Next Civ game most likely will be a fantasy game

[Boris Gudenuf]

Reference all the discussion of reviews and criteria for judging a game (and by extension, anything else). Many decades ago, about the time that the 'internet' was an obscure system used only by a couple of universities and a bunch of military research installations, one science fiction writer wrote a story which very accurately forecast our current situation: the most valuable job in his future society was someone who could identify, review, and accurately relay to everyone else what was good, bad, or worthless in the absolute deluge of data and information with which they were being bombarded.

Sound familiar?

Not only in gaming, where a really informative review is priceless compared to the dreck from shills, opinions, and reviews that are simply informationally void comments, but everywhere on the internet we are deluged in dreck with little way to dig out the useful from the simply numbing.

At the very least, everyone should remember (Theodore) Sturgeon's Rule:

"99% of Everything is Crap."

It applies most definitely to Reviews, Opinions, Poll Results and the internet in general . . .

 

[Haig]

I think a sign of quality for a computer game is how many people are playing it:
People watch a bad film once and never return to it, so it might have a big revenue but no lasting value.

Good games are played for years with constant big player base.

(Of course there are great games with a small base but those are usually some niche genre and cult classics)

 

[Irealys]

So I don't get why some people are saying civ 6 is a failure.

Cause people are dumb. They think if they dislike something, it HAS to mean it's a failure, no matter if the reason they dislike something makes sense or not. Very few people can just dislike something of quality and recognize it. Civ is a great game. It's another solid game by Firaxis who always release quality games. You might not like them but Civ and X-Com are well made games. That doens't stop idiot from putting a not recommended on a game because it has an external launcher, as if that was an indication of quality of the game.

And when people dislike the art style of a game (let's say a 4X game that is too "bright and cartoony" for angsty teenagers to appreciate because it's not in the Snyder palette, then it's not just a game with a visual style they don't like, it's "the worst game Civ has ever made" and they'd be willing to make that review before ever playing the game. I remember hearing those. So why the fudge should you care about the reviews of a game? You shouldn't. The opinion of gamers? NEVER. Do you know how many years in a row I have heard that DCUO (an MMO) was about to close? 9 years. It was released 10 years ago. Because the people who disliked the game couldn't comprehend that someone else could like it. They still can't. The game is still out and it's still played. Just like Civ 6 is still played despite it being "the worse gme Sid Meiers ever done, so bad it's unplayable lol"

And it's the reason why 4/6 of the the Season Pass mods were fantasy stuff instead of stuff most people asked for. It was Firaxis method to tenderize Civ6 players into the idea:

*Apocalypse mode with disaster calling soothsayers.
*SS mode with vampires, mages, illuminati and Cthulhu cultists.
*Legendary mythological heroes.
*Zombie mode.

On top of that the Atlantis hint in the TSL Earth map along the elephants in the last season pass video.

That is some WEAK ASS proof. Was the content that was added in the last additional content from ANY previous game the basis for the next game? Not once you say? And that's why your argument is dumb.

Civilization. Read the name again. No, read it again. I said again. Clearly you haven't looked at it enough. READ IT AGAIN!!!

Not random stuff, Civilization. That's the name of the game. Every single game followed the same formula, most of them had downloadable content, some of that content was fantasy related before too, BUT IT STILL CAME BACK AS A CIV GAME ON THE NEXT RELEASE.

Moderator Action: Please refrain from flaming other forum members. Site rules regarding flaming can be found here under Civility & Discussion: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889 ~ LK

 

[Pistol90]

I think there is legitimate worry about game going fantasy/futuristic .... If you play game CIV6 with everything for that game (all expansions and DLC's) which is in my mind finished/last version of any game ... in Civ6 you will have wizards calling natural disasters, vampires fighting giant robots, mayan apocalypse happening etc ....

This is 100% of the game, and if you want normal realistic some history-based game, you need to cut it to 80% of content and play.

 

[Sherlock]

Civ 6 isn't too shaby on sales part of success either. So civ 6 is successful in both terms of sucess-by gamers and by sales. So I don't get why some people are saying civ 6 is a failure.

Because it's not as good as CiV.

 

[Zaarin]

I think there is legitimate worry about game going fantasy/futuristic .... If you play game CIV6 with everything for that game (all expansions and DLC's) which is in my mind finished/last version of any game ... in Civ6 you will have wizards calling natural disasters, vampires fighting giant robots, mayan apocalypse happening etc ....

This is 100% of the game, and if you want normal realistic some history-based game, you need to cut it to 80% of content and play.

The devs explicitly said that modes were extras you could turn on or not, and I'm pretty sure they advised against turning all of them on at once. So Civ6 with all modes enabled isn't really the finished game so much as ruining your own game with too many barely compatible dev-made mods. That being said, ignoring modes, I think NFP killed Civ6. The new civs were poorly made and poorly thought out and detracted from the overall game.

On the topic of "will the next Civ game be a fantasy game," neither the OP nor anyone else was suggesting Civ7 would be a fantasy game. We're talking about a Beyond Earth-style spinoff. Personally I'm of the opinion we won't see a spinoff. Economically moving straight to Civ7 makes more sense.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think there is legitimate worry about game going fantasy/futuristic .... If you play game CIV6 with everything for that game (all expansions and DLC's) which is in my mind finished/last version of any game ... in Civ6 you will have wizards calling natural disasters, vampires fighting giant robots, mayan apocalypse happening etc ....

This is 100% of the game, and if you want normal realistic some history-based game, you need to cut it to 80% of content and play.

Well what is considered a complete game is subjective considering the modes are optional. I mean technically even the expansions are optional.
That being said my complete version of the game is all the civs enabled with GS rules along with Monopolies/Corporation and Barbarian Clans turned on.

The devs explicitly said that modes were extras you could turn on or not, and I'm pretty sure they advised against turning all of them on at once. So Civ6 with all modes enabled isn't really the finished game so much as ruining your own game with too many barely compatible dev-made mods. That being said, ignoring modes, I think NFP killed Civ6. The new civs were poorly made and poorly thought out and detracted from the overall game.

I think the main downside is the civs were designed to be compatible with the base game and not the expansions. That being said there definitely were highlights and don't consider it a total failure. I did enjoy the overall contents of the Ethiopia Pack as well as the Vietnam/Kublai Khan pack. The others were a mixed bag though.

 

[Zaarin]

I think the main downside is the civs were designed to be compatible with the base game and not the expansions. That being said there definitely were highlights and don't consider it a total failure. I did enjoy the overall contents of the Ethiopia Pack as well as the Vietnam/Kublai Khan pack. The others were a mixed bag though.

I liked Maya and Vietnam. But graphically the NFP leaders and other art assets were substandard (shockingly substandard compared to the higher bar set by GS, but substandard even by base game standards), and the designs really felt like they were scraping the bottom of the barrel. Overall, Civ6 was a better game before NFP. (Which was very disappointing as it added four of my favorite civs--Maya, Ethiopia, Babylon, and Byzantium--plus a civ, Gaul, that I had been asking for for a long time. Sadly I only actually liked their implementation of one-and-a-half of them: I liked Maya and didn't hate Ethiopia. I'm okay with Babylon now that I've modded it to be nothing like Firaxis's boneheaded design...No offence to the Minbari.)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I liked Maya and Vietnam. But graphically the NFP leaders and other art assets were substandard (shockingly substandard compared to the higher bar set by GS, but substandard even by base game standards), and the designs really felt like they were scraping the bottom of the barrel. Overall, Civ6 was a better game before NFP. (Which was very disappointing as it added four of my favorite civs--Maya, Ethiopia, Babylon, and Byzantium--plus a civ, Gaul, that I had been asking for for a long time. Sadly I only actually liked their implementation of one-and-a-half of them: I liked Maya and didn't hate Ethiopia. I'm okay with Babylon now that I've modded it to be nothing like Firaxis's boneheaded design...No offence to the Minbari.)

Yeah I took in to consideration not only the design of the civs but the game modes as well and it's an even split when it comes to them. I could live without Dramatic Ages, Apocalypse and definitely the Zombie Mode.

 

[Zaarin]

Yeah I took in to consideration not only the design of the civs but the game modes as well and it's an even split when it comes to them. I could live without Dramatic Ages, Apocalypse and definitely the Zombie Mode.

I like the idea of Dramatic Ages, but it needs a lot of polish that it will never get.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I like the idea of Dramatic Ages, but it needs a lot of polish that it will never get.

Dramatic Ages is a Mode that I always use, because it is close to what I thought 'Ages' should have always been. But, at least in Civ VI, I doubt that the Ages will be developed any further to get a real Rise and Fall mechanic that the game desperately needs.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Dramatic Ages is a Mode that I always use, because it is close to what I thought 'Ages' should have always been. But, at least in Civ VI, I doubt that the Ages will be developed any further to get a real Rise and Fall mechanic that the game desperately needs.

I agree with what you are saying. The reason I don't necessarily play with it on is because there's no Normal Ages, which I understand why. But going from one extreme to the other every turn with nothing in between isn't for me.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I agree with what you are saying. The reason I don't necessarily play with it on is because there's no Normal Ages, which I understand why. But going from one extreme to the other every turn with nothing in between isn't for me.

After 3000 + hours of playing, I find that most of my Civ VI games are now played with gritted teeth putting up with systems that are Not Quite What I Want but are all that's available . . .

 

[Thormodr]

Just say no to a Fantasy Civ VII. However, a spinoff would be fine like Fall from Heaven. That is how a fantasy civ should be done. Well, that and Fantastic Worlds from Civ II.

Anyway, keep the main game as it has always been. Earth history-ish.

Because it's not as good as CiV.

Disagree about that. Civilization 5 was an unmitigated disaster. With Vox Populi, the fan base brought the game up to decent.

Anyway, hoping Civ VII is better than Civ VI and absolutely stomps a mudhole in Civilization 5.

 

[Jkchart]

Because it's not as good as CiV.

That's a fine opinion to have, but it's still an opinion. I rarely found myself drawn to V (and mods weren't enough for me to love it), especially thanks to the horrendous Global Happiness mechanic, railroady social policies that left little room for flexibility, a lackluster sound and music design, and honestly I hate the art style. Civ VI isn't without flaws in art, but V feels incredibly sterile. Civ V was also one of the worst things I'd ever played at launch - people talk about the Civ VI AI and launch as a disaster without accounting for the fact that V was just as awful if not as worse.

Personally, I've had much more fun with VI than V. But to call either a disaster, especially after long development cycles, increased revenue, larger playerbases, increased mod support (V has VI beat there IMO), etc., to call either game in the end a "disaster" is really just someone voicing their opinion on whether they like V or VI better.

Though when Rhye finishes his Civ V Rhye's and fall mod you bet i'm playing that.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Just say no to a Fantasy Civ VII. However, a spinoff would be fine like Fall from Heaven. That is how a fantasy civ should be done. Well, that and Fantastic Worlds from Civ II.

Anyway, keep the main game as it has always been. Earth history-ish.

I don't think anyone here believes that Civ VII will be fantasy, but there are some that say the next civ spinoff game might be.

 

[Sherlock]

I don't think anyone here believes that Civ VII will be fantasy, but there are some that say the next civ spinoff game might be.

People talk about CiVII being announced in the fairly near future. I think we'll see a spin-off game first and then no CiVII for at least another year.

 

[Vandlys]

People talk about CiVII being announced in the fairly near future. I think we'll see a spin-off game first and then no CiVII for at least another year.

I think a spin-off is indeed likely, but am curious to see when it would arrive then. 2022 at the earliest I'd say. So far, Civ VI (incl. DLC cycle) has been released over a longer timespan than the installments before it. The problem with NFP is that I don't think it took too many resources from the whole team, so it might have been working on more behind the scenes than it would have during, say for example, R&F.

If they followed the same release pattern (depending on your viewpoint) the releases would be:
About 1 year after completion of the main series a spin-off is released. This would put the spin-off in 2022.
7 years after the previous main title, the new one would be released. Civ VI released in 2016, so the new main entry would release in 2023. (based on the window between release of IV-V base game, V-VI base game.) Seems unlikely to me.
4 years after the completion of Civ VI the new main title would be released: this would put the release of Civ VII in 2025. (Based on the window between release of IV-V incl DLC and V-VI incl DLC.) Seems more likely to me.

So, a spin-off in 2022, maybe 2023, then a full release in 2025? Seems like a good estimate I'd say. Of course, if they decide to do no spin-off at all, or multiple spin-offs, this whole pattern is disrupted.

According to wikipedia:
There were two years between the completion of Civ IV and the release of V.
There were three years between the completion of Civ V and the release of VI.

There was 0-1 year between the completion of Civ IV and the release of the following spin-off.
There was 1 year between the completion of Civ V and the release of the following spin-off.

Main iteration and expansions (2005-2008):
Civ IV: 2005
Civ IV Warlords: 2006
Civ IV BtS: 2007
Civ IV Colonization: 2008

Spin-offs:
Civ Revolution: 2008 (3)

Main iteration and expansions (2010-2013):
Civ V: 2010 (5 from main title, 2 from spin-off)
Civ V G&K: 2012
Civ V BNW: 2013

Spin-offs:
Civ BE: 2014 (4 from release main)
Civ Revolution 2: 2014 (4 from release main title, 0 from spin-off)

Main iteration and expansions (2016-2021):
Civ VI: 2016 (6 from main title, 2 from spin-off)
Civ VI R&F: 2018
Civ GS: 2019
Civ NFP: 2020-2021

 

[Haig]

I wrote this before but I belive we get Civ announcement this year:

2K Games has written that there will be several Firaxis projects announced this year, including new franchise in August. That game was Midnight Suns.

Now we are supposed to have Civilization 30yrs anniversary specials and surprises so I think announcement of a new Civ would fit there quite nice, with release sometime in 2022.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I wonder what is more likely based off the modes and scenarios?

With Heroes and Legends mode it would be interesting if they expanded that into a Civilization Mythology game with mythological creatures as well as heroes. The concept of Zeus leading Greece, Odin leading the Norse, Ra leading Egypt, Quetzacoatl leading Aztecs, Himiko or Amaterasu leading Japan etc. would be amazing.

I also wouldn't mind an updated Colonization game. After how good that pirate scenario looked I think an updated Colonization game with that same look would be nice too.

Not sure if they would go to sci-fi again though like a BE2?