How do you think Civ VII competes best against the rivals?
I think it's the other way around: How the "Rivals" could compete best once Civ VII releases. Because there is no Competition for Civ, until one of those new 4X Games actually has a good start, and keeps growing for a couple of years. Calling 1 of those Games a "Competitor/Rival" to Civ is just putting too much trust in something that we know nothing about not to mention how it will end up in a couple Years.
Don't get me wrong, some of those Games look promising and have potential, but establishing a Competitor where none of them comes close to even Civ 5 in terms of success and popularity is a bit of a stretch if you ask me. But let's take a look at those Games for a moment:
The ones released so far:
- Old World: a 4X and good Game for sure, but clearly not a Civ Competitor. Why? Bc for one, it's a completely different Game, that shouldn't be compared directly to Civ-like Games - It's not a Civ alternative. It has Elements that will never fit in a Civ Game, and it's also much shorter. I'm only putting it here to remind people of that. Old World is it's own thing. For the other, the Game barely has more active Steam Players than Beyond Earth, a practically dead Civ Game. Yes, Old World didn't initially release on Steam, but it's nearly 2 Years since the release on Steam, and seeing even Civ3 (a decades old Game) having nearly double the
active Players there doesn't exactly scream "Civ Competitor". But, even if it's not something for me, it's a good game for sure.
- Humankind: a Civ-like Game through and through, raised enough clout before release (the best at marketing itself as a Civ-like game so far, and its Art-style was also well done), and had tons of potential to be a good alternative to Civ, if not a close rival. But somehow they messed up the Game's potential along the way. I have no Idea when/how that started, could have been even before the release, but the Game certainly lacks a clear Vision. I have no Idea if the Game will ever be more successful/popular than during its early release Days.
The upcoming ones:
- Millennia: this Game has many interesting Mechanics, and that's where it shines in most. The 2 most Interesting "Flagship" Mechanics are the dynamic Eras System and the Resource Management System. Problem is, the Former is 1) forced, 2) doesn't seem to be interesting enough to carry the Game on its own. And the latter is already part of the Mechanics kit of ARA, where it looks like to be better integrated into the Game and playing an important role, instead of just having resources give more of a certain yield, which seems to be the case in Millennia. And then there is the Elephant in the Room: Graphics. I said this elsewhere, but Visuals are part of a Game's Appeal, and should be treated as equally as its Mechanics, if not greater at first. The first Impressions of a Player are always the Visuals, and most People, especially today, also play with their Eyes (you know, like the saying "eating with the Eyes"), and neglecting that will certainly do no good to the Game. I see no Competition for Civ here, not even for older Civ Games.
- ARA: This is where it becomes interesting for me. The only thing that I don't like about this Game, is the 'look' of the UI, bc it looks like a placeholder to me. And even if the Artstyle of the Game (Map, Characters...etc.) might not be really unique and inspired (but rich in detail!), it feels like it fits to the Game, and as the previous Dev Video has shown, that was on purpose. Which I don't think takes much away from the Game. But apart from that, all I hear about this Game sounds great. Nothing individually that sticks out much so far, but the sum of the improvements and details that the game offers overall speaks for a very solid and grounded game, a Game with a clear Vision and Design in mind. Which I think is enough, no need for a fancy new mechanic to stick out from other 4X Games. Let the Game slowly grow from that. IMHO, this is the best way to introduce a 4X Historical game that may pass the "Test of Time". Thus, if there is any potential "Civ Rival", then it's goint to be ARA. But definitely not at release. This is the only Game that convinces me so far. Looking forward to this Fall!
All in all, even if you combine all these 4 Games together, they won't suddenly become a Civ "Rival". Even if we consider Civ6 to never have been released, and its release was this year, 2024, it would still put all of them in the Shadows. Perhaps even Civ5 would do that! I think Firaxis, over the many Years, has proven to be a reliable Studio to make a popular and successful 4X Game. And all the other Studios have proven to me, is that the way Firaxis makes, markets and communicates (or lack thereof) its Civ Games, was the better approach after all. Not to say that there is no room for improvements, mind you, but if I have any criticism about Firaxis and hesitation about Civilization VII, then its bc of reasons that only the Hardcore Fans care about, like Modding or Dev Diaries (Victoria3 is the best by far in this regard, and Firaxis should take some notes from them IMO).
TL;DR: Civilization VII doesn't have any Competition. Once it releases all Talk about other 4X historical games will fade away and shift towards Civ7, even without any Marketing/Advertising of the Game. The other Civ-like Games need to prove themselves first and grow before they can be
considered potential Competition.
).
), and that's it, to the point it even becomes pathetical. As to "Gilgabro", I feel like I cheat when he amasses 4-5 donkeys in my borders and I ask him for friendship, he accepts and he has no choice to go find another target... that's totally broken and it's a good example of how I feel about Civ6 in general.
