If there was a fourth “future” age added later on, I’d like them to go all-out with speculative wackiness

[ombak]

Obtuse? Really? That seems fairly harsh.

The marketing team has released footage of modern age combat featuring WWII era tanks. No footage of GDRs or X-Com units, not even of an Abrams-generation tank. Of course that doesn't mean that more modern units aren't going to be available in the game, but I don't feel like you should be surprised that it could lead people to speculate that maybe they aren't. For everything beyond the antiquity age, we're all in pure speculation mode.

As a side note, re your comment about the devs not saying that they're making a change, I think that's a valid point. The counter-point is to question if that's a selling feature for the game? If it isn't, that could be an explanation for why they haven't said anything up to now. Again, I'm not saying that we don't get futuristic tech - I'm saying we don't have evidence one way or the other, so people are going to speculate. Especially on this forum, its what we do.

They also released footage of a rocket launching into space. And somehow despite that people starting to spread this idea that the game ends with a WWII equivalent event. Then when the rocket was pointed out some rationalized it as just the beginning of the space race or some equally arbitrary cut off point.

Obtuse might be harsh overall but if I would be tempted to use it when thinking of that example specifically.

Maybe the game does end with World War 2 units. But there is certainly evidence of later events. It just gets cast aside because it's one piece of evidence that contradicted a popular line of thought when the speculation about an earlyish ending was going strong.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

They also released footage of a rocket launching into space. And somehow despite that people starting to spread this idea that the game ends with a WWII equivalent event. Then when the rocket was pointed out some rationalized it as just the beginning of the space race or some equally arbitrary cut off point.

Obtuse might be harsh overall but if I would be tempted to use it when thinking of that example specifically.

Maybe the game does end with World War 2 units. But there is certainly evidence of later events. It just gets cast aside because it's one piece of evidence that contradicted a popular line of thought when the speculation about an earlyish ending was going strong.

Yes, I think I referenced in my original post that there is evidence of going up until satellites / moon missions. That's still 20th century tech, not futuristic or even 21st century, which is what I've seen people speculate as the end date (maybe I've missed the speculation you're referring to).

 

[Olleus]

Obtuse? Really? That seems fairly harsh.

Fair, that's harsher than what I meant. I can't think of the right word: obstinate? contrarian? Something like that.

And, yes, I think achieving something greater than any real human civilization has - including pushing further into space or breaking the current frontier on technology - is a fairly large part of the fantasy the game sells.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Fair, that's harsher than what I meant. I can't think of the right word: obstinate? contrarian? Something like that.

And, yes, I think achieving something greater than any real human civilization has - including pushing further into space or breaking the current frontier on technology - is a fairly large part of the fantasy the game sells.

Agreed. My personal guess is that we'll get a bit of that in the base game, along with things like a simple climate change mechanic, since the dev team has spoken about feeling like they don't want to remove that, but that we'll get more fleshed out versions of future tech and climate change in the first expansion. But I'm not confident enough in that guess to wager even so much as a jelly donut, as there's no evidence to support it.

 

[Navelgazer]

If something like this were to happen I hope it'd be in the mode of Beyond Earth, as it's own separate game that you can start and play on its own, but which would also have an option to let you "evolve" your civ from the end of Civ7 into one of the Civ options there.

(Now, there might be some issues with that idea, for instance, it'd be coolest if your opponents in Civ7 also evolved into their spacefaring counterparts, but if you've eliminated them, that gets tricky. Also, would you continue on playing Ashoka on another planet? But details aside, this is how I'd hope to see a "fourth age" represented were we to ever get one.)

 

[Gori the Grey]

I've floated the idea before, but I think the Modern Age should end with a Crisis so severe that it sends humankind "back to the stone age," i.e. back to antiquity. There are rules for which Antiquity civ you can pick, the elements surviving from Modern Age make up the goodie huts of the new Antiquity age and you just play Civ on an endless loop.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

If something like this were to happen I hope it'd be in the mode of Beyond Earth, as it's own separate game that you can start and play on its own, but which would also have an option to let you "evolve" your civ from the end of Civ7 into one of the Civ options there.

(Now, there might be some issues with that idea, for instance, it'd be coolest if your opponents in Civ7 also evolved into their spacefaring counterparts, but if you've eliminated them, that gets tricky. Also, would you continue on playing Ashoka on another planet? But details aside, this is how I'd hope to see a "fourth age" represented were we to ever get one.)

That's an interesting idea. Market it as a stand-alone game, but include mechanics to allow you to transition from Civ 7. It's a potentially natural evolution of the Civ 7 crisis/transition mechanics (which we've still seen nothing substantive about, hence my use of "potentially"), let's them appeal to gamers who only like the sci fi stuff, and it may reduce allocations of "you're selling as a DLC things that should have been in the base game".

 

[Atlas627]

Yeah, Civ isn't a co-op game. It's competitive. That's the nature of the genre and the game mechanics, not a statement about the values it attaches to humanity or history or whatever. This feels rather like criticising Call of Duty for not letting you play as the Red Cross, or Chess for not allowing all the pawns to come together and overthrow both monarchies. Besides, Science victory where you settle another planet arguably is done for the collective good rather than one civilization's superiority. Not that one side exerting dominance is necessarily against the collective good anyway (eg, achieving eternal world peace via a diplomatic victory). And no base version of the game has declared a Civ the winner by being "what the United States became in our timeline", it's always required substantially more. The Apollo program is the start of the space race, not the end.

You can still compete for credit over who managed to cure cancer first, achieve singularity first, etc. You can still race to utopia. Forming an alliance for world peace should be an option, though much like Diplomacy the player in the lead might have to be coerced into accepting a "draw".

I think the issue here is that Civ is a multiplayer game. How do you allow all of those players to have a say in the way they lose, while still playing the game? Stopping a victory should be easier than achieving your own. How do you stop a victory that represents domestic improvements, like eradication of poverty? How do you allow players to aim to achieve something morally good without making their opponents morally evil for stopping it?

 

[Krikkit1]

They also released footage of a rocket launching into space. And somehow despite that people starting to spread this idea that the game ends with a WWII equivalent event. Then when the rocket was pointed out some rationalized it as just the beginning of the space race or some equally arbitrary cut off point.

Obtuse might be harsh overall but if I would be tempted to use it when thinking of that example specifically.

Maybe the game does end with World War 2 units. But there is certainly evidence of later events. It just gets cast aside because it's one piece of evidence that contradicted a popular line of thought when the speculation about an earlyish ending was going strong.

There was evidence of some developer talking about the modern age as power of steam to the power of the atom.

So it is possible that they have the modern science tree top out at nuclear power/weapons and rocketry (Apollo=Science victory)

I really hope they didn't....I'm hoping for a Modern Age that goes
1800-2000 (100 turns)
2000-2100 (100 turns)... but normally you finish before that time is out. (normally finishing ~in 130-170 turns so between 2030 and 2070)

Get up to current/ (could be near future) things like Internet-Social Media, Drone Warfare, Population Decline, Serious Climate Change, Fusion Power and make a Mars (or Interplanetary) colony the Science win

 

[Jeppetto]

I presume Base Game will contain handful of main aspects of current age for the sake of not omitting them If they are a staple. But I do anticipate one Expansion that adds Information Age (shifting features here so the Modern Age is fully Industrial Era + War Era, plus additional features), especially since with the path like Maurya -> Chola -> Mughal, there's space to add more contemporary India, though a lot of Civs do already lack different terms to distinguish themself across ages - unless Spain just remains forever randomly changing to France or USA or whatnot, since it's already Spain in Exploration Age, it would be Spain again in Modern and then again in Information.

Separately, I'd expect another Expansion with Futuristic Age. Though that's just grand ambition, maybe nobody needs it that much and they are better off focusing on expanding current roster.

As for what should FA look like, on one hand, I like how aesthetically grounded in reality Civ 6 GS was, cities looking like slightly more modern Seoul but nothing fancier, no fancy graphics for improvement in style of Civ BE, as humans tend to overestimate how we'll change in future (we've got bunch of movies/games in whose "future" we've lived already year-wise), on the other hand it's already fantasy/sci-fi/fictional Age, might as well make it hella crazy. Would serve to make proper difference between IA (which may last until 2100) and far more futuristic FA (2100+).

 

[AlexByrde]

I think that people are speculating about what the Modern Age encompasses based on shaky assumptions, both in terms of the timeline and based on what they intend belongs to the Age. Nobody expected the Exploration Age to start in 400 CE game time or for Khmer to be Antiquity Age until we learned more about Firaxis's design philosophy.

That makes it hard to guess what could be beyond the Modern Age or what a Contemporary or Future Age would have as its central theme and design.

Based on what we do know and can infer about the design philosophy, I don't think a Contemporary Age fits super well (which is why I currently think that contemporary techs and civics will be part of base game Modern Age, but wouldn't be surprised if they get added to Modern Age later on as part of a revamp to the base 3 Ages). A Future Age could be fun, but it's an entirely speculative game. I can jive with future-versions of the civs we built up over the rest of the campaign, but make-believe technologies, civics, Wonders, and the Age's new mechanics, would be increasingly impenetrable the further into the future you go. I can see it as a procedural/mix-and-match thing, but I'm hesitant to speculate about fully featured civilizations with all the custom assets tied to them. I like the idea, but realistically it'd be a pretty big lift.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Yeah, generally there are 3 variants:
1. Modern age includes all contemporary mechanics. No contemporary age. Future age is possible, but unlikely.
2. Modern age has no contemporary mechanics. Contemporary age is very likely for expansion.
3. Modern age has some contemporary mechanics. Contemporary age is possible, but would require some modern age rebuild.

Once we see modern age gameplay, we'll be able to make more educated guesses.

 

[Pistol90]

NO, NO, NO

Dont turn Civ into something that isnt ...
Game should end in 2050, if someone want go beyond-let it be beyond earth 2 or something

 

[stealth_nsk]

NO, NO, NO

Dont turn Civ into something that isnt ...
Game should end in 2050, if someone want go beyond-let it be beyond earth 2 or something

No one says it should go beyond 2050, quite the opposite. If modern age ends in 1950, contemporary age could go exactly 1950-2050.

P.S. By the way, 2050 was set as a final destination for civ 33 years ago. Probably it's time to extend it a bit.

 

[Uberfrog]

The whole idea behind the ages system in Civ 7 is to avoid late game stagnation. I don’t think they can tack on a fourth era without fundamentally undermining that idea. Especially considering the contemporary/future age would be a) the furthest from the historical gameplay that is the series’ primary appeal and b) the most problematic in terms of designing civs for that era.

I could see it as a spin-off or a overhaul mod, but would hate to see it incorporated into the main game.

 

[stealth_nsk]

The whole idea behind the ages system in Civ 7 is to avoid late game stagnation. I don’t think they can tack on a fourth era without fundamentally undermining that idea. Especially considering the contemporary/future age would be a) the furthest from the historical gameplay that is the series’ primary appeal and b) the most problematic in terms of designing civs for that era.

I could see it as a spin-off or a overhaul mod, but would hate to see it incorporated into the main game.

Avoiding late game stagnation is one of the goals for ages system, not the whole idea. And part of the solution is to introduce different mechanics in different ages to make them interesting.

So, potentially, contemporary age could do just this. With focus on space, ideologies and informational technologies it could open another dimension in the game and make it fun.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

Maybe I'd make it an optional bonus round if you lost the standard game, essentially giving you a lot of cheat technologies and units, if you want another chance to win.

Building land bridges or zapping mountains into flat terrain would be interesting. Plus units which could fly to any tile instantly. Just crazy ideas like that which make it a free-for-all like in Populous...

 

[Nikolai II]

No one says it should go beyond 2050, quite the opposite. If modern age ends in 1950, contemporary age could go exactly 1950-2050.

P.S. By the way, 2050 was set as a final destination for civ 33 years ago. Probably it's time to extend it a bit.

I wouldn’t be opposed to a future post 2050 age tackling solar expansion if it was optional and gave some good gameplay.

 

[dagriggstar]

The issue I’ve always had with future eras is that how can you give any factions getting unique bonuses ? And if you can’t come up with anything - surely that’s because it’s beyond the scope of the game and actually you want to play a different game ?

 

[stealth_nsk]

The issue I’ve always had with future eras is that how can you give any factions getting unique bonuses ? And if you can’t come up with anything - surely that’s because it’s beyond the scope of the game and actually you want to play a different game ?

That's only a problem if we talk about "future" era. It's not a problem for contemporary, for sure. If it comes in expansion, we could see a bunch of contemporary civs going together with it.