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

[StargazingDog]

Anyone who digs through my post history will see that I have always been very optimistic for this game. I initially enjoyed the era changes and other decisions that led me to finish every game I started. It felt fresh and new. However, the more I played, the more the cracks began to show.

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.

I didn't buy Civ 7 to "invest" in a future game. I don't play Civ game with the intent of submitting feedback. I signed up for the "content roadmap", but not to be a game designer. I enjoy Civ games when I am learning a particular set of mechanics and improving my play over time. This is difficult in Civ 7, when the game is missing basic functions and repeatedly changing the rules of the game.

I'm clicking the RETIRE button on Civ 7. Fortunately, Firaxis still hasn't added a "hall of fame" feature to record my surrender.

 

[j51]

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.

 

[Gorbles]

I too worry that the developers are abandoning their original vision for the game, but a lot of posters critical of that vision are probably happy that this is the case.

Time will tell what the right choice was (other than "making a different game", I'm speaking given the game that was released as-is, what paths the developers had to support and iterate on it post-release).

 

[protocol7]

The people who didn't like the original vision probably were hoping for something more than being able to just turn off the original vision, with nothing at least so far to replace it.

 

[j51]

Yeah I’d still play if they were pumping out more civs and leaders instead of this endless tweaking. I want the R2R content I’ve paid for lol! And I want more techs for each era but especially the early part of Modern.

I do think I’ll give modding a try. At least trying to bend the game more to my vision on small things

 

[kaspergm]

Well, we're not making it easy for them either, are we? When we don't like their decisions, we tell them what we want. And when they give us what we want, we critisize them for not sticking to their initial vision.

Ok I'm just (half) joking here. I get that OP did not call for the changes that have been added. But I can't help but feel we're putting them in a bit of a "damn if you do, damned if you don't" position here.

 

[moondog385]

We’re criticizing them for changing things and improving things in response to feedback now? I’m confused… I thought we wanted them to listen to the community. The game’s original design philosophy with the ages and civ switching is still present and hasn’t been affected by anything they’ve done.

Like is it really a lack of “backbone” behind the fact that they changed the original game icon? Could just be goodwill towards the community.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Yeah I’d still play if they were pumping out more civs and leaders instead of this endless tweaking. I want the R2R content I’ve paid for lol!

The last DLC wasn't universally praised, so I'm not surprised that they chose to take their time with the latest one.

 

[protocol7]

They've foreseen fourteen million six hundred and five possible futures and selected the only one where everyone is peeved.

 

[m_mus]

Having watched the "Developers Udpate" video didn't sound to me, as if they were slowly abandoning their original vision. It rather felt like confession, that Civ7 missed the mark in some critical aspects (legacy paths), so until they receive a meaningful update, they can be toggled off.
But their work on the economic legacy path for the exploration age (treasure fleets) up until now and Edward Zhang's mention of wanting to deepen religious gameplay as well let's me suspect that these reworks are under way and will come at a certain point. In that sense I see the option to toggle of legacy paths rather as a temporary band-aid and not a fundamental shift in their vision. I hope it's not, because if I want to play a Civilization without legacy paths and civ-switching, there are the perfect games of civ6 and civ5.
I want them to stick to their vision and make it worthwhile.

 

[j51]

The last DLC wasn't universally praised, so I'm not surprised that they chose to take their time with the latest one.

Hopefully they’ll add more fan favorite civs. (Hint, hint)

 

[Disgustipated]

I want them to stick to their vision and make it worthwhile.

Even if that vision if flawed? I believe it is. If it didn't work on release, it's never going to work as far as I'm concerned. Regardless, they kind of have to stick with their vision in some capacity, since the ages system revolved around it. Unless they find a way to eliminate the age transitions. So as of now, the original vision is still in the game. Nothing fundamental has changed about this game (even if you can disable some things).

I still enjoy it, but it doesn't hook me nearly as much as Civ 6. It's just not as good a game as Civ 6, plain and simple. But I do believe it to be better than Civ 5 was at release.

 

[Krajzen]

They've foreseen fourteen million six hundred and five possible futures and selected the only one where everyone is peeved.

Well that's what you get when you suddenly blow up the most important mechanic of the 30 year old game series, crucial to its identity to the point you have to change the entire serie's motto Instead of testing the new off the wall concept in some separate experimental spinoff game, where you won't delete half of your fanbase's basic motivation to play the game in the first place

 

[GIO888]

I was waiting for the 411 on this patch before maybe buying CivVII - now it looks like I'll be waiting til nearer Xmas. Maybe.

I'm so glad Ara came out when it did.......

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

We’re criticizing them for changing things and improving things in response to feedback now? I’m confused… I thought we wanted them to listen to the community. The game’s original design philosophy with the ages and civ switching is still present and hasn’t been affected by anything they’ve done.

Like is it really a lack of “backbone” behind the fact that they changed the original game icon? Could just be goodwill towards the community.

I think what this speaks to is that they'll be fundamentally lost the trust of the fanbase, and the relationship is no longer a balanced one. When you're in a relationship with someone and the rose tinted glasses from the honeymoon period come off, suddenly you can start seeing flaws, and the things that you used to like about them irritate you. Sometimes they're even things other people do that you praise, you've just got "the ick".

That's the point where you break up and move on or it becomes an unhealthy relationship. A customer/fanbase is different to a romantic relationship, and they have a set of expectations about standards and will keep stringing a company along for the "benefits" long after the love as gone, but with less offered in return, so I think we're pretty set on the path to an unhealthy relationship now and firaxis is indeed damned if they do and damned if they don't. They will no longer please everyone whatever they do.

 

[StargazingDog]

To be clear, I gladly welcome the age transition mechanic, removal of worker units, the city/town relationship, and other major changes. I could have been content with bug fixes, UI changes, and more leaders and civs. Unfortunately, the game was released when it was far from complete.

The game is currently in a perpetual alpha release state, with fundamental mechanics being changed or removed, while core functions remain to be added. Every set of patch notes is a list I would expect to see from an early access game two years out from release.

 

[Rambo919]

When you look in to check if your predictions were wrong after all.... and everyone in the room is in a depressed state proving your intuition.

 

[MutilationWave]

Anyone who digs through my post history will see that I have always been very optimistic for this game. I initially enjoyed the era changes and other decisions that led me to finish every game I started. It felt fresh and new. However, the more I played, the more the cracks began to show.

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.

I didn't buy Civ 7 to "invest" in a future game. I don't play Civ game with the intent of submitting feedback. I signed up for the "content roadmap", but not to be a game designer. I enjoy Civ games when I am learning a particular set of mechanics and improving my play over time. This is difficult in Civ 7, when the game is missing basic functions and repeatedly changing the rules of the game.

I'm clicking the RETIRE button on Civ 7. Fortunately, Firaxis still hasn't added a "hall of fame" feature to record my surrender.

I hope it gets much better and you can come back and enjoy it in your favorite way. Good Luck!

 

[m_mus]

Even if that vision if flawed? I believe it is. If it didn't work on release, it's never going to work as far as I'm concerned. Regardless, they kind of have to stick with their vision in some capacity, since the ages system revolved around it. Unless they find a way to eliminate the age transitions. So as of now, the original vision is still in the game. Nothing fundamental has changed about this game (even if you can disable some things).

I still enjoy it, but it doesn't hook me nearly as much as Civ 6. It's just not as good a game as Civ 6, plain and simple. But I do believe it to be better than Civ 5 was at release.

I suppose that is where we differ.
I grant that that the implementation of their vision was far from perfect, in fact regarding certain legacy paths it was (and is ... religion *cough*) straight out disappointing. But I like the vision nonetheless a lot.
First for immersive reasons, although this might a minority position, I know. But I fully buy into the "history was built in layers"-argument, as yeah the Ottomans inherited a certain society shaped by the Byzantines, as did the Normans who took over from the Anglo-Saxons or Mexico in regards to Spain.
Second for gameplay reasons, though again this as well is surely a minority position as I mostly play multiplayer with a casual group of 8 friends. We play on online-speed and it always was a downer, if you missed the at times very narrow timeframe to utilize your unique units, or if your unique buildings and abilities came way too late into play to turn things around. Now each age you are guaranteed to be able to utilize your civilization's abilities (to a certain degree), which I like. I also find it fascinating to ponder the many possibilities and its strategic implications of combining leaders and civilizations or to envision a most effective sequence of civilizations throughout the ages.

 

[Krajzen]

When you look in to check if your predictions were wrong after all.... and everyone in the room is in a depressed state proving your intuition.

"Depressed" is the most succint description of my Civ morale right now (but only in the realm of civ, otherwise my life is going great rn )

I have complained about a lot of things regarding civ6, which I haven't ultimately liked very much, but I have always admitted its objectively a good game with a coherent design that satisfied most people, just not my personal taste. The vibe of a community as a whole was uplifting. Civ5 had a terrible launch with a lot of chaos, but its core gameplay loop was strong enough for it to have a massive army of supporters full of optimism and energy, it ended up being fantastic.

Civ7 seems to be... lost. Not necessarily as in "broken beyond repair", there have been games with even worse reception on release which then slowly become excellent (No Man's Sky is probably the most spectacular example of this). But as in "literally lost its path in the forest and its future is very uncertain". It was born of marriage between the fundamental misunderstanding of the fanbase and a very messy developmental process, with the two probably being interwined. And now it's a messed up child of this dysfunctional marriage and it's trying to figure out what's wrong with its life and what kind of help should it get, while the time is passing quickly and opportunities are passing by...

And I am simply too tired of critically following civ6 and hoping it gest more palatable for my taste - to repeat that with much more dramatic case of civ7. I am tired, boss, and this exhaustion made me kinda apathetic. I think I'll go silent soon and come back in a few months and see how it goes - in particular if the modding scene is fine.