What do you think it means

[Gori the Grey]

that the "Stories and Tales" section of this site doesn't have anything posted in it yet?

For reference, I checked Civ 5 and 6, and they each had multiple threads within days of the games' release.

Edit: Oh, got my own answer. There's a "Videos" sub-section of the Civ 7 section and Let's Plays, that make up most of Stories and Tales, are going in there.

Mods can feel free to delete this thread.

Edit Edit: Although now that I look at it, there's not much posted in Videos either (most from before release). So maybe my question is a valid question after all.

 

[The_J]

At the moment there are also actually not many let's-plays posted, so I guess the question is still valid.
Also in how far the traditional "stories" concept will survive in this day and age.

 

[AriochIV]

It seems to me that the emergent narrative of playthroughs has been very weak so far in Civ7. The Age system and lack of variety in the maps, Crises and Paths has really hurt this element of the game, in my opinion. Every playthrough feels very much like the last.

 

[Thormodr]

With much more restrictive gameplay and less of a sandbox to play in, that's the consequence.

 

[Taefin]

At least for me, I always enjoy sharing snippets of game story along with general discussion posts. I think that the discussion is playing out in general is just where folks go to hear and share their experiences.

RHS AI mod thread is filled with stories emerging from gameplay.

That said, the most dramatic stories I have felt emerge from my games are when doing something truly challenging, such as conquests with modded up AI difficulty, where failure was possible and success required taking several risks.

The AI do seem to lack the personal touch that could make them feel like part of the world with me. My stories so far have not had other memorable characters beyond my own civ. They kinda just feel like cells in a spreadsheet. Maybe because they don’t ever present you with dilemmas (other than whether to ally with them). Old world has a lot of these requests (improve relationship with another leader or their heir), and Stellaris has long lasting effects of rock-and-hard place requests from fallen empires.

 

[protocol7]

The game tries very hard to make every story play out nearly the same, it’s hard to be fully creative within that framework. Always one of the same few crises appear around the same times every game, every age provides the same few challenges to do for bonus points, every age resets the game in the same way.

 

[ThichN]

What do you think it means

I think it means people are playing the game and having fun. I've thought about (and even started) an AAR. It takes a lot of time and work and removes you from your game. I still want to do it. I have so much to write about in each of my games, so many stories. The emergent narrative feels more present than Civ6. Civ6 had the spreadsheet feeling to me. It was all about optimization, getting an early lead (and never losing it), lack of surprises. It's striking to me how many people forget how predictable Civ6 was, in every single playthru. It didn't matter if they threw on some novel mechanic to a leader (e.g., Eleanor), you still knew what play to make, and when.

In my current Civ7 game: Napoleon just wiped out Augustus (I am Isabella). One of the nails in Augustus' coffin was an independent power, a city-state that took his northernmost city, suzerain-ed by Napoleon. That city-state is now a power-house: two cities, and it just built a wonder. This is the Exploration Age. I wonder what will happen to this city in the next age? Prior to that, as Carthage in the ancient era, I created a trade network in a nice inland sea with ocean access. I took Rome on the very last turn of the Age. So I suppose you could say Augustus has been a bit of a punching bag. Moving into modern, I can tell that Napoleon is going to be a force to be reckoned with.

This is a snippet, but wow, I'd love to expand this into a wider story. A story of Carthage vs Rome. Of the cavalry arriving last-minute to an army of legions defending Rome. The plague wiping out their legates to the north at just the right moment. Carthaginian ships raiding merchants in the inland sea. Ada Lovelace, in an alliance with Rome, deciding to threaten my own trade routes with her formidable fleet. Or how about throughout the age, Isabella's diplomats allying with every city-state surrounding that sea, ensuring protected waterways?

There have been so many moments in this game of "WTH just happened?" that totally transform my game or how I'm angling my civ. There are even moments where I say to myself, "I'll definitely pick X civ in the next age," but a course of events happens which drives me to pick another.

 

[King Flevance]

Funny, I was actually thinking of doing a story as I noticed it was empty last week. However, I was waiting for the patch to release first. Currently, I am planning out the story structure. Plus, trying to think of some fun ideas to throw in.

 

[The_J]

Funny, I was actually thinking of doing a story as I noticed it was empty last week. However, I was waiting for the patch to release first. Currently, I am planning out the story structure. Plus, trying to think of some fun ideas to throw in.

Me too ! I was thinking about posting a great thread in Strategy & Tips but I had so much fun enjoying the game that I couldn't.

Looking forward

 

[thecrazyscot]

The game tries very hard to make every story play out nearly the same, it’s hard to be fully creative within that framework. Always one of the same few crises appear around the same times every game, every age provides the same few challenges to do for bonus points, every age resets the game in the same way.

It's not more restrictive to a narrative than previous iterations.

Some of my best narratives occurred in Civ2, but only because I would ignore trying to win and instead do some sort of roleplay.

I've had some memorable games in Civ6 - but usually only memorable for part of it unless, again, I decided to mostly ignore the victory framework and do my own thing.

Every previous iteration railroaded you into certain paths if you wanted to win. You can easily ignore the legacy paths in Civ7 and build a strong narrative as well.

 

[King Flevance]

Don't you think you should open the map first, though ? Before planning out the story, I mean...
Perhaps you mean the map doesn't matter.

gl gl

Nah, the map is just improv material for this story. I am planning a role play playthrough with mostly random settings for the game aspect and I may even lose. But the story is more of a fun attachment to the playthrough and I will just see how well I can plug them in together. The civ switching has me a little wide eyed. Things might get really weird. But I usually have a lot of options to choose from on age transition and worst case scenario I just lose.

 

[Thormodr]

I really think that they are trying to emphasize multiplayer going forwards. So, that could impact things such as needing a level playing field and an emphasis on smaller maps and scripts that start you out on say a big continent with 5 equal starting positions. (ie everyone gets a peninsula)

That could impact on stories and creativity as you'd see the same thing over and over again. Hopefully, that maps will become larger and more varied over time.

 

[Kyriakos]

Can you rename cities by now, or is this going to be out indefinitely as it is a hate-crime or something? ^^
Such things also can affect enjoying the game, which is a prerequisite for bothering to write a story about it.

 

[protocol7]

It's not more restrictive to a narrative than previous iterations.

I’m definitely getting the same age resets and crises around the same times every game, is there some way you found to avoid this? This is happening in my installation even if I try to role play and ignore victory conditions, and I don’t think this is happening due to mods. Any help is appreciated.

 

[Yzman]

I think it means people are playing the game and having fun. I've thought about (and even started) an AAR. It takes a lot of time and work and removes you from your game. I still want to do it. I have so much to write about in each of my games, so many stories. The emergent narrative feels more present than Civ6. Civ6 had the spreadsheet feeling to me. It was all about optimization, getting an early lead (and never losing it), lack of surprises. It's striking to me how many people forget how predictable Civ6 was, in every single playthru. It didn't matter if they threw on some novel mechanic to a leader (e.g., Eleanor), you still knew what play to make, and when.

In my current Civ7 game: Napoleon just wiped out Augustus (I am Isabella). One of the nails in Augustus' coffin was an independent power, a city-state that took his northernmost city, suzerain-ed by Napoleon. That city-state is now a power-house: two cities, and it just built a wonder. This is the Exploration Age. I wonder what will happen to this city in the next age? Prior to that, as Carthage in the ancient era, I created a trade network in a nice inland sea with ocean access. I took Rome on the very last turn of the Age. So I suppose you could say Augustus has been a bit of a punching bag. Moving into modern, I can tell that Napoleon is going to be a force to be reckoned with.

This is a snippet, but wow, I'd love to expand this into a wider story. A story of Carthage vs Rome. Of the cavalry arriving last-minute to an army of legions defending Rome. The plague wiping out their legates to the north at just the right moment. Carthaginian ships raiding merchants in the inland sea. Ada Lovelace, in an alliance with Rome, deciding to threaten my own trade routes with her formidable fleet. Or how about throughout the age, Isabella's diplomats allying with every city-state surrounding that sea, ensuring protected waterways?

There have been so many moments in this game of "WTH just happened?" that totally transform my game or how I'm angling my civ. There are even moments where I say to myself, "I'll definitely pick X civ in the next age," but a course of events happens which drives me to pick another.

Wait, the CS took a city without razing it and they akso built a wonder? They can build wonders?

 

[ydejin]

Can you rename cities by now, or is this going to be out indefinitely as it is a hate-crime or something? ^^
Such things also can affect enjoying the game, which is a prerequisite for bothering to write a story about it.

Renaming cities and commanders is in tomorrow’s patch.

 

[Thormodr]

I must admit, I like the fact that city states/independent powers can conquer cities and build wonders. That is a step forward. Cool!

I remember barbarian empires in Civ IV that had Wonders, back in the day.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I really think that they are trying to emphasize multiplayer going forwards.

I've seen a couple of people suggest this but it seems bizarre to me, MP is less than 5% of the user base as I understand it.

 

[Thormodr]

I've seen a couple of people suggest this but it seems bizarre to me, MP is less than 5% of the user base as I understand it.

I understand the skepticism. However, 10 years ago, would us PC Civ players have anticipated the explosion in mobile Civ players?

I think what the suits want is the Civ of the future to be focused on multiplayer, small maps, online only. Sort of exact opposite of what I do. (Single player, large maps usually and offline only.)

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I think what the suits want is the Civ of the future to be focused on multiplayer, small maps, online only.

Not many successful suits would say "let's cater to this tiny niche of our market and ignore the other 95%", if MP starts growing towards 25/30% maybe we see more of that but at current levels I think it's really unlikely.