Review Keys Out, Embargo ends on Feb 3rd

Civilization VII review – your empire strikes back in glorious new detail​


PC, PS4/5, Switch, Xbox; 2K Games/Fireaxis
The fiendishly addictive sim returns with compelling fresh challenges across the ages. Prepare to say goodbye to a lot of free time

Keith Stuart
Mon 3 Feb 2025 14.00 GMT


Many years ago, when Civilization II was on its way, I’d just started as a writer on the video game magazine Edge. As a fan of the original Civilization, a complex turn-based strategy sim about building vast kingdoms through thousands of years of human history, I was keen to review the sequel and my editor let me. Reader, I became completely addicted. I played the game for two weeks non-stop, leaving many pages of the magazine unwritten. This earned me a very severe written warning. In short, Sid Meier’s series almost ended my career in games writing – which is perhaps why I didn’t review the following four instalments. Now it is back, and I can no longer avoid it. I must face my seductive nemesis.

In many ways, this is the game that I, and many thousands of other fans, have always known and obsessively loved: a complex, far-reaching and fascinating simulation tracking the rise of empires from ancient tribal groups to modern-day superpowers. As a player, you found towns and cities, gather resources and research new technologies, from literacy to nuclear fission, while sending out settlers, merchants and armies to expand your reach and either placate or destroy other nations. Victory can come from military might, cultural cachet or economic domination, depending on how you play and what you’re interested in. No two campaigns are ever the same.

Extra nuance …

For this new instalment, coming almost a decade after its predecessor, Firaxis has made some radical alterations. The biggest by far is that you no longer guide a single civilisation throughout the entire campaign. Instead, you select a leader with attributes you admire – the sneaky Machiavelli, perhaps, or how about the wise Confucius – then guide that figure through a series of three distinct historical ages picking a different nation for each section. Each nation has its own unique units and buildings, adding extra nuance to your game. In my first playthrough I started the Antiquity Age with Greece because I really fancied building the Acropolis. Then I flipped to the flighty Normans for the Exploration Age, then finished as the US for the Modern Age. You don’t lose everything in this switching process – all your discoveries and progress points from the previous age remain, and you can opt to keep all your towns. You’re also able to select specific legacies of your past to bring forward.

This gives the game a very definite structure, combatting the malaise that can often occur hours into a Civ campaign when you realise you don’t stand a chance against some brutally powerful neighbour who’s somehow developed an army five times the size of yours. If you’re struggling during one age, you just need to hold out until the next one arrives, giving you the chance to reset your objectives and relationships with nearby nations. It also ensures a technological makeover for all your units, so you can’t enter the modern era with a civilisation that can build nuclear power stations but still fights with spears and gets about the place on horseback. In a sense, it’s like your leader is on a journey through successive domains – which makes it feel more like an adventure than a straightforward sim.


More approachable …

There are other changes to make the game more approachable for modern players. Leaders attain attribute points based on achievements in six categories such as culture, science and combat, which can be spent on related skill trees – just like a role-playing game. There are also legacy targets that act as quests, such as building a certain number of Wonders of the World or making key scientific discoveries, moving you towards an outright victory.

Beneath all this, lots of systems have been tweaked and re-thought. Maintaining diplomatic relations with other nations is a multifaceted dance involving the use of a new currency – influence – to organise shared cultural events and economic pacts, or when things go badly, many different types of subterfuge and sabotage. Throughout the years, narrative events crop up like Chance cards in a game of Monopoly, providing moments of humorous challenge. How do you react when a famous poet writes a highly critical epic about you? What do you do when a mysterious stranger demands that you copy and pass on a dusty old scroll to at least three other civilisations or face a terrible curse?

Does it still resemble a sort of digitised board game? No. The landscapes may be divided into hexagonal tiles in the traditions of table-top wargaming, but they are now crammed with colour and authentic detail, from craggy mountains to swirling seas, to lively cities crowded with ornate buildings reflecting both the time period and the civilisation they belong to. Battles play out as animated tussles between intricate miniaturised troops and thundering armoured vehicles. Occasional natural disasters send floods, tornadoes and fires across the map with devastating drama.

One of the key concerns in the run-up to release was the quality of the opponent AI, but to me, it seems like business as usual. You get the nations that hide in a corner and quietly invent space travel before you’ve got a reliable train service, and then there are the warmongers – and I’m looking at you Gilbert du Motier – who start little fights to probe your defences then turn vicious and unrelenting, surrounding your cities and crushing isolated units. Alternatively, there’s always the cross-platform multiplayer mode if you want to pit yourself against human competitors; I wasn’t able to test this on public servers before release, but it has performed well in previews.

So here we are, more than 30 years after the original game, still hungry to rule the world – and devouring every morsel of maniacal power. Some veterans may balk at the structural changes: Civilization VII is very much the Civilization for now – deep and complex, but with an emphasis on human drama and achievement rather than the sweep of faceless units across a mathematical matrix. There are still few moments in video games as pleasing as building the Hanging Gardens, or discovering a bountiful new location for a town, or marching a phalanx of troops into a battered enemy capital. This game, which once almost cost me my job, will gracefully sneak away with hours, days and possibly months of your life. But then, nobody ever conquered the world in an afternoon.

Civilization VII is launched on PC (version tested), PS4/5, Switch, Xbox One and Xbox Series S/X, 11 February
 
Eurogamer - 4/10 Dull and those pesky narrative's no relationship's or meaning .
Some points

"You can't name continents, rivers, or even your own cities, deepening the sense of disconnect, a lack of character you can't fill in."

Civ 7 has another key conflict: it wants to be sleek and approachable, but teems with hidden rules and details. Information is absent or buried away in submenus, while microscopic icons - another issue - deliver poorly organised, irrelevant news every turn. Some text is needlessly confusing,

Statistics screens are almost non-existent, laborious layouts make poor use of space, its "breakdowns" are unsortable and near useless, and there's no unit list. If you park an explorer, you're never finding him again.

But its lack of character is endemic, the extent of its annoying habits and oversights shocking for a series of such pedigree. It's a dull, contradictory game
 
Eurogamer - 4/10 Dull and those pesky narrative's no relationship's or meaning .
Some points

"You can't name continents, rivers, or even your own cities, deepening the sense of disconnect, a lack of character you can't fill in."

Civ 7 has another key conflict: it wants to be sleek and approachable, but teems with hidden rules and details. Information is absent or buried away in submenus, while microscopic icons - another issue - deliver poorly organised, irrelevant news every turn. Some text is needlessly confusing,

Statistics screens are almost non-existent, laborious layouts make poor use of space, its "breakdowns" are unsortable and near useless, and there's no unit list. If you park an explorer, you're never finding him again.

But its lack of character is endemic, the extent of its annoying habits and oversights shocking for a series of such pedigree. It's a dull, contradictory game
You've never been able to name rivers or continents in Civ 5, 6, or BE. Some of the points are valid, but others seem petty/specific.
 
Would you give it a 9/10? Didn't think so.
Does it matter? Reviews are opinion; they're not emphatic fact, etched on unbreakable stone. It's okay to disagree with parts of one, or even all of one. It often signifies little more than a different in opinion.
 
You've never been able to name rivers or continents in Civ 5, 6, or BE. Some of the points are valid, but others seem petty/specific.

Correct that's a pity maybe someone should have thought of that but then again why bother I'm sure 2k could always sell such "addition" in a DLC .
If Civkind was to maybe copy good ideas like say ... Old world
 
Correct that's a pity maybe someone should have thought of that but then again why bother I'm sure 2k could always sell such "addition" in a DLC .
If Civkind was to maybe copy good ideas like say ... Old world
While I'm sure it'll be added here in a patch relatively soon, it seems like such a minor nitpicky thing that I couldn't imagine it headlining any review I'd give of anything.

Cities Skylines II, 12/10 I can rename my cities!
 
CD-Action 60+% - https://cdaction.pl/recenzje/civili...m-zla-wiadomosc-to-najgorsza-civka-w-historii
[Google transl.] "we get quite a lot of variety... at least for the first 10-15 hours. Then, unfortunately, the game becomes more and more repetitive. Despite all these varieties, no Civilization has bored me that much.
I just don't understand how anyone can say something like that seriously. 10-15 hours is what, at most 3 full playthrough (I don't estimate base on MY play speed, that would barely be one single age)? That's like saying that a new game has the novelty of a new game, and that any second playthrough of a strategic game feels like playing the same game. Because of course Civ # will always feel like playing Civ #. So that means... nothing?
 
Couple of review links -







































 
Last edited:
Eurogamer - 4/10 Dull and those pesky narrative's no relationship's or meaning .
I stopped reading as soon as the reviewer wrote "There's something uncomfortable about Pachacuti converting people to Catholicism".
This is someone who clearly doesn't understand Civilization or Christianity, and clearly has hostility towards the later.
 
With everything, what matters to one person might not matter to someone else. Like, I don't think in my 2600 hours of civ 6 I have ever re-named a city or a unit. I mean, maybe I renamed a unit once by accident, but I honestly couldn't even tell you where the button to rename a city is in the game.

For the replayability, I think the concern is that people don't like to "fail". So like, if I'm going for a science victory, in civ 6 I could just fail at culture, and I might not even realize I'm falling behind until the end of the game where I wonder where the policy cards I wanted to use are. Now, we get some checkpoints along the way. So it's a lot harder to just ignore culture or religion in 7, because you explicitly get a big F on your report card when the age turns over if you have ignored it. I haven't really looked into what happens if you do get a 0 on any of the legacy paths, to actually know how much you have to try them. So I think that's really the key - the game seems to force you to maybe do stuff you don't want to do. And I could see how people might get annoyed at that, and feel that could limit how much replayability the game has.
 
I’m thinking this looks pretty promising. Civ 5 and 6 were in similar kinda dull states before all the expansion packs.

The UI is an easy fix. Within a year we should see much more streamlined useful UI. I’m always shocked at how clunky vanilla 6 looks whenever I load it after years of playing with GS.

The sameness of victory is also something we should see addressed as more civs/leaders are added. I remember when 6 was pure university/rationalism city spam for science vs all the options we have now. But even without changes, I’m not sure it’s that much of a problem.
 
Performance -


 
I generally don't really like the "older Civ is always better, 6 (and 7) is a downgrade" crowd (in fact, I was just being harassed by such a grognard on reddit), but Marbozir is an exception. Honest and clear-eyed. His criticism is very on point as well.
same—i think he’s wrong about civ 6 and 5 but he at least backs it up in a way that isn’t just “but but my art style
 
Nice to see it’s very good on replayability according to Marbozir

What I feel after his “sort of “ review is that it would be nice for us as players to control the age transition a bit and not have it abruptly be thrown at us when we hit 100%

Not sure how Firaxis can do that but maybe let us choose between
- transition now
- play another 10 turns
- play another 20 turns

Example he makes is wars but could also trying to incorporate a city state into your empire
 
Likes/dislikes -

TechSpot Metascore​


Based on 12 expert reviews

Reviewers Liked


  • Beautiful art style and sound design
  • The Age system is a true standout
  • Matches have a more consistent pace
  • Classic Civilization feeling
  • Mixing and matching leaders and civs adds strategic variety

Reviewers Didn't Like


  • Some missing customization and game options
  • Live-service leaders don't feel like Civilization
  • Some minor visual bugs here and there
  • Quality of life issues hold the game back
  • Diplomacy feels half-baked
  • Matches sometimes end abruptly, and the conclusion is muddy
 
Yeah, one thing I have gathered from both the reviews and the early videos is that I’m cranking age length to the max in all my games, one other thing I think I’ll do, tho I’ll wait till I play with it to determine for sure, is turning off Crisis.
 
* personally not too worried about UI - that’s fixable
* performance is a bigger concern
* AI seems the usual Civ mid to poor quality AI
This guy did some performance test and he thinks Civ 7 is optimized well.

1.png
FPS

2.png
Turn times graph. Average turn time was similar in both systems.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom