Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread

[stealth_nsk]

You keep saying civ5. Not sure why. No one would program in the fashion of 20 years ago. Civ6 and civ7 are on a completely new engine than civ5. Civ5 engine is called LORE and is primarily a rendering engine (Low Overhead Rendering Engine). Civ6/7 engine is still C++, but is written in a way to support cross-platform.

I'm not talking about engines. I'm talking about native vs. scripted modding. This part haven't changed in the recent not only 20 years, but recent 40 years.

The reason why I continue bringing Civ5 is because it's the last Civ game which allowed native code modding, making it possible for Vox Populi to be made. Civ6 and Civ7 don't have that scale of modding capabilities.

Unless you said it somewhere else that I am not across, you didn't mention console hardware anywhere. I saw you say the console company needs to review code mods. Which may have been the case years ago, but current gen consoles they are not as strict as the consoles are now built with better support for modding. Not perfect, but better. There's no specific requirement for code mods to be reviewed by console makers anymore if the game has structures and supports built in place to ensure hardware and security are not compromised.

Again, that's only true for scripting mods. I'm talking about mods with native code, for which you can't have those measures.

You say it's impossible to implement cross-platform modding tools.

It's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you could create cross-platform modding tools only for scripted mods, which are inherently limited to the API exposed by the game.

 

[user746383]

It's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you could create cross-platform modding tools only for scripted mods, which are inherently limited to the API exposed by the game.

It’s just simply not true though. You should check with people who work in the actual video game industry. Both myself and Dale do, many others if you specifically don’t trust us for some reason. Your information is simply out of date.

I won’t say anything more on it because it’s quite easy to validate yourself independently and I know how these conversations go in circles.

 

[trev1972]

There is a bit of a numbers improvement. It looks like the new patch and new map landed well with people?

 

[bumpyglint]

The discussion has moved on but maybe one of you smart people could help me understand something. I haven't done any coding since qbasic and I was not good at it.

So in reference to the getting extra benefits each age bug, Elizabeth's gold, Terracotta Army, etc. Why is the following not an easy solution.

If age != Antiquity then do not apply bonus gold, create new great general etc etc

I'm sure it can't be that simple, but it feels that way. Anyone want to help out a layman?

I've already tested it. In some cases, it works—while in others, it doesn't.

For instance, the Terracotta Army bug has been partially addressed (the fix should be included in the community bug fix mod). I added a condition in the code: "if it's not the Ancient Age, don't assign a new commander." This mitigates one issue, but the wonder is still bugged for other reasons. Specifically, every time a city with the Terracotta Army is conquered, the wonder triggers again, granting a new commander to the new owner—then again if the city is recaptured, and so on. I wasn’t joking when I said the deeper you go into the game code, the worse things look, it's a complete mess.

The real issue is that this kind of workaround doesn't apply to most other cases. Take Isabella’s gold bonus, for example—it’s supposed to be active every Age. If you discover for the first time a Natural Wonder during the Exploration Age, you should still receive the gold bonus the first time it happens (but obviously it shouldn't activate again if you discovered it in the previous Age, even if unluckly at the moment this also happens). So disabling her power after the Ancient Age wouldn't be a valid fix but a huge nerf.

The same applies to attributes: it’s perfectly legitimate to select them during the Exploration or Modern Ages rather than Ancient, so deactivating them later doesn’t solve the problem. The same goes for the Great Stele, the Egyptian Ageless Quarters, and similar mechanics.

Ultimately, the only real solution would be a complete overhaul of the game code. And that’s exactly why I fear 2K will never do it—they struggle to fix way easier bugs, so they will almost for sure just leave the game in a perpetually buggy state (also because considering how bad the game is going economincally, fixing would not be a good return for them, so I'm not even sure they'll give us the classic "2 big expansions").

 

[Kyriakos]

There is a bit of a numbers improvement. It looks like the new patch and new map landed well with people?

Is this the data in the relevant timeline? (27-now)

Highs look nice, I hope they can stabilize and increase.
Here is the chart for one week (for the before and after effect)

 

[UWHabs]

I've already tested it. In some cases, it works—while in others, it doesn't.

For instance, the Terracotta Army bug has been partially addressed (the fix should be included in the community bug fix mod). I added a condition in the code: "if it's not the Ancient Age, don't assign a new commander." This mitigates one issue, but the wonder is still bugged for other reasons. Specifically, every time a city with the Terracotta Army is conquered, the wonder triggers again, granting a new commander to the new owner—then again if the city is recaptured, and so on. I wasn’t joking when I said the deeper you go into the game code, the worse things look, it's a complete mess.

The real issue is that this kind of workaround doesn't apply to most other cases. Take Isabella’s gold bonus, for example—it’s supposed to be active every Age. If you discover for the first time a Natural Wonder during the Exploration Age, you should still receive the gold bonus the first time it happens (but obviously it shouldn't activate again if you discovered it in the previous Age, even if unluckly at the moment this also happens). So disabling her power after the Ancient Age wouldn't be a valid fix but a huge nerf.

The same applies to attributes: it’s perfectly legitimate to select them during the Exploration or Modern Ages rather than Ancient, so deactivating them later doesn’t solve the problem. The same goes for the Great Stele, the Egyptian Ageless Quarters, and similar mechanics.

Ultimately, the only real solution would be a complete overhaul of the game code. And that’s exactly why I fear 2K will never do it—they struggle to fix way easier bugs, so they will almost for sure just leave the game in a perpetually buggy state (also because considering how bad the game is going economincally, fixing would not be a good return for them, so I'm not even sure they'll give us the classic "2 big expansions").

Yeah, something like Isabella's bonus, you'd basically have to track which wonders you get the bonus for, and make sure it's only applied once. I know in 6, and I think in 7 as well, there's some bonuses which should apply once per city (ie. free infantry when you build a district, or capture a city), and I know in 6 those were also initially bugged so that every time you recaptured a city, or repaired the district, the bonus got handed out again. For Isabella, you'd have to pay attention to which wonders have been given out. I'm guessing that right now, they haven't quite got a full mechanism for passing that information between ages yet.

 

[stealth_nsk]

It’s just simply not true though. You should check with people who work in the actual video game industry. Both myself and Dale do, many others if you specifically don’t trust us for some reason. Your information is simply out of date.

The problem here is that everything Dale said so far actually confirms my understanding (and the things I know about Unreal Engine, Unity or Civ7 modding). It just looks like misunderstanding and arguing against things I didn't actually say.

But it's not an important issue to argue about anyway. We'll have Steam Workshop support with current modding capabilities in the next patch and for cross-platform mods and enhanced modding capabilities we have to wait more.

 

[Dale]

I'm not talking about engines. I'm talking about native vs. scripted modding. This part haven't changed in the recent not only 20 years, but recent 40 years.

The reason why I continue bringing Civ5 is because it's the last Civ game which allowed native code modding, making it possible for Vox Populi to be made. Civ6 and Civ7 don't have that scale of modding capabilities.


Again, that's only true for scripting mods. I'm talking about mods with native code, for which you can't have those measures.


It's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you could create cross-platform modding tools only for scripted mods, which are inherently limited to the API exposed by the game.

Okay, thank you for the chat. I do encourage you to do your own research on this. I think you have quite the knowledge gap here. Plus, you keep moving the goalposts making it hard for me to discuss this with you.

It’s just simply not true though. You should check with people who work in the actual video game industry. Both myself and Dale do, many others if you specifically don’t trust us for some reason. Your information is simply out of date.

I won’t say anything more on it because it’s quite easy to validate yourself independently and I know how these conversations go in circles.

Thumbs up to you. Hope you have a great day.

 

[bumpyglint]

Yeah, something like Isabella's bonus, you'd basically have to track which wonders you get the bonus for, and make sure it's only applied once. I know in 6, and I think in 7 as well, there's some bonuses which should apply once per city (ie. free infantry when you build a district, or capture a city), and I know in 6 those were also initially bugged so that every time you recaptured a city, or repaired the district, the bonus got handed out again. For Isabella, you'd have to pay attention to which wonders have been given out. I'm guessing that right now, they haven't quite got a full mechanism for passing that information between ages yet.

Exactly—the problem is that I’ve tried almost everything, but it still resets between Ages. Even "tricky workaround" doesn’t seem to work with the way their code is structured because nothing remains tracked between the Ages.

As mentioned in other threads, the worst aspect of these bugs is that they are simply always active. It’s not like these bugs occur only under very specific conditions (e.g., “if you take Leader X with Civ Y and perform this rare action”). The vast majority of Civ VII bugs are perpetually active because the code itself is fundamentally flawed. This implies that:

1) They either never thoroughly tested most of the game’s features (or tested them without noticing the problems, which means they did a terrible job at testing)
2) They did test them, realized they didn’t work properly, but chose to ignore the issues and released the game anyway (despite many of these bugs simply required a change of 1 or 2 parameters in the code, fixable using ChatGpt).

I really don't know which of the 2 options I hope is the correct one

 

[stealth_nsk]

Okay, thank you for the chat. I do encourage you to do your own research on this. I think you have quite the knowledge gap here. Plus, you keep moving the goalposts making it hard for me to discuss this with you.

I accept. I believe the source of misunderstanding is me messing with terms and I'll check if I have some knowledge gap here - while it's not directly tied to my work, that's something I always liked to research.

P.S. I wish there would be the same weight of expert opinions on other topics in this thread.

 

[user746383]

I think there are, I also have experience in data and AI tooling, and market/competitive research (I've been a founder so done lots of different things). Several others chimed in they have various related experiences and I'd bet they even know more then me. But the core topic of thread is by definition speculative and nobody can show up except Take 2 to settle it, and they certainly won't. All we have is evidence of low PC player counts, streamers stopping playing the game, overwhelmingly bad reviews especially recently, and that sort of thing, which can be fun to look at and discuss and try to read the tea leaves so to speak. But at the same time, maybe there's some hidden country somewhere where the game sold well, and all the streamers are now in languages none of us speak, and they all don't use Steam or Reddit, and for whatever other reasons can't find or measure them in any way. We can never really disprove it because anyone can always think of more and more outlandish places where things are going really well to make up for or even dwarf all the evidence we do have that seems to point the other direction.

I actually personally find it more fun and interesting to speculate and discuss than to sort ourselves out by who has the most credentials so we can declare a thread winner and shut it down.

Things like whether modding tools exist as discussed is a separate matter, there's actual verifiable facts there.

 

[trev1972]

Is this the data in the relevant timeline? (27-now)

View attachment 732998

Highs look nice, I hope they can stabilize and increase.
Here is the chart for one week (for the before and after effect)

View attachment 732999

I simply compared last tuesday/wednesday max with this tuesday/wednesday max and saw a small increase.

Which is a change from the decrease we have seen every week. Yes it is too early and too small to be obvious on the graph.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

If Steam was 20%, the game would have sold 5m copies. The report stated that only 3m were sold across the franchise. Hence, it‘s officially far from the truth.

That's if the steam figures are accurate. Maybe the steam figures are double reality, and only 500,000 units have shipped on steam as 20% of 2.5mil units overall.

Maybe Civ VII is selling so well on non PC devices that it's bumping the sales of Samsung smart fridges.

But I think the likelihood is this business consultant doesn't know what he's talking about and the 20% figure is an industry level stat, or one pulled from his behind

 

[itix]

Using scripting languages was and still is possible. Civ5 originally had Lua scripting available right at release and Civ7 has JS/TS. You could use bytecode from .NET or Java, it's not much different in performance now.

But, whatever is used for scripting, the core engine and performance-critical parts are written in platform-specific C++ (or similar highly-efficient compiled language) and mods can't access this logic without deep and native integration. That's why Civ5 opened dll.

You can leave platform-specific and performance-critical parts to C++ and write the application layer in C#. Modding could be exposed via DLLs with well-defined APIs in C#, and it works on any platform.

 

[sixty4half]

3m! Wouldn't that mean Civ 7 has sold better than Civ 6? Iirc, 6 hit 2m after six months

 

[stealth_nsk]

You can leave platform-specific and performance-critical parts to C++ and write the application layer in C#. Modding could be exposed via DLLs with well-defined APIs in C#, and it works on any platform.

I know all this pretty well. I was talking about limitations of this approach - as you correctly pointed out, it works only through exposed APIs.

 

[firadin]

3m! Wouldn't that mean Civ 7 has sold better than Civ 6? Iirc, 6 hit 2m after six months

3m was the total civ figure, including all civ games sold this year. I think someone said they also count major DLC as separate units? so a Civ6 complete edition is 3 units (base + 2 expansions)

 

[itix]

I know all this pretty well. I was talking about limitations of this approach - as you correctly pointed out, it works only through exposed APIs.

Yes, the studio must make a decision to what degree they want to support modding. Some studios have dedicated developer(s) working on mod support only.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Yes, the studio must make a decision to what degree they want to support modding. Some studios have dedicated developer(s) working on mod support only.

Yeah, but sometimes modders access binary files directly. Civ5 welcomed it by opening DLL source and sometimes modders do it without welcome - for example script extenders for Bethesda games, which just replace executable files. I was talking about those cases and I still don't know I've being told it's not actual (Oblivion Remastered already has Script Extender and it's 2025 game). More research for me to do.

 

[Askia Muhammad]

I simply compared last tuesday/wednesday max with this tuesday/wednesday max and saw a small increase.

Which is a change from the decrease we have seen every week. Yes it is too early and too small to be obvious on the graph.

To be fair to Firaxis, map size limitations, map types, and limits on # of players in MP lobbies were common complaints. Let’s give them credit for addressing them.

I think given how minor the patch changes are, this bump and change in trajectory (should it hold) should be celebrated as a success. I’d expect a slightly higher bump this weekend as well.