Excuses for Civ VI underperforming don't alter the observation that it has underperformed (relative to Civ V at the same point in its release cycle - relative to Steam as a whole it's doing very well). It outsells Civ V at present, so the argument that Civ V was bolstered by extra sales at a discount holds little water and I doubt Civ VI sales were significantly impacted by people refusing to buy Australia or Nubia DLC. There's no widespread boycott of products that use DLC and you can't simultaneously argue that Steam has grown and so sales are likely to be greater, and that it's underselling because people are refusing to buy it for whatever reason. If people here are any guide, difficulty and AI performance are a significant component of what they judge to be 'quality', and on both metrics Civ VI is well below where Civ V was by the release of Gods & Kings, with no indication so far that the expansion will change this. But either way the opinions of a community of 200-odd veteran players is unlikely to affect market shares. Civ V's playerbase kept pace with Steam's growth, it's still in the top 15 most-played games on Steam, and was ahead of Civ VI on players (with the exception of Rise & Fall's release week) until the autumn patch last year. Exceeding Civ V's players - and even now not by much - for fewer than 6 months is not going to overcome almost a decade of being a bestseller.