Civ 7 and Ara: A Cross Comparison 100 hours in.

[Xefjord]

I am on a free month of PC Game Pass, so I gave ARA a try. I don't think I have bounced off of a game more quickly than this. I got about six turns in and quit when the tutorial said "you have explored how to manage your science, military, commerce...", when the game hadn't actually mentioned any of these things yet. Seemed to be a bad omen for the quality of the game.

I probably would have enjoyed it if there was a manual. There is just too much going on for a basic tutorial, especially one that isn't even made properly. I mean, the very first thing you see is a screen of 40 Civs with walls of text being poorly narrated.

The onboarding for this game is pretty bad. Reminds me of paradox games. At least you have nested tooltips to help. But it doesn't give you a good idea of the general direction and structure for how to play.

Problem is not many people are making videos on the game to teach others how to play in the same way you would find with Civ 7 or a paradox game. For how complex the game is, and how quickly things get updates (often for the better), I don't know that it is even a good idea to remake the tutorial at this stage. But I agree with above commenters that there should be better community content teaching how to play from us experienced players.

If anyone needs a quick rundown personally on how to play, you can add me on discord (same ID as here) and I will do my best to explain how to get started.

 

[j51]

I will try my best to answer each of these:

They have been gradually increasing the unit art style diversity over time. It's been a common request to add more visual diversity, and they are moving in that direction, just there are still many generic things like all the buildings except houses tend to be generic for each district.

The city lists have been pretty good imo, but it's important to know that the way Ara handles city naming is that when the map is generated, it names every tile in the vicinity of a civs start, then building a city will name it after the tile you built it on. This means that if you forward settle someone (or vice versa) your city will be named after their civilization's name list, not yours. If map is large and doesn't have enough civs, it will reuse the name list for far off tiles, but add the name "new" in front of cities. So somewhere within 5 tiles or Beijing there may be a Shanghai, and 20 tiles away there may be a "New Shanghai". But you normally won't see this as there is generally enough players to fill out most of the map with other civs city names.

You can of course manually change the name of any city any time. (you can rename a lot of stuff, from units, to buildings, etc)

Oh wow that city naming system sounds really annoying. Is it easy to mod the city names so every civ and not just the human player has a nice appropriate list to draw from?

 

[user746383]

They should have their marketing team make a how to play video every major patch then.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Just left a positive review, since that's how I feel I'd still love a video of someone playing 1.4 talking through their decisions and how they are keeping track of everything. Seeing the game played would help me a lot I think. I can play the game fine, I'm just a hopeless optimiser and feel like I'm always doing something inefficiently.

I wonder, if you'd compare Civ7 in its current state and Ara in its current state (both got huge changes since release) objectively without any comparisons with older Civ games, budget considerations and so on, which one would you consider more fun and engaging?

 

[user746383]

My personal opinion is Ara is much deeper, more refined, and more fun at the moment, but I don’t necessarily think that has to or will remain true over the long term.

 

[CliffCo]

My personal opinion is Ara is much deeper, more refined, and more fun at the moment, but I don’t necessarily think that has to or will remain true over the long term.

I was a beta tester for ARA briefly but really disliked it, maybe updates have changed things since.

 

[Xefjord]

I wonder, if you'd compare Civ7 in its current state and Ara in its current state (both got huge changes since release) objectively without any comparisons with older Civ games, budget considerations and so on, which one would you consider more fun and engaging?

Not the person you asked, but I got 100 hours in Ara pretty easily. I started to feel like I was kind of forcing myself to play pretty quickly after my first full game with Civ 7. And I have not been able to make it to triple digit hours. I am just very spoiled by the resource and economy system in Ara. And the other systems in Civ just don't really make up the lack of meaningful city building to me.

 

[KayAU]

I was a beta tester for ARA briefly but really disliked it, maybe updates have changed things since.

I was also a tester, I didn't care for the first two alphas, but with the third everything fell in place for me. The game has improved significantly since launch, although the core gameplay is pretty much the same, so it depends what turned you off it. I would say the biggest changes since launch are:

• The National Economy screen, giving you a place to manage production and supplies for all buildings. You can also set supply policies here, no more need to individually click each improvement.
• Reduced region size, making every map size effectively twice as large as before.
• The AI is much stronger.
• Performance is better.
• Auto supply feature, citizens will automatically fill supply slots (if enabled).
• The game has been completely rebalanced.

There is also more content like leaders, nukes have been added to the late game, more diplomatic options, several UI improvements, the terrain shader has been improved. It's pretty substantial, but as I said, it really depends on what turned you off in the first place. If you just don't like to manage production chains for example, those other things will probably not be enough, as that is still a core part of the game.

 

[KayAU]

As for Civ 7, I really hope they manage to turn things around. As someone who has been a fan of the series since the beginning, it's somewhat distressing to see how poorly it has been received. I don't mind the major design changes in principle, but it looks like they need a lot of refinement. On the positive side, hopefully this means they are more open to reworking things this time around.

The ideal scenario for me would be to pick up a much improved Civ 7 at a discount at some point. If recent reviews went positive, and the game got a substantial discount (50% would be nice, it's a very expensive game in my region), I would probably buy without hesitation.

I also hope that Ara becomes more well known, and continues to improve like it has. I have wanted a good competitor to the Civ series for a while now. Of all the "Civ-likes", Ara is the one I like best, and which I think also has the most potential.

 

[Jimuth]

Back again for 2nd comment and just wanted to temper my previous comment slightly.

So still playing Prince (normal difficulty) - large map - 18 other civs - and for some reason I've nailed it playing as Georgia. In the Prestige lead immediately and have just rushed through to the information age with a strong lead over 2nd place.
I don't really know why I ended up doing so much better than the previous starts.

So the first act was fun but Ara is now getting really boring. I'm not even sure I'll finish this game. I'm just clicking through turns. I don't really care about the QOL meters at this point, I'm just building whatever improves the lowest value.

There are just so many buildings now and units. I'm finding it frustrating that I'm having to craft specific items to stop things being greyed out. I'm frustrated by not being able to skip through turns quicker.
I've just turned fascist so I can steamroll everyone else, but because the combat is Ara's weakest point, I can't face warring with everyone else. The Force limit is frustrating, as is the city cap. I understand why they're there but if this was civ, I'd just be wiping everyone out now for entertainment and to end the game.

Weirdly, it's made me appreciate what they were trying to do with Civ7. It's the classic 4X issue of being fun when everything's streamlined and you're chasing the game, but as soon as you've peaked, it becomes a monotonous end game slog. It reminds me of some Civ6 sessions but I don't think I've ever felt less inclined to finish a game in Civ1-6 than I do at the moment.

The other thing I have to warn about Ara is it's performance. I have a Ryzen 5 5500 & RX 6550XT set up and can play Cyberpunk 2077 at very high (not raytraced) 1080p with no issues, and every other game 1080p with high requirements with no issues at all. Ara on the other hand constantly utilises 95-100% of GPU and because I've got adaptive fans I'm sick of sitting here next to a plane about to take off. Don't even get that sort of noise playing CP2077 at all.
My guess is that all the little people and the great detail you see zoomed in are still getting rendered/processed even when zoomed out. It's mad.

The other thing is the lack of minimap. This is really bugging me now. I've discovered all the world and it's 2 poorly generated continents, but I find it hugely frustrating not being able to see the bigger picture.

Hope this helps anyone considering a purchase. I've got about 30 hours clocked up now btw.

 

[Leucarum]

The production chain/crafting mechanics are what are putting me off trying Ara. I found Civ7's cursory factory mechanics to be more than I wanted and I tend to bounce off games which make those mechanics central. How much do you have to engage with that side of the game? Is there any automation of resource chains or is it too central?

 

[user746383]

I'd say if you don't like factory games it will not be that much fun, your empire is basically a factory.

 

[Leucarum]

I'd say if you don't like factory games it will not be that much fun, your empire is basically a factory.

That was my fear...

 

[user746383]

On the other hand, if you do, it's a pretty cool combo

 

[KayAU]

So the first act was fun but Ara is now getting really boring. I'm not even sure I'll finish this game. I'm just clicking through turns. I don't really care about the QOL meters at this point, I'm just building whatever improves the lowest value.

You may be surprised, but I agree the end game is not that fun. It's not unique to Ara, most 4Xs suffer from this to some degree, but it is perhaps exacerbated by how detailed the economy management is in Ara. At some point, there are just too many things to put into too many slots. This is why UI improvements and more automation are among the most requested features. The devs are aware of it, and they have already made significant improvements. At launch, there was no national economy screen, no supply policies, and no auto-supply. You had to go into every city and every improvement to do things. That's fine when you have 2 towns and a limited number of improvements, not so much when you have 11 large cities.

For me, Act 1 is awesome, most of Act 2 is also very good, as I'm getting my supply chains sorted out and gain access to resources I have been needing. Act 3 is a bit tedious. Mercifully, you can rush through it quite quickly if you are far ahead. Unless there is something in particular I want to accomplish, I will just set my cities to produce research, and research the minimum number of techs in each era. As of the last version, I think you only need 2 techs before researching the era catalyst. Once you get to the last era, a prestige goal is set, and once you reach that, the countdown to the end starts.

It's not an ideal solution, but it's something. For me, I had it worse with Civ 6, where I also enjoyed the early game, got bored in the early mid-game, at which point it was abundantly clear that I had won, and then had to keep playing for ages to finish it. Which I would do, because I compulsively finish my games. I wish there had been some way to just declare victory and have anyone who disagreed fight me or something.

I'm sure Ara's late game will improve. I have brought up the Act 3 tedium with the devs, and they are more critical of it than I am. For now, I will just continue thoroughly enjoying the first parts, and then rushing through the end so I can start over.

 

[KayAU]

Weirdly, it's made me appreciate what they were trying to do with Civ7. It's the classic 4X issue of being fun when everything's streamlined and you're chasing the game, but as soon as you've peaked, it becomes a monotonous end game slog. It reminds me of some Civ6 sessions but I don't think I've ever felt less inclined to finish a game in Civ1-6 than I do at the moment.

I haven't played Civ 7 yet, but I also appreciate that they are trying to address the late game tedium. It seems to inherent characteristic of the genre. As you start out, you have only a few things to do, and those things are impactful. Like in Civ 6, placing down your first Campus. Finding a good spot is going to make a lot of difference. However, as you continue to play, and are successful in the expansion part of the game, you will find yourself with a lot more to do, and each thing barely matters. Does it matter if your 16th Campus has a +2 or a +4 adjacency?

It's like this in most 4X games, I think, although not to the same extent. I found Civ 6 particularly egregious. Civ 5 wasn't quite as bad, as I had fewer cities to manage, and city management generally was quicker. You could just queue up things with a single click, no need to think about placement. You also had other things to focus on in the late game, like ideology, the World Congress and cooperative projects.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I'd say if you don't like factory games it will not be that much fun, your empire is basically a factory.

Yep. Positioning Ara as Civ competitor did a lot of damage to its initial perception (together with pretty rough initial state). Factory games are quite different, but they have their kind of fun.

 

[KayAU]

Yep. Positioning Ara as Civ competitor did a lot of damage to its initial perception (together with pretty rough initial state). Factory games are quite different, but they have their kind of fun.

I partially agree. I think it was a bit hard to communicate exactly what Ara is. I think it "civ-like" is a mostly correct description though. It has the same scope and framing, and deals with the same concepts. Choose a leader, lead your people from ancient times to the near future. Explore, build cities, research technologies, build armies, engage in diplomacy, and so on. You have settlers, scouts, spearmen and archers. For me, it scratches the same basic itch.

I think part of the problem is that it is so similar in overall concept, that some people picked it up expecting it to also play exactly the same, and were either turned off by, or failed to understand the actual mechanics. Of course, there were also plenty of very legitimate complaints, like the excessive micro-management, especially at launch.

I haven't heard the term "factory game" before, but it partially fits. I think Ara is a combination of civ-like, city builder and factory game. For me, it's easily the best alternative to Civ to date.

 

[Wrenched]

I finally had a chance to spend some time with Ara and while I am still working through the learning curve a great sign for me is that I have been constantly thinking about the game when not playing it.

For some folks Ara won't scratch the exact same itch that Civilization does, but I found it close enough to be interesting. It does layer on a thick application of "factory game" mechanics as some have said. To me, I am thinking of it as inspired by Anno and Settlers and their complex production chains, luxury goods, and population needs...just in turn based format. At first blush that does seem to increase the importance of resource access map control.

The interactions between empires/leaders has been very compelling. I am only playing at Normal difficulty and the other leaders have been very competent and even intelligent. I am playing Rome and France offered a bribe if I declared war on Ethiopia. I decided to take it since my relationship with Ethiopia was already poor. A few turns later France declares a surprise war on me as well so in short order I had forces from two empires converging on my capital. The AI can wage war effectively and Ethiopia actually sieged and captured my second best city despite it being defended by a fairly strong military. AI leaders will refuse gifts with the claim that I may have ulterior motives even when I am on good terms with them. I found myself falling behind the land rush as the AI factions were quick to plant new cities while boxing in my territory and expansion opportunities. Only in my first game and I had some of the most interesting and memorable interactions with AI leaders/factions; some of the best of any recent 4X I have played. Maybe it was just random luck, but the AI actually seems consistent and keeps a long memory. I have been in several hot wars and periods of cold hostilities with France and Ethiopia the length of my game while Venezuela has been consistently warmer and open to alliances and trade.

Aesthetically the game is quite pleasing and it is really cool how far you can zoom out and and how microscopically close you can zoom in to see wildlife like buffalo herds, your people working, walking about, and cheering in awe at wonder constructions. There is a lot of little bits of humor and personality when you zoom it such as the one bozo in the logging camp that has a whole animation of trying to cut logs with his bare hand and a karate chop then grabs his sore hand and winces in pain before seemingly waving at the camera! Like others, my PC is running a little hot with fans spinning up fairly consistently...hoping for some improvements in this area.

Another small aspect I enjoy is the event system. Adds some nice narrative flavor and the game offers historical context/inspiration to the events by linking the in-game occurrence to actual recorded events in history. That is a nice touch.

Still early for me so my thoughts are still forming but there is a lot of meat here I want to chew on. I have been most impressed with the behavior of faction AI and their ability to play the game and pose a nice challenge even on normal (I am still learning the mechanics so at a bit of a handicap myself currently).

 

[KayAU]

The production chain/crafting mechanics are what are putting me off trying Ara. I found Civ7's cursory factory mechanics to be more than I wanted and I tend to bounce off games which make those mechanics central. How much do you have to engage with that side of the game? Is there any automation of resource chains or is it too central?

It is very central, and most of it can't be automated. I don't like the term "crafting mechanics", because it is something I associate with Minecraft-style item production, and Ara isn't like that at all. "Production chains" is the better term, and it is more similar to historical city builders. You see a resource on the map, you build something to extract it, you build a building where that raw material is transformed into something else. The production chains are vastly more complex than in those old city builders though, with multiple inputs and outputs for most things.

I really, really like this aspect of Ara. There is still room for improvement in the UI, but it is satisfying for me to gain control of a resource, and then plugging it into my production chain to reap the benefits. So for example, my city grows, I gain a new region which has Foxes, I build a Hunting Camp, and now my Tanneries can produce more Leather, which again speeds up my production of both Sandals and Books. If this kind of thing doesn't appeal to you, I suspect you will not enjoy Ara that much. You still have the other 4X stuff, like fielding armies, doing diplomacy, growing your empire and so on, but the production aspect can't really be ignored.