What's your opinion on civ switching?

[McSpank01]

As I was corrected, the ability to turn off all crises was in the game since release, so the whole argument is invalid. The only thing they added in process is to choose, which particular crises to disable, which fits the definition of fine tuning by any account.

Just because they technically could do it, doesn't mean they conceptually envisioned the game without crises. Very different.

I don't understand this "at least".

Its an admission that the game is in a bad state. It isn't actually in early access, it just feels like it is because its so unpolished.

 

[Bug Repellent]

Civ7 has its audience, has its sales and with iterative improvements it will do fine with the current ages core. How fine it will be will affect decisions for Civ8, but not earlier. Even expansions are smaller in scope and won't allow it.

I do not share your optimism. As I type this, Civ7 has ZERO streams on Twitch. Zero, zilch, nada, bupkis. This is the clearest indication that except the small vocal fraction of the player base here and on Reddit that like the game, the large majority of the franchise doesn't. Pushing forward making Civ7 even more Civ7 instead of addressing its poorly received core features that pushed most Civ fans on the sideline will be a huge mistake.

Compare this with Civ6's 605 viewers:

This is simply devastating.

 

[Siptah]

You don't even have to look at the current streams, you can also look at the number of followers – and you'll see that civ 7 isn't at all popular on Twitch, and apparently also never was.

Which is understandable to me insofar as I don't see the appeal at all to watch someone play civ 7. It was fun before release to get to know the game. But watching civ being played for entertainment? I'd rather watch the rain fall down outside my window that seems more thrilling. But I think the same about the other civ titles, actually. Yet, I can see one reason for the older titles: to learn strategies that you don't have up your sleeve yet. Sadly, this doesn't seem to exist for civ 7, where aside from beginner tips, I have not encountered videos that teach strategies as far as I remember.

 

[Bug Repellent]

You don't even have to look at the current streams, you can also look at the number of followers – and you'll see that civ 7 isn't at all popular on Twitch, and apparently also never was.

I agree, that's another data point, but people will argue that being only 6mo old, it is normal for Civ7 to have less viewers.

Regarding Civ7's poor streaming numbers, I blame this on Civ7's horrendous city sprawl that makes the map unreadable. Every time I try to see one of Ursa Ryan's videos, all I see are lots and lots of indistinguishable districts that I have no idea what they are and why they were built. It's like a game of chess where all pieces look like pawns and instead of white and black pieces and squares, you have slightly different shades of gray.

 

[McSpank01]

Which is understandable to me insofar as I don't see the appeal at all to watch someone play civ 7. It was fun before release to get to know the game. But watching civ being played for entertainment? I'd rather watch the rain fall down outside my window that seems more thrilling. But I think the same about the other civ titles, actually. Yet, I can see one reason for the older titles: to learn strategies that you don't have up your sleeve yet. Sadly, this doesn't seem to exist for civ 7, where aside from beginner tips, I have not encountered videos that teach strategies as far as I remember.

By contrast I used to watch Civ 6 streams all the time, there was a lot to learn and given the freedom to play in different ways and adapt to the game, made it always worthwhile. That streamers can still put out videos in 2025 for that game says a lot about it.

One weakness with Civ 7 is that there really aren't any interesting strategies. You don't need to focus on anything, you don't really even need to think that hard. You just do the most obvious thing. You have decide which tile to work.. well it's the one with the most yields. Easy. I'm not sure what any strategy video would even say.

 

[WillK96]

They stated that they presented the prototype for civ 7 to 2k at the same time that Humankind was announced.

So realistically there was 7+ years of development here. Incredible.

 

[Siptah]

By contrast I used to watch Civ 6 streams all the time, there was a lot to learn and given the freedom to play in different ways and adapt to the game, made it always worthwhile. That streamers can still put out videos in 2025 for that game says a lot about it.

One weakness with Civ 7 is that there really aren't any interesting strategies. You don't need to focus on anything, you don't really even need to think that hard. You just do the most obvious thing. You have decide which tile to work.. well it's the one with the most yields. Easy. I'm not sure what any strategy video would even say.

I agree, but I feel very similar about civ VI to be honest. You decide what you want to do in the beginning, and than there aren't many interesting decisions. Sure, you need to survive the rushing AI and that may make for interesting parts of a video, but strategy-wise? All but culture victory seem rather determined.

 

[McSpank01]

I agree, but I feel very similar about civ VI to be honest. You decide what you want to do in the beginning, and than there aren't many interesting decisions. Sure, you need to survive the rushing AI and that may make for interesting parts of a video, but strategy-wise? All but culture victory seem rather determined.

I think there are a million ways to play Civ 6 actually. Obviously if you just sit on Deity level, your options are reduced because you are forced to be optimal each time. At more average levels though you can do almost anything, and if you play it right you will succeed. I recently played a Preserve game where I tried be a nature loving, diplomacy civ who doesn't build any of those nasty industrial or military zones. It worked really well. Point being the game gave me the option to play how I want. I could play a tech game, a religious game, a tourism game, diplo game, a mix of any of those. The choices are endless.

How does that translate in Civ 7? There is really only one way to play it for the most part. Even something as simple as your opening build order is essentially a non choice.

 

[Bug Repellent]

One weakness with Civ 7 is that there really aren't any interesting strategies. You don't need to focus on anything, you don't really even need to think that hard. You just do the most obvious thing.

This should terrify the devs, as it suggests the game is one dimensional and thus boring, which is very, very hard to fix.

 

[Siptah]

I think there are a million ways to play Civ 6 actually. Obviously if you just sit on Deity level, your options are reduced because you are forced to be optimal each time. At more average levels though you can do almost anything, and if you play it right you will succeed. I recently played a Preserve game where I tried be a nature loving, diplomacy civ who doesn't build any of those nasty industrial or military zones. It worked really well. Point being the game gave me the option to play how I want. I could play a tech game, a religious game, a tourism game, diplo game, a mix of any of those. The choices are endless.

How does that translate in Civ 7? There is really only one way to play it for the most part. Even something as simple as your opening build order is essentially a non choice.

I think we'll have to disagree here. I played civ 6 the same as you do – for the most part, at least, I played some games on Deity as well. But I also do the same with 7. Play freely and try things out. For both games, I rarely felt like it could go wrong and I would need strategy. It's either a non-decision or a decision to do things sub optimally on purpose.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I do not share your optimism. As I type this, Civ7 has ZERO streams on Twitch. Zero, zilch, nada, bupkis. This is the clearest indication that except the small vocal fraction of the player base here and on Reddit that like the game, the large majority of the franchise doesn't. Pushing forward making Civ7 even more Civ7 instead of addressing its poorly received core features that pushed most Civ fans on the sideline will be a huge mistake.

Civ5 and Civ6 have way more current owners, which those things show. Civ7 pops up to Steam top-100 on each sale, which means sales are still coming in some steady flow.

Sure, Civ7 has its problems, but they don't look terminal.

 

[McSpank01]

I think we'll have to disagree here. I played civ 6 the same as you do – for the most part, at least, I played some games on Deity as well. But I also do the same with 7. Play freely and try things out. For both games, I rarely felt like it could go wrong and I would need strategy. It's either a non-decision or a decision to do things sub optimally on purpose.

Oh I think there is a problem with snowballing in 6 where eventually it’s impossible to make a bad choice. That is a thing, but I do think there are a lot of complex but fun systems to learn in 6. It’s just that once you understand them you have a huge head start on the AI

 

[Crashdummy]

You don't even have to look at the current streams, you can also look at the number of followers – and you'll see that civ 7 isn't at all popular on Twitch, and apparently also never was.

Which is understandable to me insofar as I don't see the appeal at all to watch someone play civ 7. It was fun before release to get to know the game. But watching civ being played for entertainment? I'd rather watch the rain fall down outside my window that seems more thrilling. But I think the same about the other civ titles, actually. Yet, I can see one reason for the older titles: to learn strategies that you don't have up your sleeve yet. Sadly, this doesn't seem to exist for civ 7, where aside from beginner tips, I have not encountered videos that teach strategies as far as I remember.

Its not about strategies, its about Civ 7 not being fun, neither to play nor to watch. Every single number available points in that direction, and every time numbers are mentioned we have to face the "hidden" numbers that could be higher in a hypothetical scenario.

TakeTwo executive admits Civ 7 had a slow start, numbers show a failure scenario, Firaxis is trying to change what you call "core" mechanics on every single patch

If it has 4 legs and barks....

 

[stealth_nsk]

One of the interesting thoughts is that at some point Civ7 will have scenarios and expose them to modding. This would allow making classic mode as a scenario mod. If enough modders will be interested in this, it would be possible to make some interesting things as modders require less efforts by not following corporate standards. Sure, it would still require things like custom tech trees, but we've seen modding communities pulling out such tricks before.

The only limitation there will be 2 buildings per district, which I believe will be impossible to overcome within the same game engine, so it's likely some sort of overbuilding will still be needed for this scenario.

 

[Siptah]

Its not about strategies, its about Civ 7 not being fun, neither to play nor to watch. Every single number available points in that direction, and every time numbers are mentioned we have to face the "hidden" numbers that could be higher in a hypothetical scenario.

TakeTwo executive admits Civ 7 had a slow start, numbers show a failure scenario, Firaxis is trying to change what you call "core" mechanics on every single patch

If it has 4 legs and barks....

No need to hyperbole. I know a few data points that point into the direction that civ 7 is a lot of fun ;-)

 

[Leucarum]

Civ7 is very fun for the first age! It always bears repeating just how good Antiquity era Civ7 is. I genuinely think Antiquity is the best that the Civ series has ever been.

Unfortunately the cliff it proceeds to drop off with each subsequent era is extremely steep. I have hundreds of hours in Civ7, and I would guess that 80% or more is in antiquity. It's that gameplay which keeps me around here being critical of the rest.

 

[Crashdummy]

Civ7 is very fun for the first age! It always bears repeating just how good Antiquity era Civ7 is. I genuinely think Antiquity is the best that the Civ series has ever been.

Unfortunately the cliff it proceeds to drop off with each subsequent era is extremely steep.

Yeah Antiquity is fun, but it ends fast, its not enough

Once the Humankind systems kick in, the game goes down into an abyss

 

[stealth_nsk]

Civ7 is very fun for the first age! It always bears repeating just how good Antiquity era Civ7 is. I genuinely think Antiquity is the best that the Civ series has ever been.

Unfortunately the cliff it proceeds to drop off with each subsequent era is extremely steep. I have hundreds of hours in Civ7, and I would guess that 80% or more is in antiquity. It's that gameplay which keeps me around here being critical of the rest.

I think the initial settlement phase is the most interesting part of any game in Civilization series. Actually Civ7 exploration tries to prolong it, but fails partially due to current map generation. I hope with the map generation improvements we'll potentially have the longest "fun phase" among all civ games.

 

[Siptah]

Civ7 is very fun for the first age! It always bears repeating just how good Antiquity era Civ7 is. I genuinely think Antiquity is the best that the Civ series has ever been.

Unfortunately the cliff it proceeds to drop off with each subsequent era is extremely steep. I have hundreds of hours in Civ7, and I would guess that 80% or more is in antiquity. It's that gameplay which keeps me around here being critical of the rest.

I actually really like the 50 or so first turns of exploration as well. But then it's just a hell of a snowball. Yields explode, you have more money that you can spend, and all paths are easy to complete if you just wish so. That always makes me a bit sad. But the exploration and newly round of expansion in the beginning of the second age: I like a lot. And civ switching to get a new kick: I like as well. But I know we differ there.

 

[McSpank01]

Civ7 is very fun for the first age! It always bears repeating just how good Antiquity era Civ7 is. I genuinely think Antiquity is the best that the Civ series has ever been.

Unfortunately the cliff it proceeds to drop off with each subsequent era is extremely steep. I have hundreds of hours in Civ7, and I would guess that 80% or more is in antiquity. It's that gameplay which keeps me around here being critical of the rest.

I would qualify that by saying the first 2/3rds of Antiquity is great. At some point it stops being all that interesting and I'm waiting for the age to end. Then there is rush of excitement as I start a new age with a new civ, and then my excitement inevitably deteriorates as the ages falls into tedium. I rarely make it to modern.