Civ 6

[braytholomew]

Okay, so I am a HUGE fan of civ 5 and even civ 4 loved them both. Also I am a very big fan of the game Spore. Now my first question is will there be a civ 6? and if there is what do you guys think will be changed, and what do you think should be changed, or upgraded. For me the biggest change in the actual gameplay would be, after you have reached the end, like the science path for instance, you build a space ship and that is the end of the game and you have "won".

I think it would be really sweet, if they added another level , which would totally change the game. After you reach the level of research that you can get a space ship, you should be able to slowly explore the universe, like spore, but not exactly. For example to start, we could start putting up satellites, and then the race to the moon, and then even farther then the human race has in real life.

Such as exploring our solar system's most out most reaches, and then out of our solar system, and eventually the entire universe. They should put their own civ twist on it though, like you could colonize certain planets, or take over current ones on other planets. this is just a rough idea so far, but I really think this would be a GREAT idea. What are your thoughts?

 

[Maktaka]

Will there be a Civ 6? Well, just check out http://store.steampowered.com/stats/ at any time you care to. CiV will typically be in the top 5 titles played (it trades with BlOps and MW2 over the course of the day) and has stubbornly stayed in the top 10 since release day, a full year on. That's some impressive staying power, and a good indication there's plenty of market still for civilization games.

 

[MantaRevan]

Okay, so I am a HUGE fan of civ 5 and even civ 4 loved them both. Also I am a very big fan of the game Spore. Now my first question is will there be a civ 6? and if there is what do you guys think will be changed, and what do you think should be changed, or upgraded. For me the biggest change in the actual gameplay would be, after you have reached the end, like the science path for instance, you build a space ship and that is the end of the game and you have "won".

I think it would be really sweet, if they added another level , which would totally change the game. After you reach the level of research that you can get a space ship, you should be able to slowly explore the universe, like spore, but not exactly. For example to start, we could start putting up satellites, and then the race to the moon, and then even farther then the human race has in real life.

Such as exploring our solar system's most out most reaches, and then out of our solar system, and eventually the entire universe. They should put their own civ twist on it though, like you could colonize certain planets, or take over current ones on other planets. this is just a rough idea so far, but I really think this would be a GREAT idea. What are your thoughts?

Probabily. But since 1992 there have been five games, that's about a game every four years. Civ V has been out for one.

 

[tranx]

I can only say that I really liked Call to Power open ending type. Build cities in space etc... I never ever finished one game nor played 'in space' for too long (it got a bit boring at that stage) but I liked the idea of my civilization carrying on from where I left it.

Now for Civ6 (ain't it a bit early to talk about it?) I'd surely want to be able to play evil leaders, rogue states: indulge in drug or arms trafficking, forging goods and money, training terrorists, genociding a population or a minority in my own society... that type of thing.

 

[MantaRevan]

I'd surely want to be able to play evil leaders, rogue states: indulge in drug or arms trafficking, forging goods and money, training terrorists, genociding a population or a minority in my own society... that type of thing.

That sounds a bit...dark.

 

[SuperJay]

If there's money to be made with the Civ brand, yeah, 2K Games will likely continue to release products that have the word "Civilization" in the title.

 

[tranx]

That sounds a bit...dark.

Well your civ do can sometimes fall into fascism or ruthless theocracy, right? Why can't civs ruled by the law of such bad regimes do evil, wicked things other civs wouldn't normally do?

There's simply no fun being a dictator in Civ

 

[MkLh]

The scale of Civ is already more than large enough, You really need an another game for that space stuff.

 

[vincentz]

in civ 6 you should be able to form armies. that way sod and cod would be ancient history. (plus more importantly it would become SOOO much easier to make a competent AI)
also, in all the civ games I played, when you get to a certain point (usually taking the land of 1 or 2 civs) it just become too easy to steamroll the rest of the map (once on top of the scoreboard always on top). stability should be a factor for large empires, and sooner or later drastic measurements have to be taken to salvage the crumbles.

 

[Optional]

in civ 6 you should be able to form armies. that way sod and cod would be ancient history. (plus more importantly it would become SOOO much easier to make a competent AI)

Armies like in Civ III you mean? The ones the AI didn't understand how to create?

No seriously, Civ 5 still has so many bugs that it makes Civ III look like a flawless game, even with an AI that can't make armies and other problems that never got sorted.
Civ 5 isn't finished yet, not by a long stretch. To already be talking about a Civ 6 is... well go ahead, by all means, but I think Firaxis' developers shouldn't even be dreaming about a Civ 6 yet. Let them concentrate on bringing Civ 5 up to the level it deserves to be.
Civ 5 is in my opinion the best of the series yet, potentially at least, but a lot of aspects are very sloppily done, like they cut corners or didn't care or whatever. Let's hope they're getting it sorted out.

Hum, I feel this kind of thing has been posted a million times already...

 

[TomMcV]

So many wants for civ6...

1. Armies.
2. Corruption/stability.
3. Rebels - from unhappy cities, or cities that have recently been conquered.
4. Choice of govenment.
5. Keep social policies, but call them cultural traits.
6. Don't try and make the graphics too pretty - I want to be able to smoothly run huge maps with all AI players.
7. I want to see large empires get taken down by corruption - civil war, new civs emerging from the ashes.
8. The civs should be customisable like Master or Orion 2's races.
9. Independence movements - from newly conquered territory or overseas colonies.
10. Religion
11. Bigger tech tree - with more 'dead end' techs. Samurais should only be built because you have discovered "advanced sword making" - but this tech has no other use.
12. Greater geographical diversity - unique flora and fauna, impassable and passable mountain terrain, greater variety in the graphics - is that grassland in the tropics or the arctic?
13. Canal building in the industrial/modern era.
14. Anti-nuke defence.
15. Espionage.
16. Social revolutions. When communism turns up the whole word should be forced to pick side.

 

[Drawmeus]

I have just two wants for Civ 6:
1. Don't build a new engine.
2. Deliver the C++ code for modders within the first year after release.

That's it.

 

[Scrooge]

I have just two wants for Civ 6:
1. Don't build a new engine.
2. Deliver the C++ code for modders within the first year after release.

That's it.

Spot on. BTW - Civ continuing in space... poor AI...

 

[Johan de Witt]

7. I want to see large empires get taken down by corruption - civil war, new civs emerging from the ashes.

This!

I want it to be hard to manage a larger empire and when it doesn't work, the entire thing should come crashing down.

 

[torfish]

I'm sure we will see Civ 6, but not for another 3-4 years from now. Which is fine by me. I love LOVE Civ V which gets better after each patch. Fix the various bugs and make the AI combat better would get my vote. Possibly add a new Civ or three would be good too.

I don't need a new Civ right now.

 

[Iberian]

So many wants for civ6...

6. Don't try and make the graphics too pretty - I want to be able to smoothly run huge maps with all AI players.

It isn't the graphics it is the AI processing. I know it is hard to believe after seeing the results of all that work but go play a game at chieftan or whatever the low level is called and then go play one on diety and you will see the game is much slower due to all the units and the pathing.

 

[Cristoval]

My wish is for them not to completely take out features (why take out religions
and vassalage?) just because they were flawed. Devs should have improved upon the ideas from Civ 4. Civ 5 was supposed to have more features than Civ 4 BTS.

 

[HammerandSickle]

I don't want civ 6 yet, but the space idea is my dream coming true.

 

[Drawmeus]

My wish is for them not to completely take out features (why take out religions
and vassalage?) just because they were flawed. Devs should have improved upon the ideas from Civ 4. Civ 5 was supposed to have more features than Civ 4 BTS.

Religion was taken out because it was counterproductive to the game they wanted to build. It would have made Civ 5 worse (in their opinions), so it's gone.

In general, the fact that a feature existed in a previous version does NOT make it cheaper to add to the new version, though. When they're choosing between a flawed, older feature and a newer feature which they think will be good, I should hope they will continue to pick the newer feature.

 

[derflensburger]

in civ 6 you should be able to form armies. that way sod and cod would be ancient history.

Keep the 1 upt but allow to have a couple (e.g. 1 per 5 cities, only formed by a GG) of "Armies" into which you can put a couple of units (maybe 5 to 10).
This could find its reason that 5 Cities are able to support an army so they don't have to live from what they find in a specific tile.

In CivV naval battles and naval invasions are no fun at all. This needs to be reworked.