Looking for honest opinion

[ShouteN]

Is the game really deserving of mixed reviews? I’m a longtime fan of strategy games, including Civilization. I’ve played almost all of the most famous strategy games, from RTS to grand strategy. Will I enjoy this game?

[J0NATR0Nv2]

I found myself getting frustrated a lot. There's a lot of the mechanics are obscure. Not to mention you can't even use nukes. The game ends after Operation Ivy is researched and you can't even continue playing "One more turn".

[Otto von Waffles]

The game needs more time for developers to respond to community feedback. There isn't much new content that wasn't original to competing titles like Ara History Untold and Humankind. They've also stripped out or simplified game sub-systems that didn't need simplification or removal. The UI is not as helpful or intuitive as previous titles, but it hasn't been a deal breaker yet. It feels more like a Civ 6.5 than a Civ 7, I feel like the community deserves better.

[of Anwyl]

Publicado originalmente por Chess_Forever:

I feel like I'm in the twilight zone. The game has a rating and a bunch of comments -- but on my monitor it appears that it hasn't been released to Steam yet.

What gives?

Only if you pay the super special deluxe moneygrab expansion fee do you get early access.

[Roston]

Publicado originalmente por R.E.D:

If you are a detailed planner and want to have hours of planning your empire the way you want and play the same empire for a long time and see it develop this game will be a jarring experience. Its just to simplified and quick and the era switching is just like starting mostly a new game with your empire a few hundred years in the future, sure its kind of the same empire, but a lot of things reset on the game board to even things out.

If you are a person that like quick games, multiplayer and rts strategy games, this game will have what you need.

I like both genres, I just did not play CIV for the second one, I have lots of other games for that. Which means I lost a grand strategy game and gained another fast rts like strategy game, This is why a lot of people are upset, its pretty much a new gameplay loop.

Bofore they had the same main gameplay loop with different changes for 6 versions, now is simply a different game, way more casual.

Its most likely be a good faster game at some point, but a sandbox grand strategy, civ 7 is not.

I and many other will most likely play it, I think it is just not worth the money right now with the features they have and all the DLC shenanigans. If you have money to spare buy the regular version on some discount sale and try it. I might in a month or so. Then play it for what it is, a casual scenario based civ.

I personally wont pay 138$ for that kind of experience, so refunded my founders edition.

Yeah this is it, this feels like a quick game/rts game style more and more in the last two iterations. Hell, id bring up how I seen this coming since revolutions but I think most people forgot those games.

[NH Ghost1113]

Oh absolutely, I currently have an army setup in my opponent's capital and cannot raze it or capture it. reloading does not help This is just one of many issues with the game. This game probably needed to be delayed anywhere from 3 months to a year before it would be complete in my opinion. Even talking to people I know that don't often play 4x games are baffled by the missing QOL features.

They'll get the game fixed up and then all will be good.

[taomastercu]

Publicado originalmente por NH Ghost1113:

Oh absolutely, I currently have an army setup in my opponent's capital and cannot raze it or capture it. reloading does not help This is just one of many issues with the game. This game probably needed to be delayed anywhere from 3 months to a year before it would be complete in my opinion. Even talking to people I know that don't often play 4x games are baffled by the missing QOL features.

They'll get the game fixed up and then all will be good.

You need to make sure to capture all walls and fortified districts not just the city center I think? Although there may be bugs even if you do all that. But many people who had this issue just hadn't realized they had missed something.

[(Rúna)]

Publicado originalmente por Steve:

The end-of-era crisis management system -- basically, it doesn't matter how well you do in a given era anymore; you're going to have to deal with an artificially-created problem just for the sake of having something to do near the end of an era..

Publicado originalmente por Steve:

Now it doesn't matter how well I do. A crisis is going to happen, because that's the way the game is designed now. I didn't need or want artificial busywork at the end of an era.

Steve, I see you don't own the game, so you might not have realised this, but you can turn the crisis situation off.

There is an setting for the crisis in the create game options; you simply untick the box, and there is no longer a crisis at the end of an age. Theres a tool tip for it and everything.

[Steve]

Publicado originalmente por (Rúna):

Publicado originalmente por Steve:

The end-of-era crisis management system -- basically, it doesn't matter how well you do in a given era anymore; you're going to have to deal with an artificially-created problem just for the sake of having something to do near the end of an era..

Publicado originalmente por Steve:

Now it doesn't matter how well I do. A crisis is going to happen, because that's the way the game is designed now. I didn't need or want artificial busywork at the end of an era.

Steve, I see you don't own the game, so you might not have realised this, but you can turn the crisis situation off.

There is an setting for the crisis in the create game options; you simply untick the box, and there is no longer a crisis at the end of an age. Theres a tool tip for it and everything.

That's good news! I played it just under two hours and decided to refund, so I probably didn't get the time to dig into all that.

Is there a toggle for the Switch-A-Civ gimmick?

[micdy]

The game is ton of fun, most complain come from the UI ,

[Videogame Jukebox]

Won't find it here. Most are here to gaslight you and are not even interested in the game.

[Mountain Man]

Publicado originalmente por Steve:

Publicado originalmente por Mountain Man:

I can already play Civilization IV whenever I want, so, no, I wouldn't buy a simple "remaster" unless it contained significant new features.

Fair enough, but I thought BTS was peak gameplay for the series, so I would. For me, it's the gameplay, and less about what's "new" or "different".

If same is good, then more of the same is better, for us types. Ain't nothing wrong with that, yeah?

Obviously Sid Meier disagrees, and you really can't argue with his success.

[taomastercu]

Publicado originalmente por Mountain Man:

Publicado originalmente por Steve:

Fair enough, but I thought BTS was peak gameplay for the series, so I would. For me, it's the gameplay, and less about what's "new" or "different".

If same is good, then more of the same is better, for us types. Ain't nothing wrong with that, yeah?

Obviously Sid Meier disagrees, and you really can't argue with his success.

You know Sid doesn't really get involved in development these days right?

[DogRuleCatDrool]

Look at the civilization website and read the different game guides or look at some of the livesteams that they did on the civilization channel. Those go over everything about Civ switching, commanders, story events etc. etc. If you do research on the game and think that all the ideas for changes in Civ 7 are awful, like for example you hate the idea of Civ swapping, than you'll hate the game. If you think that they are great ideas or at least worth a try, then you'll probably love the game.

In my opinion, despite the minor problems (yes I just said minor there is nothing that destroys the game experience), the game is the best Civ yet. The ages keep the game fresh, the commanders are soooo much better than the old army systems, and the AI is a lot better.

Basically, I would recommend the game, as long as you know what changed from other Civ games.

[Mountain Man]

Publicado originalmente por Roston:

Hell, id bring up how I seen this coming since revolutions but I think most people forgot those games.

I really liked Civilization Revolution on the Nintendo DS. It was perfect for that platform.

[iheartdaikaiju]

Publicado originalmente por DogRuleCatDrool:

Yes I just said minor there is nothing that destroys the game experience

I can't agree with that. Lack of quick combat and quick move and forcing full graphics, and a computer that takes a long time between turns even for civ (and that is saying a lot), can make the game unplayable for some players even if it isn't game ruining for you. At the very least it is something we need to make people aware of so they can go into this eyes wide open. There are players out there that can get a kick out of watching the little soldiers march across the battlefield, and then there are those of us that have disabilities that make us forget everything we were trying to keep track of before the game responds.

I will gladly agree that the sort of player that would prioritize responsive gameplay over beautiful graphics, especially in a turn based board game, are probably less than 1 in 5 players, and that the game is playable and enjoyable for most people if they know what they are getting into.

But I can also say that the majority of the vague "the UI is bad" complaints or even "the UI is buggy", these people are complaining about the unresponsiveness which is a major issue that should be addressed quickly, and if people go in unaware, those "the UI is bad" complaints are just going to keep coming.