[POLL updated on request] About Civ6 finishing and Civ7 initiation

[ehecatzin]

One thing I'd like to see explored in full in civ 7 is to put much more focus on each civ and give them more dept, for example, getting rid of monolithic leaders all together. To me it seems leaders should be another kind of great people unique to each civilization (or even have some shared) that plays to very diferent strategies.

Just take Rome, having leaders in game as "Great Leaders" could allow you to switch gears, it shouldn't be the same to have Marcus Aurelius or Caesar as leaders. or...Louis XIV and Napoleon for France, and I think you can come up with your own examples. If that meant sacrificing ultra animated leaders for very cool concept art and a crapton of great leader choices, I'd be fine with it.

Yes sort of like humankind does but for the same civ instead of culture hoping. To me static bonuses is what is holding civ back, and forces you to go gun for a specific victory condition since turn 1.

EDIT. that said I'd like them to keep on developing civVI for all it is worth until they come up with new ideas they just cant implement on it.

 

[AsH2]

God no, Jon Shafer did not make CIV 4. He... (I"ll be nice and stop there). But I agree, not sure why he would be on this poll.

For several reasons, but mainly to emphasis a distinction from "rushed - release ASAP".

 

[Janskey]

Personally, I'd prefer more CivVI content and better moddability, not trying to create CivVII in these circumstances. A year or so doesn't mean that much to a company that's doing reasonably well and I prefer everyone staying safe. Instead of Jon Shafer (though I like his design philosophy, explained quite thoroughly e.g. in his GDC talks), I'd like them to hire Julian LeFay/Jensen to code the AI for the next iteration - he sure seems to know his stuff.

Slightly OT but related to the situation in game development and everywhere else as well:
Despite recent Russian claims (more about this https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/08/russia-s-approval-covid-19-vaccine-less-meets-press-release), safe vaccines against the current (and constantly changing) COVID-19 will probably take 12-18 months to be both safe and readily available. E.g. https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/28/eabc7428 or https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00502-w In addition, there are some alarming reports of long-lasting side effects despite having the disease as "mild", e.g. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...ovid-19-s-lingering-problems-alarm-scientists

e. I'm sorry, Zaarin, will do.

 

[Zaarin]

I prefer everyone staying safe.

Could we please keep that in off-topic? It really doesn't have any bearing on discussing Civilization.

 

[AsH2]

..
You added Jon Shafer to your poll, wasn't he the guy who made Civ4 ? Probably people are not too kind to want him eagerly as we are in a Civ6 forum, and maybe they don't even know him.

There are more info in the Poll Notes: [1] [2] [3] [4]

 

[seankhan]

civ is pretty much finished on both sides of a hex tile.the next move is a cube.so if there going to be a civ7 it will be something like xcom.

 

[The googles do nothing]

The should not start Civ7 until they have an plan for AI handle all the game handle the complexity of gameplay in civ, and be able to use QA Automation so we don't get bugs like the Work Ethic going away from pillaging. Too many random scenarios in civ to cover by hand. Free up Carl's time for play testing.

 

[sonicmyst]

With the recent announcement of Civ6 being available in Android, I see it as more reasons for dev to continue on polishing, adding, and improving features and game mechanics while brainstorming what a Civ7 could look like.

 

[krasny]

At long last Firaxis has some serious competition in the Civilization sphere now than Humankind is on the horizon. Maybe Firaxis will rise to the challenge and produce a Civ that grogards like me can get behind, or maybe they'll make Shirk lead developer and continue on the pretty but brain dead philosophy that produced V & VI. My money's on the latter, but I hope for the former.

 

[JJOne]

Voted for modability, since there are some great modders out there, and I probably played more hours of civ 4 mods than civ 5 and 6 together... But I think that's the least likely to happen. The business model changed a lot, and if they can get $5 per leader/civilization... they will keep doing that. Most likely will be a second season pass or a rework of existing systems (like cataclysm was for WOW).

 

[Abaxial]

The question is, how can Civ 7 be more than "Civ 6 changed a bit".If you think about how things have changed in the past - Civ 5 was radically different from Civ 4: hexes instead of squares, no stacking, far better graphics. Civ 6's major change was having cities expand into districts. So what would be the USP for Civ 7? It has to be more than just tinkering with things to improve them. Not that I have anything against tinkering and improvements. Really, I would rather have a major Civ 6 update that fixed all the annoyances than have Civ 7.

I can think of two things that would make Civ 7 more than just Civ 6.5.

1) Civ on a sphere. I'm sure this could be done, and it would make polar regions interesting.
2) Graphics using the Unreal engine or similar. Imagine being able to zoom into your city and see the actual citizens walking the streets. I'm thinking of something like Transport Fever 2.

Either of these would make Civ 7 a worthwhile successor game and not just another Civ 6 update.

 

[AsH2]

civ is pretty much finished on both sides of a hex tile.the next move is a cube.so if there going to be a civ7 it will be something like xcom.

You're thinking of the XCOM's underground headquarters presented in a view dubbed the "ant farm"?

 

[Caprikel]

Personally I don't really care about new civs very much unless they were made to be at least as interesting as the Gathering Storm civs. I would much rather see them release the DLL files so that the community can fix what they can in Civ 6, and work on making a Civ 7 that both adds radical new features (Like a fully fleshed out nomadic system), and refines the unpolished systems added in Civ 6 (i.e. make loyalty more dynamic and interesting, and not just forward settle punish tool, I want actual revolutions. Also they could refine districts using what they learned from Civ 6 and make districts more like the post-patch industrial zone, so that district planning becomes an even more intricate and rewarding puzzle).
Civ 6 was a good game that brought a lot of great new ideas, but ended up only being half as good as it could have been if the systems were more dynamic, refined, and interconnected. Also of course there's the problem with the AI not being challenging enough due to it getting most of its bonuses at the beginning of the game, and because it can't handle the more complex systems that favor human decision making, like 1UPT combat, district planning, governors, or policy cards.

So basically to summarize, I thing they should give DLL to let modders hopefully refine the Civ 6 systems, and work on Civ 7 using what they've hopefully learned from Civ 6 instead of putting more toppings onto the Civ 6 cake to cover up the fact that it's a bit undercooked.

 

[KayAU]

I went with "Modability" and "Mature". I think it is fine that they are releasing more content, and Secret Societies was fun, but at this point, I am sort of fed up with the game on a fundamental level, and new content can only do so much. It doesn't seem likely that I'm getting the more fundamental gameplay changes I would have liked, and so I look to the next game.

It would be great if we could get a mod pack on par with Vox Populi or Fall From Heaven at some point.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

I think F'xis should max out Civ6 before making Civ7 (which IMAO is under development by now.)
but first they gotta study its rival. the Humankind.
I don't know if F'xis had invitied @Boris Gudenuf for advisory before??

 

[Zaarin]

I don't know if F'xis had invitied @Boris Gudenuf for advisory before??

Probably not, but they absolutely should.

 

[Arianrhod]

I see no value in making a Civ 7 until they actually understand the flaws of Civ 6 enough to resolve them. Before that, you're just sacrificing massive amounts of content for something that will probably be just as flawed as 5 and 6.

I agree with the earlier post saying they should focus less on animated leaders. It's a cute idea to do once, but I'd much rather have quantity here considering how many interesting leaders and civilizations there are. I'd be more than willing to accept something even as simple as talking heads, if it meant we didn't spend the game's entire life span catching up to previous entries.

 

[Futumch]

I'd prefer that Firaxis take their time over Civ 7 (assuming such a thing even happens). While Civ 6 is around there is plenty to distract game players from a protracted development cycle of Civ 7. Take your time, do it right. And polish that AI until it glows.

 

[Mahi]

I don't need civ 7 if I can have the same depths in mods as in earlier civ versions. I would rather have a large enhancement patch/update before a second NFP. I may even consider buying the first NFP if they made an enhancement patch first

 

[criZp]

Full source code release and having another guy take the lead of the next game development is most important.