Looks like Civ 7 will have Experience Point system

[Alkahest]

https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1fjgj93/experience_point_system_in_civ_7/

Something I believe most people did not catch from the recent dev stream. Also the 2K Civ 7 page says “unlock progression bonuses for your leaders across multiple gameplay sessions.”

So EXP system tied to gameplay bonuses that forces and incentives players to play multiple sessions in the game… Not sure how exactly this would be a good thing for a Civ game. Really worried that it’s gonna work like a battle pass.

[evolena]

The same "blue person" notification icon appears also after the age transition, so after selecting some "+ attribute point" legacies.
Oh, and I was wrong in my assumption, although there is only one legacy option for each attribute point catagories, these can be selected multiple time.

[Many-Named]

Originally posted by ParabolaWaVe:

Even if the feature was "generally" well received in that game, we're comparing apples to oranges here. Age of Wonders is not Sid Meier's Civilization. It is not the top game in critical reception and sales. You never make experiments with a successful product, a market leader with big brand recognition, unless you're really going down the slope in sales. Coca Cola tried that once, how did it turned out?

If 2K wants even more sales from the game, it would've been far better to invest in marketing, social media and youtubers... you know, try to make a cultural impact rather than changing what already works. That we, poor people, have to explain these lessons to the suits, makes me feel like human intelligence is really getting scarce for some reason.

In all fairness Coca-cola is not a creative studio. It's normal that Firaxis wants to try new stuff. But is is worrying that they stray more and more from the formula's dna. I mean this meta progression is only possible because now leaders are completely disconnected from the civs they lead, something we have never seen before. So anyway, I really hope another studio picks up the mantle since Firaxis seem to no longer be interested in making civ games...as we knew them.

[ParabolaWaVe]

Originally posted by Many-Named:

So anyway, I really hope another studio picks up the mantle since Firaxis seem to no longer be interested in making civ games...as we knew them.

The solution for Firaxis is actually very easy... and it is, to put the thinkers in charge of its projects again. You know, the guys with the good ideas, and who know better than anybody else what works and what doesn't. Millions and millions of dollars and man-hours could be thrown into the toilet next year, just because somebody with no clue was allowed to write incredibly stupid things on a whiteboard during a six hour creative meeting. The success or failure of an entire project depends on the people leading it... who'd know, huh?

And the sin of this industry, is having treated its best talents like garbage over and over again. Old designers and writers, great stars in videogame conventions, have been fired, canceled, too early retired, or denounced by their colleages in the workplace. So there's a brain drain going on since a while, and it shows.

And as the thinkers with ideas of their own, like Reynolds or Schafer, are fewer and fewer, the industry has to copy those ideas from somebody else... but without talent, neither they're able to identify what they're supposed to copy anymore, so even the copy is bad. They choose a bad place to copy their ideas from.

For instance, I don't think the problem with "Humankind" was with execution at all, unlike what some people say. I think execution was fine. The problem was with the ideas themselves... and that's the complicated thing for Civ 7. "Garbage in, garbage out": an excellent execution of garbage ideas, is going to produce very well executed garbage. Nothing more.

[ParabolaWaVe]

The game is going to suck so much, that in addition to zero workers, you'll no longer be able to pick which tiles surrounding your city to exploit. One less choice to make. There's more complexity in the stuff the OP describes, than in the actual gameplay.

How can somebody claim to be honest, while believing that these "improvements" are truly going to make the game deeper, more enjoyable? I wish I knew.

[JerBeware]

Originally posted by ParabolaWaVe:

The game is going to suck so much, that in addition to zero workers, you'll no longer be able to pick which tiles surrounding your city to exploit. One less choice to make. There's more complexity in the stuff the OP describes, than in the actual gameplay.

How can somebody claim to be honest, while believing that these "improvements" are truly going to make the game deeper, more enjoyable? I wish I knew.

Go back and play their older titles. Enjoy your Coke. Instead of this Eeyore-fest with zero rational basis.

You have a choice on how to approach it: Am I going to be a Doom and Gloomer? Somewhere in the middle? Or take a one way ticket on the Hype Train?
(I'm in the middle)

I understand the dislike of certain systems on the surface. I can even empathize with it. We haven't played the game nor have we seen enough of the systems to draw rational, informed conclusions. What I have been able to play is their past titles. And I've gotten plenty of entertainment and value out of those.

[Wiegraf Folles]

As long as it's not a PTW part of the system and just encourages multiple plays of a campaign I don't understand the concern here. I've played colonization over 100 hours, and Civ 5 for about the same. It feels like the kinda thing you'll unlock normally just by playing and arguably it'll keep you wanting to go back and play games to grind leaders. One of my issues with Civ games and why I didn't really play 6 even after purchasing it has been the lack of anything to achieve other than personally created goals. I.e. I wanna use XYZ to win an ABC victory. or Let's play this faction on hardest difficulty just to beat our heads against a wall for a playthrough and never do it again because the AI literally cheats in higher difficulties.

Adding something to strive for as long as you can enjoy the game without the progression is actually something I think would make for an interesting way to push for more replayability.

Although what I really miss is the Civ2 gold era of map making and unit making that made it so wonderfully moddable that I probably played 300 - 500 hours of the game and would still have done so if it was something that continued. Or the Civ 3 (i think) where people were creating entire new factions/worlds for Magic style games. My biggest issue with recent releases has been how they have become un-customizable and modding has gone basically extinct. There was some really amazing overhauls that people came up with in the past that made them so massively replayable.

[ParabolaWaVe]

Originally posted by JerBeware:

Originally posted by ParabolaWaVe:

The game is going to suck so much, that in addition to zero workers, you'll no longer be able to pick which tiles surrounding your city to exploit. One less choice to make. There's more complexity in the stuff the OP describes, than in the actual gameplay.

How can somebody claim to be honest, while believing that these "improvements" are truly going to make the game deeper, more enjoyable? I wish I knew.

Go back and play their older titles. Enjoy your Coke. Instead of this Eeyore-fest with zero rational basis.

You have a choice on how to approach it: Am I going to be a Doom and Gloomer? Somewhere in the middle? Or take a one way ticket on the Hype Train?
(I'm in the middle)

I understand the dislike of certain systems on the surface. I can even empathize with it. We haven't played the game nor have we seen enough of the systems to draw rational, informed conclusions. What I have been able to play is their past titles. And I've gotten plenty of entertainment and value out of those.

No, actually we have all been able to read and watch the basic systems extensively, thanks to written word and promotional videos explaining how things are going to work, down to the details. You also have the *positive* youtubers trying to leave a good impression on the game, yet not always succeeding. Same thing with Reddit and its very possitive civ subreddit. So... unless Firaxis is deceiving their customers, anybody who is paying attention can visualize, very well, how the game is going to be. Save, of course, for aesthetics, animations, notifications, that kind of stuff.

There are, for sure, people excited about the very controversial changes that the critics, me among them, are bothered about. And that's fine. Nobody should tell you not to enjoy the product in your own free time, paid with your hard earned money.

But just as I'm told to leave elsewhere to "drink my Coke", I can also say that the people lionizing these changes, those for which Civ VII is exactly the sort of game they want to play, shouldn't backflip later on, and complain about those mechanics after the game is released...because we have tons of info right now. People would do far better in learning to love what they asked for, instead of spamming the forums with complaints and criticism afterwards as it usually happens. In fact, the sole reason I'm even discussing the game right now, is because its still unreleased, and the features might not be fully set in stone.

Once its released, its absolutely pointless to say anything about it. Unless you're writing a Steam review.

[StrayCat]

The game is going to suck....it isn't spiritually CIV ...and you people telling us to shut up...that we've not played the game....we don't know anything.........well when the game is released and it sucks....and it will.... and we complain....you same people are going to tell us that we were told all along that the game would be different and that it's brilliant...blah blah blah...

Things never change.

[JerBeware]

Originally posted by ParabolaWaVe:

No, actually we have all been able to read and watch the basic systems extensively, thanks to written word and promotional videos explaining how things are going to work, down to the details. You also have the *positive* youtubers trying to leave a good impression on the game, yet not always succeeding. Same thing with Reddit and its very possitive civ subreddit. So... unless Firaxis is deceiving their customers, anybody who is paying attention can visualize, very well, how the game is going to be. Save, of course, for aesthetics, animations, notifications, that kind of stuff.

There are, for sure, people excited about the very controversial changes that the critics, me among them, are bothered about. And that's fine. Nobody should tell you not to enjoy the product in your own free time, paid with your hard earned money.

But just as I'm told to leave elsewhere to "drink my Coke", I can also say that the people lionizing these changes, those for which Civ VII is exactly the sort of game they want to play, shouldn't backflip later on, and complain about those mechanics after the game is released...because we have tons of info right now. People would do far better in learning to love what they asked for, instead of spamming the forums with complaints and criticism afterwards as it usually happens. In fact, the sole reason I'm even discussing the game right now, is because its still unreleased, and the features might not be fully set in stone.

Once its released, its absolutely pointless to say anything about it. Unless you're writing a Steam review.

I can only go off your words in the forums, but you've made multiple comments (not just criticisms) and demonstrably bad comparisons.

No one said don't criticize. In fact, I'm skeptical of many of the changes too. There's a difference between criticism and blanket comments like 'this game is going to suck' or 'they shouldn't experiment', etc.

And last I checked, playing a game is vastly different than watching YouTube and promotional videos. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother playing any game.

[ParabolaWaVe]

Originally posted by JerBeware:

I can only go off your words in the forums, but you've made multiple comments (not just criticisms) and demonstrably bad comparisons.

No one said don't criticize. In fact, I'm skeptical of many of the changes too. There's a difference between criticism and blanket comments like 'this game is going to suck' or 'they shouldn't experiment', etc.

And last I checked, playing a game is vastly different than watching YouTube and promotional videos. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother playing any game.

It depends. With certain games, like those from the action genre, you don't really know how a game is going to be before release. Animations for example, play too large a part. But in strategy, its a different world. You're able to figure how its largely going to play from enough scattered tidbits. My personal problem with Civ VII by now is the whole of it, not just this or that individual feature, or this or that winning condition.

And you know, I'm not a serial complainer. I value, many times, games which I feel are very unfairly criticized by the players themselves. Civ: Beyond Earth is one. I have a positive, in fact very positive, opinion of that game against consensus. I can also value very risky design choices, and great ambition even if it comes along with a flawed execution, or tons of programming bugs.

But in my opinion, Civ VII is none of that. Its not a revolutionary idea taking big risks for a great payoff. For me, it is generic strategy game #153. The key characteristics from the Civ gameplay, that always have put it aside from other turn based games, are all gone.

Sometimes, we need honest friends who can approach us and say, "better think it over... if you go this way, you're going to make a mistake". Well, I think Firaxis needed a friend from which to receive that kind of criticism and advise. And I'm quite sorry that the game didn't managed to get enough backlash, because it might have helped to improve it on release

[hannibal_pjv]

Well… the covernors in previous game was XP system… the sciense and culture have been XP system long time… aka you do certain things in game and get ”mana” that allows upgrades.
People are soon gonna demonice civ7 because it has cities!
;)

[oddball]

I don’t like this XP system and if it gates gameplay I’ll download a mod to unlock all of it. Screw progression systems.

[Many-Named]

Originally posted by oddball:

I don’t like this XP system and if it gates gameplay I’ll download a mod to unlock all of it. Screw progression systems.

it's not a bad idea tho, doesn't subtract anything from the game...not like the forced civ switch and 3 mini game eras....

[Ultimate Sadistic Creature]

Originally posted by Alkahest:

https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1fjgj93/experience_point_system_in_civ_7/

Something I believe most people did not catch from the recent dev stream. Also the 2K Civ 7 page says “unlock progression bonuses for your leaders across multiple gameplay sessions.”

So EXP system tied to gameplay bonuses that forces and incentives players to play multiple sessions in the game… Not sure how exactly this would be a good thing for a Civ game. Really worried that it’s gonna work like a battle pass.

omg

They're going to include a Battle Pass system, aren't they?

[Alkahest]

Originally posted by hannibal_pjv:

Well… the covernors in previous game was XP system… the sciense and culture have been XP system long time… aka you do certain things in game and get ”mana” that allows upgrades.
People are soon gonna demonice civ7 because it has cities!
;)

Things you mentioned are not meta progression and only affects one gameplay session, but nice try