Civ I was not like the original board game. Why all the flak that this one is not like previous titles?

[Stormwalker]

Civ I was Sid Meier's computer version of the board game Civilization. However, it was not by any stretch, the same as the original game. He created a game series that we have enjoyed for decades.

Why then is everyone so resistant that they are trying a new direction with this version?

I would think that due to their success with past versions of the game, the audiences would have a little faith in their ability to make yet another good version of Civilization.

I for one, am looking forward to seeing where the game will go and seeing how the new mechanics play out.

[seven_stars]

Their main core feature this time was taken right from Humankind, along with many other mechanics. It was one of the major complaints about Humankind. So we shall see if Civ players warm up to it or not over time.

[Stormwalker]

seven_stars původně napsal:

Their main core feature this time was taken right from Humankind, along with many other mechanics. It was one of the major complaints about Humankind. So we shall see if Civ players warm up to it or not over time.

OK. So the Devs saw something they liked about another 4X game and decided to explore those concepts in the Civ game. Again, makes perfect sense. The WHOLE series was the same thing. A Board Game adapted to a better more interesting computer came.

I still don't get what their argument is.

[Cheeky little sausage]

Stormwalker původně napsal:

seven_stars původně napsal:

Their main core feature this time was taken right from Humankind, along with many other mechanics. It was one of the major complaints about Humankind. So we shall see if Civ players warm up to it or not over time.

OK. So the Devs saw something they liked about another 4X game and decided to explore those concepts in the Civ game. Again, makes perfect sense. The WHOLE series was the same thing. A Board Game adapted to a better more interesting computer came.

I still don't get what their argument is.

How many people do you think played the board game? The comparison is meaningless. I've played every Civ game since Civ 1 on the Amiga. Never played the board game. Had no idea it exists.

Comparing Civ 7 to Civ 4, 5 or 6 for example is much more realistic.

[taomastercu]

Cheeky little sausage původně napsal:

Stormwalker původně napsal:

OK. So the Devs saw something they liked about another 4X game and decided to explore those concepts in the Civ game. Again, makes perfect sense. The WHOLE series was the same thing. A Board Game adapted to a better more interesting computer came.

I still don't get what their argument is.

How many people do you think played the board game? The comparison is meaningless. I've played every Civ game since Civ 1 on the Amiga. Never played the board game. Had no idea it exists.

Comparing Civ 7 to Civ 4, 5 or 6 for example is much more realistic.

People are so ridiculous about this. As if the board game community was a large target market for Civ 1 just because it was based on a boardgame.

Lots of early strategy map games used a boardgame IP because investors like to see that stuff and then the game was nothing like the board game and the audience had never played the boardgame before.

[Stormwalker]

taomastercu původně napsal:

Cheeky little sausage původně napsal:

How many people do you think played the board game? The comparison is meaningless. I've played every Civ game since Civ 1 on the Amiga. Never played the board game. Had no idea it exists.

Comparing Civ 7 to Civ 4, 5 or 6 for example is much more realistic.

People are so ridiculous about this. As if the board game community was a large target market for Civ 1 just because it was based on a boardgame.

Lots of early strategy map games used a boardgame IP because investors like to see that stuff and then the game was nothing like the board game and the audience had never played the boardgame before.

And yet there is a Civilization Board Game based on the computer game still being published today.


I think you are underestimating the number of board game players, you are aware that Board Games have been around for thousands of years longer than computer games, yes?

Still haven't answered the main question: Why do you have no faith in the team's ability to produce a fun game? Why are you SO stuck on playing just another recycled version of a game model that has basically been beaten to death?

[taomastercu]

Stormwalker původně napsal:

taomastercu původně napsal:

People are so ridiculous about this. As if the board game community was a large target market for Civ 1 just because it was based on a boardgame.

Lots of early strategy map games used a boardgame IP because investors like to see that stuff and then the game was nothing like the board game and the audience had never played the boardgame before.

And yet there is a Civilization Board Game based on the computer game still being published today.


I think you are underestimating the number of board game players, you are aware that Board Games have been around for thousands of years longer than computer games, yes?

Still haven't answered the main question: Why do you have no faith in the team's ability to produce a fun game? Why are you SO stuck on playing just another recycled version of a game model that has basically been beaten to death?

Different people get different things out of Civ. So different changes are going to please or upset different people.

In point of fact my objection to Civ 7 isn't the Ages or the split between civs and leaders, I play EU4 after all so I'm perfectly happy to minmax stat blocks with no consideration for "vibes". It is the ♥♥♥♥ UI and the price and also the overall "direction" of the changes and the way they offer so few options in the base game.

I'm sure I'll buy the game for like 70% off on a sale with all the DLC once they unlock larger map sizes and triple the number of leaders and civs and at least marginally make the UI less of a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, and remove Denuvo. So like 5 years from now?

Also they use Coherent UI from Coherent Labs as their UI custom Chromium middleware implementation and devs who use CUI should not be rewarded for their bad decisions.

[(TITLE CARD)]

I'm okay with a lot of the changes. The issue I have is it feels kind of like a browser game because of the UI and weight of the menu and buttons.

My biggest complaint though is the lack of the signature "one last turn" button at the end of the game. That's unforgivable...

[taomastercu]

Oh boy... původně napsal:

I'm okay with a lot of the changes. The issue I have is it feels kind of like a browser game because of the UI and weight of the menu and buttons.

My biggest complaint though is the lack of the signature "one last turn" button at the end of the game. That's unforgivable...

They're actually using Coherent UI, a custom Chromium based UI framework for binding to C++ games, to do the UI. So it will absolutely feel like a browser game.

[Gigantoad]

A computer game was not like the board game? Shocking.

[taomastercu]

Gigantoad původně napsal:

A computer game was not like the board game? Shocking.

The Paradox games literally started as tick base(sorta real time with pause) even though they were based on a board game. Because no one in the 80s/90s had a vested interest in 1 to 1 board game/video game adaptations. But OP doesn't care about facts.

[(Rúna)]

Cheeky little sausage původně napsal:

How many people do you think played the board game? The comparison is meaningless. I've played every Civ game since Civ 1 on the Amiga. Never played the board game. Had no idea it exists.

Comparing Civ 7 to Civ 4, 5 or 6 for example is much more realistic.

LoL how many of these people complaining have played Civ4? Because you could swap leader with cultures in that game.

Furthermore, it's been a feature requested on the Civ Fanatics forum for over a decade for the previous game.

Y'all this manufactured controversy is just easily manipulated reactionaries wasting time being angry and miserable about everything; thats whats fun for them. Not playing any of the games, evidently. Civ 7 is just the latest distraction for them. They'll be frothing about something else being woke and ruined etc within a week or 2 and move on. Sometimes it's literally just days

[taomastercu]

(Rúna) původně napsal:

Cheeky little sausage původně napsal:

How many people do you think played the board game? The comparison is meaningless. I've played every Civ game since Civ 1 on the Amiga. Never played the board game. Had no idea it exists.

Comparing Civ 7 to Civ 4, 5 or 6 for example is much more realistic.

LoL how many of these people complaining have played Civ4? Because you could swap leader with cultures in that game.

Furthermore, it's been a feature requested on the Civ Fanatics forum for over a decade for the previous game.

Y'all this manufactured controversy is just easily manipulated reactionaries wasting time being angry and miserable about everything; thats whats fun for them. Not playing any of the games, evidently. Civ 7 is just the latest distraction for them. They'll be frothing about something else being woke and ruined etc within a week or 2 and move on. Sometimes it's literally just days

Untethered leaders existed in Civ 4, sure but the scope of the Civ 7 change is much larger and also not option. I don't care about civ swapping but people who do aren't invalidated just because of Untethered Leaders.

Also Civ 3 is the best Civ.

[misesfan]

The original computer game was absolutely based on the board game, read Sid Meier's biography if you doubt that connection, where he stated it explicitly. Sid was a big board wargamer and lots of his ideas and designs are based on board wargames. Ed Beach (current designer) is a huge board wargamer - see the wargame Great Campaigns of the American Civil War for reference.

The model they are using now for Age expiration was also done back in the day as a board wargame called History of the World. Its a great wargame.

[(Rúna)]

taomastercu původně napsal:

Also Civ 3 is the best Civ.

Ok, let me preface this that I'm not trying to ♥♥♥♥ on a game you like. I'm sure there's a lot fo reasons you've like it for so long.

All I'm saying is the game is some 25 years old and the world map and the UI really do reflect that. I'm pretty sure I've seen you lambast the UI and world map on Civ7.

And sure, there's a lot of element that do need some major TLC.

But something like Civ3 just doesn't hold up against Civ7, in an more objective sense. Maybe it's nostalgia, why you love that one but strangely hate Civ7 without giving it a chance? maybe it's something else, I dunno maybe something to reflect about

[The Doctor]

taomastercu původně napsal:

Untethered leaders existed in Civ 4, sure but the scope of the Civ 7 change is much larger and also not option. I don't care about civ swapping but people who do aren't invalidated just because of Untethered Leaders.

Also Civ 3 is the best Civ.

All true, especially the Civ 3 was the best Civ. Fortunately, I just don't care about untethered leaders at all.

To the thread in general, I played the original board game so there's one at least. I didn't like it at all which is why I skipped Civ ! thinking it was an adaption of the board game. I was wrong. It's been known to happen. :D

I know I'm missing the point but as a life-long board gamer myself, don't be dismissive of board games - you're probably noticed that some computer games are becoming board games nowadays which suggests that there's good money to be made in them. EU was originally a board game as well but now we're getting a board game version of HOI4 (no thanks, I'll stick with the board game World in Flames.)

Even what are called by some 'computer board games' like Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2 make your Civ 4X game look like a child's toy in comparison so please don't knock the board games. Civ VII has plenty to point and laugh at if you're so inclined so don't drag board games into it.

To sum up, non-sim games that have a long run of sequels will often end up wandering very far from their original design. Some even go off the rails for some fans with their very first sequel - Darkest Dungeon for example. The very basic elements of a Civ game are still there, 'Bread', 'Shields'' and 'Beakers' in addition to Influence and Culture and any other in-game currencies added over the decades. Not every new Civ has been revolutionary, Civs 3 and 5 perhaps bringing the most impactful changes to what preceded them. Civ VII may have gone too far with the era and culture shifting but overall, it feels and plays very much like a better Civ VI to me.