Civ 7 Needs One Big Patch

[Leucarum]

BTW, being an Imperator fan myself I noticed that quite a few concepts of IR appear in a similar form in EU5 - one can surely feel that Johan is behind both titles. The (sad) irony is that IR also tried to combine stuff from other gsg, but failed (too shallow on release with the really changes/content having come too late to save it, as well as some design errors like the mana system)...however that failure might have actually laid a good foundation for EU5.

Hot take: Mana was to Imperator what Civ Switching is to Civ7. A big overarching feature which turns off a lot of players and overshadows a bunch of very good additions.

But more broadly it looks to me - in terms of communication and community engagement - that paradox learned a lot of lessons from Imperator's flop and applied them well.

Firaxis really could learn a lot from Paradox's community engagement these days. It has now become very early (so you can implement reccomendations and act on community feedback), frequent (players know when to expect news and it comes often), and relevant (getting opinions on important topics like map design/UI as opposed to peripheral things like auto-explore options). Imagine how Civ7 could have looked if Firaxis had got the same amount of feedback Paradox have gotten for EU5 well before release...

 

[IntelligentDisk]

I took a look to see if Crusader Kings III or Victoria 3 had an affect on Civ VI. Crusader Kings III had almost no affect. Civ VI dipped by 8% in the 2 weeks following Victoria 3s release but bounced back in the 2 weeks after (gained 25,000+ players, 90% sale plus Leader Pass was announced)

Some other things to note:

1. EU IVs peak is 48,165, less than both CK III & Victoria 3
2. EU IV has less followers than Victoria 3 & Crusader Kings III
3. Both CK III & Victoria 3 had more followers on Steam 2 weeks before launch than EU V does currently 2 weeks before its launch

 

[Nikolai II]

BTW, being an Imperator fan myself I noticed that quite a few concepts of IR appear in a similar form in EU5 - one can surely feel that Johan is behind both titles. The (sad) irony is that IR also tried to combine stuff from other gsg, but failed (too shallow on release with the really changes/content having come too late to save it, as well as some design errors like the mana system)...however that failure might have actually laid a good foundation for EU5.

Loved Imperator myself and I think Johan has learned a lot from its demise. In fact, EU5 seems to be very much full of content, to a hitherto unseen level in Paradox sequels history.

 

[Leucarum]

I took a look to see if Crusader Kings III or Victoria 3 had an affect on Civ VI. Crusader Kings III had almost no affect. Civ VI dipped by 8% in the 2 weeks following Victoria 3s release but bounced back in the 2 weeks after (gained 25,000+ players, 90% sale plus Leader Pass was announced)

Some other things to note:

1. EU IVs peak is 48,165, less than both CK III & Victoria 3
2. EU IV has less followers than Victoria 3 & Crusader Kings III
3. Both CK III & Victoria 3 had more followers on Steam 2 weeks before launch than EU V does currently 2 weeks before its launch

Yeah I wouldn't expect to see anything there. Especially for Victoria 3 which had a very rocky launch.

 

[Nikolai II]

One single, giant, humungous patch to get the core player base back in the game. Make the UI perfect, the way it should have been at launch. Massively fix government, religion and crisis mechanics.

To address this, as it is after all the theme of the thread ( ), I am very happy we get a minor to major patch each month and not months of silence as we wait for bigger fixes. If the game is saved, it is because of just that.

 

[Lebo44]

I fear that Civ 7 is going to get brutalized by EU5 in a few weeks. This is what happens when you release a game that is only half baked.

I’m too old for games that takes 500 hours to learn (-:

To me Civ > Paradox games

 

[Nikolai II]

I’m too old for games that takes 500 hours to learn (-:

To me Civ > Paradox games

EU5 might be a good start for you then, they allow you to automate almost any game system.

 

[aieeegrunt]

I’m too old for games that takes 500 hours to learn (-:

To me Civ > Paradox games

Same

 

[Crashdummy]

One single, giant, humungous patch to get the core player base back in the game. Make the UI perfect, the way it should have been at launch. Massively fix government, religion and crisis mechanics.

Civ 7 needs a Classic Mode that makes the game a Civilization game instead of a Humankind one. No other patch will mean much for the game

I dont think EU5 will have a big impact on Civ 7, although a small impact is significant when you are struggling

 

[kaspergm]

One single, giant, humungous patch to get the core player base back in the game. Make the UI perfect, the way it should have been at launch. Massively fix government, religion and crisis mechanics.

I agree. That patch is called "Civ 8".

 

[itix]

I feel it is difficult to gauge what kind of impact EU5 is going to have on Civ 7. Europa Universalis is a smaller franchise and its player base only partially overlaps with Civ. As strategy game developers, Paradox is bigger than Firaxis. As a publisher, Paradox is smaller than 2K, and Paradox Tinto is smaller than Firaxis. After all, we would be comparing AA and AAA titles...

As I see it, EU5 is not going to have immediate effects on Civ 7. But in the long term, it will be more severe.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I feel it is difficult to gauge what kind of impact EU5 is going to have on Civ 7. Europa Universalis is a smaller franchise and its player base only partially overlaps with Civ. As strategy game developers, Paradox is bigger than Firaxis. As a publisher, Paradox is smaller than 2K, and Paradox Tinto is smaller than Firaxis. After all, we would be comparing AA and AAA titles...

As I see it, EU5 is not going to have immediate effects on Civ 7. But in the long term, it will be more severe.

Honestly, I don't see it even in long term. Even for overlapping user base it's hard to imagine people deciding not to buy Civ7 primarily because of EU5 availability. Usually people switch between games they like.

But of course, there are exceptions and some small effect probably will be.

 

[Leucarum]

Honestly, I don't see it even in long term. Even for overlapping user base it's hard to imagine people deciding not to buy Civ7 primarily because of EU5 availability. Usually people switch between games they like.

But of course, there are exceptions and some small effect probably will be.

I can't see myself buying full price DLC for both... And I think that for Civ7 what they are trying to sell us in DLC is really a kick in the teeth for me, so if Paradox delivers I'll likely be pulled away.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I would hope that both games can find a strong player base and not hurt each other, especially since they are different types of strategy games. If civ7 can continue to fix issues and become a deeper, more solid civ game, it can attract civ fans back that maybe fell away. And if EU5 launches strong, it can garner a good EU fanbase.

 

[bladex1200]

I can't see myself buying full price DLC for both... And I think that for Civ7 what they are trying to sell us in DLC is really a kick in the teeth for me, so if Paradox delivers I'll likely be pulled away.

I think "full price" is the key here. People buy lots of different competing franchise games, rarely is a gamer at all concerned with brand loyalty. But brand loyalty and preference can, in my experience, decide what DLC and expansions and season passes I'm willing to splurge on (because I'm regularly playing a game and want the newest content) vs what I'm willing to wait for sales on (because I am playing a game intermittently).

 

[Leucarum]

I think "full price" is the key here. People buy lots of different competing franchise games, rarely is a gamer at all concerned with brand loyalty. But brand loyalty and preference can, in my experience, decide what DLC and expansions and season passes I'm willing to splurge on (because I'm regularly playing a game and want the newest content) vs what I'm willing to wait for sales on (because I am playing a game intermittently).

Yeah for me it's that the value of a civ in an expansion pack has been hit by civ switching. I suspect they cost more to make than a Civ6 civ.... But I am not willing to pay as much for something I can only use 1/3 of the game, when I usually only find 1 or 2 civs interesting in each DLC...

 

[Askia Muhammad]

I fear that Civ 7 is going to get brutalized by EU5 in a few weeks. This is what happens when you release a game that is only half baked.

I don’t think it is - EU series is very niche and they decided to really lean into its hardcore nature instead of simplifying this entry, I’m sure it will be a massive hit amongst its hardcore fans but I don’t think it’s going to pull casual Civ audiences.

Speaking for myself, the premise of the game is very exciting but I don’t have 100 hours to learn the basics of a game and I’m not the biggest fan of them not being turn based.

 

[aieeegrunt]

I don’t think it is - EU series is very niche and they decided to really lean into its hardcore nature instead of simplifying this entry, I’m sure it will be a massive hit amongst its hardcore fans but I don’t think it’s going to pull casual Civ audiences.

Speaking for myself, the premise of the game is very exciting but I don’t have 100 hours to learn the basics of a game and I’m not the biggest fan of them not being turn based.

The overlap is gonna be pretty small because they are really aimed at 2 different styles of gamers, even if in the same genre

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

One single, giant, humungous patch to get the core player base back in the game. Make the UI perfect, the way it should have been at launch. Massively fix government, religion and crisis mechanics.

Thats not half of the issues that would need to fix the game.
I dont care about the UI, and the other things you mentioned are annoyances.

Its the railroad design with era resets, civ switching and bad win conditions that kill it for me.
They removed the sandbox feeling and cut the ties to "my" civilization, as I'm just randomly switching every era.

Sorry but what you outline isnt enough, nowhere near enough.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Thats not half of the issues that would need to fix the game.
I dont care about the UI, and the other things you mentioned are annoyances.

Its the railroad design with era resets, civ switching and bad win conditions that kill it for me.
They removed the sandbox feeling and cut the ties to "my" civilization, as I'm just randomly switching every era.

Sorry but what you outline isnt enough, nowhere near enough.

This is a fundamental problem for sure. It completely changes the identity of the game