I also have the feeling that one of the last three NWs to be revealed in GS will be a cenote as another nod to the Maya without actually including them.
We have a Mayan city-state, a Mayan wonder, and now a Mayan natural wonder--but still no Maya. I feel trolled.
What do you mean that it's definitely the last xpac? You seem so certain. What are you basing this on exactly?No Maya in Civ6. GS is definitely the last expansion.
As long as we only have one Mayan city-state, it's still possible we get them as a definite Civ.No Maya in Civ6. GS is definitely the last expansion.
What do you mean that it's definitely the last xpac? You seem so certain. What are you basing this on exactly?
Besides, even if it is the very last xpac, there could still be some more DLC come out, releasing a few more civs and content...it's possible for this sort of thing to happen, and the devs would make money on doing so.
Simply because they have had two expansions per Civ game in the past does not mean that they will be doing the same with this one.I'm basing this off of previous Civ iterations. They never had a third expansion. The Future Era and intro cinematic movie makes it seem like this is the last expansion. There's a sense of finality in this expansion.
Other posters have argued that a third expansion adds too much bloat to the game. Some are hoping to move onto Civ7.
If they are concerned about too much bloat, a few more DLC civs still won't be a problem either.
I'm basing this off of previous Civ iterations. They never had a third expansion. The Future Era and intro cinematic movie makes it seem like this is the last expansion. There's a sense of finality in this expansion.
Other posters have argued that a third expansion adds too much bloat to the game. Some are hoping to move onto Civ7.
That poster (I can not remember his name now) who "predicted" the civs that would be in GS said that it is possible to have a third expansion, he hit many things, everything indicates that he had privileged information.
I particularly think there will be a third expansion, but I agree that this would add a lot of bloating to the game, but I still can not find a solid justification for them to omit 'canonical' civs like Babylon and Maya. Civ6 is very good, and I do not want to start all over again with Civ7, I want them to continue working on Civ6.
They could start with the Maya at least.But which Civs would they add? There's a lot to choose from.
They could start with the Maya at least.
People born after 2012 are under six and probably not paying for videogames out of pocket yet.I bet some people don't even know who the Maya
They could start with the Maya at least.
People born after 2012 are under six and probably not paying for videogames out of pocket yet.
I'd gladly pay 5 dollars for a Civ even without the scenario. Considering those DLCs were a reaction to the fanbase clamoring for more African and some SEA Civs, I don't see why they wouldn't do the same even if we don't get a third expansion. But if you need a scenario surviving until 2012 against natural disasters is a start.Would that make a lot of money? What scenario can they give the Maya?
I don't think the Nubia and SE Asian DLCs sold too well. I guess the veteran Civ fans will pay for a Maya DLC, but what about casual fans? I bet some people don't even know who the Maya are and why they are important.
Over six, no. Old enough to have been self-aware toward the end of 2012, yes. It was stupid, but it was kind of unavoidable if you were exposed to any pop culture at that time...Plus, deficient as they are, American textbooks do still teach about the Maya.You seriously believe everyone older than six know who the Maya are?