Official announcement: Hot off the presses. Next Civ game in development!!!!!!!

[Xandinho]

If they listen to the main criticisms we have here regarding Civ6 and think about resolving them in Civ7, then there's a great chance that Civ7 will be a really great game (not that Civ6 isn't already, it's already a great game, despite some problems we always point out here, but it could be a lot better).

In my opinion, they should pay special attention to AI and late game.

 

[pokiehl]

If they could release it on PS5, I would buy it, for a time. But I'm not sure I would buy a brand new computer just for this, I have limited amount of money.

I hear you, but I personally hope they don't hamstring the game by developing it to be optimized for weak and old hardware.

I'm not saying it needs raytracing, but it'd be nice if the game better took advantage of modern clock speeds and core numbers for CPUs, and processing power for GPUs. Imagine a Civ where huge map sizes don't lead to long turn times...

 

[InsidiousMage]

But wonder who would be better.

Firaxis. They already make console games and they just need to make the Civ ports in house already. Its understandable that they didn't do Civ6 in house since they probably weren't staffed for it at the time but they shouldn't have that excuse this time around.

 

[CivLuvah]

The announcement just reminded me to play more Civ6 before we get Civ7. Haven't gotten the chance to go back again since my masters and since Humankind dropped.

 

[TheCleanerDragon]

When's Civ7 getting it's own forum?

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

When's Civ7 getting it's own forum?

Probably when we get the official Press Release for 7.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

When's Civ7 getting it's own forum?

Probably when the marketing campaign officially begins.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Civ 3 was fabulous; Civ 4 was even better. Let's hope 3 + 4 = 7 and makes VII the best yet.

Get crackin' Civ staff.

 

[Thormodr]

I also feel like odd innovates and even refines. Hopefully that means VII will be new and exciting, etc.

III brought us the corruption mechanic and 5 brought us Glo-bull Happiness. Two hamfisted attempts at restraining expansion. *Ugh*

Hopefully they don't go for round three in VII. VI's design was good with ever increasing costs for settlers, builders and districts. Keep or refine that.

 

[<Nexus>]

Imagine a Civ where huge map sizes don't lead to long turn times...

Civ4
At least compared to 5 and 6.
I always chuckle seeing "Huge" maps for 5 or 6. "That's huge for you? It's normal size in Civ4 "
So, there is no need to improve graphics.
...still they will, because that sells the new hardware

 

[Krajzen]

Civ VI was imho the most similar to its precedessor from all civ game transitions. Look at the abyss between civ3 and civ4, or civ4 and civ5, in terms of graphics, engine, map, fundamental mechanics, design philosophy etc and then look at civ5 -> civ6 transition. There were many systems entirely copied straight from civ5 - the way map and terrain work, unit - combat system, religion, trade routes, city borders expansion, tourism, city states, natural wonders, the way production and yields in general work... The main profoundly revolutionary change was city district system, many game mechanics were 'add some stuff on top of what civ5 built'.

Many of those things became stale, or civ6 has proven to be unable to fix some great issues of civ5 or 4x games in genral. Such as
- Horrible exponential yield growth ('snowballing') with no ability to ever catch up for players that have harder early game (the bane of 4X games in general, though I think it is much worse in civ6 than in civ5 or civ4). The game being essentially decided halfway through, with no reason to continue to the stale, predetermined, boring endgame. By far the worst problem of civ6 it kills off half of the game for many people like me.
- Civ 5 legacy problem: AI being unable to offensively threaten the human play past early game, because it turned out designing AI for 1upt is a nightmare. Hence low difficulty, lack of tension, even worse snowballing for human player but also for other AIs (since AIs suck in offense even against each other).
- Civ 5 legacy problem: Logistical micromanagement horror of moving units through rough terrain in 1upt system which wastes a lot of time and cripples AI military even more.
- Lack of internal politics (revolutions, civil wars, actually meaningful per - city happiness, pop "cultural identity" so you can quickly assimilate any conquest). Civ6 amenities are meaningless mechanic and civ6 loyalty is a) Purely external pressure b) Helps already snowballing empires and cripples AI expansion even more instead of reverse relationship.
- Lack of colonialism in any way, shape or form - even if human roleplays it, no AI does it, so there are few lategame oversea empires.
- Lack of World Wars or Cold War due to all diplomacy being bilateral, so no alliance blocs
- (please note how all those latter problems are pillars of the first fundamental problem, of games being won or lost by Renaissance era)

In my view, if civ7 hopes to deal with those major problems which plagued civ6 and sometimes even civ5 (and sometimes even all civ games), it has to revolutionize the way population units, economy, technology, diplomacy and combat system work.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

III brought us the corruption mechanic and 5 brought us Glo-bull Happiness. Two hamfisted attempts at restraining expansion. *Ugh*

Hopefully they don't go for round three in VII. VI's design was good with ever increasing costs for settlers, builders and districts. Keep or refine that.

But lacked any manner of curtailing expansion either. Snowball effect is the biggest buzzkill in a Civ game for me.

Probably when the marketing campaign officially begins.

Jinkxd

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I don't know if this is just my age speaking, but there's a sense of nostalgia for me to experience that buzz like before 6 came out, the speculation, the guessing. I'm looking forward to that.

 

[pokiehl]

Civ4
At least compared to 5 and 6.
I always chuckle seeing "Huge" maps for 5 or 6. "That's huge for you? It's normal size in Civ4 "
So, there is no need to improve graphics.
...still they will, because that sells the new hardware

Yeah, I want better graphics for sure. That’s what I meant about taking advantage of hardware. I feel no shame in wanting that.

Civ 4 is really ugly. Civ 5 is also ugly and looks dated.

 

[Nikolai II]

I don't know if this is just my age speaking, but there's a sense of nostalgia for me to experience that buzz like before 6 came out, the speculation, the guessing. I'm looking forward to that.

Have had that feeling since I joined Apolyton in 2000 at the lead up to CtP and Civ3.

 

[blackbutterfly]

From the Business Wire story ... "As Studio Head, Hazen will manage Firaxis Games' development teams and lead its mission to build the best strategy games on the planet. With 22 years of experience in gaming and entertainment, Hazen joined Firaxis Games in 2020 as the studio's Chief Operating Officer."

She was serving as COO when NFP was released; she's been involved with operations all during the development and launch of Midnight Suns. Her previous experience includes senior roles on hugely popular games at other studios. Those games were not 4X or strategy games, but her experience impresses me as a person who listens to customers, listens to the market.

These announcements seem to mesh well together. They couldn't very well announce Hazen's promotion and Solomon's departure without commenting on the product pipeline.

Yes, good observations on the new head of Firaxis.

My read from this announcement (and having seen the departing Solomon on Firaxis' Midnight Suns livestreams) is it's "in with the new, out with the old".

I mean Ms. Hazen has only been at Firaxis since COVID.
Solomon has spent over two decades at Firaxis.

It seems Midnight Suns wasn't all old Firaxis had hoped for sadly

Steam stats:
MMS - 5,500 players
Civ VI - 50,000 players

Looking at the numbers, it is clear that it is Civilization that is still Firaxis' tentpole.
And that us 4X gamers can't get enough of it and will throw money at 2K+Firaxis for silly things like zombies and vampires.

 

[pokiehl]

And that us 4X gamers can't get enough of it and will throw money at 2K+Firaxis for silly things like zombies and vampires.

I think this really misrepresents the NFP. There was no paid dlc that exclusively involved fantastical elements. They were ancillary to the selling points of new civs.

 

[<Nexus>]

Yeah, I want better graphics for sure. That’s what I meant about taking advantage of hardware. I feel no shame in wanting that.

Better graphics for what reason? Good graphics is for FPS games. In Civ you spend most of your time watching the world from satellite and the rest are diplomacy, economy and other screen studying numbers. We don't care about flowers on the hillside.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I think this really misrepresents the NFP. There was no paid dlc that exclusively involved fantastical elements. They were ancillary to the selling points of new civs.

Indeed. Most of the modes were off-beat ideas that couched innovative takes on existing features. All of them are opt-in. I certainly hope that better-integrated and balanced versions of ones like Barbarian Clans and Monopolies find their way to Civ 7.

 

[pokiehl]

Better graphics for what reason? Good graphics is for FPS games. In Civ you spend most of your time watching the world from satellite and the rest are diplomacy, economy and other screen studying numbers. We don't care about flowers on the hillside.

Uh…Because I want it to look better? It’s fun to have beautiful things to look at. Enjoying beauty is part of the human experience man.

Otherwise I might as well play with an Excel spreadsheet.