In all likelihood, they don't even know themselves if they are going to get approved for another round of content. That's why the heavily qualified statements and otherwise silence on the matter. They probably need 2K approval for the next Pass's budget, which will require a retrospective analysis of NFP.
In all likelihood, they don't even know themselves if they are going to get approved for another round of content. That's why the heavily qualified statements and otherwise silence on the matter. They probably need 2K approval for the next Pass's budget, which will require a retrospective analysis of NFP.
You think so? I would imagine any plans for near term future content (if they have any) are already down on paper given the long lead time to create new content.
You think so? I would imagine any plans for near term future content (if they have any) are already down on paper given the long lead time to create new content.
Hopefully we get a clear signal either way sometime in the not too distant future. I'd love to see a second pass. I think NFP's been a huge success, and I love seeing the Civ team run wild with these fun ideas. But it does seem like they're wrapping up.
Incidentally, I still wonder if NFP might have been better as a full-scale third expansion, along the lines of what @acluewithout was always suggesting, as then all the systems could have interacted more cleanly. (And then to have had a pass with modes after the 3XP...) But I think it's been a success nonetheless. And I can definitely say that the pass model increased my engagement with the game as the content was released.
If Civ VI really is done, I'd like to see another spinoff. I never picked up BE because the press was so bad, but an Age of Mythology type game would be super fun. (I feel like I saw it suggested here, or maybe I'm misremembering.)
A spinoff would also allow for more time to breathe before an eventual Civ VII. I don't know how they could even start on a Civ VII right now as VI is so fully-featured that it will be very hard to go back to a base game. I think the revamp gets harder every time. There need to be radical changes to make a Civ VII worthwhile, in my opinion.
I think this. I don’t know, but it doesn’t really feel like Civ VI is done and something is cooking. Another season pass, or some sort of “legacy dlc” that hits a few notes from prior games.
I don’t get the feeling that the Firaxis guys are bored by Civ VI yet, and that must help. Civ VI is the civiest-civ that ever cived, and that must be fun to work on at some level.
If anything, this balance patch has actually changed my opinion that more stuff must be coming along the way. Even if it's another balance patch or a couple more mini-civs, so many of their choices of buffs and nerfs are just baffling...unless there are going to be new systems to even things out a bit. Or at least spice things up a little more to give the civs that were seemingly shafted (Egypt, Scotland, etc.) something to make people want to play them. It's just weird...
Since they haven't said anything yet and I do think we're too far away for Civ VII yet (I'm thinking 2023 at this point), I could totally see them adding another season pass full of updates and potentially more content. Maybe they'd announce this around the time of the Civilization series anniversary this fall. I'd much rather see another season of "meh" content that balances things out that they can produce for cheaper than a huge Civ VII that's half-baked and is going to be relentlessly compared to Humankind, CK II, and even Civ VI. Just my thoughts.
If anything, this balance patch has actually changed my opinion that more stuff must be coming along the way. Even if it's another balance patch or a couple more mini-civs, so many of their choices of buffs and nerfs are just baffling...unless there are going to be new systems to even things out a bit. Or at least spice things up a little more to give the civs that were seemingly shafted (Egypt, Scotland, etc.) something to make people want to play them. It's just weird...
Since they haven't said anything yet and I do think we're too far away for Civ VII yet (I'm thinking 2023 at this point), I could totally see them adding another season pass full of updates and potentially more content. Maybe they'd announce this around the time of the Civilization series anniversary this fall. I'd much rather see another season of "meh" content that balances things out that they can produce for cheaper than a huge Civ VII that's half-baked and is going to be relentlessly compared to Humankind, CK II, and even Civ VI. Just my thoughts.
I've had similar thoughts. The rebalance doesn't seem like it is a final cap polishing everything off - they missed several obvious tweaks. Maybe it means nothing, but I wonder if they're going to do more content, and that's why Scotland wasn't buffed, for example - the new content requires specific buffs for it, but doing it now would give the game away, so they left it.
Pure speculation, of course. I could easily be wrong.
The same here, but I struggle to understand what's the point for a video game company? As long as the NFP sells, what does it matter whether player are engaged or not? If someone could enlighten me
You can't change your farming district to a mining district if iron/niter/etc pops up in that tile. You can change improvements. Or replace a farm with a neighborhood.
I'm wondering if that's what they're going to do, a bunch of alts or persona packs? Perhaps Teddy and Cathy were them dipping their toes into the water, as it were. Not sure how I feel about that, though.
The same here, but I struggle to understand what's the point for a video game company? As long as the NFP sells, what does it matter whether player are engaged or not? If someone could enlighten me
I think we've seen the last of the big full scale expansion packs. From everything that has been said it has been a great success - commercially and in smoothing out workoads for the whole team (not just coders but graphical / marketing etc).
Engagement means more people talking about your product, more streamers playing it etc which all, presumably, translates not just into sales but positive feelings about the game - if you are more casual than us fanatics and have ended up playing more Civ VI every time a new update has come out you will likely feel you got your moneys worth and are are more likely to buy the next season pass / version etc.
Never in my life have I ever seen a "notarised legal document". I'm talking about ordinary communication between normal people. Perhaps in your neck of the woods it's different?
I think we've seen the last of the big full scale expansion packs. From everything that has been said it has been a great success - commercially and in smoothing out workoads for the whole team (not just coders but graphical / marketing etc).
Engagement means more people talking about your product, more streamers playing it etc which all, presumably, translates not just into sales but positive feelings about the game - if you are more casual than us fanatics and have ended up playing more Civ VI every time a new update has come out you will likely feel you got your moneys worth and are are more likely to buy the next season pass / version etc.
It was great for the streamers, too. Everyone tuned in for the new patches and leaders. Overall, it's a pretty good model with one major, major flaw. It's the same flaw that ruins Paradox DLCs: each DLC can't assume that you own any of the previous DLCs. So, the systems don't work together, the leaders don't take advantage of the new "modes", etc. It all feels too disjointed.
This is why expansions used to include the rules from the previous expansions!
I don't know how to fix this problem, but if there's a good solution, then I wouldn't at all mind moving to monthly or bi-monthly releases instead of annual expansions.
It was great for the streamers, too. Everyone tuned in for the new patches and leaders. Overall, it's a pretty good model with one major, major flaw. It's the same flaw that ruins Paradox DLCs: each DLC can't assume that you own any of the previous DLCs. So, the systems don't work together, the leaders don't take advantage of the new "modes", etc. It all feels too disjointed.
This is why expansions used to include the rules from the previous expansions!
I don't know how to fix this problem, but if there's a good solution, then I wouldn't at all mind moving to monthly or bi-monthly releases instead of annual expansions.
The only way I can think of is to make all the packs mandatory, a la Breath of the Wild. You can only buy the entire pack, but they are still released in packs. Still, each segment would have to be playable without future content, which would create much more work for the devs. It's a tradeoff.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
