Civ 7 Needs a future age.

[WiggyWoz]

That's one thing that's always missing in Civ Games. Where are the rail guns/rail gun tanks/battleships, high energy weapons "lasers", drone swarms, mini nukes, mechanized soldiers, human implants, nano technology? How can modern age be something that's not so modern anymore?

[katzenkrimis]

Your Supreme Commander Age will come later.

In the form of a major expansion.

Not DLC.

[TREXINATUX]

After the modern age is space age. Yes? Haven't played the game yet but, that is the current age we sapiens are currently in yes? I could foresee that they (Firaxis/2K) would want to exclude current real world factions because of political avarice centered around our highly polarized political and propagandized media ATM.

[Konzi]

They confirmed in the modern age developer live stream there will be more ages in the future. Wether they're locked behind DLC idk,but they did that for most previous civ games so not unlikely

dlc or not, new ages are confirmed eventually. I don't mind the idea of adding them later. Take the time to get the age mechanic working properly. I will have a problem if they dlc gate it, which is unfortunately likely. I like the ages mechanic, a lot of the hate that comes towards it is understandable, it's a huge change for a civ game, and the developers haven't done great at communicating (ie for cultural through lines for certain civs, they gave really bad examples of how they work early on, but when more civs got revealed, they changed it to make more sense and then just never announced that they did that), but locking ages behind dlc would be out right scummy

[Konzi]

that and it's the classic Civ fan moment of "It isn't Civ 4 so it's bad", which will exist for every future civ game

[Steve]

Originally posted by Konzi:

They confirmed in the modern age developer live stream there will be more ages in the future. Wether they're locked behind DLC idk,but they did that for most previous civ games so not unlikely

dlc or not, new ages are confirmed eventually. I don't mind the idea of adding them later. Take the time to get the age mechanic working properly. I will have a problem if they dlc gate it, which is unfortunately likely. I like the ages mechanic, a lot of the hate that comes towards it is understandable, it's a huge change for a civ game, and the developers haven't done great at communicating (ie for cultural through lines for certain civs, they gave really bad examples of how they work early on, but when more civs got revealed, they changed it to make more sense and then just never announced that they did that), but locking ages behind dlc would be out right scummy

Here's my thing:

Why not just put in a toggle? Those that want Switch-A-Civ™ (whoever they are) can have it, and the rest of us that just wanna play a normal game of Civ can do that too.

That, to me, is the elegant solution. What do you think?

[lmr]

Originally posted by Steve:

Originally posted by Konzi:

They confirmed in the modern age developer live stream there will be more ages in the future. Wether they're locked behind DLC idk,but they did that for most previous civ games so not unlikely

dlc or not, new ages are confirmed eventually. I don't mind the idea of adding them later. Take the time to get the age mechanic working properly. I will have a problem if they dlc gate it, which is unfortunately likely. I like the ages mechanic, a lot of the hate that comes towards it is understandable, it's a huge change for a civ game, and the developers haven't done great at communicating (ie for cultural through lines for certain civs, they gave really bad examples of how they work early on, but when more civs got revealed, they changed it to make more sense and then just never announced that they did that), but locking ages behind dlc would be out right scummy

Here's my thing:

Why not just put in a toggle? Those that want Switch-A-Civ™ (whoever they are) can have it, and the rest of us that just wanna play a normal game of Civ can do that too.

That, to me, is the elegant solution. What do you think?

They would have to substantially rebuild the game to make the Ages feature toggleable. This has been explained to you in this forum several times, so idk why you keep acting like it's a realistic request unless you're just trolling.

[Steve]

Originally posted by lmr:

Originally posted by Steve:

Here's my thing:

Why not just put in a toggle? Those that want Switch-A-Civ™ (whoever they are) can have it, and the rest of us that just wanna play a normal game of Civ can do that too.

That, to me, is the elegant solution. What do you think?

They would have to substantially rebuild the game to make the Ages feature toggleable. This has been explained to you in this forum several times, so idk why you keep acting like it's a realistic request unless you're just trolling.

Calm down. There's no need to sound arrogant.

No one asked for this change. Why force it on a playerbase that's been pretty loyal through a lot of missteps over the past decade? Doesn't make sense.

[lmr]

Originally posted by Steve:

Originally posted by lmr:

They would have to substantially rebuild the game to make the Ages feature toggleable. This has been explained to you in this forum several times, so idk why you keep acting like it's a realistic request unless you're just trolling.

Calm down. There's no need to sound arrogant.

No one asked for this change. Why force it on a playerbase that's been pretty loyal through a lot of missteps over the past decade? Doesn't make sense.

I am asking for this change, now. There, your argument has been invalidated. Maybe you can stop posting about it in literally every single discussion thread on this forum.

[Targonis]

Originally posted by Konzi:

that and it's the classic Civ fan moment of "It isn't Civ 4 so it's bad", which will exist for every future civ game

That's not the issue at hand. If after Civ 5 there was the, "next game will be even more fleshed out", with AI being improved, then we would get there eventually. Civ 1-4 was about continual improvements to the series. Civ 5 base game was very bland, to the point I never got the expansions, I just didn't feel enough potential was there.

I found Civ 6 to add a fair bit after 5, still with AI that was lacking, but the overall structure was an improvement in my opinion. Civ 7 I am giving a chance to see if it further fleshes out the overall game beyond what 6 had. The key is, is the series going to evolve, or will it just mutate into something that doesn't feel like Civilization? The idea of being forced to pick a new civilization with each age, even if you win the challenge to end an age feels VERY wrong, because then, no civilization survives the test of time, unless you pick one of a handful that survived in the real world. We won't be able to take Babylon from start to end, because we won't get the option.

Note that Leonard Nimoy doing the voices for new science advances was a huge boost for Civ 4 of course, and nothing could beat that, just from the standpoint of those who are old enough to really appreciate that.

[Steve]

Originally posted by lmr:

Originally posted by Steve:

Calm down. There's no need to sound arrogant.

No one asked for this change. Why force it on a playerbase that's been pretty loyal through a lot of missteps over the past decade? Doesn't make sense.

I am asking for this change, now. There, your argument has been invalidated. Maybe you can stop posting about it in literally every single discussion thread on this forum.

Okay. Why are you asking for it? (And why is this such a point of contention? There really is no need to be so rude and dismissive. If you want an actual conversation on the topic, please adjust this attitude. If not, just keep on being rude and I simply won't reply to you anymore. Thanks in advance!)

[Oaks]

Originally posted by Steve:

Originally posted by lmr:

I am asking for this change, now. There, your argument has been invalidated. Maybe you can stop posting about it in literally every single discussion thread on this forum.

Okay. Why are you asking for it? (And why is this such a point of contention? There really is no need to be so rude and dismissive. If you want an actual conversation on the topic, please adjust this attitude. If not, just keep on being rude and I simply won't reply to you anymore. Thanks in advance!)

I think that reaction is because you come across as pretty abrasive.

[lmr]

Originally posted by Oaks:

Originally posted by Steve:

Okay. Why are you asking for it? (And why is this such a point of contention? There really is no need to be so rude and dismissive. If you want an actual conversation on the topic, please adjust this attitude. If not, just keep on being rude and I simply won't reply to you anymore. Thanks in advance!)

I think that reaction is because you come across as pretty abrasive.

exactly that.

[Steve]

Originally posted by Oaks:

Originally posted by Steve:

Okay. Why are you asking for it? (And why is this such a point of contention? There really is no need to be so rude and dismissive. If you want an actual conversation on the topic, please adjust this attitude. If not, just keep on being rude and I simply won't reply to you anymore. Thanks in advance!)

I think that reaction is because you come across as pretty abrasive.

I can't control everyone's reaction. All I know is I haven't insulted anyone, and will continue to avoid doing that. That, to me, is pretty abrasive.

But we're still back to the question at hand. Why make such a drastic change that no one's seriously asked for?

[lmr]

Originally posted by Steve:

Originally posted by Oaks:

I think that reaction is because you come across as pretty abrasive.

I can't control everyone's reaction. All I know is I haven't insulted anyone, and will continue to avoid doing that. That, to me, is pretty abrasive.

But we're still back to the question at hand. Why make such a drastic change that no one's seriously asked for?

Why do you continue asking for a toggle for the Ages feature, when that is not possible if the game is going to release on Feb 6th?

[Steve]

Originally posted by lmr:

Originally posted by Steve:

I can't control everyone's reaction. All I know is I haven't insulted anyone, and will continue to avoid doing that. That, to me, is pretty abrasive.

But we're still back to the question at hand. Why make such a drastic change that no one's seriously asked for?

Why do you continue asking for a toggle for the Ages feature, when that is not possible if the game is going to release on Feb 6th?

Because I never thought I'd have to, tbh. I'm still a little skeptical that the game would ship without a reversion option, but we'll see.

Which brings me back to my question: Why make such a drastic change that no one's seriously asked for?