PCGamesN: Firaxis job advert for position with “wealth of knowledge about the Firaxis portfolio of titles, especially Civilization."

[The_J]

PCGamesN has posted a new article called "New Civilization 7 details hinted by Firaxis job listing".
The advert rather obviously indicates that the next part of the series is in development (as we know), and that Firaxis this time has a rather long-term plan, trying to develop a marketing plan for the next game for up to 5 years. This is somewhat longer than for most previous titles, for which the continued development was finished before even 3 years, and agrees with the recent late-stage developments for Civ6, including the NFP, the leader pass and current updates.
More worrysome is the line "understanding of games-as-a-service, virtual goods, and emerging technologies and trends," which in worst case can be attributed to block chain, NFTs and loot boxes, and in maybe (not necessarily) better cases to AI content (as e.g. the last GalCiv4: Supernova edition has with AI generated aliens). Or simply any other future, not yet foreseen trend.
In any case, it seems that the next title will have a more focused long-term development than previous titles.

Read the full article here.

 

[The_J]

Some of this is speculation from my side. Which I guess is as valid as PCGamesN speculating, they don't more than anyone else here does too.

 

[Shirotora Kenshin]

Sounds like Civ7 is not going to get an announcement next week .

But, jokes aside, i really like the idea that they are taking their time for the upcoming title.

 

[_hero_]

The longer perspective and games-as-a-service lines have me thinking they might be adopting a model similar to Paradox games. Multiple DLC a year with a subscription model as an alternative to buying all the DLC.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I appreciate that they are bringing in a person to head up the marketing campaign. The person will obviously have to be selected, then settle in. Then they will have create a strategy for marketing Civ VII, then begin prepping for it with screenshots and YouTube videos.

It's still quite a ways out, but not that long... hopefully it can get started in April or May.

 

[UWHabs]

The longer perspective and games-as-a-service lines have me thinking they might be adopting a model similar to Paradox games. Multiple DLC a year with a subscription model as an alternative to buying all the DLC.

It doesn't necessarily have to be a subscription model. But longer perpective to me sounds more like a continuous stream of smaller DLC and updates, rather the sort of start-stop of expansion packs. Like a Cities Skylines model where you would unlock individual pieces that all slot together, rather than one update with a ton of changes.

Although arguably, given they're hiring this position, what that person actually believes and finds out in their role may influence the development. For all we know, the person they want there is someone who can help figure out what market trends will keep people busy between large, individual expansion packs. It's a senior position - it does sound like that position would have a good amount of say in whether a subscription model vs standalone DLC vs expansion packs vs whatever is best for them and the community, and can help make that decision and get it going.

Speaking totally randomly, that is a position you would presumably want filled a good amount of time before launch, if only to have them able to advise/decide on whether you offer like a launch subscription model or not. It's not someone you need in the 3-4 years of development leading up to release. But someone you presumably want on board with the launch campaign to make sure that ties in to the rest of the life cycle of the game. So best guess they're still a good 6-8 months away from announcing at the earliest. But probably it should be announced within a year.

 

[Dedrytus]

The longer perspective and games-as-a-service lines have me thinking they might be adopting a model similar to Paradox games. Multiple DLC a year with a subscription model as an alternative to buying all the DLC.

For me Paradox business model is not acceptable. You get base game without most basic mechanics that should be from the start then you get multiple DLCs that do not work as intended or brake previous relased one. Then you fix it by using mods but after some time you are forced to buy DLC(s) because some mods you using are non-compatible with patched game and some parts needed for mod to work are now in DLC. And Paradox version of Civ will look like: you can settle cities but you need "Raze the cities" DLC, you want to settle near the river - great idea, there is DLC for this "Rivers and harbors".

 

[GIO888]

Maybe smaller DLC and Updates is a sane way of ironing out rush-to-market buggy vanilla game?

Just sayin'................. and we are a lo-ong way from 2016 now, so who can really say what the long term intention is!

 

[Noble Zarkon]

My guess would be that a Leader Pass model planned from the beginning could be quite successful. You don't alter base systems (so still might have one or two expansions for that) but add new Leaders and abilities every month or two in between them - that's a great model for content creators, marketing etc.

 

[_hero_]

For me Paradox business model is not acceptable. You get base game without most basic mechanics that should be from the start then you get multiple DLCs that do not work as intended or brake previous relased one. Then you fix it by using mods but after some time you are forced to buy DLC(s) because some mods you using are non-compatible with patched game and some parts needed for mod to work are now in DLC. And Paradox version of Civ will look like: you can settle cities but you need "Raze the cities" DLC, you want to settle near the river - great idea, there is DLC for this "Rivers and harbors".

Yeah, I am not a fan of it, although their model doesn't require them to launch games bare-bones. That is simply a poor decision they have made.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

My guess would be that a Leader Pass model planned from the beginning could be quite successful. You don't alter base systems (so still might have one or two expansions for that) but add new Leaders and abilities every month or two in between them - that's a great model for content creators, marketing etc.

I would be worried that such a rapid flow of content would introduce bugs without allowing time to fix them before the next tranche of content arrives.

 

[vorlon_mi]

A Leader Pass model allows for fine-grained control of new leaders / civs / personas, which I like. It might even persuade me to buy a subscription, if the price is right. Yes, it could potentially allow an overpowered or unbalanced leader to be released, then have the values/settings tweaked in a later release.

I'm not sure that's the best way for introducing major new game systems, like Civ4 Espionage/Great Spies (introduced in BTS), Civ5 World Congress (introduced in BNW), or Civ6 Loyalty. Those should be thoroughly tested with the current set of leaders/personas, and perhaps with the leaders who are "on deck"... due to be introduced in a month or so. Maybe annual?

Including optional game modes, as happened in NFP, could be done in a more rapid timeframe. Yes, some polishing was needed for each "ice cream topping," but I think that the model worked overall. Each mode can be turned off, if unbalanced or unfun.

 

[leif erikson]

My guess would be that a Leader Pass model planned from the beginning could be quite successful. You don't alter base systems (so still might have one or two expansions for that) but add new Leaders and abilities every month or two in between them - that's a great model for content creators, marketing etc.

That will raise hell for Game of the Month and for Hall of Fame. The constant changes will be difficult to deal with and there will never be a mod like BUFFY.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

The constant changes will be difficult to deal with and there will never be a mod like BUFFY.

In my vision there would be no engine changes just new Leaders so I'm not sure that's right. Not convinced there will ever be a BUFFY, unique confluence of having the source code and the skills available to take advantage of it :-(

 

[Jeppetto]

Well hopefully it won't end up like The Sims 4 where Ultimate Collection will cost 1000+€ or such because what used to be part of Exp Pack will now be separated into million packs. Governor Game Pack, Loyalty Game Pack, Ages Game Pack is already haunting my dreams.

 

[UWHabs]

Civ 6 at launch almost had a leader pass-like model, didn't it? LIke you either bought the base game or the deluxe version which included a bunch of the first DLC for a discount. The question more is really whether you continue that model beyond the first 6 months, or change up how you run a program like that.

 

[tedhebert]

Honestly, this depresses me a little...

I honestly thought they were much further along in CIV 7 dev than to be looking for someone in charge of dev/players relations and marketing advisor...

I might be totally off the mark here, but I feel it indicates that major design decisions have not even been made yet.

Hope I'm wrong, but I'm changing my expectations from a "soon to come along" game to a "Still a few years in the making before launch" game.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I honestly thought they were much further along in CIV 7 dev

I think the ongoing Civ 6 content was a clue on that.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Honestly, this depresses me a little...

I honestly thought they were much further along in CIV 7 dev than to be looking for someone in charge of dev/players relations and marketing advisor...

I might be totally off the mark here, but I feel it indicates that major design decisions have not even been made yet.

Hope I'm wrong, but I'm changing my expectations from a "soon to come along" game to a "Still a few years in the making before launch" game.

I'd say major design decisions were made years ago. The time consuming things are art, programming, and polishing. Marketing is the sort of thing that kicks in late, after most of the other stuff is done.

 

[vorlon_mi]

Honestly, this depresses me a little...

I honestly thought they were much further along in CIV 7 dev than to be looking for someone in charge of dev/players relations and marketing advisor...

I might be totally off the mark here, but I feel it indicates that major design decisions have not even been made yet.

Hope I'm wrong, but I'm changing my expectations from a "soon to come along" game to a "Still a few years in the making before launch" game.

My job in RL is kicking in here... backfill. When I have someone on my team leave, I need to backfill that person.
They may have had a person in charge of player relations, giving input to decisions about business models and marketing plans for 1-year, 3-year, 5-year horizons after release. They may be backfilling that person, not creating a brand new position and filling it for the first time.

The key decisions about business models -- how to release DLC, how often, when to do expansions -- can be made or changed while development continues. The key decisions about gameplay -- how to build cities, how to wage war, which yields are used for which purposes -- those should be made already and locked in.