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

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

A science victory that could work in almost any era: If you're X number of eras ahead of every other civ in tech you win. That would prevent the game from dragging on once its clearly in the bag. Like in Old World how you win if you have double the victory points of anyone else.

So, you want Korea to win every time once you reach the Classical Era?

 

[pokiehl]

A science victory that could work in almost any era: If you're X number of eras ahead of every other civ in tech you win. That would prevent the game from dragging on once it’s clearly in the bag. Like in Old World how you win if you have double the victory points of anyone else.

That’s a really interesting idea, I think, for a number of victory types.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

So, you want Korea to win every time once you reach the Classical Era?

Dunno about him, but I want Civ Uniques and Victory Conditions to be tailored to the game mechanics so that I can enjoy a game past the Classical/Medieval/Renaissance Eras . . .

 

[Haig]

Free Steam codes for Sid's Birthday. Cool!

They gave out exactly... 7 codes..hmm.

....

I think announcement in May/June for late 2023 release, or announcement in October for spring 2024 release.

 

[Patine]

For someone who is championing diversity, the bit about mud huts and plant material is borderline racist. You are insinuating that they were primitive or beneath another culture because of that. Do better.

BTW, the Muisca didn't live in stone houses, either, and they actually used clay and canes as a prime building material. This in spite of abundant stone resources in the area.

The Guarani have stood the test of time. They are still around and their language is still widely spoken. (2.8 million people worldwide have Guarani as their native tongue) That's a lot more than many older civs in the game can say.

Well, perhaps, the mud huts term was the wrong way to put it. However, the Muisca do strike me as being more interesting and holding more potential for a civ. Also, the Guarani lasting the test of time because their language was survived, is quite a deceptive claim. Paraguay is NOT built, as a nation, on the foundations of the Pre-Colonial Guarani. It is, basically, for all intents and purposes much like all other Spanish American Post-Colonial countries, in terms of Government, military, architecture, corruption, religion (89% Roman Catholic), and legal codes, with the few remnants of indigenous culture other Spanish American nations have. Every El Supremo, member of a Triumverate, or President of Paraguay has had a Spanish name, or in a few cases, one from another European language - none have Guarani names. So, has the Guarani CIVILIZATION stood the test of time, or just the language and some traditions and beverages within the frameworks of a typical Spanish American Post-Colonial nation?

Moderator Action: If you wish to continue this discussion, please take it to the History forum or OT. This thread is not the place. leif

What's funny is that we are completely terrible at predicting future tech in both directions: we utterly fail at predicting what tech will transform the world, while in the same time we utterly fail at overhyping tech which doesn't end up transforming the world.

Two great examples are AI and space travel. In 50s it was fairly common in sci fi and futurology to expect colonizaton of other celestial bodies in the early 2000s, as well as superhuman AIs. And I ain't talking about no pulp fiction stuff here, but Clarke's Space Odyssey 2001.
AI is a microcosm of this tendency in itself, since it turned out we have completely failed to predict which human - like skills are very easy and which are very hard for AI to reproduce.

The exception from this is Stanisław Lem of course - some time ago I've read his book written in like 1965 in which he casually imagined social issues of future mass access wireless communication networks, almost word by word predicting social media echo chambers and political danger of such discourse

Peaceful civilian nuclear was another. It was so believed to be the universal solution to all power generation in the '50 and '60's - unlimited power with no smog. Tiny, nuclear generators were envisioned to one day power automobiles and homes off the grid. Isaac Asimov even portrayed it as the power source of the crumbling Galactic Empire in his first few Foundation novels. However, a Three-Mile Island, a Chernobyl, and a Fukashima later, enthusiasm was greatly diminished, and fear and suspicion largely replaced it. The cackling, cartoonish (approrpriately in a cartoon), and villiainous Simpsons' character Montgomery Burns, of course, owns the local nuclear power plant, which is a bit of a sign of modern attitudes.

 

[Patine]

For someone who is championing diversity

And, if you read my comments, it's not, "diversity," I specifically champion (you've gotten confused for a few others, here) it's a sense of balance, and some of my own preferences, which often are not necessarily, "standard."

 

[Kupe Navigator]

All these ideas asking to shake Civ game to the core...


An I the only one who thinks Civ 7 will be fairly conservative and will not breakaway from core elements of civ franchise that much?

 

[Patine]

All these ideas asking to shake Civ game to the core...


An I the only one who thinks Civ 7 will be fairly conservative and will not breakaway from core elements of civ franchise that much?

Shooting for the Moon is common practice when a new Civ name, or new game or big Xpac, is announced for any popular franchise.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Shooting for the Moon is common practice when a new Civ name, or new game or big Xpac, is announced for any popular franchise.

I don't think they will ever change victory conditions that much... and yes space race as form of science victory will remain for civ 7 and beyond.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

All these ideas asking to shake Civ game to the core...


An I the only one who thinks Civ 7 will be fairly conservative and will not breakaway from core elements of civ franchise that much?

They will certainly keep as many of the 'core concepts' as they can, but they are also, for the first time in years, are facing real competition in the historical 4X genre, so they can't just spew out the Same Ol', Same Ol' or Humankind II or Ara:History Untold will eat them alive. They will have to come up, at the least, with some new twists on the old concepts just to stay competitive - and in business.

 

[Kwami]

They will certainly keep as many of the 'core concepts' as they can, but they are also, for the first time in years, are facing real competition in the historical 4X genre, so they can't just spew out the Same Ol', Same Ol' or Humankind II or Ara:History Untold will eat them alive. They will have to come up, at the least, with some new twists on the old concepts just to stay competitive - and in business.

Eh. Humankind wasn't very good. Old World is a very different kind of 4X game. I guess I don't know anything about Ara: History Untold, but, well, that's saying something.

I think that Firaxis will make the game that they want to make and not worry so much about other games. Worrying about other games and letting them influence your own game too much is no good.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

They will certainly keep as many of the 'core concepts' as they can, but they are also, for the first time in years, are facing real competition in the historical 4X genre, so they can't just spew out the Same Ol', Same Ol' or Humankind II or Ara:History Untold will eat them alive. They will have to come up, at the least, with some new twists on the old concepts just to stay competitive - and in business.

Eh Fraxis cares only about money and in terms of money Civ 6 is a success and blows both HumanKind and Old World out of water. I don't think they see much need of change the formula.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Eh Fraxis cares only about money and in terms of money Civ 6 is a success and blows both HumanKind and Old World out of water. I don't think they see much need of change the formula.

And I don't think 2K would want them to anyway. Gotta keep that golden goose in its cage.

 

[Krajzen]

I actually think civ7 won't be conservative, since civ6 was the most conservative sequel this series has ever seen, and I don't think devs are blind to the many systems inherited straight from civ5 (and some even earlier).

Look at the screenshots and fundamental mechanics between different civ games. Civ6, especially at release, was Civ5 2.0. You get districts, which are quite fundamental change how things work... On top of the map structure and in the city/population/borders/yields context taken straight out of civ5. Combat, barbarians, religion, culture/tourism, resource extraction, trade, technology, all work essentially the same as in civ5, just with some twists and more sugar on top of the formula.

Tech progress works fundamentally the same as in civ5, just split into two trees (imo bad change both for 'history' and gameplay but nevermind) and with the eureka gimmick on top of it allowing you to bypass some tech costs. But they way techs themselves are arranged, the way they work, their very concept, the way science yield is accumulated - same old.

Diplomacy may be controversial since some people may argue it contains so much new stuff by the late civ6.. But its fundamentals of
- condemn/DoF bipolar neurotic world
- purely bilateral wars and negotiations, so no coalitions and world wars ever, gee how exciting
- AIs being trickster board gamers who flip the table for weird metagame reasons instead of ingame rationality
- incredibly frustrating and historically nonsensical idea of warmongering penalties
- etc
Are taken straight from civ5, later you just get a lot of (often failed) ideas on top of that, trying to brute force fix certain problems arising from civ5 fundamentals.

Thus, I really hope folks in Firaxis are bored of 10 years of all global religions in civ essentially being carbon copies of Christianity/Islam, and other stale bread ideas, and will change some deep stuff.

 

[Pistol90]

I on the other hand, want CIV 7 to be conservative.

I dont want zombies, wizards, vampires etc in CIV game.

Give me 1/3 new, 1/3 change, 1/3 stays the same.

I also understand there is not soo many options for new stuff/changes, because CIV 6 is already full of things, but some things like:
More dynamic map
More dynamic districts and integration with city center
Better UI
Economy overhaul
Religion overhaul
Diplomacy overhaul
Free Cities/City States maybe becoming civs (large feature, but would love to see this mechanic one day in CIV)

 

[pokiehl]

They will certainly keep as many of the 'core concepts' as they can, but they are also, for the first time in years, are facing real competition in the historical 4X genre, so they can't just spew out the Same Ol', Same Ol' or Humankind II or Ara:History Untold will eat them alive. They will have to come up, at the least, with some new twists on the old concepts just to stay competitive - and in business.

As others have said, I doubt any of the “competition” is going to move the needle at Firaxis. Old World is a niche game with a tiny player base from an independent company. Humankind is a mixed bag at best and a failure at worst. Ara isn’t out but what I’ve seen far doesn’t have me holding my breath. Civ is simply in another league.

I on the other hand, want CIV 7 to be conservative.

I dont want zombies, wizards, vampires etc in CIV game.

Give me 1/3 new, 1/3 change, 1/3 stays the same.

I also understand there is not soo many options for new stuff/changes, because CIV 6 is already full of things, but some things like:
More dynamic map
More dynamic districts and integration with city center
Better UI
Economy overhaul
Religion overhaul
Diplomacy overhaul
Free Cities/City States maybe becoming civs (large feature, but would love to see this mechanic one day in CIV)

I don’t get why people cite the mode stuff (vampires etc.) as stuff they don’t want to return, as if it were offered as part of the core game.

And there were no wizards.

 

[Patine]

I don’t get why people cite the mode stuff (vampires etc.) as stuff they don’t want to return, as if it were offered as part of the core game.

And there were no wizards.

I would rather they appeared in a scenario or mod where such things were embraced across the board, rather than as jarring tack-ons to the core game.

 

[AntSou]

All these ideas asking to shake Civ game to the core...

An I the only one who thinks Civ 7 will be fairly conservative and will not breakaway from core elements of civ franchise that much?

Eh Fraxis cares only about money and in terms of money Civ 6 is a success and blows both HumanKind and Old World out of water. I don't think they see much need of change the formula.

Every Civ game has been a departure from its predecessors in some important way (well, at least since Civ IV, I don't know much about the titles prior to that).

If a new title does not innovate, or it takes too long to be a solid experience, players will resist moving on to the newest title. It's opposite to games like Fifa or Madden, in which players move on immediately to the new title, despite being the same game. But those are mainly multiplayer games, and there's stronger social pressure within that player base to own the latest thing.

So I could argue the opposite, that Civ VII will be the most innovative game in the series. It needs to be a new experience right out of the box. I suspect the main way they'll accomplish that is through innovating the map/board. The map has become more reactive to player decisions since Gathering Storm, and I think it will mature in Civ VII. A bit like how Civ V introduced city states and then these matured in Civ VI.

By reactive board I mean, for example:
- An actually integrated ecosystem with more profound opportunities for manipulation of the environment, as well as more profound implications deriving from that manipulation (rather than just a cumulative value which may or may not trigger consequences towards the end of the game);
- Introduction of navigable rivers and map elevation;
- Reintroduction of biomes (for graphical diversity);
- Less rigid peoples in the game map (depart from the barbarian/tribal village basic dichotomy. Perhaps even integrate with City-States into the same system).

I think they need to expand on what was introduced as far back as Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. That game succeeded in making you feel like the planet was an entity.

 

[Patine]

Every Civ game has been a departure from its predecessors in some important way (well, at least since Civ IV, I don't know much about the titles prior to that).

Yes, that trend was definitely also the case for Civ1, Civ2, and Civ3, I can attest.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I would rather they appeared in a scenario or mod where such things were embraced across the board, rather than as jarring tack-ons to the core game.

On the initial release game I'm only expecting core elements but this is my sentiment too. Also this board is a place to express there are more ways to make a fun civ game than one about piling up the highest yields.