Prices are insane

[tedhebert]

The thing is... they really haven't convinced me that the deluxe and founders edition are worth it...

In Canadian dollars, they are priced at $90, $130 and $167 respectively... they're not offering anything interesting apart from the DLC collections (from my perspective)... so are THOSE going to be worth $40 ? Really ? I'm just not convinced

I'll probably pre-order the basic game to get Tecumseh, and wait for the DLCs to come along before deciding if they're worth it. In the meantime, I'm sure I'll have plenty of leaders to try out and civ swapping to do with the base game before
those DLC are anything close to being a 'needed' thing.

My FOMO is lower than they expected I guess... not clearly announcing what the exact content and pricing of those DLC collections will be will most likely make it so I'm NOT buying their special editions... What gets me into season passes and such
is the foreknowledge that I'm getting a good deal by doing so, when it's a game I KNOW I will play a lot like CIV is... Feels like a missed marketing opportunity to me, but hey... it's not the end of the world

 

[Siptah]

Yeah, I don't know enough about the game to fully evaluate these items, but a lot of them seem to be what I would consider to be zero or very close to zero value. Like the 8 customization thingies for my player profile, is that 8 out of the 25 listed? There are several other things which seem very superficial. In terms of substantial content, I am not convinced that the Founder's Edition is much better than the Digital Deluxe for Civ 6. Certainly nowhere enough to justify the more than 2X price increase.

Also, didn't pre-ordering generally use to get you a small discount? I know Ara does it, but I seem to recall it was common. Has that changed?

As it seems, 4 are cosmetics (2 of them include 4 customization thingies each), the others are civs, leaders or personas. I would guess that you save quite some
money with the founders edition compared to buying the 14 DLCs of the crossroads of the world and right to rule packs. I would assume each of these 14 is priced as $3+

 

[Kev1916]

Terms like loyal custoners are a misnomer to modern companies like 2K -

With almost double the money from basic to founders ? what info do you get in terms of value - None , Also there is a slim chance that Dlc's may be delayed ! just check out Skyline 2

Maybe if modern companies focus of making there base game value for money than a blatant cash grab cosmetic benefits sure are fine,
BUT what is
"New game play bonuses , alternative agenda different personality !!""

Are they really going to make changes to game play that will not be included in the base game! just to squeeze out more coin,
and what if you buy the game later days, weeks,months down the line are you seriously going to lose out in game play mechanics for ever !.

 

[Siptah]

Terms like loyal custoners are a misnomer to modern companies like 2K -

With almost double the money from basic to founders ? what info do you get in terms of value - None , Also there is a slim chance that Dlc's may be delayed ! just check out Skyline 2

Maybe if modern companies focus of making there base game value for money than a blatant cash grab cosmetic benefits sure are fine,
BUT what is
"New game play bonuses , alternative agenda different personality !!""

Are they really going to make changes to game play that will not be included in the base game! just to squeeze out more coin,
and what if you buy the game later days, weeks,months down the line are you seriously going to lose out in game play mechanics for ever !.

I feel the need to play devil's advocate here. I don't like 2K or consider them a good or trustworthy company. Yet, the DLC model is the way to go in my opinion. Constant DLCs allow to extend the development time of a modern game from ~5 years to twice that and more. In my personal experience, games can greatly benefit from that. My two favorite games since digital distribution took off are Anno 1800 and EU4. Both were great games when they came out (I thought back then). And both received years of DLC content that ended up costing a multiple of the original game. For both games, it is not necessary to own all of them to enjoy the game, but I would never want to go back to the base game of any of them. In my personal experience, they have developed so much (and mostly in a positive way) over the years. And I have to admit that I enjoyed getting the add-ones (and thus new content and mechanics) step-by-step. I don't envy people that start with a finished version of either of these games, it's sure to be a complexity overload. Hence, I view the ~$400 that I paid for EU4 DLCs a good investment, and similar for the ~$150 for Anno 1800 DLCs. And I'm happy if FXS is going a similar route with civ VII. But I acknowledge to be very, very privileged in that regard, living in a western European country (and additionally in one in which games are dead cheap compared to the majority of other goods).

 

[KayAU]

As it seems, 4 are cosmetics (2 of them include 4 customization thingies each), the others are civs, leaders or personas. I would guess that you save quite some
money with the founders edition compared to buying the 14 DLCs of the crossroads of the world and right to rule packs. I would assume each of these 14 is priced as $3+

Maybe it will be cheaper, but it's really hard to tell, as I know neither what the pricing will be, nor what will be sold separately or as part of a pack. I also do not know what value I would assign to the things in the edition. I have some vague idea of the value of civs and leaders in general. I suppose leaders are worth more this time around, since they have more to them, and civs may be worth less, since their scope is smaller. Personas I don't know how to evaluate. But in any case, if there really were 25 "substantial" DLCs with the Founders Edition, with the 740 NOK (71 USD) price difference, that would average about 30 NOK for each (a little less than 3 USD). If only 14 are what I'd consider to hold some value, the average price of those would be about 53 NOK (a little more than 5 USD). In either case, it's a lot of money to pay up front.

Going back to the comparison with Civ 6 Digital Deluxe pre-order, which cost 750 NOK back in the day, I went into my purchase history to see which DLC packs were associated with it:

This is what the Steam page says the Founders Edition includes:

I am still not convinced Founders Edition is that much bigger than Digital Deluxe pre-order was. I would certainly contest that "25 DLC versus 4 DLC" is a reasonable comparison.

 

[Siptah]

Maybe it will be cheaper, but it's really hard to tell, as I know neither what the pricing will be, nor what will be sold separately or as part of a pack. I also do not know what value I would assign to the things in the edition. I have some vague idea of the value of civs and leaders in general. I suppose leaders are worth more this time around, since they have more to them, and civs may be worth less, since their scope is smaller. Personas I don't know how to evaluate. But in any case, if there really were 25 "substantial" DLCs with the Founders Edition, with the 740 NOK (71 USD) price difference, that would average about 30 NOK for each (a little less than 3 USD). If only 14 are what I'd consider to hold some value, the average price of those would be about 53 NOK (a little more than 5 USD). In either case, it's a lot of money to pay up front.

Going back to the comparison with Civ 6 Digital Deluxe pre-order, which cost 750 NOK back in the day, I went into my purchase history to see which DLC packs were associated with it:

View attachment 704018

This is what the Steam page says the Founders Edition includes:

View attachment 704020

I am still not convinced Founders Edition is that much bigger than Digital Deluxe pre-order was. I would certainly contest that "25 DLC versus 4 DLC" is a reasonable comparison.

You are correct that the civ VI deluxe was eventually more than 4 DLCs. Yet, the deluxe edition for civ VI was upgraded after release. At first (pre-launch), it did not include Nubia and the Khmer & Indonesia package (not sure about the Soundtrack), making it 9 civs (including the preorder) instead of the 5 planned. I wouldn't bet money that the same thing happens again and would say Founder includes 9 civs, 9 leaders, 4 personas as "important" content. Yet, I'm pretty sure you would save money with the Founder's Edition, as I can't see FXS selling civs for less than $5, even if their are restricted to one age.

 

[chaosprophet]

I feel the need to play devil's advocate here. I don't like 2K or consider them a good or trustworthy company. Yet, the DLC model is the way to go in my opinion. Constant DLCs allow to extend the development time of a modern game from ~5 years to twice that and more. In my personal experience, games can greatly benefit from that. My two favorite games since digital distribution took off are Anno 1800 and EU4. Both were great games when they came out (I thought back then). And both received years of DLC content that ended up costing a multiple of the original game. For both games, it is not necessary to own all of them to enjoy the game, but I would never want to go back to the base game of any of them. In my personal experience, they have developed so much (and mostly in a positive way) over the years. And I have to admit that I enjoyed getting the add-ones (and thus new content and mechanics) step-by-step. I don't envy people that start with a finished version of either of these games, it's sure to be a complexity overload. Hence, I view the ~$400 that I paid for EU4 DLCs a good investment, and similar for the ~$150 for Anno 1800 DLCs. And I'm happy if FXS is going a similar route with civ VII. But I acknowledge to be very, very privileged in that regard, living in a western European country (and additionally in one in which games are dead cheap compared to the majority of other goods).

I got into Anno 1800 around mid of last year and got it with all content. While it was lots of fun and made me burn tons of hours, I have to agree it was quite overwhelming with all that content... looking forward to anno 117

You are correct that the civ VI deluxe was eventually more than more than 4 DLCs. Yet, the deluxe edition for civ VI was upgraded after release. At first (pre-launch), it did not include Nubia and the Khmer & Indonesia package (not sure about the Soundtrack), making it 9 civs (including the preorder) instead of the 5 planned. I wouldn't bet money that the same thing happens again and would say Founder includes 9 civs, 9 leaders, 4 personas as "important" content. Yet, I'm pretty sure you would save money with the Founder's Edition, as I can't see FXS selling civs for less than $5, even if their are restricted to one age.

I could see the Founder's edition being more expensive than standard + dls or deluxe plus the founders edition only dlc because of the early access to the game thing possibly being added to the price, and it isn't something that would be available for later.

 

[aieeegrunt]

60 and 90 for Civ 6 regular and deluxe respectively.

We've easily had 15% inflation since 2016. Probably more.

Add 15% and you get 69 and 103.5.

Prices seem quite reasonable to me.

Wages for the fast majority of people, especially if you actually work for a living, have not even come close to keeping up with inflation.

So yes, this is a massive price increase.

It’s literally a car payment for me. For one game.

 

[Gorbles]

Wages for the fast majority of people, especially if you actually work for a living, have not even come close to keeping up with inflation.

So yes, this is a massive price increase.

It’s literally a car payment for me. For one game.

Wages haven't kept up. Is that a problem that developers need to somehow undercut the cost of their own game to accommodate?

Like, there are problems. But any potential solution ends up being dramatically off-topic very quickly. Even lowering the price of a game gets off-topic because it goes to publishers and the global markets, more than it goes anywhere near anyone at Firaxis I reckon.

So how do we discuss it? If the price sucks for you, you can't afford it. I limit myself to a game or two a year these days for that exact reason. But the fixes are so beyond what we could discuss here. No?

 

[KayAU]

You are correct that the civ VI deluxe was eventually more than 4 DLCs. Yet, the deluxe edition for civ VI was upgraded after release. At first (pre-launch), it did not include Nubia and the Khmer & Indonesia package (not sure about the Soundtrack), making it 9 civs (including the preorder) instead of the 5 planned. I wouldn't bet money that the same thing happens again and would say Founder includes 9 civs, 9 leaders, 4 personas as "important" content. Yet, I'm pretty sure you would save money with the Founder's Edition, as I can't see FXS selling civs for less than $5, even if their are restricted to one age.

I think the soundtrack was initially included. If your summary is accurate, maybe the FE has a little bit more than what DD ended up having, but it's not that far apart. 9 Civs (which would also add 9 leaders) versus 9 civs, 9 leaders, and 4 personas, as well as some skins and knicknacks. But the price has more than doubled. I get that this is targeted at the most enthusiastic, but I find it a bit exploitative.

As I mentioned earlier, competitor Ara's prices in Norway are are equivalent to 57 USD, 60 USD, and 69 USD for the Standard, Deluxe and Premium editions, respectively. It doesn't include any future DLC, but to get all substantial game content at launch, you only need the Deluxe edition at 60 USD. That will get you the 5 extra leaders and some skins. All pre-orders will get the "gilded" skin pack, regardless of edition. And for the extra enthusiastic, like myself, the Premium Edition just adds the soundtrack and artbook.

The conclusion for me is that I agree with the original poster. Maybe I would use the word "exorbitant" rather than "insane", but whether I compare it with its own predecessor or its current competition, Civ 7 looks very expensive to me.

EDIT: Okay, so this is a little bit on the side, but I just saw @PMF's post on the Ara subforums, with a quote from one of Ara's devs on Discord:

Spoiler :

There's no doubt that Ara is very much the challenger in this space, but in terms of which publisher is doing the most to be consumer friendly, I think Xbox Game Studios is winning it for me. Fairly priced. No scary DRM. And a year of free updates already approved.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Wages haven't kept up. Is that a problem that developers need to somehow undercut the cost of their own game to accommodate?

Like, there are problems. But any potential solution ends up being dramatically off-topic very quickly. Even lowering the price of a game gets off-topic because it goes to publishers and the global markets, more than it goes anywhere near anyone at Firaxis I reckon.

So how do we discuss it? If the price sucks for you, you can't afford it. I limit myself to a game or two a year these days for that exact reason. But the fixes are so beyond what we could discuss here. No?

I don’t have a solution other than Madame Guillotine Has Slumbered Overlong, but trying to pretend that the price increase isn’t actually a price increase because NeoLiberal governments made Money Printer Go Brrrr in order to further wealth inequality is flat out wrong.

That was my point.

Does Fireaxis generate tons of revenue and profit? Then yes, they are probably gouging you.

For me not only do I limit my new game purchases because it’s an unacceptable bite into disposable income, but I also have many many other options for my disposable free time. So you better fracking wow me.

Unless you are FOMO, for me the smart move is to always wait. You get honest feedback, the game will be patched into a more stable state, the modding community has had a opportunity to do their thing, and often you can get a discounted price on a steam sale, and in the mean time it’s not like Civ6 and Civ3 stopped working for me

Although I guarentee that day is coming

 

[Siptah]

I think the soundtrack was initially included. If your summary is accurate, maybe the FE has a little bit more than what DD ended up having, but it's not that far apart. 9 Civs (which would also add 9 leaders) versus 9 civs, 9 leaders, and 4 personas, as well as some skins and knicknacks. But the price has more than doubled. I get that this is targeted at the most enthusiastic, but I find it a bit exploitative.

As I mentioned earlier, competitor Ara's prices in Norway are are equivalent to 57 USD, 60 USD, and 69 USD for the Standard, Deluxe and Premium editions, respectively. It doesn't include any future DLC, but to get all substantial game content at launch, you only need the Deluxe edition at 60 USD. That will get you the 5 extra leaders and some skins. All pre-orders will get the "gilded" skin pack, regardless of edition. And for the extra enthusiastic, like myself, the Premium Edition just adds the soundtrack and artbook.

View attachment 704050

The conclusion for me is that I agree with the original poster. Maybe I would use the word "exorbitant" rather than "insane", but whether I compare it with its own predecessor or its current competition, Civ 7 looks very expensive to me.

EDIT: Okay, so this is a little bit on the side, but I just saw @PMF's post on the Ara subforums, with a quote from one of Ara's devs on Discord:

Spoiler :

View attachment 704051

There's no doubt that Ara is very much the challenger in this space, but in terms of which publisher is doing the most to be consumer friendly, I think Xbox Game Studios is winning it for me. Fairly priced. No scary DRM. And a year of free updates already approved.

I'm happy that you are so enthusiastic for Ara and wish that you will have a lot of fun with it. I'm a bit skeptical, myself.* But aside from that, I don't think price comparisons between Ara and Civ VII are that interesting. What I've seen of Ara looks like it has a much lower production value compared to civ. And if we disregard that and say it doesn't matter as long as the game is fun, Ara is also overpriced compared to other 4x games such as Old World, Millennia, Ozymandias or Microcivilization, which started around $40 or even less.

*I'm skeptical partly because there is so few information around so close to release. I haven't seen any late game content, not even 2nd era iirc. I have my doubts that what seems to be the main game loop, internal economy management, scales well into the later eras. I don't think it's actually that much a competitor to civ VII from what I've seen. There's barely extermination, and exploration and expansion seem to play a much smaller role compared to civ, while exploitation is in the focus - although far from the depths that non-4x games such as Workers & Resources have. But as I'm missing information, I can't really make up my opinion on the game yet. And as I said, missing information a few days before release looks like a very bad sign to me (I think there's more to know about civ VII already). Happy to change my mind once it is released and I've seen a full play through.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Can we please keep the Ara stuff in that forum and not have it leaking here so much. Thanks.

 

[Gorbles]

I don’t have a solution other than Madame Guillotine Has Slumbered Overlong, but trying to pretend that the price increase isn’t actually a price increase because NeoLiberal governments made Money Printer Go Brrrr in order to further wealth inequality is flat out wrong.

That was my point.

Does Fireaxis generate tons of revenue and profit? Then yes, they are probably gouging you.

All I can say is I don't disagree, except to say all profit is funneled up to 2K, who probably set the price in the first place. The publisher provides the budget and is the one looking to maximise ROI.

I often get told there's no distinction, but in the magical world where stuff like this was addressed, Firaxis would still be making the games. 2K wouldn't. But that's increasingly off-topic and I don't want to test the rule haha.

 

[anemo]

In my country 70 euros is not cheap. But I play the game from civ 2 and it is the only one that I always preorder, as a thank you to the developers, for the thousands of hours of great playtime. And they never disappoint me.

 

[aieeegrunt]

All I can say is I don't disagree, except to say all profit is funneled up to 2K, who probably set the price in the first place. The publisher provides the budget and is the one looking to maximise ROI.

I often get told there's no distinction, but in the magical world where stuff like this was addressed, Firaxis would still be making the games. 2K wouldn't. But that's increasingly off-topic and I don't want to test the rule haha.

Probably the right call. This is by far the best moderated forum I have ever seen, and I’ve been online since people had BBS servers with phone lines in their basements

 

[Fippy]

The thing is... they really haven't convinced me that the deluxe and founders edition are worth it...

In Canadian dollars, they are priced at $90, $130 and $167 respectively... they're not offering anything interesting apart from the DLC collections (from my perspective)... so are THOSE going to be worth $40 ? Really ? I'm just not convinced

I have yet to find a game where those fancy name packs (deluxe..founders..ultimate or whatever) are worthwhile.
Companies offer them cos enuf peoples who don't have to care about such sums buy them.
Imo nobody who does care about that money should ever buy them.

 

[Kwami]

Wages for the fast majority of people, especially if you actually work for a living, have not even come close to keeping up with inflation.

At least in the US, that simply isn't true.

Wages since the start of 2020 are +22.7% and inflation since the start of 2020 is +21.0%. Real wage growth is about +1.5% since 2020. That's not a lot, but it contradicts what you wrote.

You can see a nice graph here:

Infographic: Have Wages Kept Up With Inflation?

This chart shows the cumulative change in nominal and real wages as well as the Consumer Price Index in the United States since January 2020.

www.statista.com

That article was written in June. Since then, inflation has been even lower and wage growth has continued at a faster pace, so the real growth is actually a bit better, now.

Here is the wage growth data:

Wage Growth Tracker

Measure of the wage growth of individuals. It is constructed using microdata from the Current Population Survey (CPS), and is the median percent change in the hourly wage of individuals observed 12 months apart.

www.atlantafed.org

You can see that very category tracks the overall numbers pretty closely, including hourly earners.

If you don't trust Statista, then you can see the inflation data here:

Table 1. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U. S. city average, by expenditure category - 2024 M08 Results

www.bls.gov

It's not as pretty as the graphs, though.

 

[Gorbles]

Wages since the start of 2020 are +22.7% and inflation since the start of 2020 is +21.0%. Real wage growth is about +1.5% since 2020. That's not a lot, but it contradicts what you wrote.

By looking at cumulative wage growth and price increases since January 2020, we can answer the question of whether or not wages have kept up with inflation over the past four and half years. The answer is: yes, but just barely. While nominal wages have increased 22.7 percent since the beginning of 2020, consumer prices have also surged by 21.0 percent on aggregate. This leaves real wage growth at a meager 1.5 percent for the entirety of the past four and half years, which is equivalent to an annual (real) pay increase of 0.3 percent.

I don't think it contradicts anything to say "inflation has caused consumers to effectively absorb the impact of any pay rises they might have received for the past four and a half years". In fact, it helps illustrate the point.

But this is a bit off-topic

 

[Leyrann]

Wages for the fast majority of people, especially if you actually work for a living, have not even come close to keeping up with inflation.

So yes, this is a massive price increase.

It’s literally a car payment for me. For one game.

Firstly, expenses are keeping up with inflation, so obviously people who sell stuff are also going to keep up with inflation because if they don't, they lose purchasing power. Whether they're a company or an individual. If everything gets 15% more expensive, a game developer needs to increase their prices by 15% to make the same profit. The alternative is to purposefully steer towards bankruptcy.

And second, I don't know about your country, but in mine, the minimum income you can be entitled to is directly tied to inflation. Wages aren't (with some exceptions), but if your wage falls below the threshold, the government will cover the difference. (and that threshold is more than enough - I'm actually slightly under it myself because I don't find the bureaucratic hassle to be worth it)

The conclusion for me is that I agree with the original poster. Maybe I would use the word "exorbitant" rather than "insane", but whether I compare it with its own predecessor or its current competition, Civ 7 looks very expensive to me.

Again, it is factually cheaper (corrected for inflation) than Civ 6 was, at least in dollars and euros.

For reference, Civ 6 at launch cost $78.70 or €76.47 in 2024 money, while Civ 6 Deluxe Edition at launch cost $118.05 or €114.71 in 2024 money.

Sources:

Inflation Calculator | Find US Dollar's Value From 1913-2025

Easily calculate how the buying power of the U.S. dollar has changed from 1913 to 2025. Get inflation rates and U.S. inflation news.

www.usinflationcalculator.com

Euro Inflation Calculator: EUR from 1997 to 2025

This inflation calculator uses the official Eurozone consumer price index. An inflation rate of 2.12% per year means €100 in 1997 is worth €179.78 in 2025.

www.in2013dollars.com