Do you think a post-modern era could be added to the game?

[SeBounart]

I played all Civilization from 1 to 7 and anytime and what I like best about it, aside from the gameplay, is the post-modern eras (like "atomic" and "information" era in Civ 6). Unfortunately they are missing in Civ 7. Any time I reach the last era, it feels incomplete. No computer, no stealth bomber, no nuclear plant, ICBM and so on... barely there is the first space flight but nothing fancy like Mars colonization. All techs, buildings and units in modern era in Civ 7 refer to the Victorian era + both WWs. I miss the atomic and information era from previous games and that cold war vibe. I liked to go from prehistoric times to nowadays.

So I'm wondering if there is a chance they will add post-modern era in the game or should I just give up this idea?

 

[Nikolai II]

Yes, quite possibly.

 

[Siptah]

Someone found a mention of the Atomic age in the game files iirc. Some art for the modern age looks like it belongs to a newer epoch. Hence, it seems likely that we'll see some more contemporary things at some point. How this will look, how it plays, and what it includes is pure speculation. There have been quite some discussions here about whether it should be a fourth era after modern, a continuation of the third era, or a victory-only era at the end. Also, when it starts and ends, is unclear. The other crises go on for centuries/decades and skip a good proportion of human history (in numbers of years, but also content; naming a legacy path enlightenment doesn't mean the corresponding time is actually included in the game). This means that a fourth age could start where the modern era ended (1950s), but just as well in the 1970s, 1990s, or even 2020 or 2050.

I wouldn't rule out that the contemporary/future content comes with a patch, but I think it is more likely that it will ship as a paid expansion. The good thing about that would be that it is optional though

 

[queenpea]

Before the launch, I thought a fourth age was inevitable. I’m not so sure now. I think the priority really should be fleshing out the existing three ages and improving the experience we have currently by adding and refining features, civs, mechanics, etc.

 

[protocol7]

I'm sure they have plans to sell us all kinds of things like this if they can get the player numbers up.

 

[Krikkit1]

I’m really hoping so. A Fourth Atomic/Information/Global Age has a lot of interesting possibilities

MAD properly applied (all actual civs have
nukes… so wars must be covert or proxy)

an Actual Space Race Victory (Economic+Scientific colonize another planet..escape the map)

an Actual Domination Victory (Cultural+Military make a world culture so the map is all yours)

Decolonization… Diplomatic/Military competition to keep IPs in your sphere of influence (since conquering and keeping vast amounts of territory isn’t done anymore)

An actual UN with the new Diplomatic system (Global Endeavors/Sanctions)

The Demographic Transition…. population explosion and then collapse/aging

Multinational corporations…including tech corporations for influence

A Climate change and local pollution system.

If it was set from 1960~2100 it could work fine


However, that does require them to get the rest of the game in a good state first.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Firaxis definitely had plans for 4th age, too many hints towards it. Whether they are still following those plans is the question.

 

[NickTheGreek!]

It certainly could be added to the game. In my opinion it should be added to the game at some point (Expansion) since the current timeframe does feel incomplete. Of course there are a ton of other important things that are still missing and should be added before they go about churning expansions(like for example a Greek leader? wink wink , a decent UI or maybe even a proper Civilipedia).

 

[CliffCo]

I feel like they should extend the length of the current 3 rather than add an extra one.

 

[Buckets]

It could be, but I see a big hurdle in how to handle post-modern civs.

I suppose you could simply have civs based on political entities from 1950-present. But there could be a lot of overlap with the current modern civs. Alternatively you could have fantastical civs from the near future more akin to BE. Or maybe take the modern civs, add an ideology, and get a fantasy combo like communist France.

 

[stealth_nsk]

We had several topics discussing how it can be done and generally there are no serious problems with civilization selection and things like this.

The bigger issue is how to make it interesting. Antiquity is about initial settling, Exploration is about expanding to distant lands and Modern is about war between civs sprawled in Exploration. How 4th age could keep gameplay interesting with already settled world and no focus on world wars - is a big question.

 

[Buckets]

We had several topics discussing how it can be done and generally there are no serious problems with civilization selection and things like this.

The bigger issue is how to make it interesting. Antiquity is about initial settling, Exploration is about expanding to distant lands and Modern is about war between civs sprawled in Exploration. How 4th age could keep gameplay interesting with already settled world and no focus on world wars - is a big question.

Gee thanks for letting me know that the royal we has it covered.

 

[Krikkit1]

Gee thanks for letting me know that the royal we has it covered.

The point is there are several options, including the Rome-Byzantine option where the civ is the “same” just renamed and with different uniques for the new Age (see Russia-Soviet, Britain-England/UK, Prussia-Germany, etc.) they have been discussed and while some people don’t like various options…that’s also true of Antiquity Khmer or naming a “civilization” after a dynasty (Meijii)

That said it’s not a serious problem, most of the civs in Modern aren’t really worth including as their continuous form for Atomic*. Atomic is better for a wider variety of modern civs (Canada, Australia, Indonesia, etc)

* if they have it, Mughal-India isn’t continuous, etc. WWI and II and the decolonization massively changed most regions of the world.

 

[Buckets]

How it's done will determine how the game mode is presented. Near-History or futuristic fantasy? Cold war, climate change, skynet, warp drives? I mean this thread is asking for speculation, so I'm speculating on how that whole package might fit together.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

The point is there are several options, including the Rome-Byzantine option where the civ is the “same” just renamed and with different uniques for the new Age (see Russia-Soviet, Britain-England/UK, Prussia-Germany, etc.) they have been discussed and while some people don’t like various options…that’s also true of Antiquity Khmer or naming a “civilization” after a dynasty (Meijii)

That said it’s not a serious problem, most of the civs in Modern aren’t really worth including as their continuous form for Atomic*. Atomic is better for a wider variety of modern civs (Canada, Australia, Indonesia, etc)

* if they have it, Mughal-India isn’t continuous, etc. WWI and II and the decolonization massively changed most regions of the world.

How would one handle or design an Atomic or Post-Modern version of America? That's the major caveat that I see, not counting the idea that I'm really not sure how popular it would be for people to play a 1950 and later Soviet Union, UK, Germany, China etc.?

I wouldn't mind a 4th age if it was treated as an extension of the 3rd age and you kept your previous civ. The previous victory conditions could just cause a crisis (Nuclear Fallout, Stock Market Collapse, Robot Uprising, Counterculture Movement) and you'd have to overcome that crisis to win.

 

[Manpanzee]

I neither want nor expect a post-Modern era. While obviously some people disagree, I do think there's a real issue with substantial differentiation between Modern vs. post-Modern iterations of civs. I also think people seriously underrate the political sensitivity of including contemporary civs and the value of sidestepping that by staying in the past. Finally, I think that having too much of the game situated in the 19th century and later would erode the experience of civ as a historical game.

If they do add a fourth age (which would definitely be a project for a major expansion, not for an update patch), I think the much more appealing approach would be to split out the Medieval era from the Exploration age.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Gee thanks for letting me know that the royal we has it covered.

No offense meant, just wanted to pont out that a lot of speculations here were already discussed.

Several points in those discussions were probably raised more than 10 times, including the topics of civilization selection and whether 4th age should be a full age.

How it's done will determine how the game mode is presented. Near-History or futuristic fantasy? Cold war, climate change, skynet, warp drives? I mean this thread is asking for speculation, so I'm speculating on how that whole package might fit together.

Civilization games traditionally end with Alpha Centauri flight. Even when it's not available on release, like in Civ6 case, it's added in expansion. So I'd say pretty safe to assume we'll get there if we'll have 4th age, catching some scifi techs like GDR in between. As for the start - around 1950, with UN, satellites and nuclear weapons as a reality.

Another interesting topic is the actual expected end year. Civilization games traditionally ended in 2050, but while it looked far away when Civ1 was released, it's probably time to push the expected end date forward to 2070 or 2080.

 

[Krikkit1]

How would one handle or design an Atomic or Post-Modern version of America? That's the major caveat that I see, not counting the idea that I'm really not sure how popular it would be for people to play a 1950 and later Soviet Union, UK, Germany, China etc.?

I wouldn't mind a 4th age if it was treated as an extension of the 3rd age and you kept your previous civ. The previous victory conditions could just cause a crisis (Nuclear Fallout, Stock Market Collapse, Robot Uprising, Counterculture Movement) and you'd have to overcome that crisis to win.

Atomic age (say 1960-2100) US I would focus on Cultural hegemony as opposed to Industrial power of Modern Age America.

I probably wouldn’t have Germany and France as Atomic Age civs, instead have them reflected as individual Traditions/Civics in an EU civ.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Atomic age (say 1960-2100) US I would focus on Cultural hegemony as opposed to Industrial power of Modern Age America.

Sure, but what would you call it? It's not like Industrial age America was a completely different civilization or had a different name from Atomic Age America.

 

[Krikkit1]

Sure, but what would you call it? It's not like Industrial age America was a completely different civilization or had a different name from Atomic Age America.

United States (or rename Modern Age to United States and then have America for Atomic Age)