Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread

[IntelligentDisk]

Regular game and Settlers edition is currently 35 % off on Steam. I'm tempted albeit a bit divided. I don't have any particular desire to play Civ 7 right now, but I will probably wanna play it at some point, and if I should get a significant additional discount, that would mean waiting for a 50 % sale, and I don't think that's likely to happen this side of New Year? Also, buying now would give me the free download, if I'm not mistaken, which as I understand it, will not be free after a certain date in the new year - am I getting those things right?

Civ VI didn't go on sale for 50% until just after a year after it's released, so that would be March 2026 for Civ VII, however VI had already been on sale for 40% by this point and VII has only just gone on sale for 35% for the first time, so it might be even beyond March next year that it goes on sale for 50%. VII is slightly lagging behind VIs sale periods.

 

[Paideia]

Regular game and Settlers edition is currently 35 % off on Steam. I'm tempted albeit a bit divided. I don't have any particular desire to play Civ 7 right now, but I will probably wanna play it at some point, and if I should get a significant additional discount, that would mean waiting for a 50 % sale, and I don't think that's likely to happen this side of New Year? Also, buying now would give me the free download, if I'm not mistaken, which as I understand it, will not be free after a certain date in the new year - am I getting those things right?

I share your concerns.. I wouldn't want to give anyone at TakeTwo the notion that this means that I support the current state of the game, but historically Civ Games do tend to improve with expansions.. and it is quite a saving.

 

[kaspergm]

I share your concerns.. I wouldn't want to give anyone at TakeTwo the notion that this means that I support the current state of the game, but historically Civ Games do tend to improve with expansions.. and it is quite a saving.

Yeah, I'm torn between wanting to punish them for making such a mess of the game on one hand, and my loyalty to the franchise on the other hand.

 

[IntelligentDisk]

Despite the launch of Europa Universalis V, update 1.3 saw a higher 1st day update peak than the previous 5 updates at 10,648. Over 1,100 higher than the previous best which 1.2.2 saw (9,532). It's also:

• the highest midweek peak since the end of May
• highest number of positive reviews in a day since the end of May (47 positive)
• best reviewed 1st day of an update at 75.8% positive (62 total reviews, previous best was 58.7% positive for update 1.2)
• now a 5 week period over 50% positive
• the best 30 day reviewed period ever at 52.9% positive (916 total reviews, previous best was 51.1% at launch)

 

[trev1972]

Despite the launch of Europa Universalis V, update 1.3 saw a higher 1st day update peak than the previous 5 updates at 10,648. Over 1,100 higher than the previous best which 1.2.2 saw (9,532). It's also:

• the highest midweek peak since the end of May
• highest number of positive reviews in a day since the end of May (47 positive)
• best reviewed 1st day of an update at 75.8% positive (62 total reviews, previous best was 58.7% positive for update 1.2)
• now a 5 week period over 50% positive
• the best 30 day reviewed period ever at 52.6% positive (478 total reviews, previous best was 51.1% at launch)

View attachment 746833

Yeh the free dlc and patch was extremely well timed, it will be interesting to see if the noticeable boost is still there in a couple of weeks.

 

[Pfeffersack]

My problem with the Paradox model is that it results in a very fragmented audience. They introduce core game mechanics and other important changes in DLCs. If you skip a pack, then you aren't just missing out on flavor for a small number of countries; you're missing out on important game mechanics. The next DLC can't rely on those game mechanics, though, because some players won't have them available. Keep doing that for a few years and you have a very complicated game with far too many different variants to support and a whole lot of DLC that doesn't interact with the rest of the DLC.
(...)

While I fully agree wthat DLC-locking features being is bad for exactly those reasons, it has to be said that whether it's true for Paradox games depends heavily on the GSG you are loooking at

CK3 is really problematic and my worst offender here: A big share of its deeper mechanics is DLC-locked and many of them suffer from being orphaned. They also tend to end up abandoned, as later patches only rarely touch them. One Proud Bavarian hit for the nail on this in one of his last vids: It feels more and more like a theme park with independent attractions of varying quality...and the content is more and more attractions getting added. For me a point has been reached that I'm unsure if I will get future DLC anymore.

Vic3 is the complete opposite: Especially the latest patches brought groundbreaking changes to the base game you can enjoy without the accompanying DLC (which mainly give flavour content to certain ares). In terms of features, only some minor ones are DLC locked or you might gain extra choices when having the DLC. And if you take e.g. Agitators as old DLC-feature, you never have the feeling that they bite in any way with new content - they just fit in a big coherent picture the team behind seems to have.

HoI4 sits somewhere in the middle: Some of the big stuff is free, others things end up in the DLC. At least the latter work in principle together; however in reality, often too many bugs interfer with a flawless experience. A bonus point can be given for a delayed integration of some DLC in the base game (I'm aware that some people don't like that move, but I see it as positive for the sake of getting a better game)

IR never matured enough for afull picture, but followed on its short journey -sadly with lower sucess- the Vic3 route in terms of patch/DLC-content ratio.

Can't talk about EU4 or Stellaris, as I haven't played them.

EU5 however was marketed to go full blown in the Vic3 direction of packing all big mechanics in the base game or free patches later. Given that promise (and my experience with IR...yes, they abandoned it...but I got that much fun out of the hgame, it introduced my into the world of pdx gsg and I still play it with the Invictus mod), I didn't hesitate to order the Premium Edition.

 

[queenpea]

Despite the launch of Europa Universalis V, update 1.3 saw a higher 1st day update peak than the previous 5 updates at 10,648. Over 1,100 higher than the previous best which 1.2.2 saw (9,532). It's also:

• the highest midweek peak since the end of May
• highest number of positive reviews in a day since the end of May (47 positive)
• best reviewed 1st day of an update at 75.8% positive (62 total reviews, previous best was 58.7% positive for update 1.2)
• now a 5 week period over 50% positive
• the best 30 day reviewed period ever at 52.9% positive (916 total reviews, previous best was 51.1% at launch)

View attachment 746833

It’s also on sale, at a higher discount than any other previous sale. This patch is different from previous patches as well due to the free content.

I hope they continue to provide new civilizations and leaders as free content in the future, as I think this is the only way forward to satisfy players, patch holes in historical simulation, and to increase perceived value.

 

[Siptah]

It’s also on sale, at a higher discount than any other previous sale. This patch is different from previous patches as well due to the free content.

I hope they continue to provide new civilizations and leaders as free content in the future, as I think this is the only way forward to satisfy players, patch holes in historical simulation, and to increase perceived value.

I personally find the solution „free for early adopters/limited time“ that they have shown with ToP quite elegant, to be honest. But it is probably naive to believe that things will continue that way. Hope dies last though.

 

[stealth_nsk]

It’s also on sale, at a higher discount than any other previous sale. This patch is different from previous patches as well due to the free content.

I hope they continue to provide new civilizations and leaders as free content in the future, as I think this is the only way forward to satisfy players, patch holes in historical simulation, and to increase perceived value.

I wouldn't expect free content often. My guess is that after pirates we'll have 2 paid DLC packs spanning from beginning of the year to somewhere around September, plus some kind of "season pass" to get both packs on reduced price.

The thing with free content is that it's not only something to improve relations with players, it's also marketing tool to sell more base game during limited free offer. And as any marketing tool, it looses effectiveness if overused.

 

[Leucarum]

Despite the launch of Europa Universalis V, update 1.3 saw a higher 1st day update peak than the previous 5 updates at 10,648.

EU5 is not going to swipe out most of Civ's audience. As someone who is engrossed after playing EU5, sitting down to learn it is also one of the most terrifying thresholds I've tried to cross in gaming. I suspect it's going to remain a niche game, but very dominant in its niche. It is... Intimidatingly good.

That said, it has lessons for Firaxis. It pulls off the deeply interconnected game system approach which Civ7 failed to do well, and makes it look effortless... When in fact the secret sauce was probably early, sustained community feedback and engagement. It had a very stable launch, and the gamrplay is engrossing from the get-go.

Even if it doesn't dent Firaxis' player counts, I hope they are watching and learning.

 

[Gorbles]

When in fact the secret sauce was probably early, sustained community feedback and engagement.

Company of Heroes 3 did this and was pushes out in a very rough state.

Hard to guess at the secret sauce, in my experience. Will have to see what Firaxis' new thing they’re promoting sign-ups for does.

 

[Leucarum]

Company of Heroes 3 did this and was pushes out in a very rough state.

Hard to guess at the secret sauce, in my experience. Will have to see what Firaxis' new thing they’re promoting sign-ups for does.

Maybe that wasn't the biggest difference, from our prior interactions you don't tend to accept any viewpoints you didn't already hold.

We know from public statements from PDX and users who had early access that they responded to player feedback fast making requested changes to systems, flavour and historicity. And we know they started the process of community consultation insanely early. Given that Firaxis is currently playing catchup with Civ7 on all those counts... Even if it wasn't the biggest difference, I'm pretty sure it would have helped.

 

[Kwami]

Maybe that wasn't the biggest difference, from our prior interactions you don't tend to accept any viewpoints you didn't already hold.

We know from public statements from PDX and users who had early access that they responded to player feedback fast making requested changes to systems, flavour and historicity. And we know they started the process of community consultation insanely early. Given that Firaxis is currently playing catchup with Civ7 on all those counts... Even if it wasn't the biggest difference, I'm pretty sure it would have helped.

I watched a few Paradox videos and a few other videos yesterday to see how the game played. And then, I went back and read the first 20 or so developer diaries from back in 2024 to see how things changed since then. And... they didn't change much. I'm sure that the flavor and historicity improved. I'm sure that feedback lead the developers to tweak some systems and to add some stuff. But the core game doesn't seem to have changed all that much as a result of player feedback.

 

[Leucarum]

I watched a few Paradox videos and a few other videos yesterday to see how the game played. And then, I went back and read the first 20 or so developer diaries from back in 2024 to see how things changed since then. And... they didn't change much. I'm sure that the flavor and historicity improved. I'm sure that feedback lead the developers to tweak some systems and to add some stuff. But the core game doesn't seem to have changed all that much as a result of player feedback.

Trade system is the most obvious one thay underwent a lot of adjustment. Though one thing which is fair to say is that EU5 is an evolution rather than a revolution. The game systems were mostly upgrades on what was in EU4. Arguably that meant 7 needed it more...

Not looking to sway the already swayed though. As I said I don't think this will knock Civ off its perch as it's definitely playing to its niche audience. But I would love to see Firaxis learn what they can from Paradox. I think they already are trying TBH.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I don't understand this discussion about "listening to the players" as some kind of rare skill. I mean Firaxis did it all the time since internet became mature enough, this means probably Civ4 or, at least, Civ5. All civilization game designers have accounts on this site, for example.

 

[Leucarum]

I don't understand this discussion about "listening to the players" as some kind of rare skill. I mean Firaxis did it all the time since internet became mature enough, this means probably Civ4 or, at least, Civ5. All civilization game designers have accounts on this site, for example.

Yeah we're talking about scale of something not a binary do or do not, (there is no try).

 

[stealth_nsk]

Yeah we're talking about scale of something not a binary do or do not, (there is no try).

And scale is really complex thing. Players usually bad at game design and they rarely can test their ideas before suggesting them (outside of ideas done by mods), so when players suggest doing something, the suggestion is bad more often than not (or obvious for which developers just didn't find resources yet). The real power of player feedback is when they indicate problems, not propose solutions.

 

[Leucarum]

And scale is really complex thing. Players usually bad at game design and they rarely can test their ideas before suggesting them (outside of ideas done by mods), so when players suggest doing something, the suggestion is bad more often than not (or obvious for which developers just didn't find resources yet). The real power of player feedback is when they indicate problems, not propose solutions.

Given where Civ7 is I am going to doubt this argument.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Given where Civ7 is I am going to doubt this argument.

Civ7 suffered a lot from very rushed start, so the big part of its problems are not from not knowing what to do, but from not having time to do it. I mean they still didn't implement Hotseat, which was in the original roadmap.

 

[Leucarum]

Civ7 suffered a lot from very rushed start, so the big part of its problems are not from not knowing what to do, but from not having time to do it. I mean they still didn't implement Hotseat, which was in the original roadmap.

The counterpoint would be that they gave the players something they didn't want. I know that you fall on the side of hoping Civ7 doesn't change too much from original vision, so I respect that this isn't your viewpoint.

At the very leasg listening to the earlier large-scale feeback on Civ Switching at least should have set off some alarm bells that a large portion of the player base wasn't on board. Said without dismissing the views of people who love the game as is. I hope we end up with a lot of optional game modes rather than ending support down one particular path.