[poll] How excited are you currently about Civ7? [vol 1 - September/October 24]

[kaspergm]

I was curious what the current temperature of the hype-meter of the community is.

I'm asking because my own hype bubble seems to have completely deflated since they started to reveal gameplay information. It's hard for me to put a finger on a single thing that's responsible for this, so probably it's just all the small things that have added up:

• I'm not a big fan of the forced civ switching, but I don't think this alone is what has turned me off.
• I'm definitely turned off by the mix-and-match leaders with civ design, that's a big letdown for me, and as much as I can see the problem with late-game leaders and the era-tied civs, I really don't like this feature - but again, I don't think this alone would be enough to burst my hype bubble completely, given how hyped I was up to the announcement.
• The leader design is definitely another major let down, the leaders are just really ugly, the leader screens so underwhelming and I hate the face-to-face diplomatic screen, so maybe this is where things start to add up.
• I also hate that agendas are returning, and super disappointed that we will see policy cards again instead of a return to something more permanent like Civ5 policy trees.
• Another major letdown is that the great person system is gone, one of the best features in civ6 imo, and I'm not a fan of the new population/improvement/bordergrowth conglomerate that they've created, which I think is an ugly mess.

Anyway, I think my vote will land on a 4 or 5 for now. I'm pretty certain I will buy the game and probably will end up pre-ordering when we get close to release, unless I end up being convinced that the Denuvo thing is such a big no-go that I have to skip it - but given that my hype level has been around 11 for at least a year up to the showcase, this is a major let-down for me. My greatest fear is that this will end up being another HoMaM6-game, i.e. the developers have all the ingredients for the perfect iteration at hand given two great predecessors but end up taking all the wrong decisions.

 

[Fippy]

2 this franchise moves further and further away from what i loved in the earlier games.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I like new things, since for old things I could just play old games. And to me it looks like Civ7 does it right - not just experimenting, but also moving forward, trying to solve problems which were there before, while standing on the shoulders of previous games.

 

[Nikolai II]

A firm 10 here!

 

[pokiehl]

10. Civ is just one of those things for me. Can’t resist preordering, can’t resist the hype. Really looking forward to this game!

 

[chaosprophet]

10. Super hyped, not only for a new civ game, but also pretty much liking the idea or at least interested in all the gameplay changes, while negative things being things that shouldn't be hard to improve by release or not long after (like UI) or that i find meh but don't care enough to see as a negative (leaders facing each other).

 

[Leucarum]

7. I haven't preordered yet, but I will. I probably should have put myself higher on the excitement scale - a British 7 is pretty much a North American 10.

 

[tedhebert]

10. Civ is so important for me, and frankly after close to 4000 hours, I’m all burnt out on civ 6 and I embrace all the changes announced in civ 7 as things that will set it apart it from previous versions of the game, and thus as being great things

 

[TreVor_ish]

Where is the - I can't put a firm number into it, option?
Undecided.
With every new information given I feel - Yay, new CIV and it looks gorgeous.
I don't mind civ switching, with xml/sql modding back it's gonna be really easy to just put whatever civ I want to play with all game inside every age. I believe Ed already confirmed modifier system back.
Leaders are uneven, it looks like New Frontier Pass again. Also, the puppet theater is something I'm not really keen on.
Agendas are a big let down. With more leaders coming in dlc's they gonna become more and more silly.
Map looks really good. Gameboard size is what I'm a little concern about. I feel it's gonna be even smaller than in CIV VI. I hope I'm wrong.
There is also a matter of Denuvo, till it's removed, my hype goes away.

 

[ombak]

I am a 10 with excitement. I would have preordered but haven't yet because I just moved. I could buy it now, but I can also buy it the day before I play in February, so for now I'll let myself settle into the new place and in February I'll be playing Civ 7 and watching the sun come up after just one more turn but this time with a different view.

 

[Fummy]

I'm the only guy to vote "6" so far. You might think "if you're not excited why are you in a forum devoted to discussing it?" Well if 0 is not excited at all 6/10 means I'm pretty excited. But im going to watch as the info comes in over the next months to see if its going to be better than I currently think. It all really comes down to how it plays on release. But as a civ fanatic any news, especially controversial is inherently interesting.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I'm far too excited and will almost certainly be disappointed, but what's a fellow to do?

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I'm pessimistic because:-

1. Civ switching seems to be a huge move away from what makes Civ the franchise it is.
2. This iteration seems to be moving back towards Civ V which, in my opinion, was the worst iteration of the franchise.
3. Huge, sprawling empires seem to be a thing of the past.
4. Lots of global "fill up the bucket" mechanics.
5. Artificial restrictions on planting new settlements.
6. Leaders facing each other is incredibly silly when you are meant to be one of them.

I'm optimistic because

1. They seem to have correctly identified some of the issues the franchise faces - people not finishing games; the excitement reduces drastically after the initial exploration phase etc. If they crack these types of things it could be amazing.
2. They've seen what HK failed with and hopefully will do it better.
3. It's a new Civ game and unless it's a total clunker I'll get a lot of fun from it (I'm not totally convinced by Civ VI but I played it for 4000+ hours!!).
4. The community here will have fun discussing it.
5. I can always go back to Civ IV which has a very active community on here .

I gave it a 6/10 but I've pre-ordered with fingers crossed.

 

[AntSou]

9. I'm excited there's a new game but anxious it will follow the pattern of Civ 5 and Civ 6 of feeling like they lack sufficient content at release.

I'm not even burnt out on Civ 6 yet. I'll go months without playing, thinking I'm finally done with it, only to come back to it with a vengeance.

Only reason I might get in earlier this time around is so that I can keep up pace with modders as they adapt to the new game.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'm still not pleased about the civ-swapping mechanic, but it seems like it's done better than HK did. I like most everything else I've seen. 7/10

 

[Civinator]

By switching the civs and not the leaders of a civ in my eyes Firaxis "butchered the wrong pig". Denuvo is no good idea for customers.Trying to return to a more "streamlined" game is good, the map and building graphics are nice and the unit graphics now seem to be considerably improved. I am curious about the commanders and such details as the different numbers and symbols on the tanks of a civ. If the transition between the ages works well, may be Civ 7 can receive more points by me.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

Had to vote a 9, simply because I haven't pre-ordered yet...can't decide whether or not to splurge on the physical collector's edition.

 

[AlexByrde]

Easy 10. I was wary of the civ switching at first since I didn't love Humankind, but they convinced me pretty early on. Love the new mechanics being brought in and the changes to the micromanagement and empty clicks of the previous game.

 

[Voidwalkin]

I'm pessimistic because:-

1. Civ switching seems to be a huge move away from what makes Civ the franchise it is.
2. This iteration seems to be moving back towards Civ V which, in my opinion, was the worst iteration of the franchise.
3. Huge, sprawling empires seem to be a thing of the past.
4. Lots of global "fill up the bucket" mechanics.
5. Artificial restrictions on planting new settlements.
6. Leaders facing each other is incredibly silly when you are meant to be one of them.

I'm optimistic because

1. They seem to have correctly identified some of the issues the franchise faces - people not finishing games; the excitement reduces drastically after the initial exploration phase etc. If they crack these types of things it could be amazing.
2. They've seen what HK failed with and hopefully will do it better.
3. It's a new Civ game and unless it's a total clunker I'll get a lot of fun from it (I'm not totally convinced by Civ VI but I played it for 4000+ hours!!).
4. The community here will have fun discussing it.
5. I can always go back to Civ IV which has a very active community on here .

I gave it a 6/10 but I've pre-ordered with fingers crossed.

6 was also my vote, for many of the same reasons.

There's some reason to be optimistic. In the end, though, I think civ switching is gonna flop. Not a total failure. But I don't see it ever clicking with the majority of players, who I don't think will passionately love it. It may not be overwhelming despised, but I think 7 years on it will be acknowledged as something that subtracted from the game, on the whole.

 

[brewgod]

A SOLID 10 !

You vote with your wallet ! Don't like the price then don't buy it. Don't like that it will be with Denuvo then don't buy it. I have well over 6,000 hours on Civ 6 and will be getting the Founder's Edition and rocking it out on February 6th.

Brew God