I Don't Understand the Negative Reviews for Civilization 7

[Boop da Snoot]

I’m genuinely confused by the negative reviews surrounding Civilization 7. If we look back at the launch of Civ 5 and Civ 6, they both felt incomplete without their DLCs at release. It’s always been a part of the Civilization series that the game improves significantly through additional content over time.

Sure, the base game might not be perfect right out of the gate, but it's never been about just the initial release. Over the years, Civ 5 and 6 both became much better thanks to the DLCs. In fact, they often turn into completely different, more refined experiences once the expansions roll out. Why is it any different this time?

I believe we should give the developers some time to work on DLC and updates, as they have done with previous titles. I’ve been playing the game and enjoying it, even in its early form, and I'm optimistic about what will come next.

Edit: I can understand why someone would be disappointed with the industry's standard.

[metropolitan75002]

Originally posted by The Ludovico Technique:

We didn't play the same game.

Have you even played Civ1 to Civ4 to understand the comparison?

[mikehhhh]

I gave it a bad review because after playing it for 12 or so hours and getting into the Exploration age, and 15 towns / cities it became apparent how awfully buggy the game is and how much is missing.

For example my Gold income which switch every few turns or when I changed a policy from around positive 500 to -34 which I figured out is the exact unit maintenance cost. So one minute I'm getting 500 gold a turn, the next I'm losing -34 a turn, a pretty bad bug.

Another example, the plague doctors didn't even work for me and just disappear and don't treat the plague so the plague was spreading and killing all my units and no way to stop it.

Sometimes you click on something in the UI and it doesn't even respond.

There are several other bugs, like sometimes you go to a city and you can't spread region, it doesn't even tell you why, it just grey's out the "spread" icon.

Oh one other bug, sometimes in a city production screen, it will show you the Gold, Production, and happiness for another city. I was in my capital Roma which has production of 89 and it showed 10, which I figured out was for a town I had on another continent.

The game is a rip-off at 69 dollars and it should have been released early access it has so many bugs in it. Thats why I gave it a bad review, we are paying them 69 dollars for a game and giving them free Beta testing feedback. The game isn't ready in my opinion.

[keviinb]

Originally posted by ꉔꏂ꒐꒒ꇙ:

Originally posted by Boop:

As for the price: it’s the new market standard.

No, it's not.

Not every new game (big or so) come out priced at $69.99+tax (plus has an edition that costs more for a few days Advanced Access) that's only by/from the greedy/money hungry Devs/Companies.

Look at BG3 (Baldur's Gate 3), Elden Ring, Black Myth Wukong, Atomic Heart, Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 etc, all priced at $59.99+tax.

So, please, don't speak about things you clearly don't know anything about, especially if you're trying to justify the overpriced price tag this game has and for you, yourself buying it (= supporting that price range)

+1

Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 is sitting at 91% with 40 K reviews and is half the price of Civkind sitting at 50% .

Anyone who doesn't understand the negative reviews should really stop eating hamburgers and get out a bit more there is more to life than being a hillbilly

[Jolly]

I don't understand why people are buying this for $70 to review or at all it when it's obviously not ready, not a good version of Civ, and stupidly monetized before even release.

It seems pretty clear that the priority with Firaxis and 2K is to make money off the Civ name, way more so than to make the best game and gaming experience for their long time fans that have already given them hundreds and hundreds of dollars for every previous and increasingly large money grab. Releasing to console up front and unnecessarily dumbing down the game and UI for inferior devices is just another way of showing that you no longer care about the PC gamers the are the reason Firaxis even exists.

You can already pre-pay for incoming DLC and xpacs and they most likely have some DLC ready to roll already. The seem to put 110% effort into milking the game for every penny they can. Too bad they don't put that kind of effort in game itself.

As long as people are willing to buy unfinished and shoddy games and call it good enough sleazy companies will keep on doing this.

I'm not even sure I want this on sale with the leader switching, era resets, forced and repetitive gamplay, bizarre interpretations of game systems, and the ridiculous price tag and knowing it's just going to snowball into the ridiculous over the years.

This all reminds me a lot of their Marvel game release where most people were like WTF is happening, how can anything be THIS bad, and then a few apologists kept claiming to like the game and ultimately it was finally accepted to be fail. 2K paid a mass of youtubers to hype up that steaming pile too. Seems like everybody that's ever presented Civ on youtube got sponsored to shill for Civ VII. You could not find a NOT sponsored video for the longest time.

Nobody ever wanted Firaxis, one of the best company for strategy games, to make a woke inspired social/dating SIM or blend that nonsense into what otherwise could've been a good strategy game. Just like most Civ players don't want and never suggested the many goofy changes they've made to Civ VII.

Producing games nobody wants and charging as much as possible for them is a really interesting business model.

It would be truly interesting to see what kind of feedback was produced during the friends and family beta for this game (or for the Marvel fiasco). Either their F&F are complete idiots, complete kiss asses, or are completely ignored. How do you QA, play these games as a dev, or get thru F&F betas without ANYBODY bringing up the many flaws in these games? It should be impossible.

[Massive]

Ages diminish the game IMO, there is a disruption of the continuity of my Civilizations. It feels more like a game mode than a core mechanic of a game.

[ScythianUA]

there is no such thing on this market as "price standard"...you can easly name it a "greed standard" and it will be more acurate represantation...there is either "good" / "ok" / "bad" developers using different price and work policies and aproaches...some may make an epic game with low-normal budget, place no drm to it and oversell it even when most people play it for free from "green market" (many of them even come to buy a copy with discount after finishing it just to say "thx for a great time" or "sorry guys im poor but i will give you some tip i can") and still have great sales and 90%+ aproval rating from audience...even when it have bugs and flaws...others may do a small game with near to no budget and still get a great success on market even with some stupid gameplay...and some gathering funds like they are going to build a giant colosus of the century, and still fail to deliver anything worthy of investing your time in...and some just repeat a "buisness scheme" time to time to gather their harvest from an IP...and this company is from last one...a lot of fans are just fed with this...
so there is no standards...everyone just do what they think is right for them...and we are free here to express our thoughts about it...so...things are as they are...

[Flash]

Originally posted by Jolly:

I don't understand why people are buying this for $70 to review or at all it when it's obviously not ready, not a good version of Civ, and stupidly monetized before even release.

It seems pretty clear that the priority with Firaxis and 2K is to make money off the Civ name, way more so than to make the best game and gaming experience for their long time fans that have already given them hundreds and hundreds of dollars for every previous and increasingly large money grab. Releasing to console up front and unnecessarily dumbing down the game and UI for inferior devices is just another way of showing that you no longer care about the PC gamers the are the reason Firaxis even exists.

...

It would be truly interesting to see what kind of feedback was produced during the friends and family beta for this game (or for the Marvel fiasco). Either their F&F are complete idiots, complete kiss asses, or are completely ignored. How do you QA, play these games as a dev, or get thru F&F betas without ANYBODY bringing up the many flaws in these games? It should be impossible.

Shh... Just because your right doesnt mean u make us feel bad ;.;

Why do people gamble? Actually this is much better off than gambling.. we hope that they (game devs) would be faithful to the community... but first time where they used a game as a test bed for players and called it a civ game.
And the truth is, your right. You usually dont present a game before 60-80% of the game is completed or atleast most of the foundation is done. Otherwise how do u know what is possible\feasible in DLCs?

Oh how I wish I could refund it. I hoped there was some salvation but Im finding more reasons every day for how much is wrong here.

[Navy~]

how about you read the reviews, or do you need special attention?

[FaeLad90]

I just finished my first run through this morning...and I couldn't do one more turn...so yeah, that alone is a no go for me.

[mikehhhh]

Originally posted by Jolly:

I don't understand why people are buying this for $70 to review or at all it when it's obviously not ready, not a good version of Civ, and stupidly monetized before even release.

It seems pretty clear that the priority with Firaxis and 2K is to make money off the Civ name, way more so than to make the best game and gaming experience for their long time fans that have already given them hundreds and hundreds of dollars for every previous and increasingly large money grab. Releasing to console up front and unnecessarily dumbing down the game and UI for inferior devices is just another way of showing that you no longer care about the PC gamers the are the reason Firaxis even exists.

You can already pre-pay for incoming DLC and xpacs and they most likely have some DLC ready to roll already. The seem to put 110% effort into milking the game for every penny they can. Too bad they don't put that kind of effort in game itself.

As long as people are willing to buy unfinished and shoddy games and call it good enough sleazy companies will keep on doing this.

I'm not even sure I want this on sale with the leader switching, era resets, forced and repetitive gamplay, bizarre interpretations of game systems, and the ridiculous price tag and knowing it's just going to snowball into the ridiculous over the years.

This all reminds me a lot of their Marvel game release where most people were like WTF is happening, how can anything be THIS bad, and then a few apologists kept claiming to like the game and ultimately it was finally accepted to be fail. 2K paid a mass of youtubers to hype up that steaming pile too. Seems like everybody that's ever presented Civ on youtube got sponsored to shill for Civ VII. You could not find a NOT sponsored video for the longest time.

Nobody ever wanted Firaxis, one of the best company for strategy games, to make a woke inspired social/dating SIM or blend that nonsense into what otherwise could've been a good strategy game. Just like most Civ players don't want and never suggested the many goofy changes they've made to Civ VII.

Producing games nobody wants and charging as much as possible for them is a really interesting business model.

It would be truly interesting to see what kind of feedback was produced during the friends and family beta for this game (or for the Marvel fiasco). Either their F&F are complete idiots, complete kiss asses, or are completely ignored. How do you QA, play these games as a dev, or get thru F&F betas without ANYBODY bringing up the many flaws in these games? It should be impossible.

I think one thing that got me and fooled me is many gaming websites and reviewer's gave Civ 7 a good rating. For example Metacritic has a 80 score for Civilization 7 from critics, but a user score of only 3.9. I realize those reviews are BS now and maybe based limited playtime or the reviewer didn't know enough about the previous versions of Civ to make a sound judgment.

I also thought most of the steam reviews I saw were just complaining about the game changes, different UI, or missing content, etc, I didn't see anything describing some of the major bugs I have encountered playing it.

So I decided to give it a try, maybe because I love Civ and have played 1 through 6 and wanted to believe it would be good. But the more I played the more I realized how awful and buggy Civ 7 is. I realize now I was fooled into buying a 1/2 finished and buggy game for full price.

I'm asking for a refund from Steam again, they rejected my first request. But how can you know in a game like Civ in less than 2 hours that things really stink?

I'm out 69 dollars, but I really feel bad for those that forked out 129 dollars for the founders edition or 99 for the deluxe edition.

[The Ludovico Technique]

Originally posted by metropolitan75002:

Originally posted by The Ludovico Technique:

We didn't play the same game.

Have you even played Civ1 to Civ4 to understand the comparison?

I have. Which makes your statement all the more baffling. The only people upset at Civ V are those who enjoyed stack o' doom.

[MONZUN]

Originally posted by Daddy Moon:

Players would have broken down if they had experienced the transition from Civ 4 to Civ 5, lol

yeah i agree. the game, whilst being unfinished and unpolished, is sooooooo much fun.. i never had that much fun with civ6.. its specacular. i've just completed my second game in civ7 and it was by far the best game i've ever had in a civilization game.. i made 40 cities, 14 above the settlement limit of 26 (it was 27 but i took that leader attribute which lowered it by 1) and still hat +900 happiness and thousands of all other resources :D soooooooooo much fun.

i just hope the devs will FULLY fix the UI, because its pretty bad. even though at this point i don't need a perfect UI anymore because i learned everything already, i still wish it was much more informative and much smoother to navigate etc. plus the resource screen is super laggy in endgame, especially when having 40 cities -.-

edit: also, here is proof (screenshot of the last turn before i won, though i could have won at turn 60-65 already, but wanted to prolong the modern age to the point where i felt like i achieved everything i wanted so i decided to end it at that point on the screenshot) the game works well already and you can not only have A LOT of fun with it but built incredible empires :D

https://imgur.com/a/taC69EJ

[DadouXIII]

The best thing about all the hate Civ 7 is receiving, is all the positive attention being given to Millennia and Humankind, which have been hated on since they were released :)

[Ashrock]

Originally posted by Daddy Moon:

I’m genuinely confused by the negative reviews surrounding Civilization 7. If we look back at the launch of Civ 5 and Civ 6, they both felt incomplete without their DLCs at release. It’s always been a part of the Civilization series that the game improves significantly through additional content over time.

Sure, the base game might not be perfect right out of the gate, but it's never been about just the initial release. Over the years, Civ 5 and 6 both became much better thanks to the DLCs. In fact, they often turn into completely different, more refined experiences once the expansions roll out. Why is it any different this time?

I believe we should give the developers some time to work on DLC and updates, as they have done with previous titles. I’ve been playing the game and enjoying it, even in its early form, and I'm optimistic about what will come next.

Edit: I can understand why someone would be disappointed with the industry's standard.

So the whole crux of this argument is wait to buy it on sale in 3 to 4 years worth of development then it'll feel like a complete game? I don't know about you, but I feel like it's a little early access or open beta phase still.

[Webrider]

It is boring, it resets at certain points moving your units it took 50 years to move into position, you can't name cities or units ... it is just bland and boring. It cost way to much and is simply a new vehicle to sell expansion packs to make it a decent game in a couple years or not. Units move to slow like I said took 50 years to get units into place only to have the era change then they are all gone moved and replaced by the system then get to become a different country. It is just total garbage system after system. The tech tree is horrible and when the era changes do you lose techs you didn't get because you can't see them anymore.