Playing as a Continuous Civ- A HUGE Mistake

There'a so many different building models I feel like it would have to be done as a map mode overlay in some form. There are nuances beyond just "2 colours" - e.g. what to do with UBs? But I am surprised this hasn't been mofe of a priority. It's a very common critique
 
There'a so many different building models I feel like it would have to be done as a map mode overlay in some form. There are nuances beyond just "2 colours" - e.g. what to do with UBs? But I am surprised this hasn't been mofe of a priority. It's a very common critique
I think art was under heaviest time constraints. And it's not a simple task. Making semi-realistic (diorama) style AND regional differences AND readable color coding is pretty tough task. I just hope Firaxis will have resources to work on it during other work.
 
I feel like no matter what most people's position on the gameplay itself, is that both sides at least agree the game looks good graphically and is visually beautiful.
Not me. Looks like a huge muddle. In art, a lot of times less is more; Civ 7 leans heavily into the more-is-more aesthetic.
 
I think art was under heaviest time constraints. And it's not a simple task. Making semi-realistic (diorama) style AND regional differences AND readable color coding is pretty tough task. I just hope Firaxis will have resources to work on it during other work.
Art assets ars probably the stickiest thing in the game... I'd love to see changes, but I suspect the work would dwarf adding civ continuity...
 
It is beautiful, but it suffers in terms of readability relative to Civ6. Even after hundreds of hours I can't look at a Civ7 map and tell what's happening at a glance. I prefer it to Civ5... But as much as the graphics are an upgrade, in practice I think what Firaxis did with that upgrade does leave quite a bit to be desired.
Oh, I agree with this. The art is the best in Antiquity when there aren't sprawling metropolises all over the place to figure out what's going on. But even then, the city art is still pretty to look at even you have no idea what buildings are where.
I'd still take it over Civ 5 too.
Not me. Looks like a huge muddle. In art, a lot of times less is more; Civ 7 leans heavily into the more-is-more aesthetic.
I do wonder if that's not the fault of the art itself, but the UI? Civ 6 had the same thing, but it was at least easy to tell the districts/buildings apart.
 
You could just have 2 color regions in each district.
I would actually just put this as a lens that can be toggled and that activates on city build menu or just the city menu. Most of the game, you dont need to see this especially because once the decision is made, it's made. A culture district tile will probably always be a culture district tile because overbuilding is just rebuilding the same kind of building on the same tile. And knowing where your culture district tiles you already placed are is not something I can even think of a reason to need to know. Placing a population growth this is irrelevant because it is more about watching yields. Placing buildings is really the only place this could be useful but even then it is minor because you are looking more at mountains, resources, and coast.

Plus, this criticism is invalidated, from my perspective, by my own criticism that overbuilding is a repetative unfun mechanic that makes building new buildings feel monotonous and superfluous. I guess that would be a use for that. "Where are my purple buildings? Oh there they are! On that glowing green tile showing its an optimized tile." *click* This isn't really needed outside of the build menu due to how adjacencies work in 7 and would only take away from the current look of the game IMO (which looks fantastic) for no real benefit. I dont need to see purple on the main map where my obelisk is and blue where my library is. As it gives me no information that is useful in this system.
 
Last edited:
I would actually just put this as a lens that can be toggled and that activates on city build menu or just the city menu. Most of the game, you dont need to see this especially because once the decision is made, it's made. A culture district tile will probably always be a culture district tile because overbuilding is just rebuilding the same kind of building on the same tile. Placing a population growth this is irrelevant because it is more about watching yields. Placing buildings is really the only place this could be useful but even then it is minor because you are looking more at mountains, resources, and coast.

Plus, this criticism is invalidated, from my perspective, by my own criticism that overbuilding is a repetative unfun mechanic that makes building new buildings feel monotonous and superfluous. This isn't really needed outside of the build menu due to how adjacencies work in 7 and would only take away from the current look of the game IMO (which looks fantastic) for no real benefit. I dont need to see purple on the main map where my obelisk is and blue where my library is. As it gives me no information that is useful in this system.
It gives some information, for example, you could quickly see enemy settlement specialization when planning wars. But yeah, lenses would do it great.
 
Interesting. I feel like no matter what most people's position on the gameplay itself, is that both sides at least agree the game looks good graphically and is visually beautiful.
There's been a pretty vocal and significant group of fans who don't like the Civ7 graphics. Lack of readability and city sprawl are the worst offenders, my personal pet peeve is the absolute eye-sore of the city walls and the way they conform to the hexagonal grid. Yuck! So no, not everybody likes the graphics. It's definitely also one of the reasons I can't get myself to jump into the game.
 
It gives some information, for example, you could quickly see enemy settlement specialization when planning wars. But yeah, lenses would do it great.
Agreed, the other scenario for me is finding Rail Stations in the modern age. They've got a glass dome, so they are somewhat visible, but on large maps I definitely use them to shuttle units around.
 
I do wonder if that's not the fault of the art itself, but the UI?
It's the fault of unpacked cities. That's been the design direction since 6. I dislike it as much as the fans of 4 dislike 1UPT. On some matters, the franchise picks a trajectory and keeps it for every subsequent game. This one just isn't to my personal taste. My taste comes from looking at historical maps. When you look at historical maps, they tend to want to capture the extent of territory covered by a particular empire. So cities are generally just a dot. That's what I want my empire to look like in a Civ game, not a huge corner-to-corner urban sprawl. It's a purely personal taste that I recognize will go unsatisfied by the franchise henceforth.

The diorama art is gorgeous in its own right. And appealing to me. I probably should have said that. If I could click into a city view and see that, I would find it agreeable. But I'm told that modern gamers don't want to have to click into a city view: they want all relevant information on the main map. One of my historical atlases (?, I guess so) is just of the city of Rome itself. It looks just like Civ 7, and I love looking at it too.

rome.jpg

I wonder if it wasn't a design inspiration for 7.
 
Last edited:
It's the fault of unpacked cities. That's been the design direction since 6. I dislike it as much as the fans of 4 dislike 1UPT. On some matters, the franchise picks a trajectory and keeps it for every subsequent game. This one just isn't to my personal taste. My taste comes from looking at historical maps. When you look at historical maps, they tend to want to capture the extent of territory covered by a particular empire. So cities are generally just a dot. That's what I want my empire to look like in a Civ game, not a huge corner-to-corner urban sprawl. It's a purely personal taste that I recognize will go unsatisfied by the franchise henceforth.

The diorama art is gorgeous in its own right. And appealing to me. I probably should have said that. If I could click into a city view and see that, I would find it agreeable. But I'm told that modern gamers don't want to have to click into a city view: they want all relevant information on the main map. One of my historical atlases (?, I guess so) is just of the city of Rome itself. It looks just like Civ 7, and I love looking at it too.
I do think it would be interesting, and a lot better received, if the city itself was reduced to a single tile, and the city sprawl was seen in a city view map still made up of 3 tiles around. That way the actual map could be used for improvements and the city is reserved for buildings and wonders.
Another alternative is to not have urban tiles past the inner ring until the Modern Age.

But yes, my initial statement was from what I've seen most people do like the diorama art itself. It's easier on the eyes than Civ 5 and not as stylized as Civ 6. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom