This seems really bad...

[Boppah]

I do not want this game to fail, Civ is by far my favorite series, I have put thousands of hours in Civ games, and I am posting this to raise concerns about Civ 7. IK a lot of other people are doing this as well, the more voices being heard the better. I want this series to thrive. but it needs to change, a lot, before release or try to change as it goes, but these issues a MAJOR, to the core of the game.

-Stealing from Humankind (why?????)
-The God Awful Jarring Culture transitions between ages
-Literally goes against Civ features at it's core
-Influence System
-I don't hate this system but c'mon man literally stealing
-Those Terrible looking models lookin at each other across the screen, God these models look so bad, how did we revert from civ 6's models?

-Denuvo
-This literally kills the game for me, I will never install this crap on my pc

[Cirrus]

Originally posted by Boppah:

I do not want this game to fail, Civ is by far my favorite series, I have put thousands of hours in Civ games, and I am posting this to raise concerns about Civ 7. IK a lot of other people are doing this as well, the more voices being heard the better. I want this series to thrive. but it needs to change, a lot, before release or try to change as it goes, but these issues a MAJOR, to the core of the game.

-Stealing from Humankind (why?????)
-The God Awful Jarring Culture transitions between ages
-Literally goes against Civ features at it's core
-Influence System
-I don't hate this system but c'mon man literally stealing
-Those Terrible looking models lookin at each other across the screen, God these models look so bad, how did we revert from civ 6's models?

-Denuvo
-This literally kills the game for me, I will never install this crap on my pc

Again much of false statements.
Civ is not stealing anything from humankind. Ideas were presented inside firaxis before humankind was introduced to public.

Denuvo anti-tamper is not installable program. So no worry you do not need to install any denuvo crap.

Otherwise for few points you are preaching to choir here. 5 months before release no core system will change. All is done. Next 5 months is testing and polishing only.

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by Boppah:

I do not want this game to fail, Civ is by far my favorite series, I have put thousands of hours in Civ games, and I am posting this to raise concerns about Civ 7. IK a lot of other people are doing this as well, the more voices being heard the better. I want this series to thrive. but it needs to change, a lot, before release or try to change as it goes, but these issues a MAJOR, to the core of the game.

-Stealing from Humankind (why?????)
-The God Awful Jarring Culture transitions between ages
-Literally goes against Civ features at it's core
-Influence System
-I don't hate this system but c'mon man literally stealing
-Those Terrible looking models lookin at each other across the screen, God these models look so bad, how did we revert from civ 6's models?

-Denuvo
-This literally kills the game for me, I will never install this crap on my pc

I don't really care if this game fails or not as I only have time invested in it and am not a shareholder in any capacity. It's not like there are no other 4X games to play and we'll always have Civ (enter the number of your favourite here). Ara may very well be a good alternative for a lot of folks.

Stealing from Humankind - sorry but if you're going to start hurling around the stealing slur, Humankind stole from Civ first. Many, many 4X games owe something to Civ and the original MOO and so there's not really a valid complaint here. Were they actually stealing for real, Amplitude would have already initiated legal action.

Godawful Jarring Culture transitions - yes, it's not my favourite feature either and I'm a bit baffled why they chose to adopt this (that's how I would categorise this behaviour). However, from what I've read so far, it's nowhere near as absurd as it is in Humankind. Yes, the Egypt - Mongolia path is absurd to say the least but you need to work to make this an actual possibility in your game.

Done properly, there's no reason why it can't be a good feature in Civ. Civ has also received new features during its long lifetime which some would argue were not core features. Religion was not in earlier civs foir example and neither were city states, districts or 1UPT but now they are core features.

Denuvo - well, it's not an issue for me but again, it's a rather controversial addition and it absolutely WILL turn away customers in very high figures. They must think they'll save more in the long run. I don't agree - personally, I think the culture shifting was already a bridge too far for one title but again, I don't have any stakes or shares in the title.

I am waiting to hear more from the actual devel;opers rather than listening to forum drama before I make my mind up about this. I'd like to play a new Civ game but I'm in no hurry. There are just too many good games available now for me to care about this anymore. If it all goes belly-up, I won't miss it.

[parent child bowl]

Originally posted by The Doctor:

Done properly, there's no reason why it can't be a good feature in Civ. Civ has also received new features during its long lifetime which some would argue were not core features. Religion was not in earlier civs foir example and neither were city states, districts or 1UPT but now they are core features.

Those new features didn't change the very core of the game which is "building a civilization to stand the test of time". Civilization 7 doesn't have that core anymore because it changes your Civilization up to two times in a game. Then there's also how age transitions work that essentially soft catch up all the civs that aren't getting Thanos snapped.

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by parent child bowl:

Originally posted by The Doctor:

Done properly, there's no reason why it can't be a good feature in Civ. Civ has also received new features during its long lifetime which some would argue were not core features. Religion was not in earlier civs foir example and neither were city states, districts or 1UPT but now they are core features.

Those new features didn't change the very core of the game which is "building a civilization to stand the test of time". Civilization 7 doesn't have that core anymore because it changes your Civilization up to two times in a game. Then there's also how age transitions work that essentially soft catch up all the civs that aren't getting Thanos snapped.

It's not a total wipe when you move to a new age as far as I understand it so you could still be building a civ to last the test of time but rather, it is not one continuous culture.

Don't get me wrong, I am somewhat perpelexed by this new direction as I was with 1UPT but I'm waiting for more information and to see how it all plays out in the long term. I am open to something new this time around as it IS Civ 7 and apart from Civs we haven't had before, there's not much left that's new and exciting to add to Civ VI at the end of its life. But it's far from being the only change: if the military game is better this time around, I'll be a bit happier with it too.

[Docsis]

I personally look forward to this change. I played Civ 1 (on an Amiga 500!!) and every Civ since. When you really think about them, they all seem pretty much the same overall. They are all basically the same thing in a different wrapper.
Civ 7 looks like they are FINALLY changing it up enough to really make it feel like a NEW game. I can't wait......

[ParabolaWaVe]

I truly don't know how old players of the franchise can still defend the changes that are being introduced, specially since its more than clear, thanks to developer updates, that these changes dramatically cut crucial elements from the game, starting with workers. I mean, without workers, what type of units will remain? Only military?

Its safer to assume that, beyond the brand, its not even a "Civilization" game anymore... just another 4X like others which came and went. Or a spinoff in disguise.

Now, I agree that Civ VI has issues, and is a tedious game at times. But here we are, "fixing" the entire decades old formula, just because of problems introduced in the latest version and specific from it. In fact, we're doubling down on some of the same mistakes from 6. At this point, "Humankind" could very well be the superior game after VII releases.

[Sevrin]

Civ failed as soon as firaxis partnered with 2k

[Miroku Tsukino]

honestly i just want one thing and its base units reflect their culture. I dont want to see japan have basic units that are the same as germany with basic units.

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by ParabolaWaVe:

I truly don't know how old players of the franchise can still defend the changes that are being introduced, specially since its more than clear, thanks to developer updates, that these changes dramatically cut crucial elements from the game, starting with workers. I mean, without workers, what type of units will remain? Only military?

Its safer to assume that, beyond the brand, its not even a "Civilization" game anymore... just another 4X like others which came and went. Or a spinoff in disguise.

Now, I agree that Civ VI has issues, and is a tedious game at times. But here we are, "fixing" the entire decades old formula, just because of problems introduced in the latest version and specific from it. In fact, we're doubling down on some of the same mistakes from 6. At this point, "Humankind" could very well be the superior game after VII releases.

First, we're not a monolith. If you've been around since Civ 1 or 2, you're already very well used to some pretty spectacular changes to the game and unless you're one of those who found Civ V or VI a bridge too far as many did, you've learned to appreciate the new game. Now that's not to say this isn't THE single most controversial change the franchise has seen to date but Civ V with the change from squares to hexes and 1UPT was a pretty seismic shift away from earlier games in its day too. I could argue that it stopped being a Civ game back in V if not being Civ anymore is a real thing.

I also very much doubt Humankind will be seen as the better game after Civ 7 launches either. It's not like the folks who swear off Civ for going down the Humankind route are going to play Humankind instead.

I don't see this so much as being inspired by Humankind so much as being inspired by Old World and the potential it has going down the road. At the moment, there is only Old World, a game focused on one period of history and exclusively on the Med civs - no Indian, Chinese or Central American civilizations.

However, should the Old World team decide to make a Middle World game which covers the Medieval and Renaissance eras, and maybe a third title called New World with the civs we all know today (USA, China, Germany, Italy, the UK, etc, etc, etc), people will call for the developers to allow us to bring our old save into the new game. That doesn't sound like it would be feasible to me but there would be folks in the community who WOULD want to be able to do that and I might be one of them.

So, it seems to me that Civ might be getting ahead of the curve here and doing an Old World + Middle World + New World game instead - three distinctly different eras which you can take your earlier civ forward to a new incarnation.

Or maybe all that above that's just a load of old bollocks. It's plainly obvious that Humankind has inspired the team here but it's already different from Humankind in the sense that you can't just go from Egyptian to Mongolia - you have to do the work to achieve that beyond just picking a culture from one of many regardless of geography. I'm willing to wait and see what they do with this new game. I don't support it yet but I'm open to a change IF it's done in a way that makes sense to me and I think the Old, Middle and New Worlds idea expressed above would appeal to me.

[ParabolaWaVe]

No, 5 is pretty much a Civ game through and through. Even 6 still adheres to the formula, despite a couple of big deviations. Not what we're discussing here.

What we need to accept is, this is another game altogether. We're not truly talking about big changes or dramatic modifications this time. They replaced entire systems and this is an entirely different game as a result. People who were waiting for years for the next "Civ game" to come out... well, this isn't it. Only element in common with the others is the name. That's all. Even the fundamental premise of the game is different.

They still talk about having remade just a 33%, the rest being either improved or untouched... does somebody out there still believes those figures, after what the company itself has revealed in detail?

But maybe the optimists are right. Maybe the game will be good on release, at least? Its always possible... but even if they manage to pull that rabbit out of a hat, I personally find very displeasing that Firaxis went for the name of "Civilization VII", instead of creating an entirely new IP or a spinoff with this game, as the concepts and gameplay have little in common with the older titles. Save for having somewhat historical "ages" and being a turn based 4X.

In fact, the original purpose of some of these ideas being copied from other 4X games, was to prevent those games from becoming Civilization clones. That speak volumes about how radically Firaxis is moving this design away from its roots by adopting them.

[Cirrus]

Originally posted by Sevrin:

Civ failed as soon as firaxis partnered with 2k

Civ 6 with 2k was most successful civilization ever. So no.

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by ParabolaWaVe:

No, 5 is pretty much a Civ game through and through. Even 6 still adheres to the formula, despite a couple of big deviations. Not what we're discussing here.

What we need to accept is, this is another game altogether. We're not truly talking about big changes or dramatic modifications this time. They replaced entire systems and this is an entirely different game as a result. People who were waiting for years for the next "Civ game" to come out... well, this isn't it. Only element in common with the others is the name. That's all. Even the fundamental premise of the game is different.

They still talk about having remade just a 33%, the rest being either improved or untouched... does somebody out there still believes those figures, after what the company itself has revealed in detail?

But maybe the optimists are right. Maybe the game will be good on release, at least? Its always possible... but even if they manage to pull that rabbit out of a hat, I personally find very displeasing that Firaxis went for the name of "Civilization VII", instead of creating an entirely new IP or a spinoff with this game, as the concepts and gameplay have little in common with the older titles. Save for having somewhat historical "ages" and being a turn based 4X.

In fact, the original purpose of some of these ideas being copied from other 4X games, was to prevent those games from becoming Civilization clones. That speak volumes about how radically Firaxis is moving this design away from its roots by adopting them.

For some people, either Civ V or Civ VI are not Civ games either and they're waiting for Civ to get back to being a proper Civ again. Some of them might even welcome this new direction. Gamers react that way when they feel disenfranchised by some departures from the traditional format, that's all.

I accept that this is a radical change from what went before but it's not a deal-breaker for me yet as the new system seems to be an improvement on the Humankind system. Many Civ folks were on board with the culture shifting but found the total lack of connection between them too jarring. Now, Pharaonic Egypt - Mongolia doesn't sit well with me either BUT, unlike Humankind, you need to put in the work to make that happen - you need to make your Egypt become nomadic horse tribes. This never happened but calling the new Egypt Mongolia is just stupid on every level. But I can look past the 'name' for now as long as it makes some sense.

I wouldn't worry about the game and the developers getting hammered on release day and the weeks that follow. It's going to get review bombed anjd I suspect will be Mostly Negative at some point on day 1 until they are countered somewhat by the folks who got to play the game early. After all, they are already invested in the new game so I expect user reviews may end up Mixed at best at the end of Day 1. In the long term, particularly by the time the first proper expansion rolls out, most of the drama will be over and it will probably go on to be successful for the remainder of its life just like Civ V and VI did. Or maybe it won't this time. Maybe this really is too much. We'll see.

As for the 33-33-33 rule. I think that's just a guideline and not an accurate metric. Yes, more seems to have gone this time around but in what proportion to the existing features improved (city states) and the features that stay the same, I wouldn't venture to guess and I don't really care either. The new culture shifting system overshadows absolutely everything else and there's so little known about the full game that it's hard to make an assessment. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a good LATE game this time around. Maybe it will be better, maybe it won't - I don't know. I wouldn't say I'm optimistic either but I will need to know a lot more before deciding that.

[claudemac24hrs]

Originally posted by Boppah:

I do not want this game to fail, Civ is by far my favorite series, I have put thousands of hours in Civ games, and I am posting this to raise concerns about Civ 7. IK a lot of other people are doing this as well, the more voices being heard the better. I want this series to thrive. but it needs to change, a lot, before release or try to change as it goes, but these issues a MAJOR, to the core of the game.

-Stealing from Humankind (why?????)
-The God Awful Jarring Culture transitions between ages
-Literally goes against Civ features at it's core
-Influence System
-I don't hate this system but c'mon man literally stealing
-Those Terrible looking models lookin at each other across the screen, God these models look so bad, how did we revert from civ 6's models?

-Denuvo
-This literally kills the game for me, I will never install this crap on my pc

Civ III will be a complete fail that has imitating mechanics from a less and fair Humankind game, and the new age begins when Greece may have evolved to Normans or Spanish with the same leader stays the same from the Antiquity Age.

[Large Tomatoes]

Originally posted by Cirrus:

Denuvo anti-tamper is not installable program. So no worry you do not need to install any denuvo crap.

You install software (this game) and Denuvo is bundled with it, so yes, it is installed explicitly when you install the game. I presume you misunderstand the process rather than pretending word play is a logical argument?

[Nats]

They are scraping the bucket now for new games, trying to come up with new ideas for buying the same game over and over, and often the new ideas are rubbish. The only Civ-like game I've really enjoyed recently (and by recently I mean since Civ 2) was Humankind. Civ 6 was very dull and bugged. This Civ 7 will be the first ever Civ game I do not buy.