I'd be very surprised if there's additional content after NFP, unless they aren't doing a 'spin off' (ala colonization/Beyond Earth) at all. Or of course if this sells widely beyond expectations.
NFP indicates they're shifting into a GaaS sales model, which means a long time between development-intensive core games and a greater focus on selling add-ons to existing games. But how much faith did they have that they could sell a second Pass 5 years into Civ VI?
NFP indicates they're shifting into a GaaS sales model, which means a long time between development-intensive core games and a greater focus on selling add-ons to existing games. But how much faith did they have that they could sell a second Pass 5 years into Civ VI?
If Florentine Italy is a civ (which is a big “if”) then I think it’s hard to imagine anyone but Lorenzo di’Medici as their leader. In fact, that’s the aspect that makes me most excited about them - I picture a very strong Financial Civ with a Patronage LUA around gold-buying Great People.
NFP indicates they're shifting into a GaaS sales model, which means a long time between development-intensive core games and a greater focus on selling add-ons to existing games. But how much faith did they have that they could sell a second Pass 5 years into Civ VI?
I'd be surprised too if we got more content after this with 50 civs and 6 add on game modes.
I can see this as a gateway into more DLC passes though for future games like Civ VII or the spin offs.
NFP indicates they're shifting into a GaaS sales model, which means a long time between development-intensive core games and a greater focus on selling add-ons to existing games. But how much faith did they have that they could sell a second Pass 5 years into Civ VI?
Definitely, but I'm guessing it's a test run for the next games, and if this is successful it's the model they'll use instead of expansions.
Anton's comment about the game essentially being 'system complete'/not needing new systems would indicate that to me. Pretty much any other GaaS model is definitely still introducing systems in it's tail. But maybe there's more of a market for primarily content DLCs than I'm realizing.
The other things is that, frankly, I'm guessing Firaxis/2k might still be a little conservative from a marketing perspective to do two Civ-based games simultaneously. By that I mean, if there is Beyond Earth 2 or the like coming in 2021, that they'd 'finish' 6 by then so all attention is focused there. They'll test the market for GaaS first, then maybe next expand to multiple Civ 'stream' games supported at once. I don't think they'd rip that bandaid off that quickly.
DLC 3 and DLC 6 are shipping with a new map (not map script) so it could be a hint to what civs they include. Middle-east and N.America are very possible maps.
I mean I can also imagine Cosimo di'Medici as well. Of course they would be pretty similar in terms of playstyle.
I'd be surprised too if we got more content after this with 50 civs and 6 add on game modes.
I can see this as a gateway into more DLC passes though for future games like Civ VII or the spin offs.
DLC 3 and DLC 6 are shipping with a new map (not map script) so it could be a hint to what civs they include. Middle-east and N.America are very possible maps.
Mathilda would be interesting, but if they ever make Florence, it will be for the Renaissance flavor. Cosimo is definitely also a possibility, though I think Lorenzo’s more consolidated power & legendary patronage would make him the most likely choice.
DLC 3 and DLC 6 are shipping with a new map (not map script) so it could be a hint to what civs they include. Middle-east and N.America are very possible maps.
Near East and Mediterranean Sea in one map please.
Imagine Arabia, Greece, Rome, Phoenicia, Sumeria, Georgia, Scythia, Macedon, Persia, Ottomans, Egypt on that map.
Not including the possibilities of Assyria/Babylon, Byzantines or Italy making it in.
honestly i find it quite hard to see a relationship between possible new civs and the filler natural features in this map, the maya location, the gran colombian and ethiopian one i believe are purely a coincidence.
I would believe that if it were only one or two, but three geographic gaps corresponding to planned civs does seem like they were deliberating saving some features for expansions. Especially when you look at several of the other regions explicitly pointing toward Burma/Vietnam, the Timurids, and Bulgaria/Byzantium.
Some of the gaps might be meaningless, though. I don't think Iceland or Melanesia will have civs anytime soon.
I also have no idea how complete this map is, so there very well could be gaps that the creator missed.
In a way, yes. The idea is basically you release the game and then support it long-term with purchases. Ubisoft are using it as a model for Rainbow Six: Siege (base game, a yearly pass with major content launches, and smaller purchases), as well as For Honor. So instead of iterating with a new game every year or two, a game is given a much longer life with content updates.
Paradox still does an expansion + DLC model. They are just smaller and more frequent. I.e. if Gathering Storm was 2 expansions at $20 each with diplomacy in one and power/climate change/disasters in the other, and any base game mechanic changes as free updates.
They also do a lot more purely cosmetic DLC that I don't see Civ going to. I e for a full Paradox would be closer to Civ releasing with say more Civs, but none of them have leader animations/music/unique building skins, you buy that in DLCs. Those are usually between expansions.
A closer approx of the 'Paradox model' that civ might go to imho might be something like 'Expansion/major DLC' with a major new system and two Civs every 4-6 months, and 1-2 Single Civ + wonders/city states/etc in between.
Paradox still does an expansion + DLC model. They are just smaller and more frequent. I.e. if Gathering Storm was 2 expansions at $20 each with diplomacy in one and power/climate change/disasters in the other, and any base game mechanic changes as free updates.
They also do a lot more purely cosmetic DLC that I don't see Civ going to. I e for a full Paradox would be closer to Civ releasing with say more Civs, but none of them have leader animations/music/unique building skins, you buy that in DLCs. Those are usually between expansions.
A closer approx of the 'Paradox model' that civ might go to imho might be something like 'Expansion/major DLC' with a major new system and two Civs every 4-6 months, and 1-2 Single Civ + wonders/city states/etc in between.
This is why I'd rather have the model that Firaxis is having with the "Season Pass" expansion rather than Paradox's, because the latter's learning curve, and the need for one to get updated with new content and mechanics for the game, is quite tiresome and overwhelming.
DLC 3 and DLC 6 are shipping with a new map (not map script) so it could be a hint to what civs they include. Middle-east and N.America are very possible maps.
Maya & Colombia; Ethiopia; Iroquois & new Native Civ ?Navajo? (Americas Map); Vietnam; Portugal & Byzantine alt leader for Rome; Babylon (Middle East Map)
This way they could release groups based on region and introduce new maps with the new regions.
Obviously I make a lot of assumptions here
thoughts?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
So basically they're moving to bigger expansions and flavour packs. If you look at the CK3 page on Steam you get an idea.
