Simple question. I feel like one of the main purposes of the New Frontier Pass was to see if game modes would be popular enough with the player base to become a standard feature in future releases. I also feel like stuff like Governors and the World Congress would be game modes in future releases if game modes are considered to be popular enough.
I'm still trying to decide on this one, but I am learning towards "no" IF there was a choice to be in an expansion. If it's game mode or nothing then yes, a game more is great. The issue with plug and play game modes is that the abilities of civs can't really have a strong relationship with the mechanic.
In theory, features in an expansion can have stronger coupling with each other since it's a guarantee that the player as all the content of an expansion. If governors were a game mode the Ottomans wouldn't have an unique governor for example.
While I don't have the creativity to give you a good example, if the economy game mode was a feature of an expansion then it's possible that civ could have strong relationships around the mechanic. The devs of course have been modifying some abilities based on game modes, like Tamar with Dramatic ages, but this is a tricky balance issue and not something you'd want to do often. It also essentially locks Tamar from receiving other bonuses in a future game mode, because if you have 2 game modes changing a civ's ability, well which one would you take if both modes were enabled? Again, my point here is just having a cool game mechanic more tightly coupled with a civilization. (Dutch with monopoly bonuses would be neat). Some game modes don't really need a tight coupling like apocalypse so they are definitely great as a game mode.
Absolutely not. The modular design is only accentuating Civ6's biggest flaw, which is a lack of interaction among systems. Making systems modular only makes them less likely to interact. Civ7 needs to integrate its systems more, not continue down the modular bucket-filling route.
Besides the modular criticism stated by others, I would also like to add that many gamemode mechanics do not interact well with AI. It is like Ptolemy Astrology: Adding more and more extra deferents and epicycles will only make the whole system harder to work with.
If all the additions can work well with core mechanisms, I have no problem to embrace the gamemodes.
Apocalypse, Research Shuffle, and Dramatic Ages work perfectly as game modes. They are not new systems unto themselves, but rather more punishing versions of existing systems. I don't see any reason why anyone would object to more game modes in this vein.
Secret Societies, Heroes, and Corporations lean more in the direction of being new systems entirely, so I can understand the argument that they should just be built in features so they can interact with existing systems (and each other) more deeply. But that's putting aside the fact that Secret Societies and Heroes have mythological components that would cause endless amounts of whining from history purists if they weren't optional.
So Corporations is really the only game mode that should definitely be just a default part of the game if it continues into future entries in the series. Everything else has a good reason for being an optional game mode.
I'm torn. I mean I'd love it if governors were a game mode so I can turn them off. But I agree I prefer more integrated mechanics than more modular ones. I think I'd generally prefer games modes along the lines of the tech shuffle and dramatic ages and revamp an existing mechanic, rather than ones that create new ones.
Maybe?
If the gamemodes are "variations" of already existing properly established mechanics like Tech Shuffle, then sure, go ahead.
If the gamemodes are new mechanics shoehorned in like Secret Societies, Heroes, and Corporations, then no. If a gamemode with new mechanics was added, it should be more integrated with current systems, and preferable the AI actually knows how to use them.
I had high hopes for the gamemodes. They sounded such an interesting idea that could really spice up the game. Then Secret Societies was announced. I hoped Secret Socities would change espionage, religion or do something like that but they end up being global governors instead.
I said yes.
However I agree that most of the game modes should synergize together and should be expansion or base game materials such as corporations, secret societies, heroes etc.
That being said some of these are "fantasy" modes so if somehow they were historical societies and heroes it would work to please everybody.
When it comes to things like tech and civic shuffle that obviously should be optional and works well as a game mode.
I’d say yes, but only for more niche elements (e.g. secret societies, heroes, and other fantastic elements), or novel gameplay toggles (e.g. tech shuffle), although the latter is arguably better as a standard setup option than a “mode.” They should not be used for more conventional mechanics (e.g. corporations) or as a substitute for rebalancing (arguably dramatic ages).
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that I think the Game Mode system is pretty smart, in that it lets you customize your game however you want, instead of forcing features that people may not want into the base game. It also gave them the option to really go out on a limb and try out some ideas that might have been less than entirely popular. Apocalypse Mode is a great example of that: it's fun every now and then, but I would hate it if I had to play it every game. Having the option to turn it on or off, is a great decision, imo.
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that I think the Game Mode system is pretty smart, in that it lets you customize your game however you want, instead of forcing features that people may not want into the base game. It also gave them the option to really go out on a limb and try out some ideas that might have been less than entirely popular. Apocalypse Mode is a great example of that: it's fun every now and then, but I would hate it if I had to play it every game. Having the option to turn it on or off, is a great decision, imo.
There seems to be a few players wanting to turn off the loyalty system like a toggle-able game mode. I, on the other hand, don't want to ever go back to the forward settling hodgepodge empire. "Thanks, Spain, for creating a one-tile exclave in the middle of my territory!"
There seems to be a few players wanting to turn off the loyalty system like a toggle-able game mode. I, on the other hand, don't want to ever go back to the forward settling hodgepodge empire. "Thanks, Spain, for creating a one-tile exclave in the middle of my territory!"
Loyalty system bring about the "dynamics" that many of us had been requested for a long time into the game.
If anything, I would say the Dramatic Age gamemode is a step too far on loyalty, while the normal loyalty mechanics are too conservative to be effective/interesting.
If the Dramatic Age mode focuses more on loyalty pressures during Golden Age and Dark Age - that is, an enhancement of base game loyalty mechanics instead of an outright punishment based on Free Cities, similar to @Taefin's mod idea - I would support such an addition. Basically, more thoughtful interaction (and most importantly, enhancement) with base game mechanics.
I, on the other hand, don't want to ever go back to the forward settling hodgepodge empire. "Thanks, Spain, for creating a one-tile exclave in the middle of my territory!"
This constantly annoyed me in the base game! And loyalty didn't completely fix the problem either as I've seen too many AIs settle cities they can never keep because of loyalty pressure. I almost never get a cultural alliance because they AI always takes it as an invitation to settler spam me.
Also, in terms of the ideas of the "togglables" alone, I would firmly support such a function, for it can make a game far more customized. IIRC Civ V has a lot of togglable options when creating a game, that is something worth bringing back into the series.
Also, in terms of the ideas of the "togglables" alone, I would firmly support such a function, for it can make a game far more customized. IIRC Civ V has a lot of togglable options when creating a game, that is something worth bringing back into the series.
Options are good. I only hesitate because of what I said before: if a mechanic is optional, the devs might be tempted to say, "Why make this feature interact with other features if it can be turned off?"
Options are good. I only hesitate because of what I said before: if a mechanic is optional, the devs might be tempted to say, "Why make this feature interact with other features if it can be turned off?"
The fact that you can turn off barbarians but that the inspiration and eureka that involve them doesn't change doesn't inspire confidence about the players being able to turn options on and off. I would like to see more game play customization but I don't expect that Firaxis would make it work too well.
Options are good. I only hesitate because of what I said before: if a mechanic is optional, the devs might be tempted to say, "Why make this feature interact with other features if it can be turned off?"
I was about to say yes i would love to be able to turn off World Congress but this exact point is the problem. Given that I think it is inevitable that some game features will be able toggle on and off I hope they really think it through. One of the smartest decisions Firaxis could make would be to realize they should start off with a well implemented game with fewer features that's designed to be expanded instead of putting out a game with more features that just need to be revised alter on.
One of the smartest decisions Firaxis could make would be to realize they should start off with a well implemented game with fewer features that's designed to be expanded instead of putting out a game with more features that just need to be revised alter on.
Interestingly, it seems that Soren Johnson had a similar idea - game mechanics should be designed with AI performance taken into consideration before writing a good AI to utilize them later on - when he was working on Civ IV. (Credit to @pokiehl for introducing the video)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
