Rate CIV 7 on release

[Noble Zarkon]

Civ5 with VP is by far superior to any version of Civ6

That's your opinion, it's not shared by me and that's ok - to each their own.

 

[Vahnstad]

The shell is good, the execution is rough around the edges. I think that's overall the consensus

Positive:
- Barb camp/city state merge, excellent. Also the ability to incorporate them is an excellent change too. A major issue though is that they don't cross over ages, however it seems they fixed that with the first hotfix patch. Overall i like this change, but the UI needs to be better, because you have to click on the town itself on the UI bar itself which is weird...
- Urban sprawling, population, ability to choose the tiles to grow towards and work: this is great, also opens up a new strategic layer of how to grow your city
- Tall / wide divide: Seems like both work and are balanced (based on my first impressions) and i like how they handled this
- Commanders and promotion: excellent change
- Reduction of micro'ing due to new urban/rural system, new commanders, removal of governor, policies being slightly reworked etc
- Distant worlds/exploration age being about exploration: this is very fun and extends some of the antiquity age novelty in most civ games extended to this age. Well done
- Resources: resources feel more impactful based on what resources are spread throughout your empire
- Ages/civ switching and separating leader: I was skeptical of this at first but imo it definitely works and is a change that is well done and also justifies a new iteration in civilisation
- Civs feel impactful
- How to unlock non-pathway civs feel well balanced, especially for the exploration age, you have to work towards it or be in a coincidentally good spot that warrants choosing the right civ.
- Map graphics
- The additional options for scouts

Negative:
- UI (and there's an entire thread dedicated to that). I'll say though that UI at first glance is less bad as people claim it to be (band-wagon effect), but there are a lot of UI issues that also come to surface after you've played like for over 10 hours. However the first glance UI definitely needs improvement too because it makes it harder to get into the game or give a good overview about the situation and what you need to in general. It's just not very informative often at times.
- Map generation (less squares and rectangles, more dynamic maps, however the climate zones and mountain ranges seem better than in 6) and i like the idea of some islands on the way to the next continent. But more dynamic and less square-y.
- Lack of options when starting a game, but i'm sure they'll fix this so i'm not worried about it. It also should not be the first priority
- Religion is somehow worse than in civ 6 lol. Needs complete overhaul, and so does the crisis in exploration age. There should also be a way to defend from conversions from AI cities which they'll spam to do, you convert, 2 turns later AI converts again, you convert. That's basically what the gameplay is. And it feels not impactful at all.
- Trade, merchants & connections (roads, rails, ports). Also probably needs a major rework. Connections are too unintuitive and hard to read or figure out whether something is connected and also what to do to set up a connection. This also does put the town/city divide into question, because it also relies on these connections to get the most out of it. Needs a major rework, also the UI for it.
- Pacing: modern age is a bit useless, i mean, maybe that's why they want to add an atomic age but the thing is that to me, it feels like you barely have or get to play all of these civs in the modern age because of the pacing. In particular culture suffers from this.
- Culture win: Adding onto that, artefacts (and relics) are probably not the most fun mechanics and a bit simple or weird to do, so this is the first victory that has to be expanded or on reworked.
- Leaders feel less impactful, and are in need of more variation (though i'm confident they'll do that later on)
- Civpedia (that's kinda outdated i prefer overlays -> hovering on something and that giving you the information you need)
- Lack of a loyalty mechanic
- Small negative but one i like to address too, i think the deep ocean should be larger, and secondly it feels like there are not enough coastal tiles which make coastal cities often pretty bad as opposed to more inland, which is a meta i don't like. Having at least or most of the time 2 coastal tiles between land and deep ocean if near a big landmass would fix that issue.

Overall: 6,5 seems like a good rating atm. But potential for an excellent game is definitely there

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Overall: 6,5 seems like a good rating atm. But potential for an excellent game is definitely there

Really fair review IMO and echoes much of my thoughts.

Map generation (less squares and rectangles

I haven't really seen an issue with this, here is the minimap from my first game.

 

[Vahnstad]

Really fair review IMO and echoes much of my thoughts.


I haven't really seen an issue with this, here is the minimap from my first game.

View attachment 719160

bottom right of the right continent

And again the structure is overall too same which hurts replayability (lack of variation), this though is one of the least rectangle continents i've seen so far.

 

[Siptah]

bottom right of the right continent

And again the structure is overall too same which hurts replayability (lack of variation), this though is one of the least rectangle continents i've seen so far.

It also depends on the script. Fractal and Shuffle created rather nice maps for me.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

bottom right of the right continent

I don't mind one square bit given the shape of the rest of it, don't really see a problem there at all.

 

[Vahnstad]

I don't mind one square bit given the shape of the rest of it, don't really see a problem there at all.

But that's not the case in the majority of games.

And archipelago is even worse in that regard

 

[Alrin Kireen]

Civ player since 3.

Rated game 7. Founders edition owner (I don't regret it)


Good

Commanders – This improved army management quite a lot.

City states – hated them in CIV 6 to the point i switched them off and really appreciate how they did them here.

Leader and civilization separation – I am not META player so i like the opportunity for trying unorthodox combinations.

Ages – I was worried but I like how they did it. I think that i will rarely have problems with finishing the game from start to finish.

Resources – You are no longer required to play trade tycoon if you decide to play peacefull playthrough.

Builders – I dont miss them


Bad

Some notices at the start of the round – no i dont have any new resources to assign. No I dont want to change specialization of the town.

Missing notices – units under attack or killed. Cities / Towns under attack. I would like to watch enemy units when they move on my territory

Religion – Didnt like missionary spam in Civ 6 and it is even worse here.


Ugly

UI – enough has been said

Map generator – I dont really like the maps i have played and most of the maps i have seen.

 

[Serenia]

11 Feb - the day of global release. I voted 8/10

My PC is coping just beautifully with the game. I love the look of the game as well!! But I was never good at war or diplomacy.

So I may have to go back to my old tactic of shutting all the other civs down and just exploring the map on my own and getting to a cultural or scientific victory on my own.

I really do NOT want to have to deal with wars and/or diplomacy.

I voted 8 on the poll above. I think this is a solid game. It looks beautiful as well.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Doesn't launch as my CPU has been made obsolete despite coping with everything else I've ever thrown at in. AVX2, never heard of her. So..probably going to refund it.

 

[Nikolai II]

Doesn't launch as my CPU has been made obsolete despite coping with everything else I've ever thrown at in. AVX2, never heard of her. So..probably going to refund it.

That technology is almost two decades old.

 

[Rambo919]

That technology is almost two decades old.

Still lots of PC's around that don't have it.... though they have recently started to become too old for new games.

Almost two decades is highly overstating the age though since it's still closer to one decade.

 

[Piranga]

Voted 4.

Era changes, and era score challenges, are the worst game mechanic in the history of the series.

There is so much positive in Civ 7, but none of it matters because how bad forced era gameplay is.

I am not optimistic this dev team will ever fix it. Fingers crossed for major mod overhauls.

 

[dawmz]

A swing and a home run. I rated 8 since there are still rough patches that needs to be fixed, and thankfully, all of my qualms are mostly about UI and presentation of information. Otherwise, the gameplay is good and I can never go back to older civ games again.

 

[Triarier]

Voted 4.

Era changes, and era score challenges, are the worst game mechanic in the history of the series.

There is so much positive in Civ 7, but none of it matters because how bad forced era gameplay is.

I am not optimistic this dev team will ever fix it. Fingers crossed for major mod overhauls.

I do not think the devs will fix it, since it is more a core game mechanic and not a bug or not broken mechanic. Potentially other game modes are being implemented though and of course mods.

Game is a solid 9 for me. I played 4,5,6 and now 7 on relase. 4 was a blast. 5 broke me. To this day I do not enjoy it. Civ VI is okay, but felt more of a puzzle game to me with the districts.

I played 4 complete games now in Civ VII and cannot stop playing. Even though there are these legacy paths, it still feels less railroady than Civ VI. I ignored the distant lands in 2 playthroughs and still enjoyed the game (AI blocked me from going to distant lands and once I played Mongolia). The milestones exist in the game, but you can totally ignore them and have a great game.

The thing I hate about this game though, is the lack of information. UI is clunky yes, but why is there so much information hidden? The settler lense gives you coloured tiles, but does not explain the difference between teal and yellow. How far does the trade network go? How can you increase it? Why is the second relgious icon sometimes red, even though both are from the same religion? Why do I get Information on the relationship with another AI when I hover ober the thumbs up/down but not if we are neutral to each other? How do unique improvements work exactly? How far apart can I build cities to have them connected by roads?

The list goes on and on.

I was willing to watch youtube videos, read stuff on civfanatics or reddit, so I got a good read into the mechanics.

But I completely understand if someone boots up Civ VII, clicks through one game, has no idea why X and Y are happening and reviews it with a 4-6.

The game is really great but it hides its greatness well. If you are not interesting in the putting time and effort to read on all of the mechanics, I suggest to wait a few months or even a year.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

After a playing a fair bit more, I will upgrade to an 8. Can't go higher than that, way too many problems with bugs and UI madness, but the core game for me is definitely much more solid and enjoyable than either V or VI were at launch.

My overriding feeling, aside from the need to fix said bugs and UI, is that the game just needs MOAR STUFF. Like, way more stuff. It needs more leaders, more civs, way more map types, more map customisation options, more natural wonders, more meat on the bones of various elements such as religion (and culture more broadly), more types of resources, more impactful world wonders, more things to do with influence, more suzerain bonuses (preferably quite wild ones), more options/routes through the different legacy paths, etc.

I NEED MOAR!

 

[Siptah]

It needs more leaders, more civs

I mean, more is more in this regard. But I'm surprisingly happy with the amount of leaders and civs. I'm missing some game play niches, of course. But I think due to the free combinations of civs and leaders, both have much more replay-ability than those of previous civ games since III. Like, I already had two games with Rome (one with Baroque Fritz, one with Revoluzzer Napi), and I would like to play Rome with Augustus and Lafayette as well at some point. And I would like to try Baroque Fritz with Egypt...

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I mean, more is more in this regard. But I'm surprisingly happy with the amount of leaders and civs. I'm missing some game play niches, of course. But I think due to the free combinations of civs and leaders, both have much more replay-ability than those of previous civ games since III. Like, I already had two games with Rome (one with Baroque Fritz, one with Revoluzzer Napi), and I would like to play Rome with Augustus and Lafayette as well at some point. And I would like to try Baroque Fritz with Egypt...

Mostly agree yeh, more leaders and civs is definitely lower down my list of priorities than more of all the other things. But as you say, more is more! I think what I'm ultimately looking for is more asymmetry, more opportunity for wild strategies or opportunities to pivot a game based on the map & what you discover, more choices.

 

[Dirk1302]

Solid. I frankly don't get the many very negative reviews, some even suggesting that the game shouldn't have been released at this point. Played for some 25 hours now and sofar it's been an enjoyable experience. Happy to see that a lot of people feel the same about this.

 

[Canadian Bluebeer]

Bought it, keeping it, because it's a Linux version from Day 1.
That is all.

edit: gave it a 4.