So anyway, place your bets: when will civ7 arrive?

Kaan Boztepe

Prince
Joined
Mar 26, 2018
Messages
392
I met Redmond Simonsen once! Sadly, he died in 2005. Only 62.

I must have another go at Fallen Enchantress, which solves things by unloading armies onto a tactical map to resolve combat, so you have correct scales for both strategic and tactical combat. It would be a possible way for Civ 7 to go.
that game is more Heroes of might and magic than it is civ series. dont get me wrong i love it but it is still not historical or 4x strategy. it is more like 4X+magic+turn based combat. i dont see that kind of game to appeal a lot to the devs of the civ franchise with their target of easy going casual players as the focus group
 

Abaxial

Emperor
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,118
that game is more Heroes of might and magic than it is civ series. dont get me wrong i love it but it is still not historical or 4x strategy. it is more like 4X+magic+turn based combat. i dont see that kind of game to appeal a lot to the devs of the civ franchise with their target of easy going casual players as the focus group

It wouldn't surprise me if Civ 7 went full-on fantasy. Civ 6 already has zombies and vampires and wizards (soothsayers), so why not add the odd orc and troll? Or at least dinosaurs, given that someone at Firaxis apparently believes dinosaurs existed in the Stone Age. Wasn't there a dinosaur option in Civ 2? Easy-going casual players love dinosaurs! It's us lot that are sticklers for history.
 

Krajzen

Deity
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
3,281
Location
Poland
I'd actually love to see Firaxis develop a full - on fantasy spin - off of Civilization. Like, you know, the entire format of historical 4X through all ages (I mean probably ending in "gunpowder and renaissance" or "steampunk") in some constructed universe with fantasy units, heroes, magic, quests, rpg elements and so on. Many civilizations spread over many races and creativity in how fantasy setting would apply to "civilization stuff" such as economy, trade, tech tree, politics, cities and so on.

And then they'd maybe remove all blatant fantasy and sci fi elements and spin off modes from Civ series, because they simply take energy that could be put into the regular content. I'd be perfectly fine if there were no future age at all, end date being like 2050 and tech tree ending like right now plus few technologies which are realistically achievable. Scientific victory through Mars travel or idk solving global warming, please not pure anime of mechs (realistically unviable in modern warfare) or pure sci fi of civ6 FTL engine (which as far as we know is still physically impossible) going for exoplanet.

(also, I still can't understand why did devs decide to include separate future era, with very little actual content in it, to artificially prolong late game EVEN MORE in a game with horrible late game; like seriously, all meaningful content within it could be simply at the end of the last "regular" era)
 
Last edited:

Abaxial

Emperor
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,118
I'd actually love to see Firaxis develop a full - on fantasy spin - off of Civilization. Like, you know, the entire format of historical 4X through all ages (I mean probably ending in "gunpowder and renaissance" or "steampunk") in some constructed universe with fantasy units, heroes, magic, quests, rpg elements and so on. Many civilizations spread over many races and creativity in how fantasy setting would apply to "civilization stuff" such as economy, trade, tech tree, politics, cities and so on.

I'm really surprised they haven't done this.
 

Iconian

Chieftain
Joined
May 16, 2021
Messages
73
Why are you all arguing about Civ 6 and 7? Are you that eager to pay more money for yet another Civ game in the middle of so much inflation? Do you think the glitches, graphical annoyances, and gameplay irritations are worth it? Or the fact that Civ 6 modders STILL can't make any dll mods? Do you really think Civ 7 is going to be that much of an improvement?


Just come back to Civ 5.

Most of you probably own it anyway, so no new $ spent.

And in 10 or 20 years, if another Civ game never gets released, which game in the series will people look back on most fondly?

Tons of great mods to extend the life of the game too, like the one in my sig.
 

Krajzen

Deity
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
3,281
Location
Poland
Why are you all arguing about Civ 6 and 7? Are you that eager to pay more money for yet another Civ game in the middle of so much inflation? Do you think the glitches, graphical annoyances, and gameplay irritations are worth it? Or the fact that Civ 6 modders STILL can't make any dll mods? Do you really think Civ 7 is going to be that much of an improvement?


Just come back to Civ 5.

Most of you probably own it anyway, so no new $ spent.

And in 10 or 20 years, if another Civ game never gets released, which game in the series will people look back on most fondly?

Tons of great mods to extend the life of the game too, like the one in my sig.

I have played metric ton of civ5, one of my favorite games ever, got 85% of achievements, played almost all civs, done all scenarios, played a lot of multiplayer, had many mods, could win immortal with closed eyes; I felt I have exploited the game completely and got bored of it forever. Ultimately disliked civ6 despite many attempts. I find no reasons to a priori discard civ7, which is not even announced yet. Thereby, I am curious of civ7 and eager to try something new.

Games in Poland are cheap
 
Last edited:

Abaxial

Emperor
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,118
I would like to come back to Civ 5, but I'm not sure I could face the happiness mechanic again.
 

Iconian

Chieftain
Joined
May 16, 2021
Messages
73
had many mods

I'd be curious to know which ones you had, and how deeply they changed the game. Were they mostly mods that added new civs, or that altered a lot of the underlying workings of the game?


I find no reasons to a priori discard civ7

To be fair, it could be a good game, if it ever comes out. But to my view, it seems more likely to follow in Civ 6's footsteps rather than 5's.


Games in Poland are cheap

Yeah . . . that very thing is actually something I aim to correct in a future mod. Have you ever tried mods that nerf Poland? I was thinking I might try adding in many more policies to the game, thereby diffusing the strength of Polish policies. What do you think? Would that be sufficient, or would more be required, like reducing current policy strength or something?


I would like to come back to Civ 5, but I'm not sure I could face the happiness mechanic again.

Oh yes, that may be the thing I disliked most about Civ 5--it was either that or the huge time it takes to build just about anything.

In Fantastic Ancients I feel I've found some pretty decent solutions to both issues, though I could really use more feedback to determine just how well they work.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,378
Location
Texas
I'd actually love to see Firaxis develop a full - on fantasy spin - off of Civilization. Like, you know, the entire format of historical 4X through all ages (I mean probably ending in "gunpowder and renaissance" or "steampunk") in some constructed universe with fantasy units, heroes, magic, quests, rpg elements and so on. Many civilizations spread over many races and creativity in how fantasy setting would apply to "civilization stuff" such as economy, trade, tech tree, politics, cities and so on.
I'd also settle for a Civ Mythology based on the real world with mythological creatures and heroes. Either way I agree that those should stay in spin-off games and keep the main civ games historical.
 

SammyKhalifa

Deity
Joined
Sep 18, 2003
Messages
6,189
I'd also settle for a Civ Mythology based on the real world with mythological creatures and heroes. Either way I agree that those should stay in spin-off games and keep the main civ games historical.
I still want a prehistoric spin off. The big "space race" style victory could be founding of the first city, rolling right into traditional civ.
 

Sana Kan

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 25, 2018
Messages
19
Why are you all arguing about Civ 6 and 7? Are you that eager to pay more money for yet another Civ game in the middle of so much inflation? Do you think the glitches, graphical annoyances, and gameplay irritations are worth it? Or the fact that Civ 6 modders STILL can't make any dll mods? Do you really think Civ 7 is going to be that much of an improvement?


Just come back to Civ 5.

Most of you probably own it anyway, so no new $ spent.

And in 10 or 20 years, if another Civ game never gets released, which game in the series will people look back on most fondly?

Tons of great mods to extend the life of the game too, like the one in my sig.

It's pretty sad that Firaxis still hasn't looked at Civ 6's engine/asset limitations. Heavy-graphical mods can't be developed properly and the game crashes when using most DLCs with them
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,378
Location
Texas
I still want a prehistoric spin off. The big "space race" style victory could be founding of the first city, rolling right into traditional civ.
I'd want a prehistoric era added to regular civ, if we can trade that for the future era. :mischief:
 

Abaxial

Emperor
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,118
"Prehistoric civilisation" is almost an oxymoron. Generally to have history, you need civilisation. If by "prehistoric" you mean palaeolithic - it's not a civilisation. In any case, Aztec, Maya, and Inca are pretty much prehistoric, and the same goes for the Africans - there is very little recorded history before the Europeans came.
 

Gorbles

Load Balanced
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
8,756
Location
UK
And in 10 or 20 years, if another Civ game never gets released, which game in the series will people look back on most fondly?
I mean, speaking for only myself, but it wouldn't be Civ 5 :)

"Prehistoric civilisation" is almost an oxymoron. Generally to have history, you need civilisation. If by "prehistoric" you mean palaeolithic - it's not a civilisation. In any case, Aztec, Maya, and Inca are pretty much prehistoric, and the same goes for the Africans - there is very little recorded history before the Europeans came.
Prehistoric is defined as being prior to written history. Prehistoric man was most definitely a thing, though the concept of civilisations as we understand it. Wikipedia helpfully places the invention of the earliest writing systems at around 5,000BC, and I don't think it's any coincidence that this has often been the starting year of any Civ. timeline. Which means before this is kinda out of the scope of a regular game.

Though, as these things are often abstracted, we literally research "Writing" as a fundamental tech in the earliest age of any / most Civ. games. So eh. Wiggle room, if they want it. Not sure much can be done there myself without making a radically-different game.
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
4,653
Location
north of Steilacoom, WA
"Prehistoric civilisation" is almost an oxymoron. Generally to have history, you need civilisation. If by "prehistoric" you mean palaeolithic - it's not a civilisation. In any case, Aztec, Maya, and Inca are pretty much prehistoric, and the same goes for the Africans - there is very little recorded history before the Europeans came.

Depends on your definitions, and they are slippery on this subject.

Prehistoric, by definition, is Before History, or a (written) record of events, but that has nothing at all to do with 'civilization'. Civilization originally simply meant 'living in cities', but that is no longer acceptable. After all, taken literally it would mean a large percentage of the people living here in the USA's Pacific Northwest are 'uncivilized' because they live in communities of less-than-city-size.

The 'earliest written language' is another slippery concept: the earliest notation systems were simple lists of items to be stored and recorded, followed by pictographs indicating what the number referred to, and then (probably) the equivalent of verbs that allowed the noun-notes to be composed as sentences and 'writing'. But the process was a long one: Well-developed Heiroglyphic and cuneiform 'writing' systems used for inscriptions dates back to 3000 BCE, but the first 'novel' ( 'Sanehat' - Story of Sinuhe) known dates to almost 1200 years later.

BUT at about the time 'writing' was in its earliest development at the earlier date above, stone, brick or rammed earth walls were being erected around settlements from the Balkans to China, standardized weights were being used in trade, solid-wheeled wagons, horseback riding, sailing on rivers and coasts, zero-notation and decimal notation in mathematics, and metal working and casting in silver, gold, lead and tin were being practiced.
Pretty obviously, 'writing' was not a requirement for a lot of the technology associated with early 'civilization' .

Furthermore, concentrations of people in excess of 1000 were already common in places as distinct as South America, Mesopotamia, southern Europe, Egypt, India and China and had been since 6 - 4500 BCE, or long before any recognizable writing system is found associated with any of them, so 'writing' does not seem to have been a requirement for Cities either.

I would dump the entire term 'prehistoric', because it refers as much to what we know now as it does to how they lived then. Tomorrow some archeologist may dig up a cache of inscribed bark fragments in Denmark or Korea and shove the invention' of the novel back a thousand years and upend a great deal of what we thought we knew about writing and 'civilization'.

A far better term is Neolithic, the last of the 'stone ages' that blended into cold-working and then smelting of the earliest metals: copper, gold, silver, lead, and tin. That period, generally dated to about 12,000 - 15,000 BCE at its earliest, happens to include the earliest 'city-sized' conglomerations of population, the invention of agriculture and major domestication of animals, and so is a good Starting Point for any game calling itself Civilization.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,378
Location
Texas
That would be something really new. Never have I heard about prehistoric civilization except in the mods.
I basically mean something similar to Humankind's Neolithic Era, which would take place before the founding of permanent cities. Maybe using the term Neolithic would be better as that's what I would want represented, the end of the Stone Age and most humans going from a hunter and gathering societies to a more urban and farming societies.
 

Tuvok694

Civ6 addict
Joined
Nov 11, 2002
Messages
403
Betting when Civ 7 will arrive?
I haven't heard of even a tiny little rumour that anything Civ-like is being developed, so I would guess we will have to wait a long long long time. Anything before 2026 would surprise me.
Or they have just given up the franchise. I already found it remarkable that they refused to patch at least the biggest bugs that this 6 year old game of Civ6 still has.
 
Top Bottom