How Would You Implement A Classic Mode?

[Crashdummy]

I've said before that I think Civs evolving over time is a really good idea. So mechanically, I think switching Civ abilities is here to stay. But in both Civ7 and Humankind a wholesale Civ switch has just been jarring and a feels-bad for too many players. The counterpoint is that other forms of Civ evolution I've seen have felt quite generic and anticlimactic.

Ultimately I think the winner will be whoever manages to make Civ evolution feel special without wholesale Civ switching.

It would be very irresponsible to risk the whole franchise on what someone think its a good idea that has proven to not be a good idea. Civ switching failed and Civ VII was hurt because of that, if Civ VIII is another failure, you are risking the franchise on a Developer whim, so i disagree on them being here to stay

Ideas that look good on paper are not always good when implemented. I think doing it on a spin off, or on a scenario to test the implementation untill they get it right would be the responsible way to do it for Firaxis

 

[Leucarum]

I kind of experience my movement through the social policy trees of Civ 5 as my civilization evolving over time

I actually think Humankind had a good version of this with its civics, where new civic choices unlocked as a result of gameplay decisions. It was one thing which rrally enhanced roleplaying in a game which otherwise took a sledgehammer to it.

It would be very irresponsible to risk the whole franchise on what someone think its a good idea that has proven to not be a good idea. Civ switching failed and Civ VII was hurt because of that, if Civ VIII is another failure, you are risking the franchise on a Developer whim, so i disagree on them being here to stay

Ideas that look good on paper are not always good when implemented. I think doing it on a spin off, or on a scenario to test the implementation untill they get it right would be the responsible way to do it for Firaxis

I said that Civ evolution was here to stay, but wholesale civ switching was probably not. I think you maybe missed the point? Civs gaining/changing abilities over time = good, Civs changing their identity = bad.

 

[AD1730]

I actually think Humankind had a good version of this with its civics, where new civic choices unlocked as a result of gameplay decisions. It was one thing which rrally enhanced roleplaying in a game which otherwise took a sledgehammer to it.


I said that Civ evolution was here to stay, but wholesale civ switching was probably not. I think you maybe missed the point? Civs gaining/changing abilities over time = good, Civs changing their identity = bad.

Well, they have already done Civ evolution in Civ Rev. It sort of works and I'd be open to a civ gaining different abilities as the game progresses. However, the Civ 7-style era system absolutely must go.

 

[Crashdummy]

I actually think Humankind had a good version of this with its civics, where new civic choices unlocked as a result of gameplay decisions. It was one thing which rrally enhanced roleplaying in a game which otherwise took a sledgehammer to it.


I said that Civ evolution was here to stay, but wholesale civ switching was probably not. I think you maybe missed the point? Civs gaining/changing abilities over time = good, Civs changing their identity = bad.

Sorry, i didnt understand you, second time this day i dont get a post, dont know what is happening to me today, im slow

Evolution might work, we would need to see how its implemented, it need to not interrupt gameplay too much

 

[Krikkit1]

I disagree. For example, now we have continuity and regroup mode and we expect both modes to be balanced and improved.


Names aren't an issue, I agree.

I mean if it is a mode, then ALL civs get no bonuses outside of their Age.

It would mean that Game elements that rely on Traditions /Unique improvements would be less significant, but you have similar issues between Continuity and Regroup.

(and I could see a "no bonus for Americans/Bulgarians in Antiquity" be improved to "generic Antiquity Age bonuses for Americans/Bulgarians" improved to "Economic Antiquity bonuses for Americans and Bulgarians, Americans also get Antiquity Expansionist bonuses, Bulgarians also get Antiquity Militaristic bonuses".... It would never be improved to "here are the American Antiquity bonuses and here are the Bulgarian Antiquity bonuses" outside of a Mod)

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Maybe there is a civ switching implementation that works but if there is, it wont be on this franchise, and they cant risk attempting it on Civ VIII, thats my point

In this, unfortunately, we are in agreement. When there is as much money involved as there is in AAA games, taking chances on a design becomes impossible: the finance people do NOT like taking risks.

On the other hand, to semi-quote Edison, now we know two ways in which Civ Switching does not work, so we can be sure not to try those again . . .

 

[Gori the Grey]

On the other hand, to semi-quote Edison, now we know two ways in which Civ Switching does not work, so we can be sure not to try those again . . .

I think a ton has been learned about Civ games from this misstep. I hope Firaxis can recover from it, and make 7 a game that satisfies more of the fanbase, and that they get to go on and make 8. When they do, I think they'll move much more sure-footedly in many respects.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I think a ton has been learned about Civ games from this misstep. I hope Firaxis can recover from it, and make 7 a game that satisfies more of the fanbase, and that they get to go on and make 8. When they do, I think they'll move much more sure-footedly in many respects.

One of the advantages of the 'other' 4X historicalish games that have come out recently (Humankind, ARA, Millenia, elements of Old World) is that they provide examples of what works and what doesn't that don't require Firaxis to spend any money or effort learning.

Any company planning to jump into the 4X historicalish game - or who are already hip-deep in it - had better be taking notes.

 

[stealth_nsk]

One of the advantages of the 'other' 4X historicalish games that have come out recently (Humankind, ARA, Millenia, elements of Old World) is that they provide examples of what works and what doesn't that don't require Firaxis to spend any money or effort learning.

Any company planning to jump into the 4X historicalish game - or who are already hip-deep in it - had better be taking notes.

I don't think it's that simple. Different genres have different audiences and there's no universal "work" or "not work". Ara got a lot of negative reviews because it was marketed as Civ competitor and it doesn't work for civ fans, but it's a nice management game and is appreciated by that audience.

Another thing is expectations. Many people are mad at Firaxis for civilization switch, but some of them could be content with it in HK, because they want to play civilization games in a way they are accustomed to, but don't have such expectations for a new game.

 

[aieeegrunt]

One of the advantages of the 'other' 4X historicalish games that have come out recently (Humankind, ARA, Millenia, elements of Old World) is that they provide examples of what works and what doesn't that don't require Firaxis to spend any money or effort learning.

Any company planning to jump into the 4X historicalish game - or who are already hip-deep in it - had better be taking notes.

I don't think it's that simple. Different genres have different audiences and there's no universal "work" or "not work". Ara got a lot of negative reviews because it was marketed as Civ competitor and it doesn't work for civ fans, but it's a nice management game and is appreciated by that audience.

Another thing is expectations. Many people are mad at Firaxis for civilization switch, but some of them could be content with it in HK, because they want to play civilization games in a way they are accustomed to, but don't have such expectations for a new game.

If ever there was a time to pull a Helldivers and move into the ecological niche Civ7 has left open it is now.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Another thing is expectations. Many people are mad at Firaxis for civilization switch, but some of them could be content with it in HK, because they want to play civilization games in a way they are accustomed to, but don't have such expectations for a new game.

The word you are looking for, I believe, is "baggage", of which Civ carries a lot going back 30+ years and a new game could arrive without.

Expectations are tricky, though. Humankind initially got a lot of positive commentary from the gorgeous map graphics and the 'tactical' map battles, the latter of which harked back to Test of Time but were never picked up by any 'regular' Civ game. Then upon release the many problems with the gorgeous map graphics, the time required to fight all those tactical battles, the inabilty to keep track of who you were playing against (and even, sometimes, who you were playing) and a host of other problems and the commentary bcame very negative and, as far as I know, remains largely so.

I'm not personally sure which is worse: having no expectations of a game, or having positive expectations that are dashed by ugly reality. ne thing Civ VII should teach is that when you are expecting one type of game and get another, what you actually get had better be enormously and comprehensively better than what you were expecting or it will be shown No Mercy.

 

[Gori the Grey]

come ’l quattro nel sei