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

[Duke William of Normandy]

They want civ players to have more engagement for longer?

Have they no mercy?

As @Andrew Johnson [FXS] let slip, they're using that time to create a time machine.

 

[bbbt]

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.

They are definitely working on another project - about 2 years ago now they Friaxis they had a new game series in the works (not xcom or civ)). They are quite likely working on Civ 7 as well, at least the game engine, as that work starts 3-5 years ahead of release usually.

I've been expecting a Civ-engine spin-off (i.e. Beyond Earth 2, or a Fantasy Civ, or an Age of Mythology Civ). But it's now occurred to me the game modes might also be testing the waters for a hybrid reskin/game mode approach. I.e. instead of paying $60 for Age of Mythology Civ with a lot of new mechanics, would people pay $20 for a Age of Mythology game mode (i.e. Heroes and Legends on steroids) or $30 for a 'Fantasy Game Mode' pack, etc.

 

[Stringer1313]

It totally makes sense that they are done with Civ 6. It's now been three expansion packs (I consider NFP one expansion pack); has any civ-franchise game had more than three? Also, usually developers work on a different project before turning back to iterating a franchise. That also makes sense - you need to give your brain a break and come back fresh.

I'm still optomistic that they will do some bug cleanup after the April. But god i hope they fix basic things like being able to list your cities in order of yield production!!!!!

 

[Kwami]

I'd gladly pay for another year of patches / balance / AI & UI improvements, even if the pack didn't come with new civs & game modes. However, I think I'm in the minority on this point when considering the player base as a whole. I am guessing it's the civs that generally generate DLC sales for the "average" player.

Yeah, no way. I'm all for paying when I get new content, but bug fixes and UI improvements aren't new content. They're fixing stuff that should have been fixed before it was released. That stuff shouldn't be paid for separately.

 

[Shadowstrike]

Including a clock in the UI has probably saved lives, mine included

I keep suggesting this over at the Paradox forums, but no luck so far...

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Yeah, no way. I'm all for paying when I get new content, but bug fixes and UI improvements aren't new content. They're fixing stuff that should have been fixed before it was released. That stuff shouldn't be paid for separately.

That's even worse than something EA or Bethesda would do. Actually, I wouldn't put them above doing that...

I keep suggesting this over at the Paradox forums, but no luck so far...

They're saving that for yet another DLC: or better yet, a flavor pack!

 

[Potworny]

It's not likely that the April update will be the last we'll ever see. They will probably have to fix some things that are sure to remain unfixed and become broken by this patch. I don't think they would be certain that they will make no further updates to the game, and therefore they wouldn't declare this update as the last outside of the context of this 'season'. That's how I see it.

Essentialy, we can be sure of nothing.

 

[Zaarin]

It’s not going to be an existential threat or a good thing to emulate for this franchise. Some of you guys here are way too optimistic or you haven’t played it.

I don't think Humankind will be any kind of threat to Civ, but I do think it will influence Civ7's development simply because we know from Civ6 that Firaxis is conscious of Amplitude. As for optimism, I'm optimistic because Amplitude makes good games. I don't expect it to replace Civ but to be something different.

If we're being honest, I would consider Phoenicia and/or Carthage a more culturally European Civ than an African one. While they were in the Levant, you have this kind of "Mediterranean" culture that permeates Greece, Southern Italy, Turkey, North Africa, and yes, the Levant. Plus, as you said, Phoenician colonies stretched across the entire Mediterranean and moreso onto the more typically "European" islands and peninsulas (I.e Italy and Iberia)

From an anthropological perspective, we consider the Greeks, Byzantines, and Romans/Italians European even though they are very similar genetically to the people of the near east...so I wouldn't discriminate with Phoenicia and lump them into the overarching Mediterranean/Southern Europe group.

Please learn to use multiquote so your replies don't get buried inside the quote! Anyway, I emphatically disagree. Phoenicia was not remotely European; it was a firmly east-oriented society far more under the influence of Egypt and Babylon than Greece. If you see similarities between Phoenician and Greek culture, that's because the Phoenicians influenced the Greeks, not the other way around (including loaning the Greeks a few gods, like Aphrodite and Adonis). The Carthaginians became Hellenized to a limited degree (they translated Greek plays and even wrote some of their own), but the Greek city-states were a backwater when Phoenicia proper was at its height. Also interesting to note that the Phoenicians not only resisted Hellenization; they also resisted Aramaicization. The Phoenician language didn't give way to Aramaic until the first century AD, which is several centuries after Hebrew became a liturgical language. (Punic probably continued to be spoken in North Africa until the Islamic conquest.) tl;dr: the Phoenicians were unmistakably Asian.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

They want civ players to have more engagement for longer?

Have they no mercy?

They want more Civ players to become CivFanatics

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

They want more Civ players to become CivFanatics

And I-we'll be there to welcome them.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Without knowing what's coming in April, I think I'm going to wait a while until I decide whether more content would be good for the game or bad

 

[AntSou]

Age of Mythology Civ

It never occurred to me! This is the best option! I so need this now!

 

[Mount Suribachi]

They are definitely working on another project - about 2 years ago now they Friaxis they had a new game series in the works (not xcom or civ)). They are quite likely working on Civ 7 as well, at least the game engine, as that work starts 3-5 years ahead of release usually.

I've long been of the opinion that NFP was a way for Firaxis to maintain some cashflow for as little resource as possible, enabling them to start diverting resources away towards Civ VII or XCOM 3 or Whatever.

And I don't blame them for that. I remember an interview with Gabe Newell after Half Life 2 was released talking about having to write payroll cheques for a million dollars month after month and constantly being under pressure to release the game before he was ready to.

But having said that, please Firaxis, can we have some QoL updates, and please please please can you stop the constant console crashes?

 

[bbbt]

I've long been of the opinion that NFP was a way for Firaxis to maintain some cashflow for as little resource as possible, enabling them to start diverting resources away towards Civ VII or XCOM 3 or Whatever.

And I don't blame them for that. I remember an interview with Gabe Newell after Half Life 2 was released talking about having to write payroll cheques for a million dollars month after month and constantly being under pressure to release the game before he was ready to.

I read an article about this in general in the game world a while ago, but it's explicitly the Art/Design/etc resources. Basically the software engineering resources primarily get moved to making the game engine of the next game, and this sort of DLC allows them to keep paying art/production/design/etc resources. Previously those resources we usually temporary/contract employees that basically got hired for a year and then let go until they got rehired for the final push for the next game, etc.

 

[LMT]

So I hate to bring this up, but many people (myself included) are assuming there will be a Civ VII.

While I think it's likely there will be, eventually, wouldn't the series need to end? Has anyone at Firaxis hinted that they're working on VII?

 

[InsidiousMage]

While I think it's likely there will be, eventually, wouldn't the series need to end?

I mean, when it stops selling sure but according to Firaxis the NFP beat sales estimates so there is no reason to stop.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Comments like this make me think it's not finished:-

“Absolutely. I think we definitely considered it a success,” Schultz tells us. “We did have a sales expectation that we met.”


Strenger was also very positive about the project, as it helped the studio meet some player engagement goals as well: “One of the goals that I had as a designer coming in and doing the Frontier Pass… Can we keep Civ more in people’s lives? By having them play more and have something to look forward to every month instead of these awkward gaps of radio silence in between bigger releases?”

 

[DJ_Tanner]

By all accounts it would make sense they are done on the dev cycle, but those public comments, I don't think would make that definitive. He very easily could have meant final game update for the NFP and just phrased it awkwardly. Giving pressers can always be a bit of trouble when you are trying to say things and say nothing at all at the same time.

That being said, there could be a couple more things to squeeze into the framework and of course you can always fart out new civs to your heart's content, but I don't think that is the plan. The game great, and will happily enjoy it until VII is released.

 

[konokoni]

Yeah, no way. I'm all for paying when I get new content, but bug fixes and UI improvements aren't new content. They're fixing stuff that should have been fixed before it was released. That stuff shouldn't be paid for separately.

Philosophically, I agree with you 100%. The game should be complete at launch and only get better from there. But practically, no game ever is nowadays, and with very few exceptions (most of them in the indie space) games stop getting bug fixes and balance improvements when they stop earning enough money to justify the expense. So, how do you get long-term support for something not earning revenue? "Player good will" is obviously not enough for a franchise as big as Civ; millions will buy each installment on release, regardless of what happened over the last installment's lifespan. A few boycotts here and there mean nothing at this scale.

I feel that most games hit a point of diminishing returns for new content, after which it doesn't really add to the fun of the experience. But, even when that time comes, I may still be enjoying the game. I just want additional layers of polish & refinement for what's already there. How can I get that without also paying for a bunch of extra stuff I have no interest in? And wouldn't I get better results if the resources invested were directed entirely towards said improvements, instead of being split towards generating and integrating new content as well?

If I'm being honest with myself I would (grudgingly) pay for a year dedicated entirely to AI / UI / balance. More than anything else, improvements in those areas would increase my enjoyment of the game. Since Firaxis wouldn't be chasing a moving target I think the results would be better. But (almost) no one will pay for that, even if we assume that there needs to be some revenue to justify the activity. The Paradox model is our current best approximation, but IMO polish takes a back seat to new content under that paradigm.

Given a choice between all polish / some polish with new content / nothing at all, I'd rather just pay directly for the polish, even if the idea of doing so is somewhat distasteful. It's a hot-take, but I don't see a world in which Firaxis significantly improves these areas without some income to back it up, and I think Civ VI has enough systems & content at this point.

 

[ManoftheHour333]

I don't think Humankind will be any kind of threat to Civ, but I do think it will influence Civ7's development simply because we know from Civ6 that Firaxis is conscious of Amplitude. As for optimism, I'm optimistic because Amplitude makes good games. I don't expect it to replace Civ but to be something different.


Please learn to use multiquote so your replies don't get buried inside the quote! Anyway, I emphatically disagree. Phoenicia was not remotely European; it was a firmly east-oriented society far more under the influence of Egypt and Babylon than Greece. If you see similarities between Phoenician and Greek culture, that's because the Phoenicians influenced the Greeks, not the other way around (including loaning the Greeks a few gods, like Aphrodite and Adonis). The Carthaginians became Hellenized to a limited degree (they translated Greek plays and even wrote some of their own), but the Greek city-states were a backwater when Phoenicia proper was at its height. Also interesting to note that the Phoenicians not only resisted Hellenization; they also resisted Aramaicization. The Phoenician language didn't give way to Aramaic until the first century AD, which is several centuries after Hebrew became a liturgical language. (Punic probably continued to be spoken in North Africa until the Islamic conquest.) tl;dr: the Phoenicians were unmistakably Asian.

I'm sorry about the multiquoting-kinda new here! It bothers me too when my entire respond appears as editing a quote for sure too...how does one actually do that on this forum so I can fix this problem lmao

Anyways I do agree that technically speaking, the Phoenicians are geographically asian. But they're just as asian as cypriots...but we also run into the issue that while the earliest parts of Phoenicia were undoubtedly more Babylonian/near eastern, the civ presented in the game is more a grouping of the various Mediterranean colonies (Lol it's their ability name) and it's partially-Carthiginian (Or at least she "founded" it...so does that make her Carthiginian???) leader...it's a mix match of all of the civilizations history so you tend to get mixing with North African and European cultures. It's just the slightly inaccurate portrayal of the civs in Civ...it's just a part of the game.

I really misspoke when I said the Phoenicians were moreso Europeans though. I tend to go by cultural groupings instead of strict geographic or linguistic ones personally and therefore think of Europe as consisting of 3 groups...the anglo/germanic/nordic in the west, the slavic/nordic in the east, and the Mediterranean in the south. The final group is one that overlaps with north Africa and the near east (I.e. Lebanon, Turkey, Cyprus, etc.) based moreso on culture. So in my eyes they are part of a cultural group that includes more classically European states like Greece, Italy, and Spain.

Given that there are so many Mediterranean civs and that they all have a shared history/culture to some degree, I think the region acts as it's own continent of sorts-perhaps separate from Europe all together. There are some kinks in that mindset (Egypt and France immediately come to mind) but it's just my opinion. It's a subcontinent at least and imo should be treated as one to make the most sense instead of locking each cultural/civ into it's own continent when there was much more mixing and the world didn't look like that then to the people living there.