Civ 7 - why doesn't it look or feel like Civ?

[Wardog]

There's a reason why Humankind has a 1000 players on a good day. Why is Firaxis trying to improved upon a gimmick we've already seen fail?

HK has less daily players than Civ 3, according to Steam Charts. A Civ 3 remaster would probably sell more than HK.

 

[ombak]

execution is the key here, I really don't feel like repeating the rest of my post. let's compare how both are aproaching it, and all with a massive grain of salt because we haven't seen specifics from Firaxis

I agree and already see improvements over how this was done in HK. I've highlighted below the ones that I think made HK bland to me, so that I never really go the "one more turn" itch:

Humankind culture switch:

• lightning fast pacing meant little time to play with a culture
• no reason to switch, it was just because star score tells me its time
• first pick first serve, you were encouraged to advance quickly to get first pick.
• No conductive tissue between cultures beyond stacking bonuses

Similarly, I've highlighted the one that remains that hasn't convinced me yet (specifically when it comes to era-switching).

Civilization civ switch

• crisis gives you the narrative and mechanic justification to switch (we'll see how well this plays off)

This is like a quest mechanic, like in HK, or BE (and BERT) and many other games that have attempted to add "quests" to give their games a narrative push. I think I see potential that it may be done much better in Civ 7, but let's see.

 

[Thormodr]

You can have new things like Economic victories. I don't care what they change, like they can get rid of corporations or religions. But to fundamentally change things like playing a leader/civ throughout the game or an expanding settler and working land model is to strip away what makes this game unique. Now I don't think Civ VII will be a unique game anymore because Humankind is a similar game.

The expanding hex by hex cities seem very similar to Age of Wonders 4.

 

[Thormodr]

Although on the flipside, if he wasn't invited to play, he doesn't get that extra knowledge and feel. (I haven't seen his full reaction videos yet, to be clear, so I'm not sure his exact takes, or what exactly he's basing his opinions on).

From the various youtuber reviews that were invited to the preview, they gave a LOT more details than what we've seen in the public releases. If you only base your reactions on what you've seen in the gameplay preview, then I can definitely see being very hesitant about things. But seeing the other reaction videos, seeing them talk about the other systems and changes and setups, it sounds a lot more interesting on the whole, IMO.

Of course, obviously those guys got a trip out to visit with the devs, so they're not going to come back with a "this whole release is terrible", at least not until everything is fully out in the open. As mentioned, just the nature to not bite the hand that feeds you. Biffa was very pro-cities skylines 2 in all his preview stuff and leading up to it, but when it came out and flopped on a lot of pieces, then his mentality definitely came a lot more in the "this game needs some serious changes" camp. Sometimes that's an aspect of "it's still early in development - I don't like XXX feature now, but maybe they will clean it up a bit more". And then they don't, or they change it even worse, so now that's another bad aspect.

The good news is that there's still a lot of time before release for them to continue to fix things up. And they have years of future balance patches to continue working. It's definitely not looking like it's just going to be civ 6.5. Arguably this looks like a bigger change in play than we had between civ 4 and civ 5. Hopefully they can stick the landing on it.

Your example about skylines is not encouraging. Lol.

Potato McM... was chiding his viewers for daring to question Egypt into Songhai. He basically said, "Both Africa. Close enough." *Ugh*
Moderator Action: Warned for flaming. The_J

 

[thecrazyscot]

C'mon, man.

 

[Thormodr]

Oh, have we already reached the "positive feedback is automatically suspect while negative feedback is intrinsically valid" stage?

No. It's called using your brain. Biases are real, positive or negative.

Until actual gameplay video comes out, I am advising caution.

 

[TheGrayFox]

No. It's called using your brain. Biases are real, positive or negative.

Until actual gameplay video comes out, I am advising caution.

This goes beyond simple biases. its also about the fact that these streamers are part of an advertising scheme and there is a conflict of interests.

They're not getting free early copies and access to these games to publicly lambast and criticize them, they're given access to showcase a product in its best light to the public. That's how this entire model works.

 

[Thormodr]

This goes beyond simple biases. its also about the fact that these streamers are part of an advertising scheme and there is a conflict of interests.

They're not getting free early copies and access to these games to publicly lambast and criticize them, they're given access to showcase a product in its best light to the public. That's how this entire model works.

Also a free trip to Baltimore and a free hotel room and free food.

 

[Red Adept]

Also a free trip to Baltimore and a free hotel room and free food.

Spiff complained that it was an economy class flight... It's not like they rolled out the red carpet for these fellows, but rather it was a business trip. No $1000 dinners with luxurious hotels and swag bags full of cash.

Most of these guys to a lot of games on their channels and sure, they're not going to come out and be highly dismissive of things, but Spiff and Potato in their discussion weren't all hyped for all the new stuff, but were mostly cautiously optimistic about things.

 

[Thormodr]

Spiff complained that it was an economy class flight... It's not like they rolled out the red carpet for these fellows, but rather it was a business trip. No $1000 dinners with luxurious hotels and swag bags full of cash.

Most of these guys to a lot of games on their channels and sure, they're not going to come out and be highly dismissive of things, but Spiff and Potato in their discussion weren't all hyped for all the new stuff, but were mostly cautiously optimistic about things.

Economy class? Yeah, that's rough.

 

[TheGrayFox]

Spiff complained that it was an economy class flight... It's not like they rolled out the red carpet for these fellows, but rather it was a business trip. No $1000 dinners with luxurious hotels and swag bags full of cash.

Most of these guys to a lot of games on their channels and sure, they're not going to come out and be highly dismissive of things, but Spiff and Potato in their discussion weren't all hyped for all the new stuff, but were mostly cautiously optimistic about things.

Wow so they all got free economy class roundtrip flights and a stay in hotel chain in major city.... how terrible! I hope Spiff is okay.

You understand the fact that you say "it was a business trip" so casually says everything we need to know about why we shouldn't be taking their words and previews at face value right?

 

[thecrazyscot]

No. It's called using your brain. Biases are real, positive or negative.

1. We've got gameplay videos. It's alpha and there's not alot of it, but we are not discussing theoretical gameplay from cinematic trailers. What we see now will be in the game in some form.

2. Calling into question the integrity of the journalists and content creators who received access is an old tactic to discount any narrative that doesn't fit with your own and pat yourself on the back for not being a schmuck like everyone else.

The same tactic is also used to undermine professional opinions in areas that actually matter, like medicine.

I find your premise invalid as it is always applied suspiciously in line with a particular narrative. Positive opinions only come from shills, amirite?

However, this is probably getting to the off-topic line, so I will stop here unless given the green light by mods.

3. An area where I think you and I will be in full agreement is in encouraging everyone to watch the gameplay footage we have as well as more complete footage we will get in the future to make up their own minds.

Isn't it great that we have 6 months of gameplay content coming up to all view and pick apart before the game comes out? It will be easy to make an informed purchase here, and I think that's great.

 

[TheGrayFox]

1. We've got gameplay videos. It's alpha and there's not alot of it, but we are not discussing theoretical gameplay from cinematic trailers. What we see now will be in the game in some form.

2. Calling into question the integrity of the journalists and content creators who received access is an old tactic to discount any narrative that doesn't fit with your own and pat yourself on the back for not being a schmuck like everyone else.

The same tactic is also used to undermine professional opinions in areas that actually matter, like medicine.

I find your premise invalid as it is always applied suspiciously in line with a particular narrative. Positive opinions only come from shills, amirite?

However, this is probably getting to the off-topic line, so I will stop here unless given the green light by mods.

3. An area where I think you and I will be in full agreement is in encouraging everyone to watch the gameplay footage we have as well as more complete footage we will get in the future to make up their own minds.

Isn't it great that we have 6 months of gameplay content coming up to all view and pick apart before the game comes out? It will be easy to make an informed purchase here, and I think that's great.

1. We know, the people (most civilization related online communities) who are not being paid with free flights and hotels to advertise are pretty overwhelmingly telling you we don't like some of the mechanics that we saw showcased

2. A lot of words to gloss over the obvious conflict of interests involved in streamers being given early access to these games specifically to advertise for companies who literally pay them to do so

3. yes

 

[Thormodr]

*Snip*

No need for tangents about medicine. That is not helpful or needed.

*Shrug* Just take everything with a mountain of salt, as I said. That includes content creators and people calling the game "woke."

When the gameplay videos come out, we'll see a better picture of how things are. Yep.

 

[Gareth44]

Interesting stats on modding, taken from these very forums:

Civ3 - Creation & Customization:
Threads
29.5K
Messages
686.2K

Civ4 - Creation & Customization:
Threads
54.9K
Messages
1.6M

Civ5 - Creation & Customization:
Threads
28.2K
Messages
585.7K

Civ6 - Creation & Customization
Threads
6.8K
Messages
63.1K

Personally, I found Civ6 extremely bloated with mechanics and disliked Civ5 for the hard limits it set on some of the changes. Fair note - I don't play pure Civ4 any longer. C2C, AoE, Dune Wars, and some other excellent mods for Civ4 (and Col, too) take this game to a level modern 4x's have yet to reach. Looking at some of the things implemented in Civ7, I feel it is the right step... away from the issues of Civs 6 and 5. But the tame and ahistorical treatment of culture and religion, a feel of mobile-style dumbing-down still lingers. I do hope I am wrong.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

When the gameplay videos come out, we'll see a better picture of how things are. Yep.

Completely! Far too many people appear to have made their mind up that certain mechanics are bad, even though we still know very little about how they work. This is no better than those who take every content creator's word at face value.

I would also advise caution, but would add both patience and an open mind to the list.

 

[TheGrayFox]

Completely! Far too many people appear to have made their mind up that certain mechanics are bad, even though we still know very little about how they work. This is no better than those who take every content creator's word at face value.

I would also advise caution, but would add both patience and an open mind to the list.

What do you think we do not know about how civilization swapping works? They literally showcased the gimmick! What is it that you think we're not understanding about how it will work?

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

What do you think we do not know about how civilization swapping works? They literally showcased the gimmick! What is it that you think we're not understanding about how it will work?

We don't know how many civs will be in the game, how many options we will actually get when faced with a switch, how the crises and end of an Age will play out, how the beginning of a new Age will work, whether there are options to limit civ switching to historically relevant civs only, whether there will be some civs with multiple versions (e.g. an exploration Spain and a modern Spain).

The point is, we haven't seen everything. I understand that people are against it on principle but maybe it will work better than expected. I don't know - because I haven't played it, and I've seen only a few very short clips of the first Age.

 

[TheGrayFox]

We don't know how many civs will be in the game, how many options we will actually get when faced with a switch, how the crises and end of an Age will play out, how the beginning of a new Age will work, whether there are options to limit civ switching to historically relevant civs only, whether there will be some civs with multiple versions (e.g. an exploration Spain and a modern Spain).

The point is, we haven't seen everything. I understand that people are against it on principle but maybe it will work better than expected. I don't know - because I haven't played it, and I've seen only a few very short clips of the first Age.

We don't need to know how many civs are in the game . we know its not going to be enough if they're advertising nonsense like Eygpt turning to Songhai turning to Burundi 6 months away from release.

How many options we get doesn't change the fact that we still have to switch to unrelated civs based on arbitrary conditionals or poorly mapped "historical" routes every era just like Humankind.

We have vague enough idea how crises and ages will work in relation to the civilization swapping mechanic to say it still looks bad.

Limiting their historical routes (which I believe they said you could) is still going to result in nonsense like Eygpt > Songhai > Burundi and native american tribes being forced into colonial states or other completely unrelated native tribes.

The point is, we really do know enough know to complain and doom. I don't want this

Moderator Action: Please be civil as you discuss your dislike for this game. leif

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I don't want this

I noticed.