I'm a very old Civilization player, since Civ 2, and even a modder (personally since Civ 3, publicly since Civ 5).I had a rather negative initial reaction when I discovered Civ 7.Now that I've played the game a bit, I've taken a step back, and I'd like to share some thoughts on what I think could reconcile me with the game:
- I don't like playing with or against famous figures (Lovelace, Ibn Battuta, etc.); I miss historical leaders:Indeed, this allows us to play civs we don't know much about: Mississippians, for example, but it could definitely allow us to have civs like Harrappa, Marajoara, etc. It also allows us to have charismatic leaders whose civs are more complicated to put into the game (Xenobia, Timur, etc.). It's up to Firaxis to expand its roster, then.If only I could have a historical leader facing each civ, it would easily give me back the desire to play.
- Interface clarity issues:When I place a building, I still don't know if the yield information I see is pre- or post-construction, or how much I'm losing.I don't like the attributes interface: it doesn't automatically open to the one where I have to make a choice (economic, cultural, etc.); I have to find the one with a 1 myself, which isn't intuitive.I think these elements could easily be improved, but I don't know if they've been reported.
- It's missing many elements that one would expect to find in an initial base game (one more turn, some basic civs, rename a city, hotseat, etc.) and their future inclusion will be presented to us as additional content.I imagine this is a shift linked to the lure of profit and the evolution of players' consumption habits. It's up to me to adapt to the changing times. I've learned my lesson; when Civ8 comes out, I'll know I'll have to wait at least two years to buy it from now on.I also think Civ6 was very complete, so Civ7 seems very light.I felt cheated and will be very attentive to what will be done to improve the game.
- I don't really have a problem with changing civs between each age. I played Humankind a lot, and I must say that the sense of continuity is maintained here in a somewhat shaky way. Being ahead loses a bit of meaning, though: why be technologically or militarily ahead if you lose that edge in the next age? I also regret not being able to cheat by discovering a passage to the new continent before everyone else in Antiquity.Civic changes could also be less painful if we had more choices.
I hope the game evolves in a positive way, and in any case, my attachment to the franchise means I'll be very vigilant about how player feedback is handled.
- I don't like playing with or against famous figures (Lovelace, Ibn Battuta, etc.); I miss historical leaders:Indeed, this allows us to play civs we don't know much about: Mississippians, for example, but it could definitely allow us to have civs like Harrappa, Marajoara, etc. It also allows us to have charismatic leaders whose civs are more complicated to put into the game (Xenobia, Timur, etc.). It's up to Firaxis to expand its roster, then.If only I could have a historical leader facing each civ, it would easily give me back the desire to play.
- Interface clarity issues:When I place a building, I still don't know if the yield information I see is pre- or post-construction, or how much I'm losing.I don't like the attributes interface: it doesn't automatically open to the one where I have to make a choice (economic, cultural, etc.); I have to find the one with a 1 myself, which isn't intuitive.I think these elements could easily be improved, but I don't know if they've been reported.
- It's missing many elements that one would expect to find in an initial base game (one more turn, some basic civs, rename a city, hotseat, etc.) and their future inclusion will be presented to us as additional content.I imagine this is a shift linked to the lure of profit and the evolution of players' consumption habits. It's up to me to adapt to the changing times. I've learned my lesson; when Civ8 comes out, I'll know I'll have to wait at least two years to buy it from now on.I also think Civ6 was very complete, so Civ7 seems very light.I felt cheated and will be very attentive to what will be done to improve the game.
- I don't really have a problem with changing civs between each age. I played Humankind a lot, and I must say that the sense of continuity is maintained here in a somewhat shaky way. Being ahead loses a bit of meaning, though: why be technologically or militarily ahead if you lose that edge in the next age? I also regret not being able to cheat by discovering a passage to the new continent before everyone else in Antiquity.Civic changes could also be less painful if we had more choices.
I hope the game evolves in a positive way, and in any case, my attachment to the franchise means I'll be very vigilant about how player feedback is handled.
