Henri Christophe
L'empereur
I started to play on civ5, I never played ancient games.
Official announcement: Hot off the presses. Next Civ game in development!!!!!!!
- Thread starter blackbutterfly
- Start date
V was a disappointment to me - I mean, granted, I still put in like 700 hours to the game or something, but it was the only game that I put away well before the next iteration came out and just couldn't go back to.
But, that being said, I think it changed a lot of stuff for the better that after it came out, no matter how disappointed I was with it, I could just never pick up 4 again and get back into it.
I think it's a lot in the nature of modern games to not give a lot of modding. You can change things here or there, but if they allow too much flexibility in modding, suddenly they're selling an engine more than a game. You run the risk of someone putting out a killer mod that vultures a future DLC that you could put out. Especially in the DLC/game mode model, I don't think we'll ever get back to the vast ability to mod like existed in the previous games.
The best part of VI to me, that no matter what deficiencies might exist, is that you can always replay it just to optimize your empire. I can play the game to try to build the best industrial zone triangle, to get the perfect Suguba setup, to get the most beautiful preserve, to build the most wonders, etc... And to me, at least, that will always give me something to do with the game. I think since it's come out, sure I've gone a few months maybe at a time without playing it, but it always has drawn me back. There's always a new way to approach the game and set yourself a challenge.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2017
- Messages
- 4,111
I just don't think that's the case. First of all, mod users are a tiny fraction of all Civ players--especially now that Civ 6 has proliferated across platforms that do not support modding.
I also don't think Firaxis is frightened away from certain content as a result of modders. For instance, there was a popular natural disasters mod before Gathering Storm, there have been popular mods of civs like Ethiopia and Gaul before Firaxis released those factions...Moreover, many popular mods for Civ 6 require the big DLC. Mods sell DLC, they don't take away sales.
I think Firaxis clearly respects the modding community. They reference it a lot, and despite the complaints from people who don't actually make mods, the modding tools for Civ 6 are robust and in many ways more flexible than what we had in Civ 5.
I think we may not see source code released due to potential legal issues and corporate policy, not a fear that modders are going to one-up the devs. The gaming landscapes of 2005 and 2010 are alien to how gaming is today. It's more mainstream and corporate than ever.
To go back to the "other games in the genre are competition" bit, while I don't think that's necessarily true, that doesn't mean there couldn't be someone who did strike upon a winning formula.
I like Civ's rule of thirds - it allowed them to deliver VI after V, and I feel it took enough risks (particularly in the art style and unpacking the cities) that really paid off. I don't think they should be any less conservative than that, and like a discussion I had earlier in the thread with other folk - I agree that another game doing something poorly isn't a reason to not try the thing in Civilisation.
My hot take is: conservativism holds games back. At the same time, really pushing the envelope can alienate fans and cause a game that might be good, to be received poorly. Because we don't all play games that are "good". Much like we don't all enjoy movies that are "good". This isn't to say Civ as a franchise isn't full of great entries, because imo it has a bunch. What I'm trying to say is that a lot of us look for different things in a Civ game. A Civ game can certainly be competent, a "Civ" game in spirit, and still not for me personally. The same holds true for a lot of players.
The tricky bit is trying to evolve the franchise at a pace its fanbase is - on the whole - positive about.
I like Civ's rule of thirds - it allowed them to deliver VI after V, and I feel it took enough risks (particularly in the art style and unpacking the cities) that really paid off. I don't think they should be any less conservative than that, and like a discussion I had earlier in the thread with other folk - I agree that another game doing something poorly isn't a reason to not try the thing in Civilisation.
My hot take is: conservativism holds games back. At the same time, really pushing the envelope can alienate fans and cause a game that might be good, to be received poorly. Because we don't all play games that are "good". Much like we don't all enjoy movies that are "good". This isn't to say Civ as a franchise isn't full of great entries, because imo it has a bunch. What I'm trying to say is that a lot of us look for different things in a Civ game. A Civ game can certainly be competent, a "Civ" game in spirit, and still not for me personally. The same holds true for a lot of players.
The tricky bit is trying to evolve the franchise at a pace its fanbase is - on the whole - positive about.
glaivemaster
Prince
Other games in the same space also don't have to be threatening to Civ in order to improve it - a lot of the people making the game are likely to also be fans of the genre, and any interesting ideas that other games come up with will fuel new ideas for what they're currently working on. It's as simple as "hey that's cool, what if we did something like that"
blackbutterfly
Emperor
Yes, new guard at Firaxis.
Though YouTubers like PotatoMcWhiskey have suggested this is more likely to impact XCOM and Marvel's Midnight Suns.
(It's a brilliant game BTW! I played it last weekend).
More relevant is Anton Strenger's departure last year.
And "Carlbarian's" promotion(?) to Junior Designer from QA.
I'm in IT, so I know what it's like when there are conflicting personalities.
It seems like Carl won. And Anton got ousted.
I feel for Anton, cos I'm usually that guy
(But don't worry, in tech, usually you end up with a better paid job and an accelerated career!)
It looks to me like Ed wants to hand over reigns to Carl.
But Carl is still too junior to lead Civ VII (that is 7) perhaps?
So re: "next iteration of Civ" I hate to say it but it looks like it's going to be BE2 (or a space Civ) rather than a direct successor to Civ VI.
Soz.
By the following dev cycle (assuming Carl works on BE2 as well) he maybe experienced enough to lead Civ VII.
I put the odds of the next game not being Civ VII at 0%. They wouldn't have bothered to pre-announce a spin-off game and they're already dropped many hints about it being Civilization VII. Also, they haven't bothered to correct us, which they probably would do if the next game wasn't VII.
Anyway, Potato is just speculating. I really doubt that there was a big conflict between Carl and Anton and that Firaxis sided with the QA guy over a lead developer. More likely, Carl wanted to try designing, so they gave him a new job. Anton left for other reasons. And it would be strange to put the new Junior Designer in charge of the next big game with almost no experience. Maybe some day!
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2017
- Messages
- 4,111
Man that’s really wild speculation with no factual basis whatsoever. I think it borders on rude to speculate about personal circumstances like that.More relevant is Anton Strenger's departure last year.
And "Carlbarian's" promotion(?) to Junior Designer from QA.
I'm in IT, so I know what it's like when there are conflicting personalities.
It seems like Carl won. And Anton got ousted.
I feel for Anton, cos I'm usually that guy
And it doesn’t really even make sense. Anton was a high-up developer with both extensive design and coding experience. Ed said that Carl only designs, doesn’t code. It’s not the same role at all.
You don't have to like them, and anyway, here's a brief explanation.
Specifically in the Barbarian Invasion iteration, you start in the Mediterranean at about 300 AD and cities have population that is majority Pagan or Christian (I don't know by how much you can mod this) and there's a risk of revolt if your official religion and/or whichever dynast you select as official governor has an antagonistic one. The religion is specific to each city's separate population, although you can, of course, help whichever one is more useful towards your designs.
In the earlier, sprite-based iterations of Civ, you actually could just convert the graphics and sounds of units from similar games (including AOE) into Civ.
Eeeeh, but fantasy-themed edit(ion)s of Civ have long been part of the game's traditions. Even to the point of Firaxis-made Easter Eggs™.
Last edited:
SammyKhalifa
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,748
Honestly theological combat would be the very first thing I'd axe as part of the "one third."
It brought some changes to the religious game, and a way to actively manage and defend against religious pressure. But yeah, swarms of apostles and lightning in battle is a little over the top that I would love to see a much better way to handle it.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,056
Considering, only a minority of religions have lightning as a symbol of Divine wrath, anyways (Christianity - and really only in pop culture, Olympianism, Shinto if it's Raijin (better known in the West as Raiden) involved, and maybe a scattering of others, but not all or even a majority.
For that reason, is why I wished the Statue of Zeus would have made your religious units stronger in combat.
Leucarum
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,772
it's the micromanagement which kills the system for me... But I understand why people find it glaringly weird in a game that - prior to expansions - eschewed otherwise fantastical elements
blackbutterfly
Emperor
Theological combat should have been a game mode.
Loyalty could also have been a mode. (Maybe incorporate into Dramatic Ages?)
HUMANKIND's influence is a much better system.
blackbutterfly
Emperor
NDA?
Well, considering the escalating number of bugs and exploits in Civ VI I can imagine conflict between QA and Dev.
Anton should have been lead developer on Civ VII (7) following FXS convention.
So either they have/are hiring a new lead developer from outside (Mohawk, Amplitude, etc.) or they wait until Carl is ready. (I doubt Ed is going to return to his old position of Lead Developer for Civ VII. Careers are upward progressions).
@pokiehl
It's a year on. Anton has settled into a new job, with probably better pay! IDK
In FXS last livestream Ed said a new "design team" has been created for Leader Pass (and henceforth).
So Civ VII is likely going to have a Lead Designer and a Lead Developer.
AntSou
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2019
- Messages
- 3,052
I don't even mind having a religious unit moving about, or frankly even the religious combat. What bothers me most of all is the unnecessary amount of types of religious units and the unit spam. There's no reason not to condense everything in an Apostle unit and then promote the unit in accordance to your needs, using an open promotion tree, rather than the randomised promotions they get atm.
It's nothing to do with an NDA. If we're wrong about the next game being VII, despite absolutely everything pointing in that direction, then it's in Firaxis's interests to tell us so in order to avoid massive disappointment later. Remember the mobile Diablo announcement? Nobody wants to repeat that.
The rest is just speculative nonsense. All indications are that Ed Beech is going to lead design for Civ VII since he was recently announced as the franchise lead.
blackbutterfly
Emperor
Recently?
2017 or 2018 I think
Ed became franchise lead as Anton Strenger became Lead Developer on Rise & Fall
https://www.civilization.com/en-GB/news/entries/announcing-civilization-vi-rise-and-fall/
Similar threads
- Locked
