Player stats, sales, and reception speculation thread

[itix]

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.

I have been playing HOI4 for years and own a few core DLCs, but I never saw it as a problem. It will complicate things for the developers, but that is their problem, and as long as the game works for me, I am fine.

What I like in HOI4 is that devs are continuously developing the base game, and occasionally this means that older DLCs are rebalanced.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

EU games get bigger, more complex and more realistic. Civ games get smaller (since civ3?), simpler and less realistic.

Less complex and "realistic" than civ III???

 

[Kev1916]

We'll see. Paradox DLC is almost always overpriced. I expect that you'll get very little for that extra $25.

Anyway, I was only correcting two absolutely false claims. EU5 is not half the price and does have withheld content.

Premium edition does have one cosmetic reward which unlocks of the bat .
The paid content is 3 future DLC's which are scenarios are not withheld content

Crossroads of the World 88% Negative reviews
"civ" vii with how many civlets to buy? 20?

"civ" vii settlers £104.99 - Europa Universalis V £ 49.99

 

[Kev1916]

Less complex and "realistic" than civ III???

Yea, thou for Civ games you have the ability to play on console's switch Etc .

Currently EUV is only for PC

 

[Xur]

Less complex and "realistic" than civ III???

Civ swapping and leaders leading any country is the most unrealistic it has ever been. Immersion and TSL is 100% dead. It's just a different and simpler direction. You might like that direction - I do not. It's not a crime to like simplicity, but I'm not going to argue objective facts of the trajectory of either game. It's like arguing about the color of the sky with a colorblind dude.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Civ swapping and leaders leading any country is the most unrealistic it has ever been. Immersion and TSL is 100% dead. It's just a different and simpler direction. You might like that direction - I do not. It's not a crime to like simplicity, but I'm not going to argue objective facts of the trajectory of either game. It's like arguing about the color of the sky with a colorblind dude.

I don't see how immortal leaders or Sumers in space are more realistic than Civ7 variant.

I mean you could surely like or dislike whichever approach, but "realism" argument looks quite out of place here.

 

[queenpea]

I don't see how immortal leaders or Sumers in space are more realistic than Civ7 variant.

I mean you could surely like or dislike whichever approach, but "realism" argument looks quite out of place here.

Civ VII leaders are still immortal.

 

[marius_kaparius]

Civ swapping and leaders leading any country is the most unrealistic it has ever been. Immersion and TSL is 100% dead. It's just a different and simpler direction. You might like that direction - I do not. It's not a crime to like simplicity, but I'm not going to argue objective facts of the trajectory of either game. It's like arguing about the color of the sky with a colorblind dude.

How so? I recall playing Rhye's and Fall on a TSL map back in the day - it was magnificent. Maybe the criticism is more about the switches at the fixed aged boundaries than the switches in general? Is everyone upset about Civ 7 really saying they would be upset if the distant land cities of England could split off and become the USA? Or is the criticism rather that you have to split off and that it has to happen at an age boundary?

 

[Siptah]

Arguing whether civ 7 or 3 is more realistic is comparable to arguing whether an apple or a pear is more like an eagle.

 

[Leucarum]

How so? I recall playing Rhye's and Fall on a TSL map back in the day - it was magnificent. Maybe the criticism is more about the switches at the fixed aged boundaries than the switches in general? Is everyone upset about Civ 7 really saying they would be upset if the distant land cities of England could split off and become the USA? Or is the criticism rather that you have to split off and that it has to happen at an age boundary?

Honestly, I think it's the mandatory & synchronous elements combined. It creates a lot of disconnect at the same time, disrupts internal narratives, and feels like agency is sapped. For me it isn't immersion in terms of "this isn't historic" as much as immersion in terms of "this makes no sense for my game's narrative." As you say, if there were organic shifts that would probably produce less disconnect, but for gameplay reasons you'd want to be able to play around those, so they have to be optional too... Which means interesting gameplay shouldn't be tied to a civ switch...

Immortal leaders or Sumerian spaceships are historically quite strange, but neither leaps up and demands you look at it at this exact moment. As Civ switching is implemented it's very much an "Change Places" tea-party scene.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Civ swapping and leaders leading any country is the most unrealistic it has ever been. Immersion and TSL is 100% dead. It's just a different and simpler direction. You might like that direction - I do not. It's not a crime to like simplicity, but I'm not going to argue objective facts of the trajectory of either game. It's like arguing about the color of the sky with a colorblind dude.

Just look at the rulebooks (such as they are). You can like one game or another, but the new games are not "simpler.". If anything the last one suffered from rules bloat towards the end.

 

[Kwami]

Premium edition does have one cosmetic reward which unlocks of the bat .
The paid content is 3 future DLC's which are scenarios are not withheld content

So, promised DLC for EU5 doesn't count as "withheld content" but promised DLC for Civ7 does. Sure.

Crossroads of the World 88% Negative reviews
"civ" vii with how many civlets to buy? 20?

"civ" vii settlers £104.99 - Europa Universalis V £ 49.99

But you're comparing the all-inclusive version of Civ7 to the base edition of EU5. That's not a fair comparison at all. Much better to compare the base versions ($70 vs. $60) or the "includes the first set of DLC" versions ($100 vs. $85). The Settlers Edition contains two full sets of DLC, which is much more content than the promised DLC for EU5.

 

[Kev1916]

So, promised DLC for EU5 doesn't count as "withheld content" but promised DLC for Civ7 does. Sure.


But you're comparing the all-inclusive version of Civ7 to the base edition of EU5. That's not a fair comparison at all. Much better to compare the base versions ($70 vs. $60) or the "includes the first set of DLC" versions ($100 vs. $85). The Settlers Edition contains two full sets of DLC, which is much more content than the promised DLC for EU5.

From the withheld content sry "all-inclusive" "dlc"

"
this should obviously be included in the base game, Criminally overpriced, T
The monetization practices are extremely predatory. Safe to say I would get my money back if I could which is disappointing.
The value for money when you can only play each Civ for 1/3 of the game is very very poor. Especially as you are unlikely to like that much in this pack
Major rip off. Should include at MINIMUM a years worth of content not 4 months of content cut from the game.
Do not buy this laughable excuse of a DLC.
Pricing for these is truly nothing short of spitting in player's faces.
Save your money on this overpriced garbage.
Wow content that should have be in the base game.
Over priced .
Cut content


Can post the other 300 negative reviews ?

EU5 has no withheld content no nations hidden behind a paywall, no cut leaders , "civ" vii withheld content and flogged it as a DLC and released it the very same day ..

 

[IntelligentDisk]

For the first time since release, Steam is showing 51% positive reviews for the last 30 days.

I don't have access to useful data on SteamDB. The numbers might be different there.

SteamDB is also 51% (50.8% to be specific) over the past 30 days. 897 reviews, 456 positive, 441 negative. It's the second highest 30 day period since the period of February 7th to March 8th, so a day after "early access" launch.

We're now seeing 7 day periods over 60% positive for the first time. The past 7 days (including today) is currently 65.9% positive which is the highest its been. The previous high was 54% during the week of February 7th. If the 1.3 update is well received, it's possible we will be seeing the first 7 day periods which are "mostly positive" - over 70%.

The past 7 updates have all seen an increase in the positive % starting from the week of the update compared to the week prior:

• 1.2.5: 40% ---> 42.1%
• 1.2.4: 25.2% ---> 39.2%
• 1.2.3: 39.6% ---> 46.7%
• 1.2.2: 34.2% ---> 35.9%
• 1.2.1: 24.7% ---> 31.4%
• 1.2: 36.4% ---> 51.1%
• 1.1.1: 39.8% ---> 47.1%
• 1.1: 44.2% ---> 42.5%

(this is comparing 7 days before the update vs 7 days after the update)

 

[trev1972]

Honestly, I think it's the mandatory & synchronous elements combined. It creates a lot of disconnect at the same time, disrupts internal narratives, and feels like agency is sapped. For me it isn't immersion in terms of "this isn't historic" as much as immersion in terms of "this makes no sense for my game's narrative." As you say, if there were organic shifts that would probably produce less disconnect, but for gameplay reasons you'd want to be able to play around those, so they have to be optional too... Which means interesting gameplay shouldn't be tied to a civ switch...

Immortal leaders or Sumerian spaceships are historically quite strange, but neither leaps up and demands you look at it at this exact moment. As Civ switching is implemented it's very much an "Change Places" tea-party scene.

This is how i feel

Yes i have heard all the arguments about sumerian spaceships and ancient americans etc before. You had to overlook a fair bit of 'unrealistic' stuff in all previous versions of the game. But you still felt you had the agency to tell the story you wanted to tell.

In my brief time playing civ 7 i did not feel that at all.

Oh as for the reviews, definitely improving- will it result in big sales? personally i think a mode letting you play one civ as promised may improve sales quite a bit. I am not convinced it will ever do as well as 6 however, or 5

 

[IntelligentDisk]

Oh as for the reviews, definitely improving- will it result in big sales? personally i think a mode letting you play one civ as promised may improve sales quite a bit. I am not convinced it will ever do as well as 6 however, or 5

No, I doubt it. An increase in sales is maybe likely but impossible to gauge how big that increase would be. The one Civ "classic mode" or whatever it is would probably have a bigger impact. The biggest impact will always be discounts. I think we will be seeing the first 40% sale this month.

Overall sentiment on the game across social media will also have a bigger impact.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Civ3 may have had simpler mechanics, but the gameplay was fdeeper

 

[trev1972]

Civ3 may have had simpler mechanics, but the gameplay was fdeeper

I probably spent more time on 2 than any other version as i had lots of spare time.

Four was the one that felt close to perfect for me, and is my fave

 

[ColtSeavers]

I don't see how immortal leaders or Sumers in space are more realistic than Civ7 variant.

I mean you could surely like or dislike whichever approach, but "realism" argument looks quite out of place here.

You are aware that leaders are still immortal in Civ 7, right?

 

[stealth_nsk]

You are aware that leaders are still immortal in Civ 7, right?

Yes, and it doesn't make them more realistic. I mean the whole realism argument don't seem to fit Civilization games.