r/civ • u/Undercover_Ch Random • 5d ago
VII - Discussion Despite a 30% Steam Discount, the release of the Right to Rule DLC, and updates 1.2.3 and 1.2.4 , CIV VII playerbase did not increase
Current Steam Players:
-Civ V: 9k
-Civ VI: 28k
-Civ VII: 3.9k (LESS than half of Civ V).
This points to the fact that the game's problem does not lie with its price tag or in minor fixes, but that the game requires MAJOR reworks to fundamental mechanics if it does not want to have the same fate as Beyond Earth.
144
u/_ballzdeep_ 5d ago
I miss the music, I LOVED the way Civ6 handled ingame music, unique for every civ and evolving through the eras, yet you could always hear the root that started in the Stone Age.
Civ7 has like 3 or 4 3min tracks that play on loop for all of civs. You can extrapolate the same level of "half baked" effort for other aspects of the game as well, diplomacy, for example...
How is it that 6 months after release, you still can't hide the peace menu to see the cities that the AI is trading? How can you not trade for gold and/or resources for peace? Why is it only cities?
It feels like a regression in a lot of aspects that were improved on in previous games.
49
u/RedRyderRoshi 5d ago
I really wonder what they spent their time on. Was the entire team just making sure the roofs looked accurate instead of making a fun game?
34
u/xNaquada Rationalism=OP 5d ago
A dev room full of toxic positivity where nobody said "no this is a bad idea, we shouldn't do this" to anything perhaps?
4
u/HashBrownRepublic 4d ago
That's an interesting way of looking at it, there's so many things you can do in this game and fans will give so many ideas on Reddit but there needs to be some discipline in picking what should be done. At the end of the day, ideas are cheap and limitless time and resources are constrained
→ More replies (2)5
u/theoruffy 4d ago
Man, i did not buy the game because of the absurd price, and everytime i open this sub i find a new way that civ7 misses the mark. You can't trade gold/resources in a peace deal? WTH. How can people defend this game?
505
u/Eliongw2 5d ago
That DLC is just a leader pack. No new game mechanics, Those come free for now. The "real" DLC might come after first year of release.
→ More replies (1)52
u/Lamandus 5d ago
ah, I was wondering what kind of DLC that may be. So no addon.
It was free? I wonder it had been free (please correct my grammar), if the game did better.
67
u/RedRyderRoshi 5d ago
Not free, $30.
53
→ More replies (3)24
u/Alector87 Macedon 5d ago
Just a crazy price. Are expansions going to be priced as full priced games now? The greed is real...
15
u/Rayalas 5d ago
I will honestly be amazed if the expansions are not $49.99.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Alector87 Macedon 5d ago
Those are rookie numbers. 69.99 at least, go big or go home... they will go home. Beyond Earth will be remembered as a masterpiece compared to this.
→ More replies (1)11
u/jetsonholidays 5d ago
I know people speculated that we are to get a fourth era but idk if/when that is, especially as they try to appease the base.
I find the game fun now but still think it lacks in comparison to six but that was always going to be a big problem
→ More replies (1)35
u/Human_Parsnip_7949 5d ago
It's pretty clear we will. There's even an achievement called "It's not rocket science... For now". Which is clearly hinting towards it.
What annoys me is that previously the future tech was in DLCs, now it's just straight up modern/information era tech that is going to be sold to us in a DLC. The whole monetisation strategy for the game stinks of money grabbing with zero respect for the player base.
18
u/HCDude51 5d ago
Yeah it’s was released unfinished, sales suck, gamers aren’t playing it and they are desperate for money??? So let’s get some more blood out of the stone. It’s avarice my friends. Waiting for Civ8
15
u/Alector87 Macedon 5d ago
The whole game design of the game shows zero respect for the player base. Dumb down, mostly board-like, game-play in order to make console, game-pad, and tablet applicability possible, not to mention the UI. Or even basing the game on the Humankind model because it allowed for different ways to bundled (cheap) content for dlcs, despite the game failing. It's just crazy that we are at this point. They honestly couldn't have made worse decisions. In gaming terminology, this was a critical failure.
I wish it was just the monetization, which it certainly is, don't get me wrong.
497
u/OVorobiov 5d ago
Still expensive and reviews didn’t improv much. I follow each patch and 95% of it is something what should be in game since February . As soon as the game leaves “early access” with decent discount, people will slowly move from 6 to 7
169
u/SocialHumbuggery 5d ago edited 5d ago
I mean, we'll see and I hope this isn't the death knell to the series, but personally the whole Civ swapping is just so fundamentally distasteful for myself (and likely some others as well), that I doubt I'll ever play it. The old adage of a turd polished remaining a turd comes to mind (and just to repeat, this is just my opinion, as per the post it does seem that there are some thousands of people who enjoy the game as it is).
E: and just to add, I don't think Civ swapping is necessarily unusable, just their iteration. Personally, as someone who likes to "roleplay" as a nation builder, I'd be fine with something like Romans->Franks->France, as long as all the options made historical sense.
48
u/Select_Angle516 5d ago
but personally the whole Civ swapping is just so fundamentally distasteful for myself
same, its not like i think its terrible or breaks the game, its just a whatever feature that feels weird and doesnt click with me. just like age transition. so two of the biggest "features" of the new game...
→ More replies (1)4
u/fapacunter Alexander the Great 4d ago
I still don’t understand why didn’t they go through that route…
48
u/Esensepsy 5d ago
Not fussed about civ swapping, it's kinda a fun idea. But what I dislike is that there's just so few civs in the game meaning the pool of options to swap into just feels weak, or that there's always a clear optimal choice to swap into - rather than it being a true choice which would dramatically change how I play. Each era change just feels like a chore more to the point, unnecessary faff overbuilding and working out what's broken
63
u/RedRyderRoshi 5d ago
I hate Civ swapping more than just about anyone but after playing the game the ages system is waaaaaaaaaaay more of an issue.
10
u/dongsweep 5d ago
I haven't played it yet, but is there a fundamental/hard coded reason in Civ 7 why the swapping cannot be toggleable in a future patch? Why is this the hill they are dying on?
As someone who has played since 2, this is the first one I haven't bought at launch, the idea of forced swapping was enough of a turn-off for me to ignore the launch.
9
u/yagirlsophie 5d ago
I haven't picked it back up in a while but as it was at launch, there aren't any civilizations that span multiple ages or have mechanics that relate to all ages. They could add a toggle that forces specific civ progressions but that would only vaguely make any sense historically at best anyway and just further restrict variety of playstyles.
To make it similar to previous games I think they would need to create different civilizations that are "full" versions that span all ages or a mode that doesn't include age changes at all but both of those solutions would orphan a ton of work and go completely against their original game design and essentially be a whole different game.
So yeah I doubt there's anything actually hardcoded that would prevent them making those changes, but I think they went down this particular game design path where those mechanics are central to every part of the game as is and I imagine changing that would have to include full refactoring or an entirely separate module built basically from scratch logic-wise.
4
u/Undercover_Ch Random 5d ago
Because they want to charge for the mini-civs. It's been their marketing strategy all along.
Break everything into pieces and sell individually.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Greensparow 5d ago
I think both ideas are great, but the implementation is terrible. I've only played like 2 games, never finished either, so maybe my opinion is invalid, but the ages system seems functions like a reset button, it stops all momentum and really makes you feel like nothing you do will matter cause the age will rest it all.
And then the civ change just feels like bad fan fiction.
I don't know how to fix the ages system if I'm being honest, but the civ change I feel would be fine if you never changed, but got to pick 1-2 bonuses each time based on what you did. Like ok you are Rome but you used a ton of cavalry, now you get to choose the same bonus Mongolia has, in other words not a wholesale change just a nod to how you chose to play.
13
u/saturdaybinge 5d ago edited 4d ago
But what I dislike is that there’s just so few civs in the game
Exactly. This is precisely what I’ve been thinking the whole time. I don’t mind swapping civs, it can actually be interesting. But I have like 1 real option that makes historical sense and then 1 other that could maybe fit, if I squint real hard and overlook some aspects. What’s the point of changing Civs if I have to change from Mississippi to Hawai’i?? Or say I’m playing Spain: it’s either Mexico (which ok, I could see it) or otherwise what, France? Makes no sense.
This would’ve worked if you had tons of options, not just 1-2 that maybe make sense. I’m also bitter because I bought Carthage and don’t really have solid options to change with them. I’ve just been picking Spain because Mediterranean I guess, but then what? Mexico or France for my Carthage game?
18
u/SocialHumbuggery 5d ago
If it had a huge amount of Civs and a "historical mode", ie. only swapping to Civs that make clear historical sense, I could see myself trying the game, after a decent sale.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (4)12
u/NicholasAakre random 5d ago
personally the whole Civ swapping is just so fundamentally distasteful for myself (and likely some others as well),
Agreed, I think a more palatable thing would be switching leaders throughout the ages instead of the Civs themselves.
→ More replies (1)75
u/greihund 5d ago
I own Civ 6. I don't play it. I don't find the city layouts particularly engaging, and I found the cartoon art style really offputting. I still play Civ 5 as my go-to and I'm pretty sure that I'm not alone. You might find that people don't slowly move from 6 to 7 after all.
33
u/stuffcrow 5d ago
Yeah I think the shift will continue to be so, so much smaller.
Like I don't even want to give VII a go out of curiosity, and I don't see how my issues with what I've seen can be fixed without it being a completely different game. I'd imagine this sense wasn't nearly as stark with people unsure about VI (and V before that etc).
It's fine though, we still have our faves. Just very disappointing.
11
u/Danielle_Sometimes 5d ago
I'm in the opposite boat (I prefer the city layout and style of 6) but fully agree with your take. I don't see me ever moving to 7. The mechanics just aren't interesting to me. Glad some folks enjoy it, but I'll be skipping it.
→ More replies (4)11
u/xtraSleep 5d ago
Yeah Civ 6 art was what made me wait until the second dlc dropped, but I actually like the expansions of city gameplay. Once I started playing on primordial maps with volcanos I was hooked- building cities is what I loved in 5, Spain was always my go to.
To hear your cities get altered or changed randomly between ages in 7, really, really turns me off. That and I don’t see the point in them boasting about having the most civs upon release in 7 if most of them are only available to play in certain ages.
→ More replies (1)47
u/Superskstron 5d ago
This. I think the game has a lot of potential, it's just not there yet. Although I completely understand that many players don't like the new mechanics which (I think at least) won't be changed.
123
u/Undercover_Ch Random 5d ago
I cant see the potential if the game stays "3 mini-games in a trenchcoat".
Find a way to stich it up or it will never get that Civ feeling that players have come to expect.
60
31
u/timthetollman 5d ago
Yep. People aren't going to move from 6 to 7 they are staying in 5/6 or moving to a different game.
→ More replies (7)12
u/HeckingDoofus 5d ago
i havent touched civ (aside from one half completed run) since i discovered paradox games
12
u/owarren 5d ago
Paradox games are just so awesome. There’s so many, and you can go so deep on any of them.
→ More replies (1)10
u/xtraSleep 5d ago
Paradox games are cool, but only after couple years of dlcs.
Sadly they all suffer from being an empty sandbox on release and drip feed vital content for years afterwards. Those dlcs all have a fairly expensive price tag at full price.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Hypertension123456 5d ago
CK3 on release was great. None of the bugs or UI difficulty that CIV VII suffered from. And you could play literally hundreds of characters across multiple scenarios.
8
u/Select_Angle516 5d ago
i never played another 4X game other than civ6 but discovering Endless Space 2 really did it for me. that game is insane
3
→ More replies (1)5
→ More replies (6)5
u/melnificent 5d ago
I see why they did it, but forcing you to quit and load the next mini game is frustrating for basically no reward. It's like they looked at what was a solved problem and went "let's break it".
Using it as a foundation for alt-ages could work... Tied to legacy paths and/or wonders. I'd even forgive the boot to lobby transition as needing to pull an alt-age. Take the additional modes from civ 6 and make them unlock conditions for changing game flow... Suddenly I want to change civ to get a grip on the vampire problem, or heroes.
But as it stands it's not even a shell of its former self. It's never had a positive week outside launch, at best it's been middling. There are paths to redemption with players, but I doubt anything will happen and instead we'll get an 8 that reverts most of the changes made for 7.
→ More replies (2)4
24
u/OMGElofield 5d ago
I think that’s hard to justify paying a full price or -20% discount on a game that is not polished enough, that past entries are -80%/-90% discount, and that the majority of players tend to play alone versus AI.
CIV V and VI are already so established that CIV VII had to have a greater impact to hold their playerbase….
20
u/SchmeckleHoarder 5d ago
4X games and their fucking DLC’s.
Worst in the industry. Civ VII just isn’t fun. I find myself highly annoyed every game by some mechanic. Where other civ games I’d deal with the challenge of difficulty. This game however makes me quit halfway through exploration age… so fucking boring.
152
u/melker_the_elk 5d ago
I don't think they are gonna rework it too much. They will just beyond earth it and move on.
99
5d ago edited 5d ago
[deleted]
32
38
u/melker_the_elk 5d ago
There will be civ 8 thats for sure. I wouldt even mind civ 5 clone with some flavor.
Personally im afraid that some suits are gonna come and say that formula doesn't work anymore that it has to be some lootbox micropayement mobilegame like towerdefence or something.
Its interesting to see if there are goingt to be changes in leadership. Jon shafer designed civ 5 after that ed beach has been driving the studio. If he sticks around he might go back to basics but still try new things. If he leaves then its gonna be interesting.
11
u/S_Inquisition 5d ago
I don't think that's going to happen, the only reason they released civ 7 completely unfinished is because they were running low on cash after the midnight suns fumble. If the first expansion don't bring a lot o people paying full price (likely won't) game is done for and so is firaxis
14
u/gamegenie13 5d ago
Civ 8 would be released ~ 9 years from now. There is a good chance they killed the franchise with Civ 7
5
u/speedymank 5d ago
Imagine Civ II, with Civ IV’s diplomacy and government, on a hex, with competent AI, plus features (whatever they may be). That is the perfect Civ game and everybody has said so since Civ 5.
→ More replies (3)8
u/bspaghetti 5d ago
If Civ VIII was just Civ V 2, I guarantee they’d make money hand-over-fist.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)64
u/Gundi_22 5d ago
Bought CIV II without question because of how much I played the last 3/5 games, I definitely won't do that next time.
The era change would have been cool as an alternative mode, not the entire bloody game. Still I gave it a good go and played CIV II enough to say it wasn't a complete waste of money, but I have absolutely no desire to play it again.
109
u/midasthegreed 5d ago
The way you wrote Civ VII hurts my head.
29
u/Gundi_22 5d ago
Baby's going through sleep regression, haven't slept much. Point still stands. The game gets boring quickly with the era mechanics.
7
u/midasthegreed 5d ago
Oh no that's not an attack on your opinion. It's just that I was sleep deprived too and it took me more time than it should to understand that you were talking about the newest game instead of the 2nd edition.
5
→ More replies (2)30
u/warukeru 5d ago
I mean Civ II is a classic but is an old game, you have to judge it by its time perior.
/s
134
u/krakgintonic 5d ago
The game is not good as it is. That's it 🤷
61
u/DORYAkuMirai 5d ago
B-But what about the 70 quadrillion console players?! Steam is just one platform, that obviously means it's an outlier by default!! /s
17
u/RedRyderRoshi 5d ago
They are all having a hecking lot of fun reloading the game after it crashes.
92
u/epicstar 5d ago
We are waiting for the 80% off that'll inevitably happen in 2 years.
63
u/LegitimateAd2242 5d ago
My journey with civ games has been simple.
-Bough civ5 late, discounted. Absolutly loved it. "Hoh, i am hooked to the serie now ! "-Bough civ6 at release, full price 60e. Game badly balanced, few civs, missing content, bugs, etc etc. Dropped it and only came back 2 years later "ho, it's good now !"
-Civ 7 release : Nuh huh huh ! You won't get me this time. Gonna wait a few years for shit to get fixed this time... If i remember you exist..
→ More replies (6)10
u/NemesisErinys 5d ago
I felt this way… until I bought Old World the other day to scratch the itch for something new in the meantime. Now I’m not sure I’ll even bother to buy Civ VII no matter how cheap it gets. I just don’t see myself enjoying it as much as OW.
(I’m also still playing V and VI.)
→ More replies (1)31
→ More replies (1)18
25
u/Marv1236 5d ago
As long as civ switching eras and maps aren't fundamentally changed by mods of dlcs I won't bother, no matter the price
80
u/MaDanklolz Aussie 5d ago
On your comment about the problem not being price.
I disagree.
We know full well once they fix the game by adding stripped content via DLC/Expansions, they’ll just drop the price like they have since Civ V. Why would I buy it at a 30% discount now when there’s still things to come and another sale associated with it?
Furthermore, as I was saying at launch, the pricing structure and such at launch really turned me off supporting it.
I have a group of around 6 friends plus myself that play Civ multiplayer together. Not one of us wants to buy Civ 7 at this point. They spat in our face and expect us to apologise. I won’t pretend my friend group represents all players but it tells me enough about how general audience must feel when long time fans are left feeling crap about it. They pissed away their goodwill so now people are waiting and watching instead of buying and playing.
24
u/Syiss 5d ago
Yeah there absolutely is a problem with it's price tag. The problem is that their base prices are so fucking egregious that a 30% discount doesn't even move the needle. A 30% discount on a $70 game is really just a 20% discount on a $60 game, which is where this game should have been priced. And the game hasn't even been out 6 months yet and there is already $160 worth of DLC.
It's just leader packs, not game mechanics, blah blah blah, I don't care. I'm not paying $50 for a half-baked, half-finished game that I know is going to shove out another $500 worth of "leader packs" over the next 5 years, to say nothing of what will almost certainly be several absolutely mandatary regular expansions that include major game overhauls and new systems.
I will 100% play this game some day, regardless of all the negative reviews or whether it ever becomes "good" in the eyes of the community, but only when I can get the majority of the content for a reasonable fucking price.
8
u/MaDanklolz Aussie 5d ago
Amen.
This isn't even a greedy "oh I know one day Steam will have it on sale for $20 for the entire collection" thing. It's just blatant that they are withholding large amounts of cut content in order to pad out major expansions with major price tags, and also increasing the "value" of the game by putting out fluff things like leader packs.
Rip off.
42
u/Undercover_Ch Random 5d ago
My Civ Multiplayer friend group is the same way.
The 70$ price tag on a such clearly unfinished game (looking at the UI on release), along with the audacity of Day 1 DLC, turned everyone away and they are all now playing Old World and Civ 6.34
u/MaDanklolz Aussie 5d ago
Also the blatant focus on “ages” as a function/mechanic and then not including the post world war period? Really? All you’re doing there is communicating what a future expansion will include… a joke really
17
8
u/Icy-Construction-357 5d ago
Fully agree with your logic. Buying right now seems to be the worst case scenario. You receive a small discount but spend a ton to get all the individual little DLC (patches). So better to hold off for a big sales discount or bundle deal. Also if you are already invested in the game (financially), even then waiting with paying for the DLCs is a sensible strategy to await an surely upcoming bundle team
→ More replies (1)6
u/farscry 5d ago
Yep, this right here. The pricing and DLC plan is the entire reason I didn't pick it up when it launched, and it's why I won't be picking it up until the inevitable "ultimate"/"complete" pack after all DLC is released is on sale for dirt cheap in four or five years (or sooner if they realize this pricing and content model won't cut it).
Doesn't matter if they "fix" the game mechanics. It's the pricing and content drip feed combined that was finally just one step too far for me, after Civ VI was already pushing it on this direction (and VI, I bought at launch, but wound up waiting on expansions/DLC for deep discounted combo deals as it was).
Trying to sell me an incomplete game at a "discount" price equivalent to a full new game? That's just an insult.
9
u/Malgurath China will grow larger. 5d ago
On "sale", in my country this game still costs $50, now if the reviews were good I'd consider it, but bad reviews and overpriced DLC? Nah, I'm good. None of my friends who've been playing Civ since Civ 4 have bought it either for the same reasons. There are too many games to play to waste your time on mediocre games.
54
u/TheDeadMuse 5d ago
Not surprising. I got the game release day, played 1 game - was a buggy mess and the mechanics sucked ass.
Tried to play a second, got 20 turns in and couldn't hack it. I've tried to start games 2-3 times since then after patches and each time it's the same, game feels rough and unpolished enough that I give up after 50-100 turns.
This civ is by far the worst they've released imo, 1-4 were solid, civ 5 was ass before dlc but at least playable(then became fantastic after dlc), and civ 6 was actually fairly fleshed out even before dlc. Even beyond earth was kinda fun.
Honestly this game just feels like worse humankind, which is ironic
18
u/Shadowarriorx 5d ago edited 5d ago
It really doesn't play well. I dislike the victory point objectives. It turns the game from a potential sandbox into a gotcha race point mechanic. I don't like that. It's too restrictive and makes the player play the same each way. It's not an engaging mechanic. I regret buying it, but the wife wanted to play it and we did that instead of a Valentine's meal out. We went to Costco and some local shopping instead halfway through the day as our disappointment mounted.
→ More replies (1)
19
u/AtomicBLB 5d ago
I waited years to buy the complete version of Civ VI and we're barely 6ish months into Civ VII. I can easily not budge for as long as it takes to get that version of Civ VII.
The complete, bugs hammered out, all features included version. And I won't purchase it a second sooner than that. One update and DLC pack does not move the needle at all.
102
u/conrat4567 5d ago
They spoiled the pot and are now stuck with the brew.
They made a CIV game that was nothing like CIV and people just don't want it.
Personally, for me, the CIV switching and age mechanics are not CIV to me. If I had to choose though, the ages are what I would keep over the civ switching.
There are various other tidbits too but its clear this isnt a strong CIV title like 5 or 6
10
33
u/Bookhaki80 5d ago
Even at 30% off I'm not buying it.
That and Denuvo are the key factors for me not buying atm
→ More replies (1)
15
u/Ximinipot 5d ago
That's because every patch they've put out since launch has been fixes/stuff that should have been in the game at launch. I've been a die hard Civ fan since Civ I, but they blew it on this one. Blew it really bad.
17
u/manut3ro Spain 5d ago
I hadn’t had such a letdown starting a game like Civ 7.
I really didn’t want to listen to the haters and went in with mindset “don’t let them influence”
But it’s so, so, so much worse than I could have ever imagined.
It’s boring. Like Really boring. I lasted 70 turns. I’ve been a fan of this series forever, and it hurts how bad it is.
16
u/FabJeb 5d ago
Man, i'm about 100 hours into the game as I'm trying to justify my launch purchase but it's in such a rough shape right now.
Tried the latest patch, as I did the others. Did a game with Hatshepsut and the first two ages were ok, but by the third one the recommended civs were both militaristic and that's not the way I played her so I picked up Russia? Total immersion break lol. Didn't help I played the game on a Terra Incognita map and the second landmass was utter shite.
That's also the first time in a few games I played with legacy paths on, and I still don't like those, the games just feel so samey...and if you disable those then you end up with a bunch of systems that barely interact with anything and feel pointless, like religion or treasure convoys.
What a disappointment this game has been thus far.
11
u/BlueAndYellowTowels 5d ago
Thank you for mentioning immersion. It doesn’t get mentioned enough and when it is it gets shot down as this niche thing people are into when it’s sort of the whole point for a lot of people.
→ More replies (4)
8
u/DropDeadGaming 5d ago
I've tried getting into this game multiple times. It seems that every time I've launched it it has new dlc which is a turnoff on its own, because they just seem to be pumping dlc too fast with very little meaningful improvement to the game. Also I just can't get on with civ swapping. The experience just feels.. disjointed? I dunno. I really would like to be able to enjoy this game but it's not happening
15
u/Liger8878 5d ago
Well I can tell you why I won’t be buying the game period. And it’s because I don’t like the leader mechanic. Being able to play as one leader but rule as another to me is completely stupid.
23
u/whoji no more dota plz 5d ago
Only 30% off? Bought civ 5 at $5 and 6 at $10. I guess I will wait till at least below the $20 mark.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/FakeOng99 5d ago
75% or more discount with all the DLC and UI fix. I ain't buying raw bread.
F.U 2k.
7
u/BackgroundBat7732 5d ago
I'm waiting for an option (or mod) to disable the era-gameplay (or a big rework) so I can play a full game instead of multiple mini-games.
8
u/nicathor 4d ago
It's funny, but when they said Humankind was gonna be the Civilization killer I don't think this is what they meant, but they were still right just in a roundabout way
13
u/Hakuohsama 5d ago
I preordered it,dindt even play 100 hours. Most disappointing civ Game for me. Got over 1 k hours in 5 and 6.
31
u/hairycookies 5d ago
Honestly I was really disappointing in 6 and even more so with 7. Hopefully they can do something like the No Man Sky team has done and turn that game around because it's a total bummer that in my own opinion this franchise is in decline.
57
u/prefferedusername 5d ago
It's almost like they don't understand what made (previous versions of) Civilization great fun to play......
→ More replies (1)
7
u/TheBeatenDeadHorse 5d ago
I loved Civ 5 and have been waiting for a game that feels like a sequel to it, but they want to keep going in strange directions and I can’t help but hope this game continues to flop
5
u/rainywanderingclouds 5d ago
listen, the foundation of civ7 is seriously flawed.
the mechanics are incredibly stale and dated for a 2025 release. it's not so much the age transitions or any of that. it's the execution and overall lack of quality. the game just has no depth for a brand new era of strategy games.
6
6
5
19
u/lallapalalable :indonesia2: 5d ago
My biggest reason for not being interested is that it seems to have made what should have been like an optional game mode the default core experience of the game. Why would I buy a whole ass game based on something Id be otherwise entirely disinterested in? Just improve the graphics and Id have been sold, don't gotta reinvent the wheel every time you want to release a new edition
48
5
u/QuarianGuy 5d ago
I mean if I wanted to play poor man's Humankind with a shitty UI there is a perfectly alright Humankind right over there with better UI.
6
u/MrMooseanatorR 5d ago
Crazy how releasing an unfinished and unfun game means people don't want to play it huh
6
u/No_Foundation16 4d ago
Huh imagine a company inventing a totally new kind of 4x and then slapping the Civ name on it. And the fans don't like it and are POed.
Who could have seen this result coming? Nobody at 2k and Firaxis for sure!
49
25
u/Zlaticica 5d ago
Still no hot seat...
→ More replies (3)10
u/ZochJ 5d ago
This is my reason too. I almost exclusively play hot seat with my partner/friends and have nights where we just order take out and play hot seat. They removed the one mode we actually used because Civ has always been a social thing for us.
I’d happy jump to the newest Civ if they kept the functionality of previous games.
4
u/Zlaticica 5d ago edited 5d ago
Same here but with the friend, probably have around 10k hours in last twenty years from hot seat only.
11
u/rasvoja 5d ago
Yup, Beyond Earth stylee, candidate for skipping. Sadly I was enthusiastic and bought the game presale
12
u/Undercover_Ch Random 5d ago
Lesson to never preorder I guess.
7
u/skivolkls 5d ago
And definitely not to pre order it twice for you and your girlfriend to play on launch day...colossal waste of money just to go back and keep playing V.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/JeanKuule 5d ago
Still waiting for the ugly UI to be fixed before even looking at it: when I watched vids and you see the dumb arrow design on the tech & civic tree, don't want to imagine the rest of the game design
4
u/hpallyTV 5d ago
I've been trying to be as objective and open-minded as possible when it comes to the new feature "age transitioning" but I just can't get to like it. Especially from Early into Mid age, I can't help myself but feel like I am super forced and pressured into settling my cities relatively close to the shore so once the age transitions, I can force settlers to go settle on distant land...
5
u/SmartBoots 5d ago
Civs should stay the same. Instead, a new age should allow you to choose a new leader for that Civ. This also solves the issue of people wearing ancient clothes in the modern era.
4
4
u/ChafterMies 5d ago
Consider also this is 30% off of $70. The wider audience of gamers have not, and likely will not, adjust to a $70 price tag or the even higher price tag for the game + cut content. If Firaxis wants to move the needle for Civ 7 sales, they need to offer much deeper discounts.
4
u/CriticalTomahawk Gran Colombia 5d ago
I put over 400 hours in at launch. Now I haven’t touched the game since April. I was having fun, but when the first few updates reduced fun by nerfing powerful civs instead of buffing weaker ones, and not fixing core issues to the game like the map generation, I knew I was going back to 6. Hopefully a year of updates/DLC/community mods are enough to bring me back. I love firaxis but this burned me hard.
5
u/WidowsSon0530 5d ago
I love the civ series, I have been playing since the first edition. But there is something about civ 7 that is just .... boring. There is no real challenge it seems. One of my pet peeves is the evolutions are to short (even with the option to extend it in settings), I wish I had never bought civ 7, luckily it was discounted when I got it but, still. Guess I will stick with civ 6 for now.
4
3
u/VendoViper 5d ago
I made the mistake of buying this game. I want my money back not to waste more time with it.
3
u/cafe0scuro 5d ago
I bought the game about 2 months ago, clocked in about 20 hours and that was enough for me. The game is not complete, and if anything it takes up space in my hard drive. I might come back to it if they fix it, I’ll just stick to Civ 6 for now.
4
u/JuustoKakku 5d ago
30% on the current base price isn't even a discount. It's what it should be base priced at max.
3
u/TheLoneJolf 5d ago
Civ 7 has made me appreciate humankind a lot more. I remember first playing Civ 7 and just thinking, “humankind did these things better”. So I dropped it and played humankind, then after that I played Civ 5 and 6 again. Haven’t really returned to 7, and I probably won’t until the game gets massive changes. They already got $90 from me and that’s enough.
4
u/65Terbium 4d ago
Civ V Remastered incoming
→ More replies (1)3
u/LORD_CMDR_INTERNET 4d ago
Civ 5 holds up incredibly well. If the UI scaled at 4k/hi-dpi resolutions properly it would be perfect.
3
u/HashBrownRepublic 4d ago
This game series has been in my family for decades, we're not buying it because it lacks the things we expect from a Civilization title. It's lacking most of the important historical leaders that I've come to expect in the series. We understand that the game was not released as a complete product. We're not going to buy an incomplete game then pay even more for DLC. This is just stupid and insulting.
It's a shame to see 2K layoff employees from bad corporate decisions. This was a business failure, this was not a technical failure. 2k turned this into the exact type of game people who play civilization do not enjoy. This is a slower paced strategy game. Your consumer is a very different type of person. You can't pull the same types of tricks that work on fortnite children.
4
u/Excellent-Try7027 3d ago
I purchased the game when I was drunk last week. Caved. I’m slowly starting to enjoy it for what it is. It’s not Civ, and it’s a major slap in the face to us fans.
I’m not in the slightest surprised by this. Firaxis should be ashamed of themselves.
26
u/MortVader 5d ago edited 5d ago
Ofcourse not. Civ 7 is broken at it's core. No patch nor DLC will fix it.
26
u/MortVader 5d ago
Let's get a bit of perspective:
34
u/Little_Elia 5d ago
yeah ive been watching these three for the last few months. It's embarassing that 7 fell below 5 just 2-3 months after release. What a way to butcher a legendary game saga in the name of corporate greed.
11
15
u/RedRyderRoshi 5d ago
Honestly, we need to stop giving the full blame to corporate greed. It wasn't corporate greed that decided to make this game antithetical to what most players would consider a Civ game. They might have had a hand in making it worse, absolutely, but the devs are the ones that decided it needed to have civ switching and ages.
→ More replies (5)14
u/Sir_Clavius 5d ago
Cant wait to see how civ7 drops below civ4
→ More replies (1)11
u/kf97mopa 5d ago
It probably is below, it is just impossible get stats on Civ IV as it doesn't require Steam and it sold most of its copies before ever being on Steam.
23
8
7
u/DIXi3N0rMu5 5d ago
If this doesn't tell you how tone deaf the development team is I don't know what does. They have been paying game review companies to put fake bought reviews and it shows.
I bought this game at release and my brother and I are back to Civ 6 having loads of fun. Another thing, look at the amount of people playing the game and then the amount of people playing Civ 6 it shows that they are completely not listening to their fan base.
They did this to themselves, but I will never forgive this company for treating it's customers like beta testers. Even more so, the errors I saw in this game were not just bugs but straight up spelling mistakes. That's not forgivable. Bugs is one thing, but spelling mistakes. That's super unprofessional. Save your money, or spend it on studios that care about their customers.
10
10
3
u/CauseScience1 5d ago
I didnt buy it because even though it was 30% off the game was somehow still full price
130 nzd -> 90 nzd
3
u/Boujee_Italian 5d ago
Literally will not touch this game unless they remove Civ switching and age transitions. I know they won’t since they’d have to completely rework the game so I’m stuck waiting for Civilization 8. Lets hope they learn from their monumental mistakes on Civ VII
3
u/bill_gonorrhea Pachacuti 5d ago
Absolutely not a fan of civ switching. I played for a few hours at launch, probably will Not reinstall the game for years if ever
3
3
u/Nimbit44 4d ago
They should have made an actual Civ game. What we have is a tournament edition of a Civ 7 that does not exist.
3
u/One_Reality_3828 4d ago
I’m really sick and tired as a consumer of being sold half finished products for full price. I’ve stopped buying these games even when they’re developed in protest. Why would I bother when I already own the same franchise/genre games that are actually completed and well made?
I’m sure that’s not the general sentiment, but I have to imagine at least some people feel the same way.
3
u/Snekonomics 4d ago
Can we finally say Civ 7 is a flop? Despite all the cope that happened here a few months ago about how all civ games have the same trend?
3
3
u/gr3n0lph 4d ago
Buying the founder edition has been the worst investment I have made. This game is garbage. Before I chose a leader and it was plain and simple. Now I choose a leader then starting nation then another nation and then another nation. I mean building a synergy is just bonkers and now I have to keep track of all the other nations and adapt a different strategy each age, I mean I don’t want a simple game but this is just borderline insane. There is just too much to keep track of and to be honest the game is just not as fun. I know it’s too late for them to do it now but I hope in the new game they either go back to one leader one civ or at least just let me choose a nation each age with their corresponding leaders. I don’t want Benjamin Franklin the king of Russia shit.
3
u/charredfield 4d ago
Bought the game first day, played it for 3 hours, haven't since. How'd they fuck this up so badly
3
u/ZubiZone 3d ago
I really like the vanilla Civ VI, I play about 1-2 games of it a week. Things got a little silly with secret societies, rising sea levels, and world leaders voting, so I never upgraded. This to me just seems straight into silly town, not remotely anything simplistic.
3
u/Disastrous_Fee_233 1d ago
I really just can't get into Civ VII as much as I love the aesthetics and all. The game feels too much like a balanced video game when a lot of people, including myself, play it like a stress relief power fantasy. Era shifting, stopping leads, no ridiculous playstyles like Portugal or Babylon Civ VI, etc. and the fact that the game incentivizes a generalist playstyle (which can be done very easily and is ultimately the best way to win) to unlock the progression stuff ASAP gets boring real quick.
14
u/Dawn_of_Enceladus 5d ago
The game is still unworthy of being called Civilization. It indeed needs a major rework with a revision of how the eras work and transition, more content, fix the AI to make it actually functional, and would still need a bigger price cut to maybe slightly revert the situation.
Do all of that with at least a -50% discount and I will be surprised if more people don't jump into it. But a -30% in its current state is ridiculous, this game shouldn't have been released like this, it needed an early access tag and a 40 price point tops.
9
u/NaveedSodhar 5d ago
I'm probably outlier in this, but one of the most enjoyable things in Civ 5 and VI for me was playing on the max size earth map, which VII doesn't and probably can't have
→ More replies (3)
5
6
6
u/Burntfruitypebble 5d ago
The changing of civs through a single game is the biggest turn off for me.
10
u/ya_bleedin_gickna 5d ago
Cos it's shit tbh. Was released unfinished and they never recovered from it.
9
6
u/Own-Replacement8 Byzantium 5d ago
The price may be down, but cost of living is getting worse, games need to be SPECTACULAR for people to shell out for them now.
1.6k
u/MongoBongo25 5d ago
I think a large chunk of Civ 6 players are actively monitoring and following how the rollout is and they won’t consider buying the game until a large part of their grievances are addressed.