Looks like Civ 6 is done: Kevin called April "final game update"

[pokiehl]

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...d-on-another-players-tile-from-being-annoying

Somewhat confusing interview in that they're pretty evasive about the future of Civ 6 the whole time, except for this part:

Schulz: We're not talking about the future of Civ at the moment. We are focused on the Portugal pack. We also have a really great final game update coming out in April. It's going to be a pretty beefy pack, very full of some things we also can't talk about at the moment. But some nice surprises in there, like balance changes we've been sitting on for a long time."

I also notice he said "future of Civ" - not "future of Civ 6."

I know there's another thread about the possibility of post-NFP content, but this is to my knowledge the only place a Firaxian has directly commented on it so I think it's worth its own thread.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I'm just neutral. I will watch the debate that will unfold here, though. I will eat Stroopwafel while doing so.

 

[Zaarin]

I will eat Stroopwafel while doing so.

I guess I'd better send you a trade route before you hit me with your umbrella.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I guess I'd better send you a trade route before you hit me with your umbrella.

No, I'm getting them from a Trade Route sent by Wilhelmina.

 

[Mahi]

The way they sliced up civ 6 and sold the complete game over such a long period is disgusting and I will definetely consider if the next iteration will be something for me to invest. Civ 6 never reached my expectation and the different release of modes, instead of patching up the core game is something I just never understood.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

I guess I'd better send you a trade route before you hit me with your umbrella.

I'd send a trade route to mollify him, but I only just met him and my trade routes can't reach that far yet.

The way they sliced up civ 6 and sold the complete game over such a long period is disgusting and I will definetely consider if the next iteration will be something for me to invest. Civ 6 never reached my expectation and the different release of modes, instead of patching up the core game is something I just never understood.

Because no-one will pay $4.99 for a patch and some balance. They will pay $4.99 for another leader pack with a new wonder and a new game mode.

 

[Luxerne]

As much as I'd love to see civs like Burma or the Navajo introduced, I always felt that the NFP had to be the last DLC, or at least the last major DLC for the franchise. Especially with Portugal and Babylon both returning, breaking the expansions' precedent of four returning civs per set of eight. Obviously we weren't getting a civ game without Maya, Ethiopia, Byzantium, Babylon, and Portugal, and since all five missing series staples were added back into the game in the NFP, who knows if the marketing folk even think they have enough to go on for a post-NFP expansion or season pass. I mean, I've listed three great candidates for returning civs (Austria, Iroquois/Haudenosaunee, and Hittites) in my signature, to which one could easily add, say, Venice or Morocco. Nevertheless, since Civ 6 came out and people clamored in comments sections to see their favorites return, I just have not really seen anywhere near as much support for the latter group of candidates as opposed to the five we got in the NFP.

 

[Socrates99]

The way they sliced up civ 6 and sold the complete game over such a long period is disgusting and I will definetely consider if the next iteration will be something for me to invest. Civ 6 never reached my expectation and the different release of modes, instead of patching up the core game is something I just never understood.

Dipping their toes into the Paradox model. I'm curious to see if VII sticks with it or if they go back to the old Civ model of two or three Xpacs and move on.

I still think it's cheaper to buy Civ VI complete than CKII or EUIV completely.

 

[thecrazyscot]

The way they sliced up civ 6 and sold the complete game over such a long period is disgusting ...

Oh come on

 

[Villager720]

"Strenger: So, I'm really happy with where it is in terms of features. My mind is shifting towards, okay, let's focus on balance right now.
Wesley Yin-Poole (Author): What I'm getting at is are you going to do another pass. Can you say that at this point?
Strenger: We cannot, no. We don't have any concrete plans for the future right now."

If the guy doing the interview interpreted what they said directly to him as such, I'd take that into account.
We, the readers, only have text to read; not tone or intonation.

As an aside : They also took time to mention that they met their sales goals for NFP & player engagement was up + more consistent; food for thought.

 

[ManoftheHour333]

If we're being honest...50 civs is actually a really nice number to end at. Any more would be nice, but if they are to add anything it should just be a leader pack...and leaders are the hardest to make so I don't see that happening too much in particular. Just my thoughts.

 

[Henri Christophe]

I hope isn't true and it still can come more one season of Civs in game. America and Africa still underrepresented

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

The way they sliced up civ 6 and sold the complete game over such a long period is disgusting and I will definetely consider if the next iteration will be something for me to invest. Civ 6 never reached my expectation and the different release of modes, instead of patching up the core game is something I just never understood.

Because it would be obviously better to still play Civ V and have a Complete unsliced Civ VI announcement few months ago

 

[aieeegrunt]

Ok, if they then do a couple of patches that focus on polish and fixes then this is probably their best move and the smartest thing they can do to boost Civ7 sales

If they are just gonna peace out after the monetization phase is done then wow, this will be their Fallout76 moment, especially since there are viable alternatives on the horizon, which is NOT a scenario they have had to deal with before (the “Victory has defeated you” scenario)

Civ6 has a TON of potential buried under features being unfinshed; bugs etc.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

"Strenger: So, I'm really happy with where it is in terms of features. My mind is shifting towards, okay, let's focus on balance right now.
Wesley Yin-Poole (Author): What I'm getting at is are you going to do another pass. Can you say that at this point?
Strenger: We cannot, no. We don't have any concrete plans for the future right now."

If the guy doing the interview interpreted what they said directly to him as such, I'd take that into account.
We, the readers, only have text to read; not tone or intonation.

As an aside : They also mention that they met their sales goals for NFP; food for thought.

"Can you say that at this point?"

"No."

It's still ambiguous, but it's not a definitely not.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Because it all depends on Civ VII development and marketing plans. They just keep their options open.

 

[MrRadar]

I wouldn't read too much into it, and draw no definitive conclusions. Looks like, they're keeping all options open.
What intrigues me most is what the April update will contain and will there be any more patches and how soon after that. Because with Civ 6 track record, I just can't believe the April update wouldn't bring another bouquet of bugs.

 

[Giskler]

Dipping their toes into the Paradox model. I'm curious to see if VII sticks with it or if they go back to the old Civ model of two or three Xpacs and move on.

I still think it's cheaper to buy Civ VI complete than CKII or EUIV completely.

While I've enjoyed NFP I sincerely hope Firaxis does not go full Paradox, bring on Civ 7 with new ideas and features. EUIV has lived way past its expiration date and it's just bloatware at this point. The Paradox DLC model has increasingly turned me off of their games, and some of the DLC they release are just ridiculous moneygrabs.

 

[AntSou]

"we hope you continue to follow us on social media to keep up to date on all the latest in the Civilization franchise." (Last update video)
+
"Let's focus on balances right now."
+
"We don't have any concrete plans for the future right now."

To me this might mean they are working on another project, but not Civ 7. They leave the door open for future Civ 6 content, but that's not their focus. I don't think that door could be left open if it were Civ 7.

Meh...
----

Also, if tomorrow's DLC introduces new bugs, and if those bugs are solved in April's patch, that might be pretty strong indication they're def slowing down and have no plans of updating the game any time soon. (either that or they leave the bugs in the game for six months... please don't do that again Firaxis)

 

[DWilson]

If we're being honest...50 civs is actually a really nice number to end at. Any more would be nice, but if they are to add anything it should just be a leader pack...and leaders are the hardest to make so I don't see that happening too much in particular. Just my thoughts.

With 58 playable options, counting alt leaders, alt civs, and personas individually, I would like at least 2, preferably 7, or happily up to 12 more playable options.

Edit: I would add that the Digital Deluxe gave us 7 playable options and the New Frontier Pass gave us 12.