Will Civ7 be a diamond?

Tekamthi said:
what does steam do, d'ya think?
Click to expand...
Sell games? Like, Valve takes a cut of every game sold on Steam, they don't make the games. Firaxis makes games, Valve sells games. They are doing two different things.
 
Last edited:
Bibor said:
Untrue. The first game I ever played was Forbidden Forest on C64.
Click to expand...

I had nightmares from the animation where spider attacks player. Also my big brother scared me about telling how the game's monsters live in our countryside place..

Atmospheric game, with nightfall approaching between every stage.

About Civ VII, I think it will be a bigger change to the previous game, unlike how in many points Civ VI had same mechanics as V.

Only real hint for direction we got was in an interview last year when Ed Beach said that the leader and civ abilities became too long and sprawling in many cases. Hopefully abilities in VII are easier to remember!
 
pokiehl said:
I don’t think it’s a good use of either of our time for me to explain the differences, but if you don’t mind I’ll tag you here when Civ 7 is revealed :)
Click to expand...
of course, though all I have stated so far is that civ7's existance is entirely speculative at this point in time, which will remain true if civ 7 is announced later. I'll give you a "good guess" if it is. You guys are probably right that a 7 will eventually be released, i doubt right now though.

Maybe to turn the discussion into more interesting topics, for this recent announcement my money's on a standalone "expansion" in the civ 6 engine, reskinned almost entirely to move away from the controversial WoW-art-style; a standalone the same way BE was to 5, or colonization was to 4 -- to be even more specific (and more speculative, mind you), I'd guess we'll see a Civ: near future of some kind, a BE-prequel, bridging the gap between the end of the civ franchise's main storyline at 2050 and where it picks up in BE around 2200. A BE-prequel, in which player can load up their world from 6, to squeeze out some more sales of 6 alongside their new product. Expect lots of climate change and nouveau-cold-war mechanisms, etc.

7, on the other hand, will directly cannibalize 6's remaining sales; and I propose with a $90 price tag 6 still has revenue left in the tank for firaxis, or at least they see at as such. Maybe my imagined BE-prequel is off, but the business case for releasing something complementary to 6 or independent to the iterative mainstay of the franchise, is stronger than the business case for 7. Generally, each iteration takes advantage of major leaps in tech between the last -- most recently 6 went 64-bit to 5's 32. What significant gaming-tech developments have occurred since 6? Seems the market has gone high-FPS and ever-more realistic lighting; FPS and cutting edge graphics have never been leading factors in a civ product's value proposition.

Back to the OP question, I do believe a standalone expansion in civ 6 engine could be a diamond, though its no guarantee. On the other hand, I don't think there's enough new tech for 7 to feel anything but iterative to 6.
 
Tekamthi said:
A BE-prequel, in which player can load up their world from 6, to squeeze out some more sales of 6 alongside their new product.

7, on the other hand, will directly cannibalize 6's remaining sales; and I propose with a $90 price tag 6 still has revenue left in the tank for firaxis, or at least they see at as such.
Click to expand...
Sure, but wouldn't a prequel also cannibalize remaining sales?

Broadly speaking, I hear your point about the ostensible pricetag of full Civ 6 now, but the game is entering it's 7th year. 99% of sales are accounted for by now, surely. Plus the game goes on steep discount every couple weeks it seems like. I'm not disagreeing that they want to get a bit more juice out of it, but I think that was precisely the point of this leader pass.
 
pokiehl said:
Sure, but wouldn't a prequel also cannibalize remaining sales?

Broadly speaking, I hear your point about the ostensible pricetag of full Civ 6 now, but the game is entering it's 7th year. 99% of sales are accounted for by now, surely. Plus the game goes on steep discount every couple weeks it seems like. I'm not disagreeing that they want to get a bit more juice out of it, but I think that was precisely the point of this leader pass.
Click to expand...
I don't think its quite that high, personally. On discount i've seen 6 anthology as low as about $30 -- just before 6's release, 5 was down around $10. Either they've shifted their pricing strategy or they're not at end-of-life pricing yet for 6.

I think a BE-prequel picking up where 6 ends, around 2050, has potential for integration between the two. ie you buy just BE-prequel, you start on randomized 2000-era world; if you have BE-prequel and 6 you can pick up where you left off in 6 to battle climate change and anarchists in the balkans or w/e in the same world you've dumped hours into already. Dont think something like this would cannibalize the same way a "6 remake" aka 7 would do, could even drive sales amongst those otherwise meh on 6.
 
Bibor said:
We, as a species, live (and die) for stories. One might argue that our lives are reduced to basic functions without them. But, the truly great stores let us participate. To become a part of the story, and expand it. In our minds, our hearts, our dreams. What isn't said, and is left to our imagination, is just as important – if note more, than what's already presented.
Click to expand...

I think ultimately that's a concept that any good game designer is trying to capture. We all love stories and anyone who's ever gone camping and listened to someone tell one knows what a simple and profound joy that experience is. Naturally, we got better at it. We got paper and ink and wrote the stories down so we didn't have to rely on memory. We added pictures to show what mere words could not. Then, we figured out how to make the pictures move and our stories became movies. And now, we want not to just passively listen to the story, but to be an active participant in the story, and that's what a video game is. Civ has given us a map and said "Write your version of human history on this map. Create your own story of greatness." It's an enormous story to tell!

The challenge to the designers of course, is that this story has been told 6 times now. Trying to do something different is a necessity in order to define a new game, but it's also a liability because your fans will expect a certain amount of fidelity to the core concept. Deviate too much from what we the community understand is a Civ game, and the game will flop like the countless competitors that have entered the arena, tried to compete, and ultimately failed to replace Civ way to tell that story. Further now history has become so intensely politicized, they risk major backlash if they take one wrong step. That's a reality that can destroy a game if a designer doesn't respect it.

Bibor said:
To have no Civilization brand to uphold an image, no existing playerbase to think of, no historical figures or events to take inspiration from. No budgeting of marketing gimmicks like very expensive intros. Designed with placeholder icons, created with game mechanics with placeholder names. If Civ4 had blue marble, let this game be in the spirit of white marble. Like Michelangelo's David.
Click to expand...

What a wonderful dream, but I'll say this: even Michaelangelo had a model to help him craft David. I don't think they need to start from scratch, nor that they'd want to.

I'd like to suggest two broad ideas:
1) I'd like them to figure out how to give us a game which isn't explicitly snowballed. Put another way, I'd like them to build in enough catch-up mechanisms that if you have terrible luck, you're not out of the game. Egypt is no longer the world's premiere empire, but it was never fully out of the game either. Same with China and we know where they're at now.
2) I'd like them to consider the idea of letting the AI play historical civs, while the player picks abilities of his/her own to define his/her own civ. That is, you would pick your own leader ability, civ ability, and unique this thing or that thing. You'd pick the eras you want to be strong in. If we really want the fantasy of telling your own story of human history, you should get to make those choices. I still love playing as historical leaders, but I'd love to see this idea in a game.
 
I mean aren't some of the rarest and valuable diamonds sometimes made from coal? :mischief:
 
Catalytic said:
2) I'd like them to consider the idea of letting the AI play historical civs, while the player picks abilities of his/her own to define his/her own civ. That is, you would pick your own leader ability, civ ability, and unique this thing or that thing. You'd pick the eras you want to be strong in. If we really want the fantasy of telling your own story of human history, you should get to make those choices. I still love playing as historical leaders, but I'd love to see this idea in a game.
Click to expand...
That's a good idea. Before people scream about it being overpowered in multiplayer (everyone choosing the same abilities because they get an 0.05% advantage), perhaps differentiate it to make it something just for single player. Personally I don't care if someone stomps 5 Deity AIs in single player with some crazy mechanics. It's fun.
 
Well I know I won't be rushing to buy it on release as with pretty much ever itineration of Civ since III. Civ 6 simply wasn't properly ready for ages after release. They really should have a properly functioning game on release but that won't happen...
 
Thormodr said:
Apologies if this is off track, Bibor, but does top down design versus bottom up fit in any way what you are trying to say?

www.geeksforgeeks.org

Difference between Bottom-Up Model and Top-Down Model - GeeksforGeeks

A Computer Science portal for geeks. It contains well written, well thought and well explained computer science and programming articles, quizzes and practice/competitive programming/company interview Questions.
www.geeksforgeeks.org www.geeksforgeeks.org

www.engineering.com

Top-Down and Bottom-Up Design

www.engineering.com www.engineering.com
Click to expand...

Yes! But both!
Top-down as the first half of the design process, where you take the final desired gameplay feature and break it down to pieces. Let's call them nuggets. And then bottom-up to integrate / fit into mechanics. Create enough nuggets, play with them for long enough, and certain patterns will start to appear on how to make them fit together (into exising or new mechanics). Discard the nuggets incompatible with the selection of mechanics and you're good to go.

Example on Civ4 religion (how I imagine it went):

1. nuggets

We want religions!

Religions need to be distributed across the map
Religions need to appear at different time periods
Religions must affect population, not tiles
Religions need to spread automatically but also manually
Religion needs to have local and global effects

2. playing with nuggets and mechanics
How to distribute religions across the map and at different time periods? --> slot into different technologies
How to make religion affect population? --> create new city center mechanic
How to make religions spread automatically? --> slot into existing auto spread (plague) mechanics
How to make religions spread manually? --> slot into unit making and movement mechanics
How to make religions have local effects? --> slot into city buildings mechanics --> slot into wonders
How to make religions have global effects? --> slot into diplomacy modifiers --> slot into wonders

We want corporations!
... -> Slot into existing city center mechanic, same way as religion
... -> slot into unit making and movement mechanics, same way as religion

2. Mechanics:
- city center mechanics --> used by: religions, corporations
- unit production mechanics -> used by: military units, civilian units, religious units, spies, etc.
- building production mechanics -> used by: ...
- diplomacy mechanics -> used by: ...
- auto spread mechanics -> used by: religions, plagues
- ...
 
To be honest, Civ VI was just a disappointment for me. I don't like its cartoon style, its leader animations, other many things (maybe because of playing almost 1000 hours Civ V) However, this time Civ VII can be really cool (at least for me)
 
Half the people will like the new game mechanics to Civ 7 and half will do nothing but complain. It has taken 6 years to get Civ 6 to this level. I clearly remember people on this site trashed the Vanilla version of 6 before the expansions and then added DLC's. Civ 7 will most likely come out in the basic version and also have dlc's at the same time for additional cost IF YOU want to purchase it. The comment about Civ 7 will be $75 dollars or some number. Well that's life with everything. How many people here buy new phones each year or two because you want the most current model number or why do car manufacturers build new cars if they thought no one would buy them. If you already have a car then there is no need to ever buy another. I have invested about $200 into Civ 6 over all the years if I paid retailed for the base game and waited for Steam sales for the expansions and dlc's. Once Civ 7 comes out, I will buy it and never look back to Civ 6. I always want the most current version of Civ at all times.

My 2 Cents!

Brew God
 
Someone above said they just discovered they don't speak English. Reading some of this thread I'm tempted to agree, (and I was born and brought up in London (England, not Ontario) nearly 70 years ago!).

For all the speculation, it seems to me that some things are absolutely unavoidable if it's to have the Civ branding:

- It will be turn-based (been there in every version since Civ 1)
- It will have named civilisations and leaders (ditto)
- It will have science (ditto)
- It will have happiness (ditto)
- It will have cities (ditto)
- It will have military units (ditto)
- It will have wonders (ditto)
- It will have workers to develop the land, and scouts to explore it (ditto)
- It will have difficulty levels (ditto)
- the AI will be stupid, and rely on cheating (ditto)

Also, it will probably have variable landforms, luxuries, resources, culture, trade, diplomacy, and religion (all have been there since Civ 2 or 3 I believe, if not Civ 1). And the first release will be minimal, and it will take two major upgrades to round it off (ditto)

It will probably have hex tiles and 1UPT (been there for Civ 5 and 6), though this can't be taken for granted.

Districts were probably the biggest change in Civ 6 (and, in my view, an improvement). I suspect these will remain, though there will be some new ones and some dropped.

It will have different ways - in some cases cosmetic, in others fundamental - of implementing these features; some new civs and leaders; better graphics; new military and civilian units; and one or two brand new mechanisms (law? soft power? media? cyber power?).

It will not fundamentally change the nature of the franchise. They know their target market. I would guess somewhere between 80% and 95% of purchasers will be be previous Civ players.
 
My expectations for Civ 7 are somewhat reduced by the trajectory of Civ 6. It seemed so promising at first, but as the expansions came, I didn't think they improved the game the way Civ 5's expansions did. Quite the opposite, in many ways they made the game worse. If they continue the philosophy of tossing in more and more loosely connected content (which I understand, makes them money), rather than refining what is there, I worry that Civ 7 will not be to my liking.

But I would love to be proven wrong.
 
I think the idea that Civ 7 can't be fairly complete is contradicted by the experience of going from CKII to CKIII. You'd expect the problem to be even more pronounced in such a game, yet the foundation of CKIII is very solid (in fact, surprisingly so, for a paradox title).

Civ 5 took two full expansions and Civ 6 took quite a few patches to get to a good place. I agree with the comment above that the elements introduced in Civ 6's expansions maybe weren't as game changing as those in Civ 5, but I think that says more about how barebones vanilla Civ 5 was.

Maybe I'm optimistic, but I think Civ 7 will release in a better state than either of its predecessors. Especially now that they've seen how much money they can make on Civs/Leaders alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Could unit diversity be simplified for CIV7?
Replies
11
Views
322
Bonyduck Campersang
Bonyduck Campersang
A
Civ 6 Review, All DLC
Replies
3
Views
2K
Naokaukodem
Naokaukodem
King Phaedron
3 Civilizations are China locked on this map - Secret of Evermore
Replies
3
Views
1K
fomrat
F
TyrannusRex
What if there were more Tech/Civic quotes?
2
Replies
24
Views
1K
Boris Gudenuf
Boris Gudenuf
Lonecat Nekophrodite
Civ7 Unit categorizations (Class and Promotions)
Replies
3
Views
534
Naokaukodem
Naokaukodem
Top Bottom