Civilization VII - Firaxis Developer Panel (PAX West - 8/31) Discussion

[Chiyo]

I just watched it and I have to say: That was disappointing! Lots of marketing blah blah but not much info on how the game really works. Listening to Ed Beach he concentrated on city development but not on civilizations which makes it sound like he should have developed the newest sim city. I do not understand how this Rome to Normans to France thing works for a whole civ. I start as Rome and I found Rome. If I also found Londinium it turns into London when I become Normans? What does it turn to when I become France? And what happens to Rome? WIll it still be my city even though there is nothing Norman to Rome? Will it belong to somebody else thanks to a crisis?

On the positive side I understand if you play India you can play on as your civilization and it just changes through time which I like. Maybe that will also be the case for China which will maybe be the only two civilizations to have stood the test of time as in the original civ sense?

 

[Mightymagyar]

What was the point of having "fan questions" when you don't ask about one of the biggest issues people have about the game? (civ swapping)

 

[notNamed]

I just watched it and I have to say: That was disappointing! Lots of marketing blah blah but not much info on how the game really works. Listening to Ed Beach he concentrated on city development but not on civilizations which makes it sound like he should have developed the newest sim city. I do not understand how this Rome to Normans to France thing works for a whole civ. I start as Rome and I found Rome. If I also found Londinium it turns into London when I become Normans? What does it turn to when I become France? And what happens to Rome? WIll it still be my city even though there is nothing Norman to Rome? Will it belong to somebody else thanks to a crisis?

On the positive side I understand if you play India you can play on as your civilization and it just changes through time which I like. Maybe that will also be the case for China which will maybe be the only two civilizations to have stood the test of time as in the original civ sense?

Maurya to Chola to Mughal works out the same way as your Rome-Londinium-Paris example.
Maurya lived in the north of the subcontinent, capital of Pataliputra, spoke an Indo-European language.
Chola lived in the south of the subcontinent, capital of Uraiyur, spoke some old Dravidian language.
Mughals lived in the north, capital at Delhi, spoke an Indo-European language, but had different names for various cities funded by Maurya.

 

[AriochIV]

I can't imagine that the names of your existing cities would change (that would be incredibly confusing), but that does bring up an issue that I hadn't thought of before... it does make sense that the default names of your new cities would draw from a list for your new civilization.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Maurya to Chola to Mughal works out the same way as your Rome-Londinium-Paris example.
Maurya lived in the north of the subcontinent, capital of Pataliputra, spoke an Indo-European language.
Chola lived in the south of the subcontinent, capital of Uraiyur, spoke some old Dravidian language.
Mughals lived in the north, capital at Delhi, spoke an Indo-European language, but had different names for various cities funded by Maurya.

Dont forget Mughal core/elite were foreign muslims, something that even know annoys Hindu Indian nationalists.

 

[moysturfurmer]

It seems the modern age ends in 1950. At least that's what I heard. It seems strange to have a civ game end so early with no space race. It looks like it may end with the dawn of the atomic age/cold war.

As mentioned above, it appears modern age will start quite early. Before the industrial revolution for sure. I'm guessing around 1776 (America is pretty much confirmed to be a modern era civ).

The game still has the space race. The only question is whether or not it’s a race to the moon or beyond.

 

[8housesofelixir]

Dont forget Mughal core/elite were foreign muslims, something that even know annoys Hindu Indian nationalists.

Yeah - I already saw a couple of very angry Indians complaining about "a foreign invader dynasty representing modern India" on Reddit (with relatively high upvotes). I can certainly foresee the same mindset popping up in the Chinese community when the Ming-Qing transition is officially revealed.

However, this is a risk that a civ-changing mechanic will always lead to; Humankind received the same criticism, just on a much smaller scale. A civ-changing mechanic cannot please everyone. If there are still Norman nationalists around (IIRC there is one IRL?), they will be mad about the Norman-French transition as well.

 

[notNamed]

However, this is a risk that a civ-changing mechanic will always lead to

Well it's the same even without civ changing. A Qing or Yuan China, Delhi or Mughal India,... e.g. https://www.pcgamesn.com/age-of-empires-4/delhi-sultanate-civilisation

Not that long ago English nationalism couldn't tolerate the so-called "Norman yoke" and would have raised a ruckus about even mentioning the fact that England at some point wasn't led by upright Anglican gentlemen.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Yeah - I already saw a couple of very angry Indians complaining about "a foreign invader dynasty representing modern India" on Reddit (with relatively high upvotes). I can certainly foresee the same mindset popping up in the Chinese community when the Ming-Qing transition is officially revealed.

However, this is a risk that a civ-changing mechanic will always lead to; Humankind received the same criticism, just on a much smaller scale. A civ-changing mechanic cannot please everyone. If there are still Norman nationalists around (IIRC there is one IRL?), they will be mad about the Norman-French transition as well.

I think it would have been better if Firaxis did this:
* Have "Modern China" and "Modern India" as the option for the last Age.
* Instead of 3 have 4 eras, a Medieval one were Chola would fit better.
* Provide alternative simultaneous options for both India and China in the Exploration Era, so Maratha and Mughal the same Ming and Qing could be played for different players in the same so people could recreate the conflict like we could Aztec vs Spanish and later get Mexico.

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

With conditions that every nation present can fulfill.
>Establish a colony in the New World and move your capital there -> USA
>Establish a colony in the New World and incorporate at least one indigenous people -> Canada
>Establish a colony in the New World and mine several natural resources -> Australia

>New Zealand. Implying we need EVEN MORE modern Anglophone states, Jesus Christ people, please stop already.
But if push came to shove, you can always draw the connection to Maori/Polynesian civs without being quite as questionable as doing the same with USA or Canada.

so something like persia - abbasid - usa is doable? nope , i definitely see no reddit posts incoming if they make the condition to be fulfilled that way

 

[BuchiTaton]

Well it's the same even without civ changing. A Qing or Yuan China, Delhi or Mughal India,... e.g. https://www.pcgamesn.com/age-of-empires-4/delhi-sultanate-civilisation

Not that long ago English nationalism couldn't tolerate the so-called "Norman yoke" and would have raised a ruckus about even mentioning the fact that England at some point wasn't led by upright Anglican gentlemen.

The issue with AoE4's Delhi Sultanate and AoE3 India (clearly Mughal India) is that for those games these are the only playable representation for the region. Meanwhile when they released the AoE2 Dynasties of India expansion with Dravidians, Bengalis, Gurjaras and Hindustanis the Indian reception was clearly positive (notoriously from Tamils). The presence of a civ representing the "invasor" Hindustanis was not a problem when they provided other factions to fight them back.

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

well , this approach of new civs each age will allow them to create 100s of civs . sooner or later they will have a civ to satisfy everyone. even if they have to play fast and loose with history

 

[bite]

The more I learn about ages the more I feel that they have given themselves a lot of flex to allow them to insert new ages in future expansion packs

 

[BuchiTaton]

The more I learn about ages the more I feel that they have given themselves a lot of flex to allow them to insert new ages in future expansion packs

I would like that, but at the same time seems unlikely since it would mean a lot of work and changes.

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

maybe if you try to tag on ages into the middle , but it is easy enough to add an information age to the end . if it sells well and is accepted than add a space age and release it as SMAC

 

[notNamed]

The more I learn about ages the more I feel that they have given themselves a lot of flex to allow them to insert new ages in future expansion packs

Well, we already know they're setting a rate of 8 civilizations (4 per pack) in 6 months (delivery by Sep 2025) with the DLC. With releases spread out, rather than coming all at once.
With that rate of development you'll have an era's worth each year.

The issue is that the limitation of eras seems to have been a "lessons learned" decision coming from Humankind. Which models history much more accurately with 6 eras and plenty of nuance in sticking cultures in the exact context they belong in. But when you combine that with the ideal game length of a single session (which was already defined by Civ7 devs), you have to race through each era and get civ shifts too quickly. Something that everyone agreed was not a good thing for Humankind.

Civ 7 stepping into the territory would just mean they went all-in on the DLC money while knowingly breaking the experience.

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

paradox makes a living with the DLC model and civ6 was a commercial success too i guess.

 

[Meluhhan]

View attachment 701618

The icons for the Cholas and the Mughals seem to have been switched on this graphic. Mistakenly, perhaps.

 

[Krikkit1]

I can't imagine that the names of your existing cities would change (that would be incredibly confusing), but that does bring up an issue that I hadn't thought of before... it does make sense that the default names of your new cities would draw from a list for your new civilization.

There should be the option to change city names, particularly your capital (whether you move it or not)

The Ottoman capital should be Instanbul not Constantiople (if you like it better that way)

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

So, take me back to Constantinople
No, you can't go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works?
That's nobody's business but the Turks