This entire post is framed on pure assumption.
The only stated fact we know about this game's production is they started* production right before Covid (so roughly 2019, the year HK was first *showcased*). Production was formely announced in 2023
I actually agree on these, see below.
and the game still looks to be in an completely alpha state in 2024.
This is opinion, not fact, it's also hyperbolic and sounds more like a gamer rage insult than anything else. The idea that this game looks like an alpha is laughable and not a fact at all.
I don't know where this narrative that the civilization devs have been secretly sitting on Civilization swapping as a core mechanic for nearly a decade is even coming from other than the imaginations of people who don't want to admit that the game first showcased in 2019 (5 years ago) probably introduced it first . Even besides the silly assumption/argument of whether Humankind did it first, AAA games with hours of cutscene and photorealistic graphics typically take around 5 years to devolopment meaning Firaxis saw HK market itself on this gimmick and fail and still doubled down
Just to be absolutely clear: I don't know when the mechanic was conceived, when it became a core mechanic (though logically it probably always was once it was decided upon just because of the nature of the game) nor how long Civ 7 has actually been in development.
What I want to do with my reply above and here is twofold:
1. Point out that the timeline for a game like this is in fact likely to begin early in the previous game's cycle. You are aware of this and indicate as much, but not everyone is. Also, the pre-covid statement is an explicit statement of when production began, but not the only indicator from Firaxis itself as they have talked about their development cycles.
I'm going to call out your "alpha" opinion again here though because it makes discussion more difficult. That seems more like an emotional rage than anything else. Conversations with insults like that thrown around are not productive.
2. Push back against the idea of this as a "gimmick". Regardless of when they decided to try this, and to be clear I think it is likely after they saw it in Humankind, but I also don't think we'll ever know unless someone says so one day, these things don't work like that. What I find much more likely, based on my experience, is that before production even began (i.e. possibly even before the "pre-covid" moment when "game production" specifically started) they were probably having high-level discussions about where to make changes (I base this on their 1/3rd approach, the approach to changing leads they've described and what I've seen from my own experience). I also think it's very likely that the complaints about tedium in the late-game, and snowballing, as well as statistics about how many players complete games, led to looking at how to fix those things.
Whether that led to independently coming up with this, or latching on to it strongly when they saw it in Humankind is irrelevant to me. Labeling it a "gimmick" is dismissive in a similar way to calling what we've seen so far "alpha". I wouldn't be surprised if this is the feature they most iterated on, got internal feedback on, had tough conversations about, etc.
All that means is that I will wait and see how it plays out, I won't label it just Humankind 2.0 and I'll give them a chance. I'm optimistic about the idea. Whether I like the implementation or not is a conversation I can't really engage in until February next year.