The lack of a unique model for a unique unit from Great Britain is an embarrassment.

[Mo02]

Just from an appearances standpoint, releasing a DLC less than a month after release looks bad and is going to upset gamers in this modern environment. This DLC should have been delayed just for appearances, if not for development reasons too.

Just another unforced error from Firaxis/2K for a game that really can’t afford it.

lol considering the state that game got released this dlc should be a free update.

 

[Psychotronics]

Yep. I think Civ 7 will be remembered as the worst launch in the franchise history (so far). If things continue going down this path, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up cutting its development cycle short.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Yep. I think Civ 7 will be remembered as the worst launch in the franchise history (so far). If things continue going down this path, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up cutting its development cycle short.

It's still much better launch than Civ5

 

[j51]

Yep. I think Civ 7 will be remembered as the worst launch in the franchise history (so far). If things continue going down this path, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up cutting its development cycle short.

I hope not. In spite of all the craftsmanship problems, at its core it’s still super fun. I’d say it’s the most fun I’ve had with Civ since IV maybe.

 

[Jkchart]

I hope not. In spite of all the craftsmanship problems, at its core it’s still super fun. I’d say it’s the most fun I’ve had with Civ since IV maybe.

I agree with this. I really want them to fix stuff, but I haven’t been this obsessed with a release since 4 either. I never finished games in 5 or 6 until later in the lifecycles. 3, 4, and 7 have all captured me the second I got my hands on them. And I say this as someone who very much loves 6 - it was NOT compelling enough to finish for the first while! (Always got farther than I did in 5 though and finished far more games and started finishing them earlier in 6 than in 5).

So agreed, I hope not as well. I’m going to try and be optimistic as I can, but I am definitely bummed by a lot of the current woes too.

 

[moondog385]

Yep. I think Civ 7 will be remembered as the worst launch in the franchise history (so far). If things continue going down this path, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up cutting its development cycle short.

That would be a shame. I love the ages and the civs I've played so far. There are a few issues like the modern culture victory but cutting the dev cycle short would be hugely overreactive.

 

[Xandinho]

It's still much better launch than Civ5

Why was the release of Civ5 so bad?
I didn’t follow the launch of Civ5; I kept playing Civ4 for another couple of years before migrating to the next interation.

But yes, despite the interface issues, Civ7 is quite fun and has a lot of potential. I think the game will be well-polished in about a year.

I still think one of the biggest issues is the legacy paths that make the eras feel rushed. Especially in the Modern Age, where you have to rush insanely to achieve a Victory.

 

[trev1972]

I have to disagree - though I live in London - I think those two are pretty uninspired especially Buckingham Palace - it really isn't a wondrous building at all, feel like other national trust properties and palaces in Europe are far more wonderous! Bigben/Palace of Westminster i'm sure will be a wonder eventually, plus we have the White Tower and Oxford Uni too.

Alternative modern age wonders for Britain, could have been the British Museum, but we already have the Hermitage, Crystal Palace would have been my ideal, but we already have the Worlds Fair. I liked the idea of a more industrial wonder, the Tube or Crossness pumping station would have been cool, but don't see how that could have worked from a mechanics and presentation perspective (rail station in every city?), there are various bridges (Forth or Glenfinnan Viaduct) but from a gameplay perspective placement requirements might not mean they're fun. Joddrell Bank Observatory became a heritage site recently (and funnily enough relates to HMS revenge as it uses it's turrets). Bletchley Park might have made for a pretty unique wonder and ties nicely with Ada. I like Battersea as a wonder, but it shouldn't have been a nautical themed wonder and should just have a river adjacency - could have been the Naval College, Docklands, Maunsell Forts or Bell Rock Lighthouse as a more naval focused one.

To me it's the UUs and UBs that feel a bit uninspired and the Revenge model a slap in the face.
Was expecting Lancaster Bombers (to have a niche with the Stuka and Zero) or the Black Watch/Green Jackets/Commandos or something given Dreadnoughts are a basic unit.

I think for a Naval wonder, the naval college is an obvious choice to be honest, i find it so bizarre having battersea be related to naval production.
Overall, the 'financial centre' quarter, choice of wonder and its associated benefit, and generic UU scream laziness and lack of effort to me, especially as the DLC was hyped up as a chance to make the civs unique.

Its self imposed PR damage in my mind, it wouldn't have taken much more effort to come up with a unique model for whatever UU they went with, come up with a really unique unit and do a wonder that has a sensible associated ability. It would have made the DLC look much more polished

 

[tman2000]

Yep. I think Civ 7 will be remembered as the worst launch in the franchise history (so far). If things continue going down this path, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up cutting its development cycle short.

That's the fear. I just had to suffer through the Kerbal 2 fiasco.

2k may have financed Civ 7 thinking it would do Civ 6 numbers at a minimum, then all those same people would pay $30 over and over for endless DLC. If it doesn't appear to be going in that direction, they may write it off. We're genuinely living in a dystopian economy, corporations can't just make money anymore, they have to make TONS of money or at least be premised on making GTA online bucks, or there's no funding. Capital only goes to high-risk high-reward. There's no economy for small projects that make modest profits.

 

[Gorbles]

To preface: I've got nothing to say about the UU. It should have a unique model, and it should've had one for the DLC being released.

However, on Battersea Power Station:

I’m also a bit disappointed with how Battersea Power Station looks. It’s not terrible, but I don’t think the artist has done a great job of capturing the architecture. I mean, it’s art deco! It is all about elegant, clean lines, even on a utilitarian structure. What we have in-game is just… blocky?

I'm glad I'm not the only person who thought this, I just didn't want to voice it.

I think what it needs is some more exaggeration of proportion. Just elongate the towers and add some extra groovy embellishments to communicate "deco."

Of course, I think part of the problem is they seem to use the base architectural assets in designing some of these wonders.

I had never heard of it before, but apparently this is what the real thing looks like. Much more iconic looking and stands out really nicely.

Battersea also has a very deco glass roof covering the entire upper structure, which is totally absent in the wonder model and replaced with crappy greenhouse-style roofs. And, in general, a lot of the additional glasswork on the wings is missing.

The glass is a recent add. The re-deco has nothing to do with how it originally looked:

(source: Wikipedia, picture dates from 2012)

Which as you can see resembles what Firaxis had made a lot closely (despite being near-derelict here, as you can see from the empty windows), including the extruded side on the left that no longer seems to exist.

The ridges on the ingame model's chimneys are again to emphasise the fact that there are ridges. If they'd been modelled more accurately you basically wouldn't see the detail on the (arguably iconic) chimneys.

Proportion is entirely off. It just also has four chimneys and the likeness generally ends there.

The proportions for Wonders in general are off, due to the need to fit them on hexes.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I find Battersea Power Station a rather uninspired choice to associate with the British, especially when there were so many better options. They could have gone with the Palace of Westminster/Big Ben or Buckingham Palace instead.

I find those more uninspired because they've been done over and over. Well, maybe not Buckingham Palace, but it's cliched IRL.

If not Big Ben, I would consider the London Eye. It also seems like they aren't staying too strict to timelines considering Nepal is getting a wonder that was built circa 400-600.

 

[RedCourtJester]

If not Big Ben, I would consider the London Eye. It also seems like they aren't staying too strict to timelines considering Nepal is getting a wonder that was built circa 400-600.

No, no carnival wonders please.

 

[Kyriakos]

The proportions for Wonders in general are off, due to the need to fit them on hexes.

No one forced them to choose this specific building

 

[Gorbles]

No one forced them to choose this specific building

Nobody forced them to choose any building. Next you'll be telling me a hex of Medjay can't fit on a boat, because the proportions are off

 

[Kyriakos]

Nobody forced them to choose any building. Next you'll be telling me a hex of Medjay can't fit on a boat, because the proportions are off

But, say, the Buckingham Palace has a more suitable form for a hex basis
If I was doing the gfx, fwiw, and had to include the Battersea station, I would have made it shorter to show at least a less square shape.

 

[Gorbles]

But, say, the Buckingham Palace has a more suitable form for a hex basis
If I was doing the gfx, fwiw, and had to include the Battersea station, I would have made it shorter to show at least a less square shape.

It's . . . pretty square? Do you mean cuboid?

Like, the wings seem a tad compressed in Firaxis' model, but not unduly so. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so YMMV.

 

[sixty4half]

But, say, the Buckingham Palace has a more suitable form for a hex basis
If I was doing the gfx, fwiw, and had to include the Battersea station, I would have made it shorter to show at least a less square shape.

And then it wouldn't look like the Battersea and you would have an 8+ page of people saying that YOU screwed up the look of the Wonder for this paid DLC.

 

[Kyriakos]

It's . . . pretty square? Do you mean cuboid?

View attachment 723493View attachment 723492

Both, as in:
-I was referring to the main body - width from yy' chimneys and length from xx' chimneys. It looks bizarre as it is now, due to the chimneys being massive and the length very small.

And then it wouldn't look like the Battersea and you would have an 8+ page of people saying that YOU screwed up the look of the Wonder for this paid DLC.

But I would have been paid by Firaxis, so I'd manage ^^

 

[AD1730]

Why was the release of Civ5 so bad?
I didn’t follow the launch of Civ5; I kept playing Civ4 for another couple of years before migrating to the next interation.

But yes, despite the interface issues, Civ7 is quite fun and has a lot of potential. I think the game will be well-polished in about a year.

I still think one of the biggest issues is the legacy paths that make the eras feel rushed. Especially in the Modern Age, where you have to rush insanely to achieve a Victory.

Civ 5 wasn't good at launch, there is no doubt there. However, a retroactive debate about what game was "better" at release doesn't particularly matter. What actually matters is what the contemporary reception of each of the games at release was, because that is what impacts sales.

The culture surrounding gaming has changed significantly in 15 years. I have little doubt that if vanilla Civ 5 released in the current environment (coming off of Civ 4), it would be poorly received. But that isn't our reality. Developers and publishers need to stop pretending to be in the environment they wish they were in (a more pliable and forgiving consumer culture) and recognize the one they are in (gamers will be hyper-sensitive to the game feeling unfinished and over-monetized).

 

[Gorbles]

Both, as in:
-I was referring the main body - width from yy' chimneys and length from xx' chimneys. It looks bizarre as it is now, due to the chimneys being massive and the length very small.

Again, that's the compromise of shrinking it. The increased lack of empty space makes it look busier even though there's roughly the same distance, proportionally, between the chimneys.

The chimneys themselves seem okay? Maybe a tad on the small size? The corner brickwork under each chimney seems oversized, not the chimneys themselves. But again, reduced scale, highlighting architectural choices, etc, et al.