Asset file hinting at future and/or cut content

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

The Vikings can just be an exploration civ, no real need for a previous civ to become them. Maybe Goths if you're that insistent.

This is a game where the Maurya can culturally progress into the Normans. That's the cultural progression.

I mean, it's also a game where you can play as dynasties of China in order or model Mexico's roots in Spain and Spain's cultural roots in the Roman Empire. We already have an example of two Civilizations set back an Age to match gameplay and transitions, the Mississippians as a predecessor to later Native American groups and Khmer as one of the first major powers in Southeast Asia. With the further-flung Normans and Iceland in the Exploration Age, a closer to home river-raider Norse that can serve as their predecessor makes sense.

 

[Potworny]

I was really hoping Firaxis would release the full-size versions of these evocative paintings. But here you came to steal my heart

These are very tempting choices for a desktop background or profile picture... shame the website banner competition ended already. Would love to see these incorporated somehow!

If you're on Steam you can find the rest in the ...\Steam\steamapps\common\Sid Meier's Civilization VII\Base\modules\base-standard\movies directory, and Tecumseh's one in ...\Steam\steamapps\common\Sid Meier's Civilization VII\DLC\shawnee-tecumseh\modules\movies !

 

[Ryansinbela]

Where would those movies even play

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

Where would those movies even play

Victory, perhaps? Move between these, the wincon-specific ones, and maybe get the Civilization art in there somewhere?

 

[wilcoxchar]

I mean, it's also a game where you can play as dynasties of China in order or model Mexico's roots in Spain and Spain's cultural roots in the Roman Empire. We already have an example of two Civilizations set back an Age to match gameplay and transitions, the Mississippians as a predecessor to later Native American groups and Khmer as one of the first major powers in Southeast Asia. With the further-flung Normans and Iceland in the Exploration Age, a closer to home river-raider Norse that can serve as their predecessor makes sense.

We already have that for the Normans and Iceland though. Just as Khmer is in antiquity as one of the first major powers in Southeast Asia as you mention, we have Rome present as one of the first major powers in Europe. We don't need to overload the game with European civs for no reason. In fact, that's one of the best things about the Civ 7 basegame. It actually has geographical balance for the most part and finally gives Europe equal treatment to the rest of the regions of the world in terms of representation.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

We already have that for the Normans and Iceland though. Just as Khmer is in antiquity as one of the first major powers in Southeast Asia as you mention, we have Rome present as one of the first major powers in Europe. We don't need to overload the game with European civs for no reason. In fact, that's one of the best things about the Civ 7 basegame. It actually has geographical balance for the most part and finally gives Europe equal treatment to the rest of the regions of the world in terms of representation.

Some people, like me, do not want to see an Iceland come from Greece or Rome. I don't think adding one Northern European civ to Antiquity will over represent them.

 

[Siptah]

Some people, like me, do not want to see an Iceland come from Greece or Rome. I don't think adding one Northern European civ to Antiquity will over represent them.

I hope for two in the long run: Goths and Norse. But I think that still isn‘t overcrowding as long as other continents also get 2-3 more in the next years. Which should be possible for most of them without scratching the barrel too much, except maybe for North America.

 

[Evie]

The idea that Europe would be overloaded if it had *gasp* two Germanic civs is so ludicrous as to beggar the mind.

Yes, if it had that many *now* when we only have 10 civs per era it would be a problem. But in the future, as more civs get added?

As to the idea that all regions should have equal representation in raw numbers: the regions of the world are not equal. Not equal in population (Asia wins that, badly), not equal in historical impact (that goes to Europe just as badly), not equal in the number of sufficiently documented polities and civilizations (Europe probably takes that cake due to its tendency to subdivide), not equal in the availability of historical sources (again Europe and parts of Asia take that), not equal in the willingness of their people to have their history turned into a game (North America, Africa and the Pacific suffer here), and so forth.

 

[wilcoxchar]

Some people, like me, do not want to see an Iceland come from Greece or Rome. I don't think adding one Northern European civ to Antiquity will over represent them.

When a region as small as Europe is getting three, or four or five depending on the topic, civs in an age while other regions like Sub-Saharan Africa or the entirety of the Americas have only one or two civs in an age, then yes that is overrepresenting them.

I'm tired of Europe taking up half to a third of civs in every civ game. Civ 5 had 17 out of 43, about 2/5 of civs were European. Civ 6 had 16 out of 50 European civs, nearly a third. Civ 7 finally strikes that balance of treating Europe just like it treats the rest of the world, 7 out of 31 in the base game, even still overrepresenting them with giving them an extra modern age civ by leaving out modern age Middle Eastern representation, and suddenly people are mad.

 

[Xefjord]

When a region as small as Europe is getting three, or four or five depending on the topic, civs in an age while other regions like Sub-Saharan Africa or the entirety of the Americas have only one or two civs in an age, then yes that is overrepresenting them.

I'm tired of Europe taking up half to a third of civs in every civ game. Civ 5 had 17 out of 43, about 2/5 of civs were European. Civ 6 had 16 out of 50 European civs, nearly a third. Civ 7 finally strikes that balance of treating Europe just like it treats the rest of the world, 7 out of 31 in the base game, even still overrepresenting them with giving them an extra modern age civ by leaving out modern age Middle Eastern representation, and suddenly people are mad.

I expect more from Civ 7, especially with their new monetization model, if they are going full greed to make a ton of new DLC to nickle and dime us, I want there to be more civs than ever before.

Instead of viewing things as "Well somewhere needs to be lacking in representation, so it might as well be Europe since they have dominated representation every prior game" I would much rather us be talking about EVERY region getting lots of representation. On every continent. I want to see the adequate amount of representation for Europe, alongside the adequate amount for Africa, the Americas, etc.

 

[evonannoredars]

I'd put up with it in the long run if Europe ended up with the most representation, I expect that from this franchise at this point. I do however wish they'd prioritised establishing a better balance aorund the start with the upcoming DLC, which aren't much addressing the gap in south american*, african and australian civs - and I think there is also a gap for an antiquity european civ that isn't from the mediterranean.
*With how mountain-themed Crossroads of the World seems to be, the lack of an antiquity or modern andean civ is esp bizarre imo lol

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I hope for two in the long run: Goths and Norse. But I think that still isn‘t overcrowding as long as other continents also get 2-3 more in the next years. Which should be possible for most of them without scratching the barrel too much, except maybe for North America.

Not to mention the obligatory Antiquity Celtic civ at least, which I'd like it to be Gaul.
I admit Anglo-Saxons are a wish too, but not sure how probable they would be.

When a region as small as Europe is getting three, or four or five depending on the topic, civs in an age while other regions like Sub-Saharan Africa or the entirety of the Americas have only one or two civs in an age, then yes that is overrepresenting them.

This is assuming that the Americas and Sub Sahara Africa aren't getting any more civs in Antiquity, which probably won't be true.

 

[wilcoxchar]

Instead of viewing things as "Well somewhere needs to be lacking in representation, so it might as well be Europe since they have dominated representation every prior game"

You know, it's really telling that people view "treating Europe just like it treats the rest of the world" as "lacking representation", it says a lot. And not good things.

Moderator Action: Don't modify what he said about a game, to make it sound like he is talking about the real world. - Methos

 

[Xandinho]

Not to mention the obligatory Antiquity Celtic civ at least, which I'd like it to be Gaul.
I admit Anglo-Saxons are a wish too, but not sure how probable they would be.

They promised a lot of British content, so I wouldn’t be surprised.

By the way, if the Norse can be in Antiquity, I think the Franks could be as well. And maybe a Slavic civ.

I’m not sure if the Etruscans and Minoans would have much of a chance of making it in.

 

[Evie]

When a region as small as Europe is getting three, or four or five depending on the topic, civs in an age while other regions like Sub-Saharan Africa or the entirety of the Americas have only one or two civs in an age, then yes that is overrepresenting them.

I'm tired of Europe taking up half to a third of civs in every civ game. Civ 5 had 17 out of 43, about 2/5 of civs were European. Civ 6 had 16 out of 50 European civs, nearly a third. Civ 7 finally strikes that balance of treating Europe just like it treats the rest of the world, 7 out of 31 in the base game, even still overrepresenting them with giving them an extra modern age civ by leaving out modern age Middle Eastern representation, and suddenly people are mad.

History is not fair, and this vision breaks apart in the face of reality. It's an expression of a delusional take on equality that seek to erase all differences in the name. Everyone should have presence, true, and more than just token presence, but the regi with better documented history should have more presence (Europe, Asia). The regions that had a broader impact on world history should have more presence (Europe). Regions where having your civs included in civilization is not seen as theft or disprespect of their culture should be more represented.

Rejecting civilizations that are perfectly well documented and non-controversial in Europe (and Asia) in order to maintain artificial equality in raw numbers with less-well-documented regions and justifying it with platitudes like "it's a small region" is no rational policy for game design. It's just chasing the lowest common denominator.

 

[Xefjord]

You know, it's really telling that people view "treating Europe just like it treats the rest of the world" as "lacking representation", it says a lot. And not good things.

I don't think it's controversial to say the rest of the world lacked representation compared to Europe in most games, but it's made worse by the way ages split up the Civs in this one. That we can't just have representation across all Civs, but we also need equal cultural/geographic representation across all /ages/.

I have some Civs I really want to see out of Europe, like a full Germanic stack, but I normally play outside of Europe, so seeing healthy non-european representation matters to me quite a bit as well.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

When a region as small as Europe is getting three, or four or five depending on the topic, civs in an age while other regions like Sub-Saharan Africa or the entirety of the Americas have only one or two civs in an age, then yes that is overrepresenting them.

I'm tired of Europe taking up half to a third of civs in every civ game. Civ 5 had 17 out of 43, about 2/5 of civs were European. Civ 6 had 16 out of 50 European civs, nearly a third. Civ 7 finally strikes that balance of treating Europe just like it treats the rest of the world, 7 out of 31 in the base game, even still overrepresenting them with giving them an extra modern age civ by leaving out modern age Middle Eastern representation, and suddenly people are mad.

I mean, personally, I consider Europe with the currently confirmed DLC to be the most fleshed-out region in the game. I think the introduction of an HRE or Exploration Italy would make it effectively complete, at least in comparison to other areas (though Asia honestly isn't doing too bad for itself, despite the fact that three Koreas and at least a second Japan are pretty much inevitable). However, the simple fact is that pop culture Civilizations sell, and for marketing's sake pretty much every DLC is going to have at least one Civilization that tries to grab the attention of as much of the audience as possible. Vikings are really well known, at least in the Anglophone world, and I'd rather keep Europe as compact as possible so that it doesn't un-complete itself with a hanging Civilization (lacking a good predecessor or successor, or sharing all of them with another Civilization so they have to compete over them). Antiquity Norse is a perfect predecessor to both the Normans and Iceland, which are already included/planned, so it's perfect to push some copies of the DLC without shifting the balance too much. A pack focused on representing the rest of the world better, such as my dream of Swahili/Nazca/Cherokee, might not be deemed profitable enough to bother. A pack of Norse/Swahili/Nazca/Cherokee with a Viking leader, though? That just might work. It's not ideal, but there are a lot of different fans who want different things, and a large amount of them want Europe. A game with an Antiquity, Exploration, and Modern Civilization for every region of Africa is the dream, of course, but that'll take a long time, and the game needs to keep making money or else 2K'll pull the plug early. That's just how it is... I do want to take up modding when my workload settles down a bit, though, see if I can get some typically underrepresented areas online before Firaxis takes a crack at them. I don't have to worry about consumer demand! Swahili and Wagadu are at the top of my list to finally break up Aksum and Songhai...

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

They promised a lot of British content, so I wouldn’t be surprised.

Yeah, that's the only probable one if they get one in Antiquity, unless they go for something like the Iceni or Picts etc. I'd expect more in the Exploration Age though, like Ireland first.

By the way, if the Norse can be in Antiquity, I think the Franks could be as well. And maybe a Slavic civ.

Maybe. I'd personally would want the Franks, as in the Carolingian Franks, to be in Exploration that way they could go into Prussia or French Empire. But with the Normans in the game, that might not happen.
I guess it's possible that if they are Antiquity, they could then go into a proper HRE/Teutonic civ and Ancien Régime/Capetian France civ. I'd welcome earlier versions of France and Germany, considering I'm not too fond of the way the Modern iterations are designed.

 

[marius_kaparius]

Is the AssetCloud file still available? I'm not seeing it at the path.

 

[Krajzen]

Fun fact: somebody on reddit discovered that in some files the original name for the US civ was "Colonial America".

That seems to be the final missing link of the notion that at one point we're gonna get the 4th age set of civs - it is certainly not accidental that devs went out of their way to name all industrial era civs in the way not colliding with the 2024 naming conventions, and they tend to focus on the period from the 18th to the ww2 era.