Remember this is exactly how civ 6 released.

[Sex]

Then over the next like 3-5 years they finally brought it up to snuff..

So itll eventually happen but good god I wish they'd actually finish a game!

[taomastercu]

This release was significantly worse than Civ 6. That doesn't mean they can't fix it. No Man's Sky got fixed after all and that was way worse.

[Sam]

Nope, the base design is entirely flawed so no amount of patches or DLCs can address it. Civilization is over during 2020s. During 2030s they'll make a Civ 8 and go back to proper history as this will flop.

[WeirdWizardDave]

Civ 6 first month of user reviews was 75% positive with 4600 odd positive reviews to 1200 odd negative. That's with it including a sketchy spyware or anti cheat thing apparently which caused some backlash. I suspect Civ 7 would kill for a 75% positive review ratio, but to be fair it may yet climb somewhat closer to that over the course of the month. I guess we'll see.

I still think the ages thing in 7 is going to prove a massive misstep, hopefully the devs can figure out how to patch it out or at least provide a continuous/sandbox mode.

[Esau]

Civ VI absolutely did not launch like this. It is a complete and total lie that Civilization has always had disastrous launches. Even V's barebones launch was received with plenty of critical acclaim. I genuinely am unsure if this game *can* be brought up to snuff. There are some pretty basic game concepts that are just not well expressed at all.

[WimpyTheWarrior]

Marbozir posted a 2:13 video with the data on user review scores of Civ6 and Civ7 Advanced Access. The results are NOT the same.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXDmcviXw9U

EDIT: Marbozir also spoke about concurrent player count during the launch phase; read the pinned comment and Marbozir replied to his pinned comment with a statement:

"...it [CIv7 concurrent player peak] will be below Civ 6's release peak, which was 162k (8+ years ago, back in 2016)."

[Mentally Unstable]

For all the faults that 6 had, it at least had auto-explore at release. Why the devs even considered it a good idea to remove it as part of their "streamlining" beggars belief.

Even though it is a very simple feature, it's absence underscores a much bigger issue. That this game is an unfocused mess that was rushed out. To add insult to injury, they have the gall to ask for a higher price of entry for it, including a "founder's edition".

[Astasia]

If by "exactly" you mean the complete opposite, sure. There were some vocal nitpicks about 6 when it released, but it was reviewing well right from day one, and it peaked at over twice the concurrent players 7 peaked at.

We can see on SteamDB that Civ6 had like 78% positive reviews in the first month, and 87% positive reviews in the second month.

Repeating that this is going down the same as Civ6 over and over isn't going to make it true.

[Lonetac]

ive been arguing the exact same.

Civ has a history or rough launches. Its built into its history.

Through years of meaningful community feedback, meaningful patches and meaningful DLC, civ 7 in a time will surpass the others as each has previously.

Civ is a marathon, its not about instant gratification. Give them time, take a pill, come back in 6 months. Complain about it all you want, its how it works and always will.

[taomastercu]

Originally posted by Astasia:

If by "exactly" you mean the complete opposite, sure. There were some vocal nitpicks about 6 when it released, but it was reviewing well right from day one, and it peaked at over twice the concurrent players 7 peaked at.

We can see on SteamDB that Civ6 had like 78% positive reviews in the first month, and 87% positive reviews in the second month.

Repeating that this is going down the same as Civ6 over and over isn't going to make it true.

The thing is that people posting this just saw that stupid meme about how all civs have drama on launch or they are going on "vibes", they never actually checked the factual data.

[xycotta]

I was thinking it was more like BE personally

[Drusain]

I don't remember Civ6 having major issues on release. Which was a massive improvement on Civ5 which had ridiculous lack of hammer production and diplo complaints (pact of secrecy, lol)

[Padds]

civ 6 released in 2016 to a 162k peak player count and hovered between 40-90k peak for the last 4 years

civ 7 released to a peak of 80 odd k? and there are twice the steam accounts today as there were when 6 launched so...

im, not saying its dead or in danger civ games are a long journey. but that is no mater how you spin some very disappointing numbers for civ

its the first mainline civ game ever i haven't purchased day one. and there's a lot of that going round,

[taomastercu]

Originally posted by Padds:

civ 6 released in 2016 to a 162k peak player count and hovered between 40-90k peak for the last 4 years

civ 7 released to a peak of 80 odd k? and there are twice the steam accounts today as there were when 6 launched so...

im, not saying its dead or in danger civ games are a long journey. but that is no mater how you spin some very disappointing numbers for civ

its the first mainline civ game ever i haven't purchased day one. and there's a lot of that going round,

Again, Steam player counts for every single game ever, not only at launch but from then onward, peak on the weekend. Civ 6 launched on a weekend and didn't have a 5 day pre launch, nor did it launch simultaneously on every console including Switch.

Why do people refuse to simply wait till the upcoming Monday when we'll actually know how the game is doing?

[Esau]

Originally posted by taomastercu:

Originally posted by Padds:

civ 6 released in 2016 to a 162k peak player count and hovered between 40-90k peak for the last 4 years

civ 7 released to a peak of 80 odd k? and there are twice the steam accounts today as there were when 6 launched so...

im, not saying its dead or in danger civ games are a long journey. but that is no mater how you spin some very disappointing numbers for civ

its the first mainline civ game ever i haven't purchased day one. and there's a lot of that going round,

Again, Steam player counts for every single game ever, not only at launch but from then onward, peak on the weekend. Civ 6 launched on a weekend and didn't have a 5 day pre launch, nor did it launch simultaneously on every console including Switch.

Why do people refuse to simply wait till the upcoming Monday when we'll actually know how the game is doing?

Probably because you are just going to shift the goalposts again when it fails miserably.

[Astasia]

Originally posted by taomastercu:

Again, Steam player counts for every single game ever, not only at launch but from then onward, peak on the weekend. Civ 6 launched on a weekend and didn't have a 5 day pre launch, nor did it launch simultaneously on every console including Switch.

Why do people refuse to simply wait till the upcoming Monday when we'll actually know how the game is doing?

We have numbers for last weekend, on Thursday the game hit 63k, on Friday it hit 58k, and on Saturday it hit 66k then dropped from there. Why would you think next weekend would be significantly different? It was 80k today, it will probably drop down to like 60k by Friday and then might climb back up to 70k for the weekend.

Ya having a prelaunch wasn't good for their numbers, that's their fault for trying to skim some extra money off preorder victims. That also gave ample time for people to consider reviews and avoid impulse buying the game. The devs shot themselves in the foot twice over here, that's not a "defense" of the game. The number of masochists trying to play this on a console are likely an extremely tiny minority, I don't think it's even worth considering other platforms here, that's not where the playerbase is and that's not how these games are played.