Will there actually be a Civ 7?

Patine

Deity
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
8,660
Most brands get knocked off shelves due to legal issues (like Alpha Centauri).
Sorry, but which legal issues do you mean? I bought my original copy, and Alien Crossfire, in the day, and still the CD-ROM's, but bought a version on GoG that is compatible with later iterations of windows. But I've never heard mention of these legal issues.
 

blackbutterfly

Emperor
Joined
May 9, 2016
Messages
1,274
Location
Leeds, UK
Wasn't there a other Beyond Earth hint like a year or ago or something?
I don't think so.

But in GS when the space victory was changed from a Mars colony to exoplanet expedition, to me it looked like a set up for BE2.
Just like before Beyond Earth was released Civ V was patched/updated to change its science victory to lead into BE? Or maybe it was in BNW? IDK
 

KayAU

Emperor
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
1,033
Beyond Earth 2, or even a new expansion for BE 1, would be wonderful news. Beyond Earth with the Rising Tide expansion was actually really good in my opinion, and it's a shame development stopped, as it could have done with some additional content.
 

Bibor

Doomsday Machine
Joined
Jun 6, 2004
Messages
3,046
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
Sorry, but which legal issues do you mean? I bought my original copy, and Alien Crossfire, in the day, and still the CD-ROM's, but bought a version on GoG that is compatible with later iterations of windows. But I've never heard mention of these legal issues.
Rights to Alpha Centauri belong to (or at least used to belong to) Electronic Arts, not 2K. I presume that's the reason why FXS went with Beyond Earth instead. Sadly, immersion-wise BE is nowhere near SMAC. It's like comparing a typical contemporary internet article to Herbert's Dune.
 

TheMarshmallowBear

Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
7,775
Location
Inside a Ziggurat
I don't think so.

But in GS when the space victory was changed from a Mars colony to exoplanet expedition, to me it looked like a set up for BE2.
Just like before Beyond Earth was released Civ V was patched/updated to change its science victory to lead into BE? Or maybe it was in BNW? IDK
It was just one random patch and all they did was change the button to mention going Beyond Earth.
 

KayAU

Emperor
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
1,033
Rights to Alpha Centauri belong to (or at least used to belong to) Electronic Arts, not 2K. I presume that's the reason why FXS went with Beyond Earth instead. Sadly, immersion-wise BE is nowhere near SMAC. It's like comparing a typical contemporary internet article to Herbert's Dune.
I tend to agree, although I do think the overall atmosphere of BE is quite good, and the soundtrack is really good.

SMAC was very narratively focused, being built around the central storyline of humans landing on Planet. I think BE could have done much more in this regard. I'm not saying they should have rehashed the story of SMAC with the planet itself being the central character, but I think the affinity system had the potential to be the backbone of a more player-centered story.

Another thing which probably hurt immersion a bit, was that the factions and leaders were not as immediately recognizable or memorable. With historical civ, you kind of get this for free, as the civilizations and their leaders are already known to some degree by most. In SMAC, they seem to have been very aware that they would not have this recognition, and made a seemingly conscious effort to compensate. The most obvious way they did that was to give each faction/leader a very strong ideological preference, almost to the point of being a caricature. It worked though, as I can still clearly remember the names and ideologies of each of them. They also had the characters do voiceovers for wonder vids and tech quotes, which further helped you get to know them. To be fair, they did some of the same with BE, but not with the same amount of success.

As a sidenote, I think this is one of the reasons why Humankind is struggling as well, besides mechanical issues like the region system and extreme urban sprawl. The game has a historical setting, but I feel they threw away many of the benefits of that. There are no historical leaders or other historical characters, and you don't really get any sense of identity from the cultures either, as they switch around multiple times per game. I do think the leaders have personality traits, but after more than 150 hours, I couldn't tell you any of them.
 

_hero_

King
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Messages
805
As a sidenote, I think this is one of the reasons why Humankind is struggling as well, besides mechanical issues like the region system and extreme urban sprawl. The game has a historical setting, but I feel they threw away many of the benefits of that. There are no historical leaders or other historical characters, and you don't really get any sense of identity from the cultures either, as they switch around multiple times per game. I do think the leaders have personality traits, but after more than 150 hours, I couldn't tell you any of them.

Historical immersion needs to either be something you dive heavily into or not at all. Those who really care about the historical aspects of games tend to grow exponentially annoyed by ahistorical elements. These are the people who were indignant about the fantasy game modes added in NFP. Those who don't really care about such things don't tend to get much value out of the low levels of historical homage paid in a game like Humankind. I think Humankind would have worked better if they'd focused more on RPG elements. You name your own culture and leader and each era you get to pick from a new pool of traits. Completely disconnected from any real history, it would probably have actually been more appealing to some people.

Though that would not have fixed many of the other problems with the game.
 

blackbutterfly

Emperor
Joined
May 9, 2016
Messages
1,274
Location
Leeds, UK
Another thing which probably hurt immersion a bit, was that the factions and leaders were not as immediately recognizable or memorable. With historical civ, you kind of get this for free, as the civilizations and their leaders are already known to some degree by most. In SMAC, they seem to have been very aware that they would not have this recognition, and made a seemingly conscious effort to compensate. The most obvious way they did that was to give each faction/leader a very strong ideological preference, almost to the point of being a caricature. It worked though, as I can still clearly remember the names and ideologies of each of them. They also had the characters do voiceovers for wonder vids and tech quotes, which further helped you get to know them. To be fair, they did some of the same with BE, but not with the same amount of success.

You have hit on BE's biggest weakness: the sponsors.

Unlike SMAC/X, BE's sponsors are basically space equivalents of historical civs: e.g: Brasilia.
SMAC/X also had the two alien factions. It would have been nice for BE to have had something similar too.
Let's also not forget the leader of the capitalist faction:

Kenyan born CEO Morgan was the shape of things to come (re: Kenyan origin Obama).

SMAC/X had soul 😁
 

KayAU

Emperor
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
1,033
Historical immersion needs to either be something you dive heavily into or not at all. Those who really care about the historical aspects of games tend to grow exponentially annoyed by ahistorical elements. These are the people who were indignant about the fantasy game modes added in NFP. Those who don't really care about such things don't tend to get much value out of the low levels of historical homage paid in a game like Humankind. I think Humankind would have worked better if they'd focused more on RPG elements. You name your own culture and leader and each era you get to pick from a new pool of traits. Completely disconnected from any real history, it would probably have actually been more appealing to some people.

Though that would not have fixed many of the other problems with the game.
Hey, have you been reading my posts over at the Humankind forums, because that's pretty close to my own suggestions. :) I have been suggesting creating your empire identifiers in the beginning (possibly pre-game, or maybe at the end of the Neolithic Era), and keeping them throughout. At each era, you get to adopt traits and abilities of a culture, but you remain yourself. I also suggested maybe putting the cultures into a skill/bonus tree of sorts, to add another strategic element. Maybe for Humankind 2...

@blackbutterfly
Yeah, I think it was probably a mistake to identify them by their former national identities. They actually do have some personality once you get to know them, I think it was just not done as consistently or well as in SMAC/X. Brasilia are militarists, ARC (the Americans) are corporate thugs, Elodie is some sort of culturally focused gamer poet, and so on. But not all are equally clear and recognizable.

It must be rough constantly being compared to SMAC/X, though. :)
 

iammaxhailme

Emperor
Joined
Jun 4, 2015
Messages
1,885
I think the nations were fine in BE. My problem with it is the tech web/tree. I find it so hard to remember what's a low tech unit and what's a high tech unit. In regular civ, obviously something like a musketman is going to destroy a spearman, or something like that. But in Civ:BE the units all kind of blend together in my mind.
 

HorseshoeHermit

20% accurate as usual, Morty
Joined
Apr 5, 2013
Messages
1,428
Location
Canada
I don't think that the ideological caricature approach would be the way to go with a science fiction Civ if it isn't a narrative the way SMAC is. Civ games are still open-ended, what-if, story from system (to draw from Strenger) kind of things. Ideological fixations would be frustrating hamstrings that constrain the story by constraining the system.
And so that being said, you are left with either: Made-up, more reasonable leaders; or no leader system at all. The Beyond Earth factions I think were a miss but they weren't *far* off of what could have captured the imagination quite powerfully. Maybe it was just putting the writing work in the wrong place, maybe it was the delivery, maybe it was the annoyance of the game's systems making me not receptive to what anything meant. But... almost.

BE 2 as Civ 7 confirmed next year would get a pass from me. I have learned my lesson on pre-orders, but I would be hype, honestly.
 

blackbutterfly

Emperor
Joined
May 9, 2016
Messages
1,274
Location
Leeds, UK
I'd like to see a Civ 7 by next 4th of July.
Beyond Earth if nothing else served as a stop gap until Civ VI.
Perhaps BE2 will serve a similar purpose?

TBH Civ VI despite being better designed than Civ V, turned out to be inferior.
Now with a number of historical 4X competitors (HUMANKIND, Old World, etc.) maybe it will give Firaxis time to develop a better game.

HUMANKIND is Civ VII for me in many ways, though it is not without flaws.
 
Last edited:

Abaxial

Emperor
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,079
Beyond Earth just doesn't make sense to me. Everyone should have a high tech level from the outset. It's all an unbelievable scenario to try to shoehorn the game into a 4X format.
 

blackbutterfly

Emperor
Joined
May 9, 2016
Messages
1,274
Location
Leeds, UK
Beyond Earth just doesn't make sense to me. Everyone should have a high tech level from the outset.
It is sci fi 😆

I mean the alien life appear to be invertebrates. I.e. symmetrical with even number of limbs, eyes, etc.

I don't think it's even been hypothesised higher order alien life would be symmetrical.

But lots of sci fi is like that. E.g: Star Trek.

Many things are about game balance. But in other respects you do start out with tech. E.g embarkation, subs (with Chemistry)
 

vorlon_mi

Emperor
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
1,167
Location
Chelsea, MI
Beyond Earth just doesn't make sense to me. Everyone should have a high tech level from the outset. It's all an unbelievable scenario to try to shoehorn the game into a 4X format.
BERT does start with a relatively high tech level. The first-level soldier, tank, and ranged units all start with projectile weapons. As they are improved, they switch to energy weapons with changes in visuals and sound effects. The advanced units, especially the hover units, are nothing like what we have in reality on old Earth. The player has the ability to launch a satellite to orbit as early as turn 10, if you are fortunate to find one in a resource pod.

Having said that, many of the intermediate techs seem to be less connected to specific advances and more a device for moving up the Affinity tree. Is there really a difference between Alien Domestication, Alien Ethics, Alien Biology, and Alien Sciences? Dark Networks, Metamaterials, and Exotic Matter all sound like they came from ST:TNG
 

KayAU

Emperor
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
1,033
I think the nations were fine in BE. My problem with it is the tech web/tree. I find it so hard to remember what's a low tech unit and what's a high tech unit. In regular civ, obviously something like a musketman is going to destroy a spearman, or something like that. But in Civ:BE the units all kind of blend together in my mind.
I actually like the tech web, even though it is a bit more complicated than classical tech trees. The techs are more advanced the further away you get from the center, but it's not really like in Civ, where the later units render earlier units obsolete. What you are unlocking is mostly new unit *types*. These are then upgraded as your affinity levels rise, and when you upgrade a unit type, all your existing units of that type gets upgraded for free. This means that even your basic infantry which you get at the very beginning of the game, will remain viable units in the late game. They have shortcomings when it comes to mobility and range, but in terms of pure combat strength, they can still fight.
 
Top Bottom