All Quiet on the Civ Front

[Trav'ling Canuck]

As far as we can tell, no, but that's complicated by the fact that part of Civ IV's life cycle took place pre-Steam, and the majority of its dedicated players likely bought in early and continued playing offline or on other servers in a way that can't be tracked. Not only does that mean the data isn't fully available for Civ IV's playerbase, the exposure Steam gives to games that debut on the platform was simply better advertising than Civ IV ever received. So Civ V was likely to have sold better even early purely because of differences in marketing.

So basically all we have to go on is imperfect Steam stats, which are somewhat more reliable but not that much less anecdotal than the testimony of the 1-200 people who post on CivFanatics.

I think we can safely say that some people love Civ 4 and think it's the best game in the series. Some love Civ 5 and think it's the best game in the series. Some love Civ 6 and think it's the best game in the series.

I'm not sure much else is relevant. Three different games, appealing in different ways, and to different degrees, to different people. They all have their good points. They all have their flaws. And they all have features that some people view as good points and others view as flaws.

EDIT: My point being that parsing usage statistics isn't particularly meaningful, anyway.

 

[Zaarin]

Was Kangxi Emperor fat? I don't think we need a second leader for China. Egypt and France are higher priorities for me.

I agree, but I wouldn't say no to China. My ideal would be alternate leader for France or Egypt + Vietnam for Asia...but only if an alternate leader for Egypt doesn't cost me a Middle Eastern civ.

 

[Savoir10]

I was creating a map using the Worldbuilder and noticed under the leader names, 8 LOC_Placeholders. Make of that what you will.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I had no idea that we were speculating that alt leaders might be replacements for Civs in that particular region. I hope that's not the case of course I mainly one European alt leaders. That also didn't stop Macedon coming after Gorgo.

 

[Haig]

Rise and Fall has three female leaders, I think we could speculate realistic possibilities for civs that could be in cause of a big female leader.

Sweden led by Kristina - She hurried the peace of Westphalia(first model of a modern treaty) that ended 30yrs war so it could fit well if the next expansion has congress and diplo mechanics.

Maya led by Six-sky

Vietnam led by Trung

I doubt Maria I of portugal returns tho..

 

[Kimiimaro]

I doubt Maria I of portugal returns tho..

The only good thing about Mad Maria representing Portugal in Civ V was her great voice actress.

 

[Xur]

When did civ games lapse into a question about leaders and countries? What happened to gameplay? An expansion or DLC should be adding gameplay that modders cant do... leaders and countries can be done by modders... I hope this is just some perverted interest here at CF. It’s doing nothing good for the game.

 

[UWHabs]

When did civ games lapse into a question about leaders and countries? What happened to gameplay? An expansion or DLC should be adding gameplay that modders cant do... leaders and countries can be done by modders... I hope this is just some perverted interest here at CF. It’s doing nothing good for the game.

Problem is gameplay speculation is a bit too wild. At least countries, we have a reasonable idea of all the options (although I doubt that the Mapuche were really considered by any of us before they were announced). Gameplay speculation tends to be simply "what mechanics from past games are we missing", and not much into what "new" ideas we could have.

Plus whenever we talk gameplay, the conversations tend to be:
-We want corporations back!
-In an interview Ed mentioned that he wanted the World Congress
-We want fixes to loyalty/governors/emergencies/etc...

And that's about it.

 

[Zaarin]

Sweden led by Kristina - She hurried the peace of Westphalia(first model of a modern treaty) that ended 30yrs war so it could fit well if the next expansion has congress and diplo mechanics.

She'd also make Mad Maria of Portugal look qualified by comparison.

When did civ games lapse into a question about leaders and countries? What happened to gameplay? An expansion or DLC should be adding gameplay that modders cant do... leaders and countries can be done by modders...

1) Historical civs and leaders are what sets the Civilization franchise apart from other (usually better) 4X games. 2) With all due respect to modders, modders can't match Firaxis' quality.

 

[Inhalaattori]

If we are talking about female leaders... I think Denmark and Ethiopia have decent candidates.

- Margaret I of Denmark ruled Kalmar Union, which unified all Nordic countries under one ruler.
- Zewditu of Ethiopia who ruled 1916-1930.

 

[Kimiimaro]

If we are talking about female leaders... I think Denmark and Ethiopia have decent candidates.

- Margaret I of Denmark ruled Kalmar Union, which unified all Nordic countries under one ruler.
- Zewditu of Ethiopia who ruled 1916-1930.

Margaret I of Denmark is a decent choice, but I think that Denmark isn't exactly the most needed Civ. Although she would make it different from Viking Norway. As for Ethiopia, I want my Menelik II

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

When did civ games lapse into a question about leaders and countries? What happened to gameplay? An expansion or DLC should be adding gameplay that modders cant do... leaders and countries can be done by modders... I hope this is just some perverted interest here at CF. It’s doing nothing good for the game.

I personally am waiting until everything is official is released before I even attempt to install mods to the game. The more things that I want to become official, the better and easier it is for to put in the game and for it to run functionally, as well.

As for female leaders here would be my choices:
Lady Six Sky of the Maya
Maria Theresa of Austria
Queen Salamasina of Samoa

 

[Haig]

I was creating a map using the Worldbuilder and noticed under the leader names, 8 LOC_Placeholders. Make of that what you will.

Is there a way to find out when they were added there?

 

[jddods]

God forbid. We've already gotten stuck with too many of them. What we really need are more ancient civs, considering we currently have a grand total of one.

I with Zaarin on this. I tend to play the older civs first in any release and modern ones are the tail end charlies.

 

[Disgustipated]

And maybe, just maybe they can give us the ability to name our own civilization leaders and civilization names. A boy can dream.

At this point it just seems to be a design decision. I'm not sure why they feel it's important not to give us the ability to rename our leader names.

And Hall of Fame. My Hall of Fame in Civ5 never worked properly, so I've gotten used to not having it. Still would be nice to have though.

 

[durfal]

When did civ games lapse into a question about leaders and countries? What happened to gameplay? An expansion or DLC should be adding gameplay that modders cant do... leaders and countries can be done by modders... I hope this is just some perverted interest here at CF. It’s doing nothing good for the game.

We have been speculating which civ comes with the game or expansion since civilization was first announced I think. Which isn't strange for a game called Civilization.
And as "Fanatics" a lot of us have an interest in history and cultures.
There are loads of threads about things that Firaxis could do for a second expansion game play wise, I suggest to look those up. As we don't know what will come game play wise with a possible Exp2 there isn't much to speculate about right now.
But we will as soon as something official is announced. Until now it's all still speculation as nothing is announced at all.

Civs on the other hand lots of us know about and it's just fun to think about that and what Firaxis might have done with them in game.
And though modded civs can be fun and are nice for civs/leaders that aren't in game yet (or probably won't ever be) and there are even some that are even animated and voiced, they aren't on the same lvl as the civs released with the game//dlc or the expansion(s).

Anyway at this point in time the decision about the civs and game play for a second expansion have been made already a long time ago we just don't know them yet, so speculating about some civs doesn't do anything bad for the game either, in contrary it keeps the interest going in my opinion.

 

[God of Kings]

I would say it would be horrible to leave West Africa out so I would put in Mali with the must haves. I might be in the minority but I would slightly want Assyria over Babylon, though both would be preferable.

My first thought is it sounds like Nintendo 64, and it's curious that the game was just released on the Switch, which goes back to cartridge based games which hasn't happened since the 64.
Edit: Maybe my mind is too much on Nintendo right now since I am planning on getting a Switch now, not necessarily for Civ though.

Win64 refers to having a 64-bit Windows OS.

Likewise, PS/1 (note the slash) does not refer to the first video game console made by Sony.

 

[acluewithout]

...Plus whenever we talk gameplay, the conversations tend to be:
-We want corporations back!
-In an interview Ed mentioned that he wanted the World Congress
-We want fixes to loyalty/governors/emergencies/etc...

And that's about it.

I thought that was pretty funny, until I realised I basically post the second and third points roughly once a week, along with “fix England” etc. So, yeah, ... sorry about that.

...Anyway at this point in time the decision about the civs and game play for a second expansion have been made already a long time ago we just don't know them yet, so speculating about some civs doesn't do anything bad for the game either, in contrary it keeps the interest going in my opinion.

If there was a window for influencing the next Expansion or major balance patch, then I’m guessing that window is well and truly shut.

This is one reason I really hope we keep getting dlc after the next expansion. I just can’t see the next expansion tackling everything, and I think the game would really benefit from ongoing development after the next expansion, including therefore more opportunities for community input. I’d be happy to subsidise that ongoing support through dlc.

That seems to me where games like EU4 and Stellaris have done so well - their dlc model has allowed them to fund a much longer period of refinement , improvement and development. Maybe FXS would need a more nuanced model, given some of the flak Paradox get. But I’d rather see the current game fleshed out and refined than go through all this again with “Civ 7”.

...anyway. I think perhaps I am repeating myself, and @durfal is right - all the decisions are made now. If FXS haven’t taken on board mine or anyone else’s views at this point, then they’re not going to now. I’m still relatively positive about the next expansion and future patches, but I’m not sure there’s much else I can usefully add. Fingers crossed.

 

[Leyrann]

That seems to me where games like EU4 and Stellaris have done so well - their dlc model has allowed them to fund a much longer period of refinement , improvement and development. Maybe FXS would need a more nuanced model, given some of the flak Paradox get. But I’d rather see the current game fleshed out and refined than go through all this again with “Civ 7”.

I have to say, I don't play a whole lot of Paradox games (just Cities: Skylines, plus picking up Crusader Kings II a month ago or so), but I really like their DLC policy. Games just get new content added to them for years, significant chunks of that is in free patches, and if you don't think the DLC isn't worth the money, you just don't buy it or wait for a sale.

And also looking at the latest DLC they're working on for Crusader Kings II... It's shaping up to be enough content that I'd call it worth at least a €15 price tag, and I really doubt they'll price a DLC higher than that.

(also the Paradox model would be worth it even if just because it also includes much more communication with the community)

 

[RohirrimElf]

Yeah, paradox is much better as a developer in many ways. But when civ 6 gets finally in a playable state i’m sure to play it nonstop. Eu4 on my steam library beats civ 6 with a large margin. I’ve only managed to play civ 6 for about 500 hours. To much, in its current state do.