The End Of An Era, And A Franchise

[taomastercu]

Ding dong the king is dead. Or is Civ 7 the witch?

We are finally at the point where we can say that even if you consider console numbers Civ 7 was a major flop.

It appears, though things could change, that civ 7 will not break 100k concurrent users, probably due to the advanced access split. But even if we pretended that the advanced access players and the regular release players are all totally separate people and added their numbers up we wouldn't see the peak that Civ 6 reached in late 2016. And even if you consider console players that still makes the game a dud.

Reviews are holding steady at 51%. Reviews on console are as bad or worse and also trending down.

The devs of Civ 7 made many major bad decisions. Worst of all of course is rejecting the use of nested tooltips. They hardcore strategy nerds and streamers would have forgiven everything if not for that, even if the casuals didn't care. I won't dig into all the other stuff since it has been argued to death, except to say that people whining about Tubman or Amina instead of actual gameplay and UI issues are losers. Grow up.

Like many long time Civ players and strategy nerds I am devastated.

RIP Sid Meier's Civilization (1991-2025)

[The Ludovico Technique]

Originally posted by Xenomorph Kitty:

What's funny is that Beyond Earth had higher peak players. It's older, sure, but has about the same amount of reviews as Civ7 yet has higher rating.

And Beyond Earth was really awful as well. That's kinda sad that Civ VII can't even match a spinoff such as BE. The amount of cope here is astounding.

[martymar82]

Yes uninstalled this steaming piece of garbage. It could be good if they just changed the core game mechanics and basically made a totally different game. Like remove the era and milestone and allow you to play like a civ from start to finnish...

[Deadlylag]

The Civ Franchise has been going downhill since 5. 4 was the last great civ game. I own all and beat all civ games except 7. 6 was a real disappointment. Didn't think it could have gotten worse and here we are.

[PhalseDemeise]

this ship is sunk, one might even say beached

[Skull]

K den

[thumper]

I'm not buying until they at-least add England. Not being in the base game feels like they're making some kind of statement and it's put a sour taste in my mouth.

The Civ franchise really needed a complete overhaul to remind everyone that every other similar 4X game is just an imitation, but they decided to play it safe and release a slightly altered version of the last game. Everything I've seen of Civ 7 that's 'new' could have realistically been added to 6 in DLC or a major update and called it Civilization 6.2.

They're basically selling the 'concept of a game' and just refreshing their DLC platform for everyone to buy features that should have been in the base game, again. At this point the devs are just glorified modders without the creativity of a modding community.

[thrr]

Originally posted by thumper:

I'm not buying until they at-least add England. Not being in the base game feels like they're making some kind of statement and it's put a sour taste in my mouth.

The Civ franchise really needed a complete overhaul to remind everyone that every other similar 4X game is just an imitation, but they decided to play it safe and release a slightly altered version of the last game. Everything I've seen of Civ 7 that's 'new' could have realistically been added to 6 in DLC or a major update and called it Civilization 6.2.

They're basically selling the 'concept of a game' and just refreshing their DLC platform for everyone to buy features that should have been in the base game, again. At this point the devs are just glorified modders without the creativity of a modding community.

Slightly modified version of Civ 6 ?!? What???

Civ 7 is by far, by far, the most radically changed version of the game, so much indeed, that many here (myself included) don't really think it belongs in the Civ series at all, and that it should have been introduced as a derivative or spin-off title (as such I am sure it would have been welcomed by many more)

And I am not talking about the production quality issues at launch (which is fair to assume will be addressed over the next few weeks/months/years).

I am talking about:

* The infamous "ages system" with its civ-switching and progress-resetting shenanigans.

* The ubiquitous and pervasive "quest system", which hand-holds e v e r y s i n g l e "decision" in the game. OMG, this is probably worse than the 3 ages thing!

[tmaura]

well i have to disagree with your title i believe the franchise will continue. i am really disappointed with this game in it's current form though. for me they have strayed too far from some key components. i want to start and finish as the nation i choose . i want the option to rename cities . why is there a cap on starting cities it should be optional. why the hell at the end of an era do so may things reset WTF where did my units go. why did the war end . what happened to my trade routes. my cities are not cities any more . no huge maps and atomic era or just one more turn. the game feels like it's in ALPHA to be honest. i don't care about the fruity leader selection but give us back the historical ones first . it will be interesting to see how the devs react to these poor reviews .

[Qoojo]

5, 6, 7 all ended the franchise. Eventually you will get it right.