Civ VII Developer Video - November 2025 | What's coming with tomorrow's update!

[pjotroos]

Agree, that those are valuable. That's why I used "also" in my initial post.

Just feels like you're looking for different ways of saying that you should be allowed to play the game. Which you are. Just not for free.

If you didn't buy just because you can't play as one civ, that is what's being added. You know that without needing to playtest extensively.

The feedback should be on whether the implementation doesn't break the game's feel or difficulty curve, compared to the current version. You cannot do a comperative test without first playing several games with civ switching, which is a thing you don't want to do.

 

[Krikkit1]

Just feels like you're looking for different ways of saying that you should be allowed to play the game. Which you are. Just not for free.

If you didn't buy just because you can't play as one civ, that is what's being added. You know that without needing to playtest extensively.

The feedback should be on whether the implementation doesn't break the game's feel or difficulty curve, compared to the current version. You cannot do a comperative test without first playing several games with civ switching, which is a thing you don't want to do.

Also they might pick some of those "never played" in future rounds if they eventualy want to see if this would get them back (although more likely that would just be a free weekend for everyone once they have the implementation that they think works well.)

 

[Sagax]

Just feels like you're looking for different ways of saying that you should be allowed to play the game. Which you are. Just not for free.

To give a more charitable judgement on this, I do think it is valid to point out that the everlasting civs feature would benefit from some input from those for whom civ-switching is such a big deal that it prevented them from buying the game.

If FXS feel like they already got enough of that - between occasional email surveys and lurking the main discussion platforms - then that's fair. Otherwise, an off-shoot survey to hear from this specific audience wouldn't be that bad of an idea (for example, the Workshop form screens them out for playtesting, but also takes them to a different form to gather written feedback).

 

[VGT]

Just feels like you're looking for different ways of saying that you should be allowed to play the game. Which you are. Just not for free.

Yes, all I dream of is getting access to civ7 for a week for free. Just not now, predownloaded EU5 already.

From the beginning I was not expecting this to happen. I just put a silly note here that I almost thought it to be happening when I saw this option, but in the end I said it's fair that it's not the case.
But it just feels like you're so eager to be so defensive of this game and not letting anyone else to touch your precious. Showing some insecurities here. Anyway, unsubscribing from discussion as it leads nowhere.

 

[UWHabs]

Not too much in the video that we didn't get in the update checkin. Looking forward to seeing what changes are coming with the patch notes.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Just feels like you're looking for different ways of saying that you should be allowed to play the game. Which you are. Just not for free.

If you didn't buy just because you can't play as one civ, that is what's being added. You know that without needing to playtest extensively.

The feedback should be on whether the implementation doesn't break the game's feel or difficulty curve, compared to the current version. You cannot do a comperative test without first playing several games with civ switching, which is a thing you don't want to do.

I do think there's some value to it (testing for first timers), just not for something like this.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Not too much in the video that we didn't get in the update checkin. Looking forward to seeing what changes are coming with the patch notes.

As expected. Video is usually recorded earlier, so only key features which are guaranteed to come, could be highlighted there.

I do think there's some value to it (testing for first timers), just not for something like this.

Yes, usually to determine how intuitive UI and game mechanics are. But that's not playtest, that's (in perfect world) UX lab test.

 

[Leucarum]

Do we know what time this launches... In a perfect world this comes out first thing in the morning. I play a Tonga game, and then EU5 comes out at midday...

I might have used some leave for a strategy gaming fest.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Do we know what time this launches... In a perfect world this comes out first thing in the morning. I play a Tonga game, and then EU5 comes out at midday...

I might have used some leave for a strategy gaming fest.

So, around 14:00 UTC

 

[Leucarum]

View attachment 746663
So, around 14:00 UTC

Sid Meier has blessed this timeline. I get to have my strategy cake and eat it too.

 

[disjointaccount]

Cold War is a weird thing, yes. But with the current split between 3rd and potential 4th age, I don't think we'll have it directly. More likely ideology will stay as 3rd age thing, while 4th age could involve other parts of Cold War, like proxy wars. It makes sense, because cold war took only small fraction of this 4th age (which is presumably 1950-2070), while proxy wars, for example, as still alive and kicking. Also, I assume some mechanics to carry ideological leftovers to 4th age (similarly to how religion could be carried) will exist too.

Yeah, I think it would be a case of the Cold War era accounting for the first half of the age and then a "future era" being the back half. The Cold War in particular just excites me because it's a chunk of history I really like and also because I think VII in particular has some mechanics that tee it up nicely. The sort of chain-wardecs that come with the alliance system lends itself well to a MAD scenario among nuclear powers (maybe tie the ability to hold/develop nukes to military legacy points from the age before), and war support feels very adjacent to some kind of proxy war system. It'd take some work in particular to have a militaristic path that still involves direct conflict while still discouraging that between the major players, but if done right it could make for a very fun endgame.

 

[m_mus]

Full UI changes will be in tomorrow patch notes and I expect them to be much bigger. Just compare highlights of the previous patch with it's patchnotes.

Yeah, I feel I have stated it before on a different topic: I hope you are right.

 

[Kenshiro70]

To give a more charitable judgement on this, I do think it is valid to point out that the everlasting civs feature would benefit from some input from those for whom civ-switching is such a big deal that it prevented them from buying the game.

It's going to be interesting to see how everlasting civs play out, because FXS didn't say anything about changing the overbuilding mechanic. In other words, even if you keep your civ, most of your work in the prior age will still become obsolete when you enter a new age. While keeping the same civ might help with immersion, I suspect quite a few people will still be dissatisfied with overbuilding still being in place.

To me it seems like a fixable problem if they reframed it as "upgrading" prior age buildings (with some minor tweaking of the design of course). But based on the pre-release videos, I get the impression that they are very attached to having that exact historical concept of overbuilding present in the game, so I'm not thinking changes are likely.

 

[Head_North]

So looking forward to this! Tonga here I come!

 

[Head_North]

It's going to be interesting to see how everlasting civs play out, because FXS didn't say anything about changing the overbuilding mechanic. In other words, even if you keep your civ, most of your work in the prior age will still become obsolete when you enter a new age. While keeping the same civ might help with immersion, I suspect quite a few people will still be dissatisfied with overbuilding still being in place.

To me it seems like a fixable problem if they reframed it as "upgrading" prior age buildings (with some tweaking of the design of course). But based on the pre-release videos, I get the impression that they are very attached to having that exact historical concept of overbuilding present in the game, so I'm not thinking changes are likely.

I´m starting to like this age system with the civ switching so I just hope they continue to make the most effort to improve that system instead of focusing to much on the option of playing as one civ (allthough a appreciate that they add that as an option for those who want it!)

 

[Leucarum]

It's going to be interesting to see how everlasting civs play out, because FXS didn't say anything about changing the overbuilding mechanic. In other words, even if you keep your civ, most of your work in the prior age will still become obsolete when you enter a new age. While keeping the same civ might help with immersion, I suspect quite a few people will still be dissatisfied with overbuilding still being in place.

To me it seems like a fixable problem if they reframed it as "upgrading" prior age buildings (with some minor tweaking of the design of course). But based on the pre-release videos, I get the impression that they are very attached to having that exact historical concept of overbuilding present in the game, so I'm not thinking changes are likely.

The fact that they want a playtest group suggests to me they want civ-specific gameplay to continue between ages, and that they probably don't have all the best solutions hammered out yet...

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I'm not sure overbuilding is really that different than back in the past, when certain buildings would go "obsolete" and suddenly disappear when an age started. IDK.

 

[rocksinmypath]

Overall, I’m excited with the update, but I have to ask why was Khmer left out of this balance pass?

 

[stealth_nsk]

It's going to be interesting to see how everlasting civs play out, because FXS didn't say anything about changing the overbuilding mechanic. In other words, even if you keep your civ, most of your work in the prior age will still become obsolete when you enter a new age. While keeping the same civ might help with immersion, I suspect quite a few people will still be dissatisfied with overbuilding still being in place.

To me it seems like a fixable problem if they reframed it as "upgrading" prior age buildings (with some minor tweaking of the design of course). But based on the pre-release videos, I get the impression that they are very attached to having that exact historical concept of overbuilding present in the game, so I'm not thinking changes are likely.

I don't think ages are going to be affected somehow. The wording is pretty specific about civilization switch.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Yeah, I think it would be a case of the Cold War era accounting for the first half of the age and then a "future era" being the back half. The Cold War in particular just excites me because it's a chunk of history I really like and also because I think VII in particular has some mechanics that tee it up nicely. The sort of chain-wardecs that come with the alliance system lends itself well to a MAD scenario among nuclear powers (maybe tie the ability to hold/develop nukes to military legacy points from the age before), and war support feels very adjacent to some kind of proxy war system. It'd take some work in particular to have a militaristic path that still involves direct conflict while still discouraging that between the major players, but if done right it could make for a very fun endgame.

The more I think about it, they could just combine the two into an "Information Age" if technology wise, they start around 1970 with the invention of home computers and the Internet later.