs come with one or two civs and maybe a scenario. Also Expansion Packs are in the price range of a third to half of the new game, while DLCs are in the price range of 5-15 euros.

Yeah, back in the day you had nothing but expansion packs really. I remember Counterstrike being released for Red Alert, which was substantial. Things like a few maps you didn't really get without some more content surrounding it.
Personally I'd rather see a different name alltogether still : ) But I can be anal like that...

 

[Leathaface]

I think another reason that a second expansion will arrive is that the DLL source code hasn't been released yet. I expect Firaxis to only release it when they are done releasing all content for Civ VI.

 

[pokiehl]

I think another reason that a second expansion will arrive is that the DLL source code hasn't been released yet. I expect Firaxis to only release it when they are done releasing all content for Civ VI.

Civ V's dll was actually released before BNW was out.

 

[Leathaface]

Civ V's dll was actually released before BNW was out.

I didn't know that. I thought that since Vox Populi only came out in 2014 that the dll wasn't released long before then.

 

[Gedemon]

I didn't know that. I thought that since Vox Populi only came out in 2014 that the dll wasn't released long before then.

The DLL source for civ5 was released in November 2012, 8 months before BNW.

The DLL source for civ4 was released before the first expansion.

 

[Leathaface]

Why are Firaxis so slow releasing the DLL source for VI?

Vox Populi improved the AI in Civ V so much that people who played on Deity had to move back down to Emperor due to the challenge. There is a rumour there is only one AI person working on Civ VI at Firaxis. I'd like to see a team of qualified modders have the chance to improve the AI.