civlateintothenights
Chieftain
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2025
- Messages
- 32
They complain because they care. Civ 7 will be truly dead when everyone still complaining becomes apathetic and bounces away for good.
Complaint Sub-Forum
- Thread starter RDomico
- Start date
I actually had to create an account just to respond to this..
But after playing a lot of closed betas I have noticed that in their lowest moments these "I like the game, so the general community opinion doesn't matter" type of posts proliferate. It is also astounding how these same people then stare blankly rubbing their foreheads when the game inevitably dies (although at least some have the decency to apologies). While I doubt civ will actually die this mentality of being king of a forum on a game no one cares about it is depressing. I never could have imagined seeing this on a civ forum and this does not bode well for the franchise.
I believe lots of people who have been posting since its release especially those on Reddit have been focusing on what they see as negatives, mostly because they don’t like the new direction the game has taken and just wanted a remake of earlier versions, then others follow like sheep and downvote those who have positive things to say about the game.
Personally after 4,000 hrs in Civ6 the game had become very stale and boring, for the most part I love the new graphics and mechanics, and feel that once more patches and improvements are released it will be a great game.
After my first 150 hrs of playing 7 I took a break until the first patches were released and tried to play 6 in the meantime, but I just couldn’t get back into it.
While people have a right to talk about things they don’t like about it, hearing the negativity every day gets old. I don’t really care if people don’t like it, as their opinions don’t affect the enjoyment I get from playing. I just try to ignore most of the more negative threads/posts.
Personally after 4,000 hrs in Civ6 the game had become very stale and boring, for the most part I love the new graphics and mechanics, and feel that once more patches and improvements are released it will be a great game.
After my first 150 hrs of playing 7 I took a break until the first patches were released and tried to play 6 in the meantime, but I just couldn’t get back into it.
While people have a right to talk about things they don’t like about it, hearing the negativity every day gets old. I don’t really care if people don’t like it, as their opinions don’t affect the enjoyment I get from playing. I just try to ignore most of the more negative threads/posts.
I really don't want to participate to much in this debate. But I am not even following the logic here, are you saying all CIV's up until 7 seven were "remakes" of one another? Because there is a difference between holding some core mechanics constant and "remaking" a game. More importantly:
CIV released at an 70 dollar price tag with a 30 dollar DLC and another DLC announced three months later. While at the same time it had with less features than most other CIV's at launch and a clunky UI
Things this is not: 1. A matter of opinion 2. A matter of taste 3. A part of "your enjoyment"
Things this is: The company ripping people off.
Calling people "sheep" because they agree that getting ripped off is bad is a very bold take.
protocol7
King
Whenever I find myself thinking I’m an intellectual with superior opinions and that other people I keep running into are sheep and simpletons who fear change, and we all can fall into this trap, I try to take it as a moment for self reflection than as an opportunity to publicly celebrate the ways I am so much better and more special than the plebs.
I certainly empathise with it getting old hearing negative opinions when you like something that’s poorly reviewed. I’ve been there. But people who don’t like something you like aren’t defective and should be contained in isolation like undesirables, and I think it’s important to keep that in mind. In some sense, as long as the game is getting 36% positive reviews by buyers on Steam, the general discussion is going to reflect that very real sense of disappointment from the people who bought it. This will continue until either the game is fixed (no guarantee) or the people who hope it gets fixed give up/are driven away. I personally hope it's the former than the latter, but there's no lack of trying to get people out of here - up to and including blaming them for the way the game was shipped, that their not properly liking it will kill the game, and more recently (and most disturbing, in my opinion) - that sharing their opinions about how they wish the game was better is actually causing mental health breaks in people. All this might feel nicely self-righteous in the moment, but I think that's about all it accomplishes.
I certainly empathise with it getting old hearing negative opinions when you like something that’s poorly reviewed. I’ve been there. But people who don’t like something you like aren’t defective and should be contained in isolation like undesirables, and I think it’s important to keep that in mind. In some sense, as long as the game is getting 36% positive reviews by buyers on Steam, the general discussion is going to reflect that very real sense of disappointment from the people who bought it. This will continue until either the game is fixed (no guarantee) or the people who hope it gets fixed give up/are driven away. I personally hope it's the former than the latter, but there's no lack of trying to get people out of here - up to and including blaming them for the way the game was shipped, that their not properly liking it will kill the game, and more recently (and most disturbing, in my opinion) - that sharing their opinions about how they wish the game was better is actually causing mental health breaks in people. All this might feel nicely self-righteous in the moment, but I think that's about all it accomplishes.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,957
May be you should try the Civ 3 mod CCM 3 in combination with the mod C3X. It is, as far as I know, the only mod of the civ series, that since several years uses a much better way of "switching" leaders and civs by having the focus on the changes in a certain territory of earth during history and not by a focus, that a certain expansion of a civ transforms all citizens of a civ from Romans to Spaniards and Mexicans (that idea could become a "playing crazy option" of a civ game, but not the standard option for an epic game of the civ series).
I hope that those who will never play civ7 again and are waiting for civ8 or are going back to playing earlier versions will at some point stop complaining about 7. If I don’t like a game and stop playing it I move on, life’s too short to be so negative about a game they don’t even play.
protocol7
King
I guess mostly they have? I occasionally see someone post that they've finally given up for good, but for the most part people are describing what they wish would change (while possibly also waiting for a big sale) rather than saying they are never going to play it no matter what gets fixed or not. Their "complaints" are what they hope the devs see and fix.
Now, some people feel the things others want fixed are things they love and would be disappointed to see "fixed", so that makes it really tough for the developers. In another thread (or maybe this one) someone pointed out that perhaps the way forward was to embrace customisability. That comes with its own challenges too, but at this point with such a fractured community after the original release, it might be their best chance. And at a meta level, that's a great example of some interesting topic that comes out of complainers remaining engaged than leaving to play other franchises/games. Even if you disagree with that particular solution, there's been lots of ideas and maybe some you do agree with. If this forum had been positivity-only, none of them would have ever been explored. And it actually takes people on every side of an issue participating to get to the best, most interesting ideas in my opinion.
Now, some people feel the things others want fixed are things they love and would be disappointed to see "fixed", so that makes it really tough for the developers. In another thread (or maybe this one) someone pointed out that perhaps the way forward was to embrace customisability. That comes with its own challenges too, but at this point with such a fractured community after the original release, it might be their best chance. And at a meta level, that's a great example of some interesting topic that comes out of complainers remaining engaged than leaving to play other franchises/games. Even if you disagree with that particular solution, there's been lots of ideas and maybe some you do agree with. If this forum had been positivity-only, none of them would have ever been explored. And it actually takes people on every side of an issue participating to get to the best, most interesting ideas in my opinion.
I don’t have an issue with CiV switching, I enjoy the new mechanics, bugs were annoying but things have got a lot better since the last couple of patches, plus there’s now some excellent UI mods.
I’m active on several social media sites and I still see people complaining about the game and saying their waiting for civ8, I’m pretty sure some of these people haven’t even purchased 7, and are just going by other peoples feedback.
protocol7
King
Probably two things there - one is just you don't have to eat a piece of poo to know you don't like it, and something along those lines probably applies to some of those commenters (and they probably also participate because they wish it was different, were excited to play a new civ game, etc. rather than being sheep or fearing change). Also, social media in general (and places like Reddit's "civ") are specifically franchise-level, or even gaming-industry level, discussion areas, rather than dedicated to civ7. When that's the case you'll naturally always get more people who like other versions of the game or even other games participating in the discussions. Which isn't strictly a bad thing, but it could be annoying if you were hoping for dedicated civ7 player perspectives.
You obviously want to participate as you purposely created an account so you could comment on this thread.
Personally I felt it needed a remake rather than just make minor changes to a previous version.
I certainly don’t feel ripped off and I don’t see why others would feel that way, everyone had options to view videos and reviews prior to purchasing it and the option to request a refund after purchasing it.
$80-100 is still cheap entertainment even if you don’t have 100+ hrs in it, you can easily spend that much going out with your family for dinner.
So much criticism you read isn’t even constructive, they just post less than 10 words, all of which are negative, they don’t even mention the things they liked. It’s been 4 months since release and some of these posts are just full of negativity and have got old. I wish some of them would just move on to a game they enjoy and post about it instead.
Positive reviews on Steam are at 47% not 36%
Last edited:
protocol7
King
Sure, that sounds really annoying. I don't really see it but I'm not using social media because in my experience that's how social media works in general, not just related to civ, but I get where you're coming from.
reddishrecue
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,459
I'm not really complaining, I just try to understand what's going on. If people don't want to play online with me that's fine, I don't have to beg anyone to do it. I could try something else where someone wants to play with me.
On average I only buy and keep a game every 12 - 18 months, I no longer have the money to spend on games that I once did. I’m very selective and only keep games I know I will enjoy enough to play for 100s or 1000s of hrs.
I’m sure most people who purchased it read some sort of reviews, and those that are hating on it now must have had reservations about it when it was purchased, so they should have known they didn’t like it in time to get a refund.
You're a new poster, so just to recap: "the company" here is actually two companies.
Very few, if anyone, is defending 2K. A lot of people are conflating things done by 2K as being done by Firaxis (understandable, but still mistaken). And some think that punishing or changing Firaxis in some way will avoid this in future.
Unfortunately, it won't - when it comes to launch windows, DLC strategies, and so on. These are things that are put in place to maximise shareholder ROI, which is why they're (almost guaranteed to be) publisher impositions.
It's why I thought delaying the second planned DLC was a good move. Gives the developers more time to work on the game itself instead of focusing on paid content.
protocol7
King
The reason people conflate Take Two, 2K, and Firaxis is because Firaxis was acquired by Take Two in August 2005, and subsequently became part of their 2K label. Like how YouTube is Google, Instagram is Facebook, LinkedIn is Microsoft, etc.
This glosses over the widely-ranging amounts of autonomy specific products can have under their parent business.
Like I said, some of the conflation is understandable. But it's still wrong, and setting the record straight r.e. what we can reasonably expect to happen is completely fair, imo. If I quoted a different poster and replied to you, that wouldn't be very helpful even if we're all CFC posters on the same forum. Saying Firaxis just need to make publisher decisions better isn't going to help Firaxis, who don't make publisher decisions. They can stand their ground as much as they want but at the end of the day, 2K makes very specific calls from the top-down.
And even if you want to handwave all that (I understand - it's a tangent of a tangent), at the end of the day, blaming forum posters for defending corporate decisions, when they are in fact not, is also a mistake. Which is why I replied to the poster I did.
Similar threads
