Discussion On Why Civ 7 Doesn't Feel Like A "Civ" Game

[BackseatTyrant]

Ultimately, I think there is just a massive dissonance between what FXS has intended the game series to be, and what the average civ player sees the series as. The players view Civilization 1-6 first and foremost as nation-building games, to the point where some game critics have called the series "an ode to nationalism", whereas the developers treated them more as role-playing games.

In other words, you never played as France or India or America. You have always played as Napoleon and Gandhi and Lincoln.

Personally, the reason I haven't bothered with Civ7 (yet) is because, besides not having a machine that can actually run the game, FXS has deliberately chosen to not only ignore one of my main complaints with the franchise as a whole, but in fact doubled down on it hard. Namely, the myth that history has already ended and that it will not matter in humanity's future.

 

[Civinator]

The players view Civilization 1-6 first and foremost as nation-building games.

In other words, you never played as France or India or America. You have always played as Napoleon and Gandhi and Lincoln.

I never played as one of these leaders and did not want to identify with a mostly bloody mass-murderer - and with the CCM mods in Civ 3 I always had at least 4 era-specific leaders for a civ in the game.

BackseatTyrant, in my eyes this is a very good analysis of a big part of the problems for many civers with Civ 7. So Civ 7 offers some leaders that are no mass-murderers, this is no solution of this conflict.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

If you don´t see that there is a reason to the need of Firaxis/2K for changing a convincing slogan in playing Civ 1-6 to the wishy-washy slogan for playing Civ 7, this is of course o.k.

The intro video has units made of sand that just ...return to sand?
It gives the impression that nothing lasts forever...
but the final straw for me was when the Horse rider inherited a sword and then 'traded' that in...
That felt to me like Luke and Rye when Luke thrown off a cliff the lightsaber moment...

I truly don't have other words to better explain my feelings right there...
It's like... forget your traditions... the past... everything...
I'd better stop here... I've been asking for actual Crusaders units and NOT deck cards since the ages and what we got?
MORE deck cards...

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I think we can explain this by saying that the design philosophy of Civ 7 was to make access to yields very tight.

I think that's the exact opposite of the game's philosophy, yields and adjacencies are through the roof!

Firaxis's excuse is they don't want us to know the full system because then we'd just play around it

I totally agree with Firaxis here, it's probably a vain hope on CFC but I would prefer people just to play the game rather than optimise the fun out of it

 

[Lazy sweeper]

in Civ III everyone cold build the temple of Zeus or the Crusader shrine -thing-

That formula provided unique units to everyone.
Civ V gave unique units by suzerain of city states. Broken but still nice.

That initial wonder-unique units spawn x 5 turns instead was magic to me.
It should have been expanded with MORE unique wonders for each civ as an example.


Romans could build the temple of Jupiter and get the OP Legionaires, otherwise scrappy Legionaires.
Persia some Zoroasthrian fire shrine and get the OP Immortal guards, otherwise standard Immortals...
Moghuls a Ganesh elephant temple and get OP War Elephant... and so on...

Unique units were a godsent for un-balanced mayhem!

 

[Lazy sweeper]

The players view Civilization 1-6 first and foremost as nation-building games, to the point where some game critics have called the series "an ode to nationalism", whereas the developers treated them more as role-playing games.

Nation-building???

The only thing that ever mattered has always been conquer, mighty battles of epic proportions, scrambling to find and secure the most remote places and resources, guarding them to death...

The focus in Civ III was on the PEOPLE. Never was the Nation. The Roman People, The Mongol People etc. Not even the Leader. Just the people.
The Nation was introduced as a concept in the Industrial Age with the transition from Empires to "Nations".
The Roman People Republic. The Senate of the Roman People.

Nations-Nationalism was a choice, always has been.
A mostly inevitable choice by modern Age, that's why probably some game critics called it an ode to nationalism... and the fact you could
choose Stalin as a Leader for Russia... but that is just a drop in the Ocean compared to what the early game offered...
Workers-city populations also could rebel and join resistance militias, that was introduced in (II) IV, and continued in V.
Slaves also revolted in Antiquity-Classical age and it had nothing to do with the concept of "nations".

Now, in VII, if the last Age transition was portrayed something like the French-American revolution, and transition from Empires, kingdoms to
Nations... that would be historically accurate in a way... but is it the case?

devs treated them as Role-playing games is NOW true, but not before.
Devs treated it like a Simulation game perhaps.
One that reflected the History of the world, with zero role-playing.
Except you could name a victorious Elite unit by your liking, and rename your cities.
We had no business-scope outside raw struggle for exploration, building roads, securing routes, and kill whoever stepped on our toes...

 

[Lazy sweeper]

What I really want is land outposts that can exploit tiles and produce wagons that can turn into treasure fleets.

Are you trying to say exploration, roads and trades building, and guarding securing distant resources is under-represented in C7?

I remember in V there was mods about workers that could secure resources outside your borders, but had maintaining costs of absurd proportions.
Maybe something similar can be done in 7?

 

[Marla_Singer]

Firaxis was founded by a Triumvirate. But the age of balance has long since passed. Now, a single voice shapes the fate of Civilization.

The architects of the Golden Age... Shelley, Reynolds, Briggs, Johnson... have long since faded into the mists, their visions consigned to memory. The Empire endures, but its throne is solitary. The Emperor brooks no equals. Beside him stands a loyal vizier, ever faithful, never contending. And so Civilization is made in his image. Those who feel estranged by its form are told not to question the shape of the world, but their place within it.