Core Imposter
Felon
- Joined
- May 13, 2011
- Messages
- 5,416
Yeah, it's like people who were not on the Titanic watching a movie about it.
No, it's more people who tried to tell the captain to turn to avoid the iceberg, but he ignored them and slammed into it.
VGT
Warlord
I'm not playing the game so I have a lot of time to whine about it.
To turn this around - what I don't understand is why people playing and liking the game instead of playing it and discussing it in productive threads - spent so much time in this specific thread trying to convince us whiners that it's a success.
Ornen
King
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2006
- Messages
- 648
I think you have to have your head very deep in the sand to ignore charts like this one and talk about how Civ 7 is doing fine & DLC sales are going to save the day:
good luck selling DLC when you've bled out 80-90% of your audience!
the "negative signals" are overwhelming and the positive signals are specious at best. there's a reason Firaxis has gone silent, when successful launches celebrate their sales figures
I am being realistic, your rosy vision of the game is contrary to very compelling data. your insistence on it is unrealistic and tiresome.
I think some form of relaunch is probably in the cards, either alongside or in advance of the first major expansion. new Civ DLC probably on hold until then (beyond what has been announced)
reboot will be hard targeted at winning back players who got burned on an unfinished $80 game. I expect some major features will be in free patches, while some systems & mechanics will still be behind the first expansion.
if that doesn't work, it's on to plan C (wind down 7, reorganize the team, and start on Civ 8)
Sagax
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1,791
At this point, neither side of the debate is convincing the opposite one, no matter how much data-bending is done on both sides. In a stalemate like this, only one faction can resolve this argument, one equally disliked by both parties:
Investors and shareholders.
At the end of the day, commercial performance is what will actually have power to dictate future direction of the game. You can have painfully mediocre games that will keep going because they just sell (Pokemon). Conversely, you can have games with high critical acclaim and cult following, but won’t see continuation for decades because of poor sales (Okami). As cynical as it sounds, it all boils down to money.
The upcoming Take-Two earnings call is on May 15th. We’ll see what numbers they choose to highlight in regards to Civ 7 and how they present them. That will tell a tale, even if the overall narrative will try to be as positive as possible by default.
Investors and shareholders.
At the end of the day, commercial performance is what will actually have power to dictate future direction of the game. You can have painfully mediocre games that will keep going because they just sell (Pokemon). Conversely, you can have games with high critical acclaim and cult following, but won’t see continuation for decades because of poor sales (Okami). As cynical as it sounds, it all boils down to money.
The upcoming Take-Two earnings call is on May 15th. We’ll see what numbers they choose to highlight in regards to Civ 7 and how they present them. That will tell a tale, even if the overall narrative will try to be as positive as possible by default.
U
user746383
Guest
Here’s where the results will be posted: https://www.take2games.com/ir/quarterly-earnings. You can see previous quarters there now to see what they typically talk about (underperforming games just don’t get mentioned unless the failure is big news, games that are doing well are highlighted).
Even then, though, you can always imagine scenarios where somehow everything gets better (or even worse). Some people somewhere are probably still desperately working out Bernie election math to where he can still win it.
Even then, though, you can always imagine scenarios where somehow everything gets better (or even worse). Some people somewhere are probably still desperately working out Bernie election math to where he can still win it.
Leucarum
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,681
Is anyone saying Civ7 has been a success?
It seems like the two sides are "Civ 7 has been an unmitigated disaster" versus "Civ 7 has been a mitigated disaster" and then there's a LOT of hyperbole flying around to justify a wafer thin difference in opinions...
It seems like the two sides are "Civ 7 has been an unmitigated disaster" versus "Civ 7 has been a mitigated disaster" and then there's a LOT of hyperbole flying around to justify a wafer thin difference in opinions...
U
user746383
Guest
It’s wound down lately but there were definitely a lot of statements posted in the lost thread about how it’s doing great, but coincidentally in places that we don’t have data, and that the only places it was going poorly were coincidentally the places we had data. I think though even the people who said it was probably going great in unverifiable ways were agreed on the UI and other problems, just not that it wasn’t most likely actually going great commercially.
IMHO it was never really convincing but there was initially strong disagreement that you could even possibly consider the game as having flopped in any way. To be fair, we still don’t really know for sure for sure. But whatever evidence we do have points in one direction, perhaps coincidentally, perhaps not. I personally tend to believe whatever I have evidence for, while being ready to change if new evidence comes in. Different people have different approaches there and that’s where the interesting discussion comes in.
IMHO it was never really convincing but there was initially strong disagreement that you could even possibly consider the game as having flopped in any way. To be fair, we still don’t really know for sure for sure. But whatever evidence we do have points in one direction, perhaps coincidentally, perhaps not. I personally tend to believe whatever I have evidence for, while being ready to change if new evidence comes in. Different people have different approaches there and that’s where the interesting discussion comes in.
Ornen
King
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2006
- Messages
- 648
this is all the absolute truth and why the real conversation is going on between Ed Beach, Heather Hazen (Firaxis studio head), and the execs at 2K
that is a conversation that started with budget for, and expected revenue of Civ 7. the outcome of that conversation was the biggest Civ team yet, making the highest budget Civ game yet, with the expectation that they could carry forward Civ 6's DLC packs into a full-on games-as-a-service model selling 2-3 $30 civ packs per year until 2035. (the upper end of revenue per user is $800-$1,000 on that model)
I don't think Civ 7's audience numbers suggests that very many users are ready to buy into that plan, at least not with the game as is. the most important # for them right now is sales on Right to Rule
- Joined
- May 5, 2005
- Messages
- 10,116
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,410
The only extent to which I disagree with this is if it comes with the implication that our back-and-forth here is moot (and I am not saying you intend this implication). This thread and the ones like it should be considered gold to that body: thoughtful, detailed, extensive commentary by people who know the games, know the franchise, think carefully and deeply about the elements that make games in the franchise enjoyable (and thus saleable). High-quality market research--provided free of charge.
Yes, anyone trying to use these threads in that fashion would have to sort through our disagreements. But as some have observed, even people who like the game concede certain of the points made by those who don't. So there are some throughlines that those concerned with MAX PROFITS could glean from these discussions.
Last edited:
After playing Civ6 for as many hrs as i did, it became stale for me, so when i heard of a new approach to the game design i was very excited to see what it had to offer, so i pre purchased the founders edition. When i first started playing i loved the new mechanics and graphics, and didn't take heed to the negative reviews, but after playing for 150 hrs the bugs really started to get to me and i quit playing for a while and was kicking myself for pre purchasing it rather than waiting, but I've been the only active admin on a FB group For Civ with almost 50k members for several years and it's something i enjoy, so even during the time i wasn't playing i didn't lose interest in the series.
The patches have helped get me back into playing again and i enjoy playing but i feel i'm unlikely to feel the same way about 7, that i did with 6 once all the DLC and patches are released, but who knows, maybe they can make some major changes over the coming year or so.
My biggest complaint is the eras and the fact that they are over too quickly. I don't believe a spin off would be the right move to bring in the extra revenue as i can't see people jumping in to buy it after purchasing 7 and being so disapointed, i feel like they need to make some major changes to the eras if they are to gain some of the dedicated fanbase that have chosen to stick with Civ6 or 5.
The patches have helped get me back into playing again and i enjoy playing but i feel i'm unlikely to feel the same way about 7, that i did with 6 once all the DLC and patches are released, but who knows, maybe they can make some major changes over the coming year or so.
My biggest complaint is the eras and the fact that they are over too quickly. I don't believe a spin off would be the right move to bring in the extra revenue as i can't see people jumping in to buy it after purchasing 7 and being so disapointed, i feel like they need to make some major changes to the eras if they are to gain some of the dedicated fanbase that have chosen to stick with Civ6 or 5.
It was? Where was this outcome reported on?
Core Imposter
Felon
- Joined
- May 13, 2011
- Messages
- 5,416
Ironically, Firaxis staff may be experiencing the end of an era as we speak.
They already experienced layoffs as a studio during VII's development, as has the wider industry as a whole. It's not really ironic, it's part and parcel of what publishers tend to see as expendable when it comes to development studios. Even the wider software industry has been getting in on the action (my own company, too). Laying people off causes stocks to rise. It's intentional, and often not really tied to any specific aspect of their portfolio (e.g. a single game) doing well or not (see: Microsoft layoffs after acquiring Activision-Blizzard. See also: earlier Activision-Blizzard layoffs after posting record earnings, etc, et al).
Ornen
King
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2006
- Messages
- 648
Gameplay Showcase | Civilization VII
Sid Meier's Civilization VII is now available for pre-order! Watch the new Gameplay Showcase and more!
civilization.2k.com
every conversation on that scale at a publicly traded company comes down to budget vs expected revenue. the outcome of that conversation is the game announcement ^
Could you please be more specific? If it's in a video, do you have a timestamp? I skimmed through the "Looking to the future" part of the gameplay showcase, and saw nothing about predicted DLC packs-per-year for the next decade.Gameplay Showcase | Civilization VII
Sid Meier's Civilization VII is now available for pre-order! Watch the new Gameplay Showcase and more!
every conversation on that scale at a publicly traded company comes down to budget vs expected revenue. the outcome of that conversation is the game announcement ^
VGT
Warlord
For the business model they jumped to hard I think. I'm checking now prices of all content for civ6 (was buying day 1, so taking prices without discounts) and add to that collector's edition of base game it seems I spent on civ6 around $300-400 after converting it from my local currency. And I actually was ok with it because I knew how many hours I'm putting into this game so conversion of fun-time per $ was still very good. Probably a lot of civ fans feels that way therefore founders edition of civ7 still sold well based on that premise.
Gradual increase in price might have worked and successfully slipped through, but remembering civ packs for civ6 at or below $10 and comparing it to what they propose now for $30 - difference is to jarring - it rubbed me really in the wrong way. I think spending repeatedly 30 bucks would be hard pill to swallow for many even in successful release so I think expected profits from DLC might be overestimated by 2K/Firaxis (not even taking into account how successful or not game is)
Last edited:
They should build a small professional team of modder types who introduce experimental beta features that come and go like live service seasons, from scenarios to bonkers rules changes. This will entice a small community who keeps up with these changes and be a low-cost source of buzz. Then, once some set of a half dozen of these experimental changes becomes popular with the "I wish they'd bring XYZ mode back" thing, then release a polished set of those experimental features as an expansion and see if it sells. This necessarily means releasing mod tools. You would have mods incorporated into a pack for an experimental weekend so all players are on the same page.
To fund this, they should release new civs one civ at a time for like $8 a pop. These should primarily be art assets that modders can then incorporate through mod tools into different things. They could literally do a Middle Earth civ like Gondor just as a kind of gag, but then that introduces fantasy models into the building assets.
There's a version of "give up on Civ 7" where they don't completely give up on it, just take it so unseriously, that they'll give a chance to the community to do stuff with it. Like I said, there's always that warhammer model of the community owns the game now, but as the official developer you can sell assets to people and they'll pay. Just a small team of "event curators" to hold experimental weekends etc.
Meanwhile, the main staff straight to Civ 8 with 5 years from now release. Make Civ 4 but with army commanders, navigable rivers, canals, floods (and flood control/dams) as vanilla features. Like, literally Civ 4 with commanders and hexes and 1UPT. You could easily embellish Civ 4. For one, you could make villas specialize. Not as districts where you can only build certain buildings, but you can "flavor" your villas to support both tall (a do-it-all city with multiple villas with diff specializations) and wide (many cities which focus on one specialization at a time). Civ 4's government system was cool, but you could cross that with a very light version of Civ 6's civic system where government type has different slots for different bonus policies.
Etc.
(You know Army Commanders could be designed to function as Civ 4 doomstacks, but are vastly more effective when laid out one unit per tile. So if you have a stack of units, all by the primary unit are "auxiliary forces" with substantial combat nerfs. A hybrid 1UPT and doomstacks is totally possible.)
I played it and did not like it, but point taken.
As to why i post here, i confine myself to this single thread as people discussing game tactics or posting funny screenshots don't need me telling them i don't like it!. I am definitely not here to annoy people.
As to why i do even that?. I guess i like to keep up to date on what is happening, i only really play civ and was hyped for a very long time before news came out about the game. The level of disappointment on the first reveal was huge as i had an instant dislike of the age system and mix match leaders as soon as i saw them.
Similar threads
