How excited are you currently about Civ7? [vol 3 - January/February 25]

[Isengardtom]

Do you approve of the diplomacy screens in 6 being mostly empty space? That seems drab to me.

Not everything in civ 6 was perfect in terms of look but I loved the colorful maps and the look of the leaders.

Something else I’m very excited for in 7 : interacting with independent powers

 

[Connor_CivFan]

Do you approve of the diplomacy screens in 6 being mostly empty space? That seems drab to me.

I think its fair to say that while graphically civ 6 was (in my opinion) better while also recognising that certain aspects of the UI (diplomacy) were extremely lacking

 

[ProMeTheus112]

I'm quite sure I'm gonna buy on day 1 ! (I just don't preorder games)
Everything about Civ7 looks great to me, specifically I'm excited about : civs starting out as ancient civs and evolving, the city system that spreads over tiles without having a predefined identity to the district other than the type of tile it is built on, and the change in the scoring system / victory system that may allow more flexibility in the win condition and perhaps make a scoring-type victory, or a victory based on multiple factors, more viable.
I suppose my biggest hope is that I won't necessarily find the same "flaw" that I found in Civ6 about difficulty and I think this has been true in Civ5 as well and maybe previous games, but very true in Civ6 : if you tune up the difficulty in Civ6 it seems like you have little choice but to start the game out very aggressive as the main way to ramp back up your disadvantage is by having high K/D ratio fights against a computer that is quite terrible or bad at tactics. And hearing from the changes in the army distribution over tiles, I think it may be alleviated by these changes so I am also excited about these. In the event that higher difficulty still seems to put too many limitations on strategic choice (vs computers), then I suppose I would retreat to playing in a lower difficulty as other players seem to do.

 

[moysturfurmer]

9, one point docked because I have my concerns about the in-game timelines of intercontinental colonization in the Exploration Age. Purely an aesthetic thing though.

 

[tedhebert]

Definite 10 for me... already got the founder's edition for my bday present, and would have bought it anyways if not

 

[Potworny]

I guess it's a 9. I see some possible cracks in the whole picture, but man, do I need a new Civ game in my life.

 

[Aeon221]

I can't tell the difference between 6 and 7 leader art.

I skip all the leader animation stuff/put it on 2D so it has never bothered me.

 

[bonito]

I'm all in (preordered in November) and am only anxious to see how it handles going for a military victory. I sometimes like to go for domination and am not sure how it will work now with breaking into three game phases...

 

[Civciv5]

Zero.

The game doesn't appeal to me at all due to its complete abandonment of its original ethos to 'build a civilization to stand the test of time'.
Instead it has somehow morphed into 'build a civilization to magically transform into another civilization that may or may not be historically related to them or make sense in general, and then do so again at another point in time for some arbitrary reason.'

Frankly, I doubt I will ever buy the game under any circumstances due to the core mechanic of arbitrary and forced civ swapping.

 

[NickTheGreek!]

5 now from 6 and 6 previously, no hype really (no preorder or even order). I am happy to watch the coming youtube playthroughs, games played from start to finish to have a complete view of the game. Also interested in the first player reviews shortly after release. My bet is that the game will be needing a good deal of work before it is on par with the other iterations.

 

[Ornen]

I'm surprised anyone doesn't like the graphics / art style, IMO this is the best-looking Civ game they've ever done. I've never faulted Civ 6's art style — in my view, it's 10x easier to read than Civ 5's muddy graphics — Civ 7 strikes a very neat balance of realism and readability.

not so enthusiastic about the game overall, though... I'm waiting on reviews, or more likely, on discounts / package deals. I was initially excited to see they're making the game more dynamic, but have since been disappointed by many of the design decisions.

one recent small point that sticks out to me is the removal of great artists, with cultural victory instead focusing on digging up artifacts. to me, that simply isn't culture. if you asked someone to define American culture, or Japanese culture, or even British culture (them being arguably the best to ever do it, if 'it' is digging up ancient artifacts), these kind of antiquity collections aren't going to come up on anyone's top 10 list.

as someone who really enjoys culture victory in 5 & 6, I don't think I can motivate myself to pursue one in a game that casts James Joyce & Pablo Picasso aside in favor of some artifact minigame. just not a fantasy I'm interested in playing out.

 

[chaosprophet]

Not much to say besides I'm at 10 max hype since the first poll, as overall it is looking great to me and I'm really interested in the bigger mechanic change that is ages.

 

[Captain Lime]

Let's call it a 5.5.

There's a lot I've seen that I really like: the new trade system, resources, commanders for units, cities and towns, independent powers, navigable rivers, the attention to detail for Mississippians and Shawnee, and more.

There's also a lot of things I really dislike: the civ designs, the concept of civ-switching, the sharp age transitions, the new leaderscreens, the UI, and that god-awful leader roster (ESPECIALLY Ibn Battuta and Macchiavelli).

In general, I regarded the nuts and bolts mechanics of the game with a lot of appreciation while the stuff they're really marketing with abject horror. I'm getting a lot of whiplash, and it continues to grow.

 

[bbbt]

I'm probably a 7.5-8. I'm excited by a lot of the changes overall. Main minuses: I strongly dislike the 'pop-up' style of events they are doing. The combo of the more limit victory conditions and the civ designs will equal less replayability I'm sure I'll still get a decent bit out of it before that though.

 

[gdr_willter]

10 again!

 

[Dragoner]

Still an 8 and I'm looking forward to play it.

 

[Vincent_lacruz]

How impatient am I? This little image should answer^^

View attachment giphy.webp

 

[Kev1916]

Zero.

The game doesn't appeal to me at all due to its complete abandonment of its original ethos to 'build a civilization to stand the test of time'.
Instead it has somehow morphed into 'build a civilization to magically transform into another civilization that may or may not be historically related to them or make sense in general, and then do so again at another point in time for some arbitrary reason.'

Frankly, I doubt I will ever buy the game under any circumstances due to the core mechanic of arbitrary and forced civ swapping.

+1 add in withheld content, a disgusting monetization policy , horrible bland UI graphics for a Playstation ....

This is not a PC game and unless the console and casual players buy into the Meta - this game is doomed I tell yea .

That said if still around in 3-5 years may buy it when on a 95% sale enjoy your night

 

[fantsu]

I will buy the game from sale. Previous games have lost their value really fast. 6 was in sale after less than two months after release. Maybe there will be physical version with some early dlc included soon-ish or at least before 2026.
Not in a hurry really. I wasted a lot of money on 5 and 6, now I want to save some as I know it will be hundreds of dollars total to get everything day 1.

 

[Hawke9]

I'm at an 8. Loving most of the changes, and civ 7 is probably the prettiest game I have ever seen. Especially loving the sprawling city building aspect. Still really dislike the civ swapping mechanic and the low possible player count. I like having at least 16 other ai players in one game.