Civ Switching - Will it prevent you from buying Civ 7?

[TheGrayFox]

Definitely not 16 either. Sort by "Popularity" and it's not Top 25. Sort by "Subscribers" and it's 25.

I'm sorting by all time popularity and counting. it's number #16

and even then remember, 1/3rd are still just playing Civ V

 

[bv98132454]

Even better then right? To subscribe to the mod on Steam you have to buy the game. So that shows despite all the vocal hate the Civ 6 art style got, people still bought the game.

In other words, heads you win, tails I lose. That's how you work.

 

[Kev1916]

Civ 6 is a mobile iOS Clash-of-Clans cartoon game for babies and now Civ 7 is too. The example is perfectly salient!

Aye that's what I said ... Enjoy your night mate

 

[pokiehl]

Aye that's what I said ... Enjoy your night mate

Not denigrating you—I’m saying that criticism is really similar between the games so it doesn’t strike me as uncharted territory.

But broadly speaking why is it a bad thing more people get to play the games? Not everyone likes PC or has a good gaming one.

 

[TheGrayFox]

they're probably betting on those 20% playing civ 6/5/4, and will come back to watch gameplay demo for civ8 or buy 7 on a sale, thereby not "losing" customers

having 1/3 of the player base loyal to the past iteration isn't making you money today as a company. The success of a game is dictated by their launch sales, player retention, and its ability to sell more exhoborent DLC and expansions.

Firaxis doesn't want people buying it on sale years from now

 

[bv98132454]

Not denigrating you—I’m saying that criticism is really similar between the games so it doesn’t strike me as uncharted territory.

But broadly speaking why is it a bad thing more people get to play the games? Not everyone likes PC or has a good gaming one.

A good way to stop such misunderstandings would be to stop strawmanning people's arguments, just saying.

 

[thecrazyscot]

its not even close. I was here for every release since V, the only complain that was even close to as vocally loud about Civilization 6 was about its art style. Were there some weirdos complaining about wokeness? sure but they were an asbolute minority.

Bruh you clearly aren't remembering Civ5's release. 1UPT was a firestorm. A basic query shows how much time was spent arguing over it, and honestly the arguments over it continue even now. It represents a fundamental divide with pre-1UPT civ and post-1UPT civ. Maybe Civ7 will represent another fundamental division in the series.

 

[TheGrayFox]

Bruh you clearly aren't remembering Civ5's release. 1UPT was a firestorm. A basic query shows how much time was spent arguing over it, and honestly the arguments over it continue even now. It represents a fundamental divide with pre-1UPT civ and post-1UPT civ. Maybe Civ7 will represent another fundamental division in the series.

I absolutely am remembering Civ 5's release. Notice you just said the keyword.... "release"

1 unit per tile was not a firestorm or particularly contentious before the game was released in a terrible state and the small small minority who rightfully concerned about how the AI would handle 1 unit per tile were vindicated... even then tactical combat was one of the most requested changes to the civ formula from 4 (doom stacks were a term to mock Civ combat) and that is primarily the reason why 5 sold so well.

 

[ColtSeavers]

Bruh you clearly aren't remembering Civ5's release. 1UPT was a firestorm. A basic query shows how much time was spent arguing over it, and honestly the arguments over it continue even now. It represents a fundamental divide with pre-1UPT civ and post-1UPT civ. Maybe Civ7 will represent another fundamental division in the series.

I'm absolutely sure it will result in a fundamental division of the series. That doesn't mean it will necessarily signficantly damage the franchise in the long run, but it certainly could. Civ 5's choice to adapt 1UpT was risky but paid out eventually (at least in my opinion ), but that doesn't mean that Civ 7 changes will do so, too.

 

[mackintosh]

I don't think the issue is how many people argued about a change but rather how many didn't purchase the game because of it. Ultimately the only thing that matters to a publisher are sales. I don't think 1UPT had much of an effect on the actual adoption rate, though it most certainly sparked many a heated debate.

 

[DukeSammael]

I downloaded the Civ5 graphics mod for Civ6, probably still have it. Played a couple of games and everything looked muddy and washed out, so I disabled it. It made me remember why I disliked Civ5's looks - map, city screen, UI - the most of all Civ games. That and the switch to hex/1UPT with horrible AI pathfinding makes it the least played Civ game in my collection.

 

[thecrazyscot]

I absolutely am remembering Civ 5's release. Notice you just said the keyword.... "release"

1 unit per tile was not a firestorm or particularly contentious before the game was released in a terrible state and the small small minority who rightfully concerned about how the AI would handle 1 unit per tile were vindicated... even then tactical combat was one of the most requested changes to the civ formula from 4 (doom stacks were a term to mock Civ combat) and that is primarily the reason why 5 sold so well.

Nah, the passionate arguments started before the game came out.

I'm absolutely sure it will result in a fundamental division of the series. That doesn't mean it will necessarily signficantly damage the franchise in the long run, but it certainly could. Civ 5's choice to adapt 1UpT was risky but paid out eventually (at least in my opinion ), but that doesn't mean that Civ 7 changes will do so, too.

I mean, anything is possible right now. It could turn out this change is fundamentally rejected and considered a failure. It's also possible that it pays off over time and for Civ9 in 2040 it's a core part of the franchise. I dunno.

There's some vehement arguments over scraps of information - Aug 31 really can't come fast enough.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I absolutely am remembering Civ 5's release. Notice you just said the keyword.... "release"

1 unit per tile was not a firestorm or particularly contentious before the game was released in a terrible state and the small small minority who rightfully concerned about how the AI would handle 1 unit per tile were vindicated... even then tactical combat was one of the most requested changes to the civ formula from 4 (doom stacks were a term to mock Civ combat) and that is primarily the reason why 5 sold so well.

It absolutely was on announcement. There were already calls for mods to remove 1upt months before the game even came out.

 

[Professor Phobo]

It's the unexamined confidence that's getting people uptight. There's a distinction between "not to my taste" and "bad idea" and it'd make the discussion smoother if we could keep that clear.

 

[pokiehl]

It absolutely was on announcement. There were already calls for mods to remove 1upt months before the game even came out.

At least since Civ 4, it’s a given that some portion of fans will be vocal about how a certain aspect of the game is going to kill the series.

Since it’s been going on for like 20 years now, I’d say it’s tradition. At the end of the day, none of the games have been bad or been failures. I’m optimistic for the same for 7.

 

[Professor Phobo]

Y'all young'uns don't remember, but back in my day, our civilizations didn't have unique traits. And lo and behold, Civ 3 rolled around, and it was going to kill the franchise, kill the sandbox, kill the balance, kill multiplayer...

Also we had to walk uphill both ways just to build a scout.

 

[TheGrayFox]

I don't think the issue is how many people argued about a change but rather how many didn't purchase the game because of it. Ultimately the only thing that matters to a publisher are sales. I don't think 1UPT had much of an effect on the actual adoption rate, though it most certainly sparked many a heated debate.

if anything 1UPT increased Civ 5's sales dramatically among people who didn't like Civ games specifically because the combat was stacks of doom.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

At least since Civ 4, it’s a given that some portion of fans will be vocal about how a certain aspect of the game is going to kill the series.

Since it’s been going on for like 20 years now, I’d say it’s tradition. At the end of the day, none of the games have been bad or been failures. I’m optimistic for the same for 7.

Heck, there were long diatribes about hexes.

I mean, I get it, we don't have a lot of info and a lot of the things they highlighted sound very different. And different is scary and bad. I have no idea if I'll like the new "stuff" or not, but I'm guessing i won't hate it enough and that i'll like the other things enough that i'll still like the game.

 

[Civinator]

Really? now many things are explained, so I would say that the concept of the revolutionary feature is not true or in any case it was born (at least as a basic concept) from the latest expansion of Civ 3: "The Conquest Scenarios" (which I have never played since I don't I found it interesting)

Of course really. Everybody who owns C3C or Civ 3 Complete can have a look into the C3C credits file. Here you can see Ed Beach and Breakaway Games. Breakaway Games did the Conquests in C3C.

On the other side: The Conquests Campaign of C3C was clearly before Humankind was created.

 

[Professor Phobo]

I know I thought I'd love Civ 6 from the previews and then boom, I just can't get into it. Something about the pace.