The problem with DLC civs between expansions is that they can't incorporate expansion mechanics in them. That would require people buying the DLC to also buy the expansion, which could potentially hurt sales.
I'd rather they continue working on Civ 6 and make 3-4 expansions before they start working on Civ 7.
Between vanilla and R&F they made 6 DLC all while working on an expansion for XCOM 2. I suspect they are gearing up for another XCOM 2 expansion due in the late spring or summer (evidence: SteamDB activity, hiring artists). They could produce DLC again while also working on the XCOM 2 expansion, and if that is the case, I expect to see related activities on the Civ VI SteamDB page.
However, if we don't see activity on the SteamDB until the XCOM 2 expansion is almost complete, and we also see some hiring at that time, then there will probably be no DLC and we will see another expansion around this time next year.
The problem with DLC civs between expansions is that they can't incorporate expansion mechanics in them. That would require people buying the DLC to also buy the expansion, which could potentially hurt sales.
I'd rather they continue working on Civ 6 and make 3-4 expansions before they start working on Civ 7.
If they did that, though, you're looking at a base game that's many many years old before the next one released. I can't see them doing that.
The one "good" thing about steam is that all of your habits are being documented, and i assume that the people at 2K will tear into those to see what percentage of people who bought the dlc also bought the expansion or the other way around.
Indeed, there is no question that there have been and there will be civilizations with more power, more prominence and more in the forefront of history (indeed, and as someone said it, it is so because they have written it),
Yes, the dominant culture in any region gets first crack at writing the 'history' and will naturally skew that history as they understand it. It requires later historians and archeologists to piece together the rest of the facts to verify or amplify the early accounts.
Now, within the history of some civilizations, there are really dark moments, that hopefully, doesn't define them. The Nazis are not included in Civ for obvious reasons, but that is but a chapter in a book.
There is not a single culture, group, civilization, nation or any other identity that has not engaged in the worst behavior mankind can display as well as the best. No one is without sin and no one is loftier than the next.
I bristle when I hear anyone say that one 'civ' is more worthy than another based on some arbitrary standards that, in the end, are based purely on personal preference. Firaxis, at least, has valid marketing decisions in mind when they make their selection. That is mere pragmatism and I can accept that.
I welcome any civ the developers want to include in the game because each one represents another flavor of humanity. Period. I don't care what name is used, the graphics or the leader. I cannot conceive of any 'civ' being lessing deserving than another for inclusion in a .....game.
The problem with DLC civs between expansions is that they can't incorporate expansion mechanics in them. That would require people buying the DLC to also buy the expansion, which could potentially hurt sales.
I'd rather they continue working on Civ 6 and make 3-4 expansions before they start working on Civ 7.
Considering how frequently the base game goes on sale, even only a year after release, requiring people to own the expansion as well doesn't seem like a very high barrier to entry.
Between vanilla and R&F they made 6 DLC all while working on an expansion for XCOM 2. I suspect they are gearing up for another XCOM 2 expansion due in the late spring or summer (evidence: SteamDB activity, hiring artists). They could produce DLC again while also working on the XCOM 2 expansion, and if that is the case, I expect to see related activities on the Civ VI SteamDB page.
However, if we don't see activity on the SteamDB until the XCOM 2 expansion is almost complete, and we also see some hiring at that time, then there will probably be no DLC and we will see another expansion around this time next year.
Considering how frequently the base game goes on sale, even only a year after release, requiring people to own the expansion as well doesn't seem like a very high barrier to entry.
There's quite a few who are militantly opposed to DLC for some reason. I can understand when it's ridiculous DLC like horse armor, but the DLC for Civ 5 & 6 have been well worth the value.
We can theorize one way or the other, but sales and marketing will dictate Firaxis' actions more than anything else. They do have to make a profit after all.
Considering how frequently the base game goes on sale, even only a year after release, requiring people to own the expansion as well doesn't seem like a very high barrier to entry.
I really don't see the "Must have R+F to buy this DLC" as a barrier. The only barrier is does FIRAXIS want to continue doing DLC packs, and we don't know the answer to that, because we don't know their priorities.
Tragically, we don't know until at least... (summoning circle for @Eagle Pursuit ), February 20th...? when a depot build could conceivably have an early DLC build.
Yes. They do. The core design and coding teams for both IPs are separate and work on different things concurrently. Steam DB only indicates QA testing activity. But based on previous examples, they will do testing on DLC at the same time as an expansion for the other IP, but they don't do QA testing on two expansions at the same time. So the QA department probably works on both IPs. The art department also seems to crossover to an extent as well. I've seen Civ artists Tweet about XCOM characters that they drew.
My point is, we should be able to ascertain what is coming next based on Civ VI SteamDB activity in relation to XCOM SteamDB activity, with regards to timing.
Yes. They do. The core design and coding teams for both IPs are separate and work on different things concurrently. Steam DB only indicates QA testing activity. But based on previous examples, they will do testing on DLC at the same time as an expansion for the other IP, but they don't do QA testing on two expansions at the same time. So the QA department probably works on both IPs. The art department also seems to crossover to an extent as well. I've seen Civ artists Tweet about XCOM characters that they drew.
My point is, we should be able to ascertain what is coming next based on Civ VI SteamDB activity in relation to XCOM SteamDB activity, with regards to timing.
Another XCOM2 expansion would be awesome, really happy with WotC. I've been playing it during the times when I'd normally be in civ. It's quite addictive! I think it's a good sign if they release another expansion, it hopefully means we might get 3 expansions for civ, or maybe post-expansion DLC.
I know some of them are here and they're not allowed to talk about it and all that, but generally speaking how big is the playtesting pool? I've just been thinking about this and this thread has come around to a marginally related subject matter . . .
Another XCOM2 expansion would be awesome, really happy with WotC. I've been playing it during the times when I'd normally be in civ. It's quite addictive! I think it's a good sign if they release another expansion, it hopefully means we might get 3 expansions for civ, or maybe post-expansion DLC.
Something is definitely cooking for XCOM2. It wouldn't make sense for them to be hiring right as R&F is about to finish if there wasn't. Also, a DLC app (which are used for both regular DLC and expansions) along with a mystery depot have appeared on the XCOM2 SteamDB page.
@SammyKhalifa watch the Civ VI credits. The QA team, as well as Frankenstein players, are listed.
But you wouldn't need an Akkadian blob civ. Just have Sargon of Akkad. The impact of the Akkadians can't really be understated on the region. Elamites used the language. Persians used the language (before it was replaced by Aramaic). It was the Mesopotamian Lingua Franca for over two millennia (though became increasingly replaced by Akkadian-influenced Aramaic). I'm honestly disappointed Gilgamesh is in the game instead of Sargon because there's definitely overlap.
But then Assyria and Babylon fans would complain. An Akkadia featuring Hammurabi and Shammamurat is just a more economical way of giving players what they want.
And I'm not sure if it's nitpicking or not, either. I mean, in the context of Gilgabro.
We can theorize one way or the other, but sales and marketing will dictate Firaxis' actions more than anything else. They do have to make a profit after all.
Implying there’s nothing wrong with late stage capitalism, but I digress.
Guess we’ll just have to wait and see. IMO there’s nothing conceptually wrong with DLCs that only work with expansions, but one’s gotta be careful with the general audience’s perception when this rolls out. And no, CivFanatics is not the general audience.
We're not? You mean they're not reading our threads slavishly and designing Civ based on our wants? Don't tell me they are trying to cater to....uggh....the masses!
@Sagax , despite my dripping sarcasm (need more coffee) I happen to agree with your assessment 100%.
In case my sarcasm indicated otherwise.
Implying there’s nothing wrong with late stage capitalism, but I digress.
Guess we’ll just have to wait and see. IMO there’s nothing conceptually wrong with DLCs that only work with expansions, but one’s gotta be careful with the general audience’s perception when this rolls out. And no, CivFanatics is not the general audience.
Acutally, there were no DLC civs between the expansions for Civ 5. It's doubtful if there will be any for Civ 6, more likely they will begin working on the second expansion immediately for a release next year. The art department has probably been working on it for a while already.
There were no DLC civs after the first Civ V expansion because people demanded expansions - from what I recall of statements from Firaxis the original intent had been to have DLC only, no full-scale expansions. Their development team wasn't set up to provide both. With Civ VI they seem to have intended both expansion content and DLC civs from the start.
The problem with DLC civs between expansions is that they can't incorporate expansion mechanics in them. That would require people buying the DLC to also buy the expansion, which could potentially hurt sales.
I'd rather they continue working on Civ 6 and make 3-4 expansions before they start working on Civ 7.
No Civ game can sustain more than two expansions, both because of Firaxis' stated philosophy of ensuring that every entry in the series has a broadly similar level of mechanical complexity, and simply because of the mechanical strain caused by feature bloat. Civ IV wouldn't have benefitted from a third expansion, while Civ V suffered from having too many overlapping systems (both global happiness and BNW economy to curtail expansion, for instance) by the end of its run. Civ VI started with greater complexity than either of those games - I'd be surprised if it can sustain a second expansion without creaking at the seams, although it will undoubtedly receive one.
Probably they should have chosen mechanics for the expansion civs that made better use of the new systems - loyalty in particular, while the major focus of the expansion, is barely related to the expansion civs - and kept civs like Korea and the Netherlands that make no use at all of the new mechanics for DLC,
As a person who casually plays other games, I typically don't buy DLC and I usually only buy expansions (such as they are these days) when they go on sale.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
