Review Keys Out, Embargo ends on Feb 3rd

[Eagle Pursuit]

Without playing yet, the issue of the same goals all of the time seems really valid. I suppose that it's not that different than any other version of the game; other than instead of one big goal at the end of the game you have three, so you'll notice it much more.

Yeah, I had gotten a sense of that from watching many of the videos, but I hadn't really found the words to describe it. I thought it was just a result of watching dozens of streamers play Antiquity over and over (usually with Augustus/Rome).

Hopefully, playing at a slower pace will reduce the effect of seeing the same Age objectives too frequently.

 

[ggmoyang]

Without playing yet, the issue of the same goals all of the time seems really valid. I suppose that it's not that different than any other version of the game; other than instead of one big goal at the end of the game you have three, so you'll notice it much more.

There wasn't much choice for science victory, but for Civ 6's cultural victory there was quite a lot of choice. Should I make use of religious tourism? Should I get GPs for great works, or maybe I dig artifacts? Maybe I can forgo all of this and use Rock bands or lategame tile base tourism...

 

[Acken]

I'd like them to explore more goals but also different ways to acquire the points depending on the civ you play.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'd like them to explore more goals but also different ways to acquire the points depending on the civ you play.

I definitely hope there are more civs like the Mongols and Songhai with alternative goalposts in the future.

 

[Seek]

The negative reviews have generally echoed one of my frustrations: that they aren't taking full advantage of the mechanics.

I agree with almost none of the design choices Firaxis has made with this entry. But, if they are going to do things that I fundamentally disagree with and alienate many longtime fans, they should at the very least do them boldly. For example, not having crises be an actual challenge for the player is a massive missed opportunity.

It just feels like they made some design choices and then felt ashamed of them or did them halfway to bring alienated fans like me back into the fold. The fact of the matter is that there really isn't anything they can do with this entry to appease fans like me at this point, so trying to do so only makes the game worse.

I get the feeling they more often back off on some of the bold design to try to appeal to casual players, not those of us who have been fanatics for decades.

Thankfully we will have mods

 

[kotpeter]

Without playing yet, the issue of the same goals all of the time seems really valid. I suppose that it's not that different than any other version of the game; other than instead of one big goal at the end of the game you have three, so you'll notice it much more.

What matters here is how narrow the corridor of flexibility is. Even in Civ VI, playing for victory requires hitting certain yields/techs/goals by turn X to remain competitive, especially in multiplayer. However, the player chooses how to get to those goals, and the game provides the player with different starting locations, city-states, wonders and neighbors nearby - all too important to ignore during decision-making. And the tree specifically is designed to encourage builds, like in RPGs, of civilizations with early focus on religion/science/warfare to encourage trying different things, as well as balancing between those.

If Civ VII is dumbed down to the point that you repeat same things in the same order and always win, no innovation can save it from criticism. At least from players who like to get immersed into gameplay mechanics and play strategically. There has to be an opportunity for meaningful and qualified decisions, and these have to differ between playthroughs depending on many factors.

 

[Ornen]

What I find interesting is despite some limited common themes, the variance of the criticism is quite wide. I'm seeing some attempts to shoehorn it to fit existing criticism from CFC, when it's even more varied than that.

Some find the legacy paths stifling, some find that the UI obscures too much information (not that the UI looks poor, which is a separate reviewer's concern). Some find the numbers game exhausting, some find the streamlining excessive.

it's possible to find common threads that unite seemingly disparate points. the UI is so streamlined that it obscures much of the game, and the numbers game can get especially exhausting when you're not getting good info from the UI and have to figure out the math for yourself.

 

[Ornen]

There wasn't much choice for science victory, but for Civ 6's cultural victory there was quite a lot of choice. Should I make use of religious tourism? Should I get GPs for great works, or maybe I dig artifacts? Maybe I can forgo all of this and use Rock bands or lategame tile base tourism...

to be fair most of these mechanics were added after release. IIRC in base game 80% of it comes down to great works (which in my view is a better baseline than missionaries & artifacts, both of which get a big ole from me)

 

[Thenewwwguy]

And what do you think about this one? BTW, I'm still buying the game.

1. very limited replayability due to the Legacy always looking the same;
2. age system limits the classic sandbox nature of Civilization, and the lack of a fourth era suggests plans for aggressive monetization;
3. Crises, although interesting in theory, turned out to be a minor threat;
4. interface is an unreadable mess;
5. major simplification of mechanics from earlier games and lack of QoL features;
6. bugs affecting the gameplay;
7. AI is even worse than in previous games, as it can't handle the new mechanics;
8. game feels like it's actually in early access.

the replayability thing is interesting, much cuz logically it should be *more* replayable. i do understand why it’s less replayable though—feeling like you’re pigeonholed into broadly the same type of progression probably isn’t fun

 

[Riconatic]

Any detailed reviews? Like comparisons of all map types, comparison of age length setting, things like that.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Firaxis definitely knows the UI needs work. They've talked about that in interviews. I think they also are aware of the Legacy sameness. I think that was hinted at in the recent post-launch livestream. It appeared that they intend to broaden legacy options with later content.

i respect that they’re aware but idk, these feel like things that shouldn’t be shipped with release

 

[AlexByrde]

I definitely hope there are more civs like the Mongols and Songhai with alternative goalposts in the future.

I love asymmetric play styles in board games and stuff and am eager for more. It's probably for the best that they didn't add too much at launch, though. Jumping into Civ with Disney Villainous style unique victory conditions off the bat would be too much.

I definitely see the critique that there's not enough variety for each legacy path. More general ways to approach those will hopefully be added early in the update cycle.

 

[Daigotsu Max]

If anything I think these reviews show this is still a very subjective matter. Which makes sense, video game are a very personal experience.

 

[Sagax]

And what do you think about this one? BTW, I'm still buying the game.

1. very limited replayability due to the Legacy always looking the same;
2. age system limits the classic sandbox nature of Civilization, and the lack of a fourth era suggests plans for aggressive monetization;
3. Crises, although interesting in theory, turned out to be a minor threat;
4. interface is an unreadable mess;
5. major simplification of mechanics from earlier games and lack of QoL features;
6. bugs affecting the gameplay;
7. AI is even worse than in previous games, as it can't handle the new mechanics;
8. game feels like it's actually in early access.

Most of these have been echoed on this forum to various degrees, so good to know that there are people sharing the same concerns after having played the game.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

i respect that they’re aware but idk, these feel like things that shouldn’t be shipped with release

It appears that the UI got the back burner treatment for much of the polishing period. Or at least, that's the subtext I'm getting from interviews where they discussed it.

 

[Oberst Kraft]

If anything I think these reviews show this is still a very subjective matter. Which makes sense, video game are a very personal experience.

Yes, but the negative/mixed ones seem more sincere than the enthusiastic ones, at least in terms of not keeping silent about flaws.

 

[Gorbles]

it's possible to find common threads that unite seemingly disparate points. the UI is so streamlined that it obscures much of the game, and the numbers game can get especially exhausting when you're not getting good info from the UI and have to figure out the math for yourself.

Indeed, that's why I said "limited common themes".

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Yes, but the negative/mixed ones seem more sincere than the enthusiastic ones, at least in terms of not keeping silent about flaws.

A lot of the issues seem pretty expected and fixable though. Which, I know a lot of people have an issue with that but it doesn't really bother me.

 

[Oberst Kraft]

A lot of the issues seem pretty expected and fixable though. Which, I know a lot of people have an issue with that but it doesn't really bother me.

I doubt that "very limited replayability due to the Legacy always looking the same" can be easily fixed.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I doubt that "very limited replayability due to the Legacy always looking the same" can be easily fixed.

Yeah we'll see about that one. But would it be enough to earn an F? At first glance a 5/10 seems pretty harsh.