The same would apply to a hypothetical Civ 8, though. It would require even more investment with no guarantee of return either. Especially if Civ 7 gets cancelled, consumers might be even less forgiving for the unfinished hot mess that we all know Civ 8 is going to be on release (if it ever gets made by Firaxis). Trust that the game will be supported and expanded is a big selling point for this type of game.
Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread
- Thread starter user746383
- Start date
The same would apply to a hypothetical Civ 8, though. It would require even more investment with no guarantee of return either. Especially if Civ 7 gets cancelled, consumers might be even less forgiving for the unfinished hot mess that we all know Civ 8 is going to be on release (if it ever gets made by Firaxis). Trust that the game will be supported and expanded is a big selling point for this type of game.
stealth_nsk
Deity
I don't see Civ7 cancellation as a possibility. Income/effort is not spread equally with financial model for games like Civ7. The amount of money they've already put into it was enormous and they only get small amount of potential income. DLC, expansions, etc. require much less work to bring comparable if not bigger amount of money. So even if Civ7 will end up being a disaster (still no real data to back up this view), continuing its support will be worth it. Even if it will not cover the original development costs, it will cover itself.
If you argue like that you would never invest in anything except for guaranteed interests as there is always a risk, especially in computer games. With established brands you have a good chance to get orders from a loyal fanbase and all Civ versions of the main line seem to have been financial successes so far. I think even Civ7 has sold well prerelease. When you release Civ8 you will probably have lost some players that were driven away by Civ7 but it is unlikely that only those playing Civ7 right now will buy a potential Civ8. If they analyze what are the major flaws in Civ7 and avoid those for Civ8 it will probably be a success again. I would definitely buy it as I would really love to get a new Civ that feels like a Civ to me. And reading the many people on this forum that dislike Civ7 but are still reading and posting on this forum indicates that the loyalty to the franchise is pretty big despite the issues many people have with the current iteration.
Even if that was true, and if it is remains to be seen after the release of the first DLC, simply covering its own costs will probably not lead to further DLC. If you invest money in something you don't simply want to get your money back but you want to make a profit. And at that step if you are a smart investor it does not matter how much you have already invested as that money is lost anyway. It is only about what you can make out of your next investment. So the success of the first DLC will probably decide the future of Civ7.
Yeah, "Just make a Civ I like" is not a particular convincing business strategy.
TylertheDestroyer
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2025
- Messages
- 114
"Just continue with a Civ almost no one likes" isn't a particularly good strategy either
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2011
- Messages
- 2,217
There is a non-zero possibility that the costs of continued development post launch exceed the possible additional revenue they might get from 1 or more expansions.
Firaxis has just under 250 employees. Assuming a conservative average salary for a software company of $60,000, that comes to about $15mil for a year on salaries alone.
Revenue wise, if we assume a $35 cost for an expansion (half base game for convenience) they would need to sell 500,000 expansions just to cover salaries for a year of development. That's before consider slices of the pie for 2K, steam, other vendors, outsourcing console ports, fixed costs like renting their building, cloud computing costs, utilities etc.
Theyve only cracked 1-2mil sales of base game, of which it's reasonable to think half at least are switched off from the game in it's current state. Chatter is dead, it's not being discussed so it's unlikely to reach much of a wider audience before fundamental changes are made.
Looking at that, I am not surprised that they are indicating a change of direction to widen appeal, as they could end up running Civ VII through it's lifecycle at a loss unless they get that player reach up.
Firaxis has just under 250 employees. Assuming a conservative average salary for a software company of $60,000, that comes to about $15mil for a year on salaries alone.
Revenue wise, if we assume a $35 cost for an expansion (half base game for convenience) they would need to sell 500,000 expansions just to cover salaries for a year of development. That's before consider slices of the pie for 2K, steam, other vendors, outsourcing console ports, fixed costs like renting their building, cloud computing costs, utilities etc.
Theyve only cracked 1-2mil sales of base game, of which it's reasonable to think half at least are switched off from the game in it's current state. Chatter is dead, it's not being discussed so it's unlikely to reach much of a wider audience before fundamental changes are made.
Looking at that, I am not surprised that they are indicating a change of direction to widen appeal, as they could end up running Civ VII through it's lifecycle at a loss unless they get that player reach up.
Marla_Singer
United in diversity
Rather than rushing Civ8, I think it would be better for Firaxis to release a spinoff first. Maybe a good candidate would be a true remake of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri.
A whole generation never played that game. Game mechanics are still very good and replayability is very high. And I'm sure that with modern graphics, maybe slightly more content like a few new factions, it would have a very strong potential.
A whole generation never played that game. Game mechanics are still very good and replayability is very high. And I'm sure that with modern graphics, maybe slightly more content like a few new factions, it would have a very strong potential.
Last edited:
While the user reviews are in no way positive overall, 30 to 40% is substantially more than "almost no-one". Are you sure you're describing the situation objectively?
TylertheDestroyer
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2025
- Messages
- 114
That's 30 to 40% of a total playerbase that was already much smaller than its predecessor
The game currently has 10,000 less players than a title in the series release a decade and half ago.... surely we aren't still pretending that this game wasn't a gigantic flop, are we?
You can describe the success of the game however you feel appropriate. I was questioning the claim that "almost no-one" likes VII.
Also, total reviews don't necessarily correlate to the playerbase peaks. They certainly don't correlate to current players.
I really don't understand why anyone is comparing this game to VI. That game has ten years of build up and has been on huge sales many, many times. This game is still new, is still growing its player base, and hasn't really had a big sale. The two just aren't really comparable.
Well, if that is the case, then Firaxis has a problem and their best bet would be doing something else for a while.
TylertheDestroyer
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2025
- Messages
- 114
I don't know what you want me to tell you... The game has less players currently than a game in the same series from 2010 and even among those that have played a majority seem to not like the game.
This game is being compared to VI because they are both titles in the same series and VII as a sequel had expectations to surpass VI. Civ VI didn't need sales to sell well initially, It had an amazing launch that far surpassed V's, I don't think we can say the same thing about VII and VI with the information we have.
Also VII's player base is doing to opposite of growing right now...
Last edited:
I guess I take issue with thousands of players (minimum) being described as "almost no-one".
Minimising criticism is bad, right? So logically, so is minimising those that actually enjoy the game.
The opposite of growing is shrinking. I doubt that sales are somehow negative.
And VI had a pretty low bar to beat V because V was a pretty bad game at launch.
"Player base" obviously means "people actively playing it" stop being intentionally obtuse. The active player count is shrinking week over week.
TylertheDestroyer
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2025
- Messages
- 114
But I'm not minimizing those who enjoy the game. No where did I imply that no one likes the game
Reality is though, a few thousand is almost no one when we're talking about a series that sells multiple millions which has other far older titles averaging tens of thousands of more players daily over a decade after their release. Those who enjoy VII are an absolute minority even among the fans willing to give it a chance.
The player base is quite literally shrinking though... everyday there are less people playing the game on average.
Also for as low a bar as you think V set, it still managed to sell very well during it's launch, having a better critical reception than either VI or VII and bringing a much larger player base to the series than any of its predecessors. Something I don't think you can say for VII.
sonicmyst
Emperor
I am still optimistic for Firaxis to make this game improved. You see their dedication in the patches (even if player counts or some opinions still think it does not right the ship yet). What other games does Firaxis do at the moment? We don't have Midnight Suns sequel, no Xcom sequel too (that I know of), it's only Civ that's on their plate right now and I feel all hands are on deck to make this a better game.
Similar threads
