I'm clicking the "retire" button on Civ VII

[AD1730]

Nah man.

When something doesn’t work, it’s always management’s fault. Even if it isn’t in the immediate sense. They have to take responsibility. That’s one of management’s major roles. “Heavy is the head…” yada yada yada. A manager has to be able to motivate their employees to deliver. If they can’t, they probably shouldn’t be a manager.

I blame both.

 

[aieeegrunt]

I blame both.

This is almost certainly what went down

 

[Pfeffersack]

(...) I look at the top ten most popular mods on the Civ6 workshop, and 7 of them are fixing the UI. (...)

Civ7 even beats that with 10 out of 10 It speaks volume that a poular mod like "Extended Policy Cards" (which shows the cards effects on yields) hasn't been considered as an UI standard for Civ7 (and again a mod made by @leonardify emerged). It would have perfectly fit in the spirit of making big decisions instead of wasting clicks on trial and error. And that's just on example...don't get me started on stuff like the resource screen, which is just an utter pain to use without Resource Re-Sorts made by @beezany

 

[aieeegrunt]

Civ7 even beats that with 10 out of 10 It speaks volume that a poular mod like "Extended Policy Cards" (which shows the cards effects on yields) hasn't been considered as an UI standard for Civ7 (and again a mod made by @leonardify emerged). It would have perfectly fit in the spirit of making big decisions instead of wasting clicks on trial and error. And that's just on example...don't get me started on stuff like the resource screen, which is just an utter pain to use without Resource Re-Sorts made by @beezany

It’s sad that this did not result in even a flicker of surprise

 

[vorlon_mi]

Nah man.

When something doesn’t work, it’s always management’s fault. Even if it isn’t in the immediate sense. They have to take responsibility. That’s one of management’s major roles. “Heavy is the head…” yada yada yada. A manager has to be able to motivate their employees to deliver. If they can’t, they probably shouldn’t be a manager.

Meh. Speaking as a supervisor of a team of IT folks, I will own being accountable for my team's actions. I give them credit when they get things right and guidance when they get things wrong. Improving their overall performance is how *my* performance is measured.

Software development includes some art along with the science. As many have pointed out here, the design needs to be sound, even separate from the execution. My team or I can struggle to implement a flawed design, or even worse, a frequently changing design. I have seen no evidence that Civ7's design was frequently changed, but I'm willing to consider that they implemented a flawed design.

Management of programmers/developers/artists is a tricky business. It does not include aerospace-level tolerances nor reasonable deadlines. Automated testing can catch many bugs that result in crashes. Managing budgets is a whole 'nother challenge.

 

[King Flevance]

I am in total agreement that the ball was dropped in the development of this title. The UI aside, even core concepts are not fully realized in the design. Age transitions, Governments, ideologies, religion, pantheons, legacies, all the way to simple tile ownership - and then some - are all clunky messes. The design as a whole is crude and very underdeveloped with only the basics having been delivered at launch and even those were broken. However, that said, I can't help but think that they have a core design with some potential here. I certainly do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

With refinement, I think this version could be a great catalyst to a fantastic Civ 8, if not a great game in and of itself after a couple expansions. Cutting down on worker micromanagement and city micromanagement helps the pacing tremendously. However, I feel that city specialization could use some mechanics to really push in. The days of switching from your farms for growth over to the mines for a production push are over and I am OK with that but I feel like cities have now become bland even though you can specialize somewhat through resource allocation. All cities need production on some level so skipping production buildings always feels wrong. Most cities specialize based on the map layout. (Mountains = culture city, resources = science city) This is something I didn't care for much in Civ 6 and am hoping Civ 7 refines this. There are multiple ways to do so. I would really like for each tech tree to offer tech leaps in unit warfare. I really think that warfare (and the diplomacy around it) is the most bland aspect of the game and needs a massive flavor injection. Plus a cohesive religion system the blends pantheons and religion together and would be nice if religion could be embraced or suppressed with a reason to do so. It would also be great if Ideologies would synergize with governments and/or religions. There is a lot of untapped potential here is my point though. This is a very crude shell of a game but with proper care and growth it could become pretty awesome.

I would like to see them pull away from civ switching in later sequels but am OK with indulging this time around. Civ switching did offer a certain charm to some of us out here in the consumer market with Humankind but others did not care for it. Civ already had its own brand of charm and I feel like Civ 7's flavor changed too much this time around that it lost some of its own charm. The new age/legacy system could be great on its own without civ switching. I do feel like they tried to add in too much and didn't have time to finish it. It is sad that this is considered acceptable but if there is a silver lining, it is that there is a lot of potential in the design if it can be developed carefully.

 

[Skojardu]

I would like to see them pull away from civ switching in later sequels but am OK with indulging this time around.

I agree in that switching is a core value of 7 and Ed, Andrew, and co should try to win us back by making it work as best they can.

It is jarring, however, that 7 is not called Civ Rev 3. It's ok if Civ has some experimental offshoots that polarize their fans (Colonization, Beyond Earth), but 7 is a system shock to the Civ fan who expects a standard of excellence from the mainline entries to the series.

 

[Core Imposter]

Well. Their game launch style is similar to the way Elon develops rockets.

And some of us are paying for that also.

 

[bluesboy67]

Based on all I've seen in the 1.2.3 update thread I still see no reason to come out of Civ VII retirement

 

[BlueWildRye]

I honestly don't see the point in playing a Civ 7 game at the moment because the game isn't complete yet and I can just wait for the next update to come out. After all, why play an incomplete, limited game when you can wait a few months or so and be able to play however you want? From what I've seen, the Civ team has made some great improvements with adding different map types, the Age Continuity option, disabling Legacy Paths, Crises, and Civ Unlocks, and adding Steam Workshop support.
There's not much more they need to do at this point, but I think I'll wait until Hotseat Multiplayer is added and the expensive DLC civs go on sale before I play again. So, I'm not retiring—I'm actually pretty optimistic. But overall, patience is key.

 

[Skojardu]

I'm not retiring—I'm actually pretty optimistic. But overall, patience is key.

I'm on your team. I have been very critical of 7, but I want to like it since I am a longtime Civ fan(atic).
I made the mistake of buying At the Gates years ago by Jon Shafer which was never finished, but we can bet our bottom dollar that they'll get this right eventually.
If 2 million copies were indeed sold, there is a huge constituency pushing for improvements. These early adopters can help make us irredentists more satisfied.
7 may be just like 5. I await its transition from being from mostly odd, to mostly prime #mathjoke

 

[Iceberg1er]

I think I’ve sadly reached that point too. The game was fun for a long while and still has a lot of potential, but I’d rather wait until any substantial changes are made and more civs for better historical paths are released. I might start modding now that that’s been released, but I might also prefer to wait for the art asset tools.

Yeah I literally started playing humankind on Xbox rather than civ 7... Which is a broken AF game on console. So that should tell you how bland civ 7 is. No true earth map makes civ 7 just like American school lunches... Tasteless, unwanted, you'd rather pay $8 for cup of noodles than their pizza.

 

[Ellye]

This latest version update was a wake-up call for me. This game was released in an incomplete state and has essentially been crowd-sourced ever since. They consistently rely on "community feedback" to make even the most obvious of design changes. They have made it explicit now, by marking the patch notes to denote which entries were suggested by users.

Firaxis doesn't seem to have a vision for the game. Every update brings concessions and changes to what initially seemed to be informed design decisions. I now accept that they are just making it up as they go. Hell, they didn't even have the backbone to stick with their original game icon, changing it immediately at the behest of a single Reddit post.

Yup.

I know a lot of people seem to love the whole "listen to the fans" and yadayada.

I really don't. Heck, imagine if book authors kept asking for feedback from the crowd instead of writing the story they want to.

I don't like Civ7. I don't think anything they change about Civ7 will ever make me like it.

Instead of listening to my feedback, they should focus on their actual idea (if they even have on in the first place), so that the people that actually enjoy it might have the best possible version of it.

Not every game is for everyone - I just accepted that Civ7 isn't for me, and I don't want the developers try to make it for me, that would be a waste of their time.

(PS: just to be clear, I do think feedback is important for usability, accessibility and stability / bug issues. But for the game design itself? Stick to your vision, devs.)

 

[reddishrecue]

I think I been retiring, really, because I haven't really gotten to use civilization 7 in awhile. I do remember some of its stuff that were glorious but im still busy to use the game and have difficulty finding time to use it.

 

[ColtSeavers]

Yup.

I know a lot of people seem to love the whole "listen to the fans" and yadayada.

I really don't. Heck, imagine if book authors kept asking for feedback from the crowd instead of writing the story they want to.

I don't like Civ7. I don't think anything they change about Civ7 will ever make me like it.

Instead of listening to my feedback, they should focus on their actual idea (if they even have on in the first place), so that the people that actually enjoy it might have the best possible version of it.

Not every game is for everyone - I just accepted that Civ7 isn't for me, and I don't want the developers try to make it for me, that would be a waste of their time.

(PS: just to be clear, I do think feedback is important for usability, accessibility and stability / bug issues. But for the game design itself? Stick to your vision, devs.)

Tell me, when exactly did they listen too much to the community? Was it when they pushed ahead with Civ Switching, even though they already knew how unpopular it was in Humankind? Or when they insisted on introducing an Exploration Age, despite many commentators warning early on that it would feel repetitive and make popular map types like Pangea or TSL unplayable? Or when they stuck with those cartoonish-looking Leaders that are widely disliked?
No, if anything, the real problem is that the devs were so confident in their vision that they felt they could ignore all criticism. In their world, they're the brilliant game designers who don’t need to listen to outside feedback. If they keep shutting out external criticism and working from inside their own little bubble, the upcoming DLCs are going to flop just like the main game did. And if that happens, it could damage the franchise in a way that might be hard, if not impossible, to recover from.

 

[Leucarum]

The main thing keeping me playing Civ7 until they address more of the glaring issues, is that I commute a few times a week and it's great on steam deck... Does that make me the target audience for their multiplatform focus?

 

[Ellye]

Tell me, when exactly did they listen too much to the community?

It's on post launch when they are more focused on trying to earn back people that they already lost, like me, instead of trying to improve the game for the people that are still there.

I'll not purchase Civ7, and therefore I'll not purchase any Civ7 DLC. Any effort they put in trying to make the game more to my taste now is wasted effort, as the changes required would basically be re-making the game from scratch which is just absurd.

They should instead focus on making the game better for the people that are playing Civ7 - the players that actually enjoy civ switching, eras, etc. Polish those ideas, make them the best possible version of them. So that these players might have incentive to buy the DLCs and have a positive experience with the game.

I don't like the whole "games should follow what the majority want" idea that seems to be the popular one nowadays.

Most of my favorite games are niche games (heck, my favorite civ game is Civ4Col). Those games I like wouldn't exist if their developers kept trying to design for mass appeal.

Let the people that enjoy Civ7 have the best Civ7 they can have. We can always have other games.

 

[aieeegrunt]

It's on post launch when they are more focused on trying to earn back people that they already lost, like me, instead of trying to improve the game for the people that are still there.

I'll not purchase Civ7, and therefore I'll not purchase any Civ7 DLC. Any effort they put in trying to make the game more to my taste now is wasted effort, as the changes required would basically be re-making the game from scratch which is just absurd.

They should instead focus on making the game better for the people that are playing Civ7 - the players that actually enjoy civ switching, eras, etc. Polish those ideas, make them the best possible version of them. So that these players might have incentive to buy the DLCs and have a positive experience with the game.

I don't like the whole "games should follow what the majority want" idea that seems to be the popular one nowadays.

Most of my favorite games are niche games (heck, my favorite civ game is Civ4Col). Those games I like wouldn't exist if their developers kept trying to design for mass appeal.

Let the people that enjoy Civ7 have the best Civ7 they can have. We can always have other games.

Civ7’s dismal performance means it can’t rely on just that segment of the market that enjoys having the core identity of the franchise dumpstered.

A Classic Mode ditching civ switching amd era resets may bring back Civ6 numbers eventually

Deck chairs on the Titanic will not

 

[ColtSeavers]

It's on post launch when they are more focused on trying to earn back people that they already lost, like me, instead of trying to improve the game for the people that are still there.

I'm not aware of any serious effort post-launch to win back the people who disliked the direction they were going. They've only done the bare minimum with desperately needed balance or UI fixes, just to calm the disastrous feedback after releasing the game in an unfinished state.

I don't like the whole "games should follow what the majority want" idea that seems to be the popular one nowadays.

Most of my favorite games are niche games (heck, my favorite civ game is Civ4Col). Those games I like wouldn't exist if their developers kept trying to design for mass appeal.

Well, I'm afraid that's exactly how they would end up with if they follow your advice, a niche game, which is no longer relevant to a broader audience. We have plenty of these already (Millenia, Humankind, Europa Universalis, Ara History Untold etc.), Civilization always used to be the elephant in the room, which was able to attract a larger and somewhat more diverse audience. How many are going to buy the DLCs, if they keep on with their "my way or the highway" attitude? Initial sales figures weren't great to begin with and, according to steam, half of the buyers regret buying it. Who is going to be left buying these DLCs, if they don't bring any of these disapointed people back? What do you think the future of the franchise will look like after a few years, if they carry on like this?

 

[Gorbles]

I'm not aware of any serious effort post-launch to win back the people who disliked the direction they were going. They've only done the bare minimum with desperately needed balance or UI fixes

This is exactly why I think it's wasted effort to cater to folks like this. They will dismiss, ignore, or otherwise not value any changes the developers make that aren't the exact and precise overhaul they personally want.

And there's nothing wrong with them wanting this. Or even doing that. They want a game that is fun to play. The current game isn't fun for them.

But what they want is a completely different game, and pivoting this game to be that fundamentally a massive challenge (to do it properly). This would completely change all future content plans and ultimately reduce the scope of what thos game could be, because effort from future content would need to be scrapped and invested in this pivot.

It lessens the current game for the people playing. And it lessens the overall game for anyone playing.

But hey, maybe the devs will do it anyway. They've already done stuff I think is suboptimal, it's not like I'm any authority