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

[PhoenicianGold]

In the official civ facebook they mentioned today how portugal/april patch is the last content of New Frontier Pass.

They never mention "last content of Civ 6" so that gives me feeling we get more stuff eventually.

Aside from that single interview (which I do think the "no concrete plans" comment may be the most accurate statement we've seen), it seems like most Firaxis statements are consistent that simply "New Frontier pass is ending."

That doesn't mean there won't be another season of content, I just think it sounds like they are weighing options and will likely have to decide soon if/how they will continue developing VI.

Unless this bonus content includes America and Africa map, as well as some subset of Vienna, Copenhagen, Nineveh, and Pagan city-states, I will maintain that they are probably planning more content.

 

[InsidiousMage]

Both of those statements feel pretty optimistic.

Let's be honest here, we are talking about people playing the game, not the entirety of the human race. Everyone playing the game has been effected by the pandemic. We are talking about adding an pandemic mode to the game while the pandemic is still ongoing. What is the problem with waiting a couple of years? Because, as far as I can tell, the only reason to put it in now is because you want it now and what other people are going through is not really something you care about. Now, we could have a discussion about how pop culture treats traumatic events, like war and natural disasters, and whatnot in general but, again, honestly no one here is going to come up with a satisfactory answer to that question.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Unless this bonus content includes America and Africa map, as well as some subset of Vienna, Copenhagen, Ninevah, and Pagan city-states, I will maintain that they are probably planning more content.

I don't necessarily know if that's the case but I could realistically see those city-states make it in a city-state pack, along with maybe another from the Caribbean and North America, if we don't get more civs.
I'd take Lhasa over Pagan though, personally for a religious city-state from East Asia.

 

[Zaarin]

We are talking about adding an pandemic mode to the game while the pandemic is still ongoing.

Are we? I'm pretty certain we're talking about it as a possibility in the future, and given that Civ6 production is probably over that means we're talking about years in the future. Granted, who knows when the politicians will give up emergency power the pandemic will be over.

what other people are going through is not really something you care about.

 

[acluewithout]

Did we think that Firaxis was going to update civ6 forever?

No. But my issue is that, notwithstanding 2 or really 3 expansions, there’s still content I’m waiting to see, and the game feels to me half finished without it.

It’ll feel a bit rubbish if FXS finish Civ 6 without adding in some of the end game stuff from previous versions, particularly Civ 5. Civ 6 has always felt like it was trying to be the most “Civiest Civ”, i.e. trying to include everything it could from past games but with modern sensibilities, more thought and QOL changes. I think FXS have mostly achieved that goal - I mean, they even managed to bring back the much maligned Natural Disasters without everyone rage-quitting and losing their minds.

Given that apparent design goal, I think leaving out big stuff people liked from eg Civ 5 ideological pressure, or some of the smaller things like Reformation Beliefs, Spy / Ambassadors, Stealth Bombers, would leave the game feeling like it hadn’t achieved its promise.

Anyway. I don’t know to what extent people feel the same. Some people might be happy with what we have, and ready to move onto Civ 7. Some people might not like Civ 6 at all, and either want new content to radically change the game, or again just want to move to Civ 7. And some people might be really happy with Civ 6 as is and that’s them done.

For me, I really like Civ 6, warts and all, and will happily drop another 1000 hours on it (when I’m not working, travelling etc). But there’s a few things missing from the game that I’d like to see to feel like Civ 6 is all it could be. That list of stuff has gotten a lot shorter since NFP, but there’s still a couple of big things on the list.

I don’t know if FXS will meet that expectation. They’re obviously not going to support the game forever. But I think at least one more final season pass, or a one off “legacy DLC” that covers off some gaps in the game via a few more game modes could happen. I’d give it 50:50 of happening.

snip

snip

Dynamic Ages. I have a lot of sympathy for @pokiehl ’s view on Dynamic Ages and why that mode really shouldn’t have a middle ground.

But personally, I would enjoy the game mode more if there was still the possibility of getting a normal age, even if that was maybe a narrower band. What I like about the Dynamic Ages mode is that the Dark Ages and Golden Ages are more impactful, and that getting Era Score is harder overall. I get why there is no normal age in this Game Mode, but I don’t actually like the binary way Dark / Golden Ages work.

Apocalypse Mode. Most of my issues with Apocalypse Mode got resolved by getting a Zombie Mode. Putting the two modes together is a pretty funny gonzo RNG mode. Still, pity there’s no Earth Quakes.

Secret Societies. At least this mode is more balanced now. I still think it’s missing some sort of trade off or intrigue. Feels like this mode really only needs a fairly small tweak in that direction to be perfect.

Pandemics. I think we sort of got this with the Black Plague scenario, but yeah some sort of pandemic board game style mode would be pretty cool. I wouldn’t say no.

[edit. Spelling, clarity.]

 

[cathar knight]

If I'd reply to the thread title, "Looks like Civ 6 is done", I'd say it was about damn time! It feels "half finished", like the previous poster said, because in a way it was already "done for", its limitations were visible from the start and were never truly fixed or cared for. I played every Civilization game since Sid Meier created them and for me Civilization VI will always be an "aspiring to be politically-correct" mess with some very debatable choices for civilizations and a handful of poorly implemented new concepts, coupled with totally dumb and kiddish game «modes». If 7 is planned to see the light some day, it has to be very different, especially so if Humankind is well received (as I really hope it will!).

 

[Piranga]

This last expansion was an obvious sign the game cycle is over. A full year of imbalanced mini game rules that had no real affect on the game. Glad to see them moving on, they don't know how to improve this game any further.

 

[Zegangani]

I think the Game Engine has nearly reached its Limit. And that's why they choose to add simple Modes instead of Expansion Quality Mechanisms. The Game crushes more than ever with Asset Heavy Mods, that didn't even get updated durring NFP. I know The Devs task is to make the Game running on its own and not making it modding compatible, but I'm mentioning this because Firaxis claimed that Civ VI is designed from the ground up with deep mod support in mind. With which I think they meant the modifications from FXS side, say DLCs/XPs/Updates. So if it even can't handle some Mods now, imagine how an XP would affect it.

Since Civ IV, The Civ Franchise was running with the same Game Engine, untill Civ VI. This really confuses me, because for a fresh built Engine, Civ VI isn't a very deep Game. In fact, it's even simpler than the previous iterations. Ofc it contains a lot of previous mechanisms already in the Base Game, but they just kinda feel... too basic to me. Maybe I'm just of this Opinion because I played the game 100s or 1000s of Hours, but...NO. The majority of the Systems/Mechanisms that were also in the previous games, were much deeper in those. So one would actually expect Civ VI to be a whole Piece better.

Civ VI is for me a half Step forward on the Graphics Side (forget the cartoonish style for a while) and a Step Forward and two Backwards in terms of Gameplay. Lots of good Elements and Lessons from previous iterations to keep iterating on, refine and learn from (with which I mean how to implement them in a better way), but FXS chooses to reinvent the Wheel . . everytime . . everything . . . Which isn't something wrong, but they way they do/did it with most of things, isn't quite appealing to me.

For me, it's no longer a Civilization Game anymore. It's just a Game with some historical Figures with some real life based mechanisms that are designed to be fun to play with and (somehow) balanced. And Yeah, Political Correctness! (it's (or should be) a History based game. excluding things intentionally because of political correctness is like denying parts of History). (I'm not even counting the many many Bugs. Every Game has to deal wit those, so let's just ignore them here). Which seems to fit with the expectation of the majority of Players, who just want to have a Fun short Play on a small Map durring the Weekend.

I don't have much hope for Civ 7 to be a much better Game than Civ 6. Maybe it will have better Graphics and some few more Mechanisms, but everything will stay the same (maybe even getting worse). Dark Times are coming to CivFanatics, and there is only one Light of Hope that could be our Salvation: Humankind.

I'm not expecting Humankind to be a perfect Game, but from what I have seen and how the Devs are developping the Game, it seems that they have studied every aspect of the Civ Franchise, picked everything that works well and/or has potential, included some mechanisms from their other Sci-Fi Games and what they have learned from them, and still made/making something that isn't comparable to the Civ Franchise, something that is completely new but familiar, something Unique, maybe the something that CivFanatics were hoping for. Combine that with their Openness with the Community and its Suggestions,... if someone had told me that a Year and a half ago, I wouldn't have beleaved them.

I have a tiny hope for Civ7 to be similar. I still love Civ VI, despite its flaws, and I'm looking forward to Civ 7, but I definitelly won't Buy it till I see The Community's Experience with it( and that after some DLCs) and I'm sure that it isn't a dissapointment.

This Post isn't meant to speak low of Civ VI (I had plenty of good Time with the Game and really enjoyed it) or a potential Civ VII, but a reminder for Firaxis that if they keep this Route they are going now, then they will loose a lot of Players, especially CiVeterans. I really want the game to be better, I love the franchise, and want to see it getting improved with each new iteration, Because the Potential is there, only a "Let's do it!" from FXS is needed.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I don't necessarily know if that's the case but I could realistically see those city-states make it in a city-state pack, along with maybe another from the Caribbean and North America, if we don't get more civs.
I'd take Lhasa over Pagan though, personally for a religious city-state from East Asia.

Well Pagan could also be a commercial city-state in a pinch. I would love it if we got both.

Also, to everyone whining about "political correctness"... I think it's a sign of extreme compartmentalization to try to escape politics when everything has political context and implications, and a sign of extreme stubbornness to try to take a position against factual correctness. It's not an argument against anything so much as an excuse people make to stew in their own ignorance and self-absorption.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Well Pagan could also be a commercial city-state in a pinch. I would love it if we got both.

Well I guess if Cahokia Mounds can grant gold, so can Payas considering they're actually golden.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Well I guess if Cahokia Mounds can grant gold, so can Payas considering they're actually golden.

And filled with relics and offerings. Also, Burma was one of the richest empires in SE Asia, and only really faded out in recent centuries as Thailand became more of an economic hub. So it wouldn't be improper.

 

[Zegangani]

Also, to everyone whining about "political correctness"... I think it's a sign of extreme compartmentalization to try to escape politics when everything has political context and implications, and a sign of extreme stubbornness to try to take a position against factual correctness. It's not an argument against anything so much as an excuse people make to stew in their own ignorance and self-absorption.

Wow! That's prejudice at it's best.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Wow! That's prejudice at it's best.

That irony coming from anyone casually throwing around "political correctness" as a criticism. I literally laughed out loud at this.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

That irony coming from anyone casually throwing around "political correctness" as a criticism. I literally laughed out loud at this.

I mostly facepalmed because we have had one user say that Civ 6 has been sexist for picking Joao III over a female Leader, a Youtube comment that stated Civ 6 was going alt-right because it had three European Civs, a user here who stated that Civ 6 was going "woke" because it didn't put crosses on the Nau Design, and now this. Civ 6 just can't win any victories here...

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I mostly facepalmed because we have had one user say that Civ 6 has been sexist for picking Joao III over a female Leader, a Youtube comment that stated Civ 6 was going alt-right because it had three European Civs, a user here who stated that Civ 6 was going "woke" because it didn't put crosses on the Nau Design, and now this. Civ 6 just can't win any victories here...

Civ is in a rough spot as far as people-pleasing goes. I do get the impression that there is a strong conservative, male-dominated base not only in the gaming industry, but especially in warfare and historical games, and especially in long-standing franchises that have been around for decades. A base that needs to be placated or at the very least not incited, while at the same time making a game culturally progressive enough that other, broader, more profitable demographics can be brought into the fold. And civ is by no means unique, I would say other male-dominated media like action films need to walk a similar tightrope.

Obviously, my previous comments suggest I care much more about exposing players to new ideas and adhering to a coherent design philosophy than pleasing traditionalists. But I do have to say that I have been generally very impressed with how the devs have managed to balance introducing diversity without tokenizing historical relevance. I'd say the worst "offense" was probably Kristina, but even then from a design and gameplay perspective (and even as far as "personifying" Sweden), she's a home run in the fun department.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Civ is in a rough spot as far as people-pleasing goes. I do get the impression that there is a strong conservative, male-dominated base not only in the gaming industry, but especially in warfare and historical games, and especially in long-standing franchises that have been around for decades. A base that needs to be placated or at the very least not incited, while at the same time making a game culturally progressive enough that other, broader, more profitable demographics can be brought into the fold. And civ is by no means unique, I would say other male-dominated media like action films need to walk a similar tightrope.

Obviously, my previous comments suggest I care much more about exposing players to new ideas and adhering to a coherent design philosophy than pleasing traditionalists. But I do have to say that I have been generally very impressed with how the devs have managed to balance introducing diversity without tokenizing historical relevance. I'd say the worst "offense" was probably Kristina, but even then from a design and gameplay perspective (and even as far as "personifying" Sweden), she's a home run in the fun department.

As part of that base/demographic, I'm glad we can both agree on issues like this.

Now, where were we? Oh, right, is Civ 6 ending with the NFP? I'm neutral, but I say I'd like at least some future updates here and then to make Civ 6 better if they do move on to Civ 7.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Dark Times are coming to CivFanatics, and there is only one Light of Hope that could be our Salvation: Humankind.

You are being over dramatic... you act like as if Firaxis is becoming like Blizzard.

 

[Zegangani]

You are being over dramatic... you act like as if Firaxis is becoming like Blizzard.

It wasn't meant seriously (but more in a funny way). And I wasn't implying that Civ is turning to a bad Game or such, I'm just seeing a lot of Potential to the Game that doesn't get drawed, that's all.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

It wasn't meant seriously (but more in a funny way). And I wasn't implying that Civ is turning to a bad Game or such, I'm just seeing a lot of Potential to the Game that doesn't get drawed, that's all.

and what about PCness? I think you are wrong about that.

 

[Zegangani]

and what about PCness? I think you are wrong about that.

Sorry, I can't follow you. Could you explain to me what I'm wrong about more clearly?