Eh, not in everything. I gotta admit, the districts, traders, trading screens, rock bands, were a nice addition or better implementation in Civ 6. But yeah, for Civ 7 I'd much prefer a more serious civ 5-ish looks, approach and tone. I'd want Civ 7 to be much more strategic and tactical - in warfare.
Agreed. The best thing though about Civ 6 were the government policies with the card system. That's about it. The climate gameplay late-stage sucked and the artstyle is obviously horrendous and fortnite-like. Hopefully they go with Civ 5 art in a modern fit
@@MrUbister I fully agree. O loved the civ tree that came with Civ 6, but not much else. Most people liked the districts so I expect that to continue, but I wasn’t a fan.
My biggest wish is a much more in depth map. For example, several terrain layers like in Humankind, navigable rivers, ocean currents, natural harbors, and just making the map more impactful.
I want strategic and luxury resources to have more uses in the game beyond just amenities or happiness for example. I want more of each resource. Make our cities more lived in and have things like transportation actually matter beyond just trade routes or productivity. I can see lithium instantly being a new strategic resource and I want economics to be expanded upon. Have it be an actual way to win the game by establishing a world currency. Trade embargoes. There’s a lot to demand. They implemented a lot of good ideas in Civ 6 and I hope they just take the ball and run with the bets parts of civ 5&6 and humankind
I played every Civilization since CIV2, but CIV6 is my least favourite, by far. Maybe its because I played it shortly after release, where it hadly had all the features you would expect. Its not just that though, I think the overall design of Civilization has gone to much into the mobile game aesthetics, or console friendly, childish art design that I did not appriciate. With other games, like ARA, and Old World, there is some more authentic enviromental design and some seriousness coming back into the genre. Even though I did not like Humankind as much as I had hoped, it at least looked better than Civilization VI. Here is hoping that CIV7 pulls me back into the series.
I tried civ 6 with all the dlc, and it does suck. It might be good if you've never played the other civ games though. I wasted a lot of my 20s playing civ 2.
Your must be my Civilization brother from another Sid Meier. I remember playing the original Civilization in college and trying to study for exams and people were placing bets if I could win when the infamous Ghandi reached the Atomic Age and I got blind sided by nukes... Ghandi the most peaceful leader who goes full nuke crazy.
Civ 6 165.6 hrs on steam and zero dlc purchased Civ 5 1,257.2 hrs on steam and I own all dlc Humankind 371.8hrs on steam and I own half dlc To me the direction was just horrid...if it's even close to Civ 6 I won't even give it a look. Hated the console port boardgame style...I prefer the more immersive empire/city building style
Mark my words: They somehow will release the first DLC for the game before the release. Before the first update that adresses common gamebreaking bugs there will be 2 more DLCs. One of which is a "wonder pack" adding some obscure unknown African monuments for 15 euros.
Got my fingers crossed. Hope for more robust, dynamic AI interaction. Most of my Civ 6 playthroughs tend to be blandly peaceful unless I do the attacking and get downright boring before the modern era. The last couple times I played, I played until the medieval era and called it a day. Last decent play until the end was with Civ 4.
I hope they kept the district system from 6. The spread out cities and being able to set up different adjacency bonuses for wildly different things all within the same city was pretty cool.
I hope they completely remake it, it was never executed well in Civ 6 in my opinion. The concept of districts is cool and I wouldn't mind them returning it from 6, but it needs to be redesigned for me to like it. I preferred Humankind's districts.
Both looking forward to it and dreading the secondary launcher that data mines the player and creates CTD after opting out. It's the first time I'm seriously doubting whether I'll buy a Civ game after owning and playing every version since the original. 2K ruined my experience so much that I'm just not excited.
I'm cautiously optimistic about this one. I did not enjoy Civilization 6. I tried it near launch, and couldn't get into it. I gave it a few years and tried again when it was content complete, and really tried, but I felt that things like the district system specifically just became a huge chore to manage and prevented me from getting into it. I've stuck with Civilization 5, and it's been my go to strategy game since 2012. If Civilization 7 is more of an iteration on 5's formula, I'd be happy. I specifically would like to see more options on building your nation wide, more so than just rewarding tall gameplay. I'm about to get a little more abstract here, but I think Civ could really benefit from expanding gameplay mechanics that reward complex strategies for offense, (whether that be militaristic, cultural, scientific, economic, or religious offense), and limiting expansion into new mechanics that are designed to bleed the player from death by a thousand paper cuts from within. Of course there has to be repercussions to each action, but I think constantly responding to threats internally caused by too many micromanagement systems causing various holes in your own Civilization's expansion is less interesting than responding to the threats caused by other Civilization's expansion. For me, it's more interesting for all players to have a wide variety of offensive options, and their primary focus being to counter the other players' equally devastating offensive options. There still would have to be consequences internally for major screw ups, but I think going too far with those types of mechanics and letting them be the main focus of gameplay is just a huge headache. I am excited to see a Civilization built for more modern hardware when it comes to performance. Civilization 6 was a definite improvement over 5 in this regard, but I still don't feel like we've seen the full power utilized of what these modern high core count CPUs can do for strategy games like Civilization. I'd love to see turns not taking 30 seconds each in the late game, if you're lucky. We will see what happens on that front. That's just me. I'm curious to know what others would want from Civilization 7.
Meanwhile I didn't like the hex grid and non-stacking units of 5, and the dumbed-down boardgame-style gameplay paled in comparison to 4, the pinnacle of "history simulators." 6 felt like a welcome polish of 5, at least, so a step in the right direction. Hopefully 7 brings back some of that genuine Civ flavor, with punishments for simply spreading too far too fast and encouragement to actually think about how your civ develops. Meanwhile some old heads are whining about how 4 removed ranged combat, I'm sure ;)
I definitely miss Civ4's simplicity in regards to expansion. The maintenance system was an elegant solution to discourage mindless city-spam, yet always allowing more settlers once your economy recvored, compared to Civ5's artificial feeling hard happiness limit.
It's so interesting that people that hate on VI are the most vocal about it online, but I guess it makes sense given they haven't enjoyed a new Civ game in over a decade. Or maybe nostalgia is overpowering open-mindedness, and some people will just never accept innovation. As someone who has enjoyed all Civ games from the beginning, for me and the vast majority of Civ fans out there, VI has been a standout in the series, in particular with the districts and policy card systems at play that enable vastly more interesting strategy. The only criticism I have of VI is the AI in how it cheats at higher diffficulty (like its predecessors) rather than making complex decisions based on other civ's game strategy, something I'm hoping will be fixed with AI advancements in recent times. The cartoony artwork that feels more mobile gameish isn't exactly my cup of tea also and I sometimes have issues with multiplayer "out of sync," at times, which has been an issue since Civ V for me. I think most would agree that changes / fixes for these moving forward would be a step in the right direction.
Or the "innovation" just wasn't particularly good and you're just biased. I mean, there's a reason every single other mainline civ game on steam has a better review. But no, you're right, it's everyone else that's being ridiculous lol.
I see a lot of people hating civ6 and saying they only play civ5. Back in the old days people hated civ5 and swore civ4 was the best. There just seems to be a trend with this game where there's a load of players who just can't move on from the old version
New player to civ, and I must say I prefer way more the artstyle of civ 6 over the realistic artstyle in civ 5 and before Could just be bcz they're older art so they're not as good, dunno tho But I must say, either way, We all love Sid Meier's civilization games right? And the release of civ 7 is a very good news
That it might include arquebusiers as a unit is all I garnered from the promo. What would be cool would be the ability to zoom into terrain from the map so you could see units and buildings at true scale and watch military actions at this level - perhaps using procedurally generated layout of scenery. However, what I really want is for the gameplay not to suck and for level difficulty to be based on, say, AI LLM learning and not just a handicapping system as usual.
Pinnacle of Civ was "Civ IV Warlords".just make a improved version of it and it will be a win.Being Deity must be as hard as it was in "Civ IV Warlords".
Kia ora my friend. I've just started playing CIV6. Thank you for all the work your doing and tips and hearing someone from NZ doing it is refreshing. ✌️
Random thing I noticed on the Switch eshop that the game listing indicates a storage space requirement of 4.8GB, which seems like the kind of info that would only be known if the game was releasing pretty soon.
I've played every game since Civ3 and really hope they can keep the magic going! Would be super nice if they can more deeply integrate the map and the natural world into gameplay. Force difficult choices with weather and natural events
Simultaneous releases on consoles not just PC is a bad sign - Civ Revolution ultra-cartoony style is not where most of the loyal fans want this to go. Expectations are low if they stick with Civ 6s trajectory, Civ 5 was prime.
One problem with this game is that it kind of demands that reviewers give it 9/10 or at worst 8/10. So it will be hard to tell if the game is any good based on the first wave of reviews. Hopefully Jumbo will deal us straight.
I think they shouldn't change it. The gameplay in 1 and 2 is the best. They can keep making improved versions of this game like Civ 2 was of Civ 1. It was called the ultimate version of the best selling strategy game. Even Civ 3 is crap because there is no benefit from trying to conquer cities or the world which is the onjective of the game! Civ 7 should be a modern improvement of Civ 2 Everyone would buy it !
One thing: Please don't be just a Civ 6 with Civ 5 graphic I want it to have all the best feature that both Civ 5 and Civ 6 has and if possible introduce the brand new mechanic that's unique from Civ 7. If that actually happening both Civ 5 and Civ 6 would have been irrelevance very quickly. Or Alternatively, just make so that you could switch the gameplay back and fourth from Civ 5 to 6 or Civ 6 to 5, Because it's quite 50/50 from the audience stand point. Civ 5 players love their own Civ 5's mechanic and vice versa! But all and all though, it's mostly likely that it's gonna be overprice, unfortunately ;(
While I might receive some backlash for this, I genuinely enjoyed Civ VI. As someone who has been playing since Civ IV, I appreciated the new elements it introduced, such as unstacking cities and the ability to personalize gameplay based on the surroundings, which added freshness to each gameplay. However, it's undeniable that at launch, Civ VI lacked the depth that its predecessor, Civ V, had accumulated over time. Personally, as a huge fan of Civ V, I'm hopeful for a return to more realistic graphics in future iterations, as it's one of the few aspects I find lacking in the current iteration of Civ VI.
i loved civ 5 and swapped to Endless legend--which is still my favorite 4X. I tried old world but couldn't get into it and bounced off humankind too. Didnt bother with civ 6 cuz i didnt like the art style. Age of Wonder 4 is pretty fun at the moment but I'm hopeful Ara:History Untold is good and Civ 7 too!
Civ 6 is the best Civ ever, and ive played them all since 2 when they were released. The district system changed the game for the better - it made cities unique, organic things with personalities. I saw the comments building up and feel like im in crazy town... One more turn, please!
I wonder if theyre sticking to Sid's only 25% new methodology again. From the looks of the logo theres one thing we can confirm at least, we're sticking with hex tiles
The thing is, the Soviet Union was very short-lived, only 70 years. Also, I notice the devs like to keep leaders pre-WW2 (with a few exceptions like Ghandi), which really cuts down the options for the Soviet Union. Realistically, it can be thought of as the old Russian Empire, just under new management.
I can see that many people have forgotten the civ 5 and 6 model. You release the bland version and then when they get the 2 upcoming major expansion. Then the game is really good.
Will this be like the early Civ games where you traded a hard earned research tech to another country, and then they quickly traded it to every other country? Making your research efforts meaningless.
Man. I have been waiting for civ 7 to come out ever since about 2 months after civ 6 came out and it bacme clear that the game sucks. But honestly if they just ditch the climate change thing from civ 6 and not make cleopatra black again it will be a massive improvment in gameplay and realism.
They either need to make the ai capable of managing a one unit per tile army or get rid of one unit per tile. I don't follow the virtue of including game mechanics that don't result in gameplay. I'm done playing civ games where I crushingly win every war. It's boring. Oh! Sending an invading force you say? No problem, let me abandon my garrison and randomly smear my units about the map while you pick off my cities one by one.
Firaxis should ditch havok engine and embrace unreal engine. I'll not surprised if civilization 7 have a buggy and crashing problems like civilization 6.
I am not excited. I don't give a damn about any modern triple A game and that studio that made Civ 6 is as shitty as everyone else. Civ 6 is a joke and Civ 7 is gonna be bad too.
@@historish165 Yes, yes I would. I do this to fight for your dignity because I really care about you guys. I fight for the dignity of gamers. You guys are gonna have some standards.
From how serious looking the trailer looked it I have a gut feeling that combat might take a higher role than previous games. If they end up having some sort of 4x style of total war that would be awesome. To have actually have massive armies and strategic warfare added in would be a dream come true. That's been my only big gripe with civ games is that the combat always seemed boring. But im probably wrong and im still going to play the ever living shit out of it.
The trailer was BLAH at best, maybe 4/10. The whole "sparrow on rails flying past non-gameplay elements from history narrated by random fake-accent ladies" is over. But the mediocre trailer is irrelevant to whether or not the game is any good. I'm looking for two contradictory things: 1. new gameplay mechanics 2. simplification of gameplay mechanics For new gameplay mechanics, maybe you get one civilization per game (with certain bonuses), but you cycle through leaders, each with different bonuses. For simplification of gameplay mechanics, the current excruciatingly slow build-war-unit-slowly-move-it-on-the-overall-map makes it difficult to combine and coordinate your army units. How about any war units you build go into a non-map box somewhere, then when you declare war your box of units and their box of units get put on a smaller war-map where you battle things out (separate from the overall map). You still have to make the interesting decision as to how much industry to allocate to war units, but you avoid the 500 year wars of uncoordinated units marching around.
You are describing a game that consists of none-connected systems. Civs appeal has always been that everything is visible at once and occupies the same space. Your armies, cities and land all interact directly with each other. One glance at the map tells you everything about the game state. You try to innovate for innovations' sake, when the core gameplay has always had simple interactions with complex interconnectivity.
All the pessimism is uncalled for, civ 6 wasn’t my favorite but the civ series has objectively never released a bad game, some just took a couple DLCs to hit their stride. Plus if the trailer and 404 image are anything to go off of it looks like the feel of Civ 5 is going to make a little bit of a return. I’m excited to see what civ 7 holds.
Civ 5 was the king of the genre. Let Civ 7 lean on Civ 5 over Civ 6.
Eh, not in everything. I gotta admit, the districts, traders, trading screens, rock bands, were a nice addition or better implementation in Civ 6. But yeah, for Civ 7 I'd much prefer a more serious civ 5-ish looks, approach and tone. I'd want Civ 7 to be much more strategic and tactical - in warfare.
CIV 4 was by far the best of them all in my opinion.
Agreed. The best thing though about Civ 6 were the government policies with the card system. That's about it. The climate gameplay late-stage sucked and the artstyle is obviously horrendous and fortnite-like. Hopefully they go with Civ 5 art in a modern fit
@@MrUbister
I fully agree. O loved the civ tree that came with Civ 6, but not much else. Most people liked the districts so I expect that to continue, but I wasn’t a fan.
Civ 6 did many things superior like the districts, cards synergy or the resource system
My biggest wish is a much more in depth map. For example, several terrain layers like in Humankind, navigable rivers, ocean currents, natural harbors, and just making the map more impactful.
Totally agree.
I want strategic and luxury resources to have more uses in the game beyond just amenities or happiness for example. I want more of each resource. Make our cities more lived in and have things like transportation actually matter beyond just trade routes or productivity. I can see lithium instantly being a new strategic resource and I want economics to be expanded upon. Have it be an actual way to win the game by establishing a world currency. Trade embargoes. There’s a lot to demand. They implemented a lot of good ideas in Civ 6 and I hope they just take the ball and run with the bets parts of civ 5&6 and humankind
I want smaller tiles to facilitate that too.
My biggest wish is 100 dlc for Civ 7
I hope it will be more like Civ 5 and waaay less like Civ 6!
I'm hoping it is more like CIV4.
I played every Civilization since CIV2, but CIV6 is my least favourite, by far. Maybe its because I played it shortly after release, where it hadly had all the features you would expect. Its not just that though, I think the overall design of Civilization has gone to much into the mobile game aesthetics, or console friendly, childish art design that I did not appriciate. With other games, like ARA, and Old World, there is some more authentic enviromental design and some seriousness coming back into the genre. Even though I did not like Humankind as much as I had hoped, it at least looked better than Civilization VI. Here is hoping that CIV7 pulls me back into the series.
Yeah Civ 5 maybe the last vestige of what Civ was, and it took a while for it to come together
I tried civ 6 with all the dlc, and it does suck. It might be good if you've never played the other civ games though. I wasted a lot of my 20s playing civ 2.
Your must be my Civilization brother from another Sid Meier. I remember playing the original Civilization in college and trying to study for exams and people were placing bets if I could win when the infamous Ghandi reached the Atomic Age and I got blind sided by nukes... Ghandi the most peaceful leader who goes full nuke crazy.
Civ 6 165.6 hrs on steam and zero dlc purchased
Civ 5 1,257.2 hrs on steam and I own all dlc
Humankind 371.8hrs on steam and I own half dlc
To me the direction was just horrid...if it's even close to Civ 6 I won't even give it a look. Hated the console port boardgame style...I prefer the more immersive empire/city building style
Personally i think CIV 6s districts is great the rest isnt as good as 5 but overall i play 6 more often.
Mark my words: They somehow will release the first DLC for the game before the release. Before the first update that adresses common gamebreaking bugs there will be 2 more DLCs. One of which is a "wonder pack" adding some obscure unknown African monuments for 15 euros.
Got my fingers crossed. Hope for more robust, dynamic AI interaction. Most of my Civ 6 playthroughs tend to be blandly peaceful unless I do the attacking and get downright boring before the modern era. The last couple times I played, I played until the medieval era and called it a day. Last decent play until the end was with Civ 4.
It's time for a return to a sophisticated, adult game - unlike the cut-back, cartoonish Civ 6. I hope they model it on Civ 5, with better AI.
They make civ7 for consoles… AI need a lot of computationa power so… there is zero change of better AI!
I hope they kept the district system from 6. The spread out cities and being able to set up different adjacency bonuses for wildly different things all within the same city was pretty cool.
I hope they completely remake it, it was never executed well in Civ 6 in my opinion. The concept of districts is cool and I wouldn't mind them returning it from 6, but it needs to be redesigned for me to like it. I preferred Humankind's districts.
Both looking forward to it and dreading the secondary launcher that data mines the player and creates CTD after opting out. It's the first time I'm seriously doubting whether I'll buy a Civ game after owning and playing every version since the original. 2K ruined my experience so much that I'm just not excited.
I'm cautiously optimistic about this one. I did not enjoy Civilization 6. I tried it near launch, and couldn't get into it. I gave it a few years and tried again when it was content complete, and really tried, but I felt that things like the district system specifically just became a huge chore to manage and prevented me from getting into it. I've stuck with Civilization 5, and it's been my go to strategy game since 2012. If Civilization 7 is more of an iteration on 5's formula, I'd be happy. I specifically would like to see more options on building your nation wide, more so than just rewarding tall gameplay.
I'm about to get a little more abstract here, but I think Civ could really benefit from expanding gameplay mechanics that reward complex strategies for offense, (whether that be militaristic, cultural, scientific, economic, or religious offense), and limiting expansion into new mechanics that are designed to bleed the player from death by a thousand paper cuts from within. Of course there has to be repercussions to each action, but I think constantly responding to threats internally caused by too many micromanagement systems causing various holes in your own Civilization's expansion is less interesting than responding to the threats caused by other Civilization's expansion. For me, it's more interesting for all players to have a wide variety of offensive options, and their primary focus being to counter the other players' equally devastating offensive options. There still would have to be consequences internally for major screw ups, but I think going too far with those types of mechanics and letting them be the main focus of gameplay is just a huge headache.
I am excited to see a Civilization built for more modern hardware when it comes to performance. Civilization 6 was a definite improvement over 5 in this regard, but I still don't feel like we've seen the full power utilized of what these modern high core count CPUs can do for strategy games like Civilization. I'd love to see turns not taking 30 seconds each in the late game, if you're lucky. We will see what happens on that front.
That's just me. I'm curious to know what others would want from Civilization 7.
I didn’t like 6 either but this feels a lot more like 5 tbh. Especially the 404 image leak.
Meanwhile I didn't like the hex grid and non-stacking units of 5, and the dumbed-down boardgame-style gameplay paled in comparison to 4, the pinnacle of "history simulators." 6 felt like a welcome polish of 5, at least, so a step in the right direction. Hopefully 7 brings back some of that genuine Civ flavor, with punishments for simply spreading too far too fast and encouragement to actually think about how your civ develops.
Meanwhile some old heads are whining about how 4 removed ranged combat, I'm sure ;)
Couldn't have said it better myself ^^
I definitely miss Civ4's simplicity in regards to expansion. The maintenance system was an elegant solution to discourage mindless city-spam, yet always allowing more settlers once your economy recvored, compared to Civ5's artificial feeling hard happiness limit.
It's so interesting that people that hate on VI are the most vocal about it online, but I guess it makes sense given they haven't enjoyed a new Civ game in over a decade. Or maybe nostalgia is overpowering open-mindedness, and some people will just never accept innovation. As someone who has enjoyed all Civ games from the beginning, for me and the vast majority of Civ fans out there, VI has been a standout in the series, in particular with the districts and policy card systems at play that enable vastly more interesting strategy. The only criticism I have of VI is the AI in how it cheats at higher diffficulty (like its predecessors) rather than making complex decisions based on other civ's game strategy, something I'm hoping will be fixed with AI advancements in recent times. The cartoony artwork that feels more mobile gameish isn't exactly my cup of tea also and I sometimes have issues with multiplayer "out of sync," at times, which has been an issue since Civ V for me. I think most would agree that changes / fixes for these moving forward would be a step in the right direction.
Or the "innovation" just wasn't particularly good and you're just biased. I mean, there's a reason every single other mainline civ game on steam has a better review. But no, you're right, it's everyone else that's being ridiculous lol.
I see a lot of people hating civ6 and saying they only play civ5. Back in the old days people hated civ5 and swore civ4 was the best. There just seems to be a trend with this game where there's a load of players who just can't move on from the old version
This is a whole word salad for nothing but showing your own personal bias. Civ VI is bloated.
Oh look, another biased comment
lol everyone calling this comment biased as if opinions aren't inherently biased
I really hope they go back to the more 'realistic' feel of civ 5. The cartoony look and feel of civ 6 really lost the immersion for me.
New player to civ, and I must say I prefer way more the artstyle of civ 6 over the realistic artstyle in civ 5 and before
Could just be bcz they're older art so they're not as good, dunno tho
But I must say, either way,
We all love Sid Meier's civilization games right? And the release of civ 7 is a very good news
Lets hope it get away from the Civ VI aesthetic and returns the magic and majesty of Civs V, which is stupendous and I still play to this day 😅
That it might include arquebusiers as a unit is all I garnered from the promo. What would be cool would be the ability to zoom into terrain from the map so you could see units and buildings at true scale and watch military actions at this level - perhaps using procedurally generated layout of scenery. However, what I really want is for the gameplay not to suck and for level difficulty to be based on, say, AI LLM learning and not just a handicapping system as usual.
I know hoping for it to be similar to Civ IV is unrealistic but the hex tile hard to get used to and the troop movements were too restrictive.
Civ IV was the best in my opinion.
I want to see Napoleon lead France, Navigable rivers, and 50 civilizations (at least) after all the DLCs.
I hope you can create land mass on ocean tiles. Maybe undersea volcanos that can create land.
it's strange how the base Civ V game's hardly ever gone on sale since 6 released but they'll discount the bundle at a third of the cost.
Pinnacle of Civ was "Civ IV Warlords".just make a improved version of it and it will be a win.Being Deity must be as hard as it was in "Civ IV Warlords".
civ 5 is on sale now! I just got it and i can't wait to try it
Civ 5 is great, so many hours into that game. even enjoyed the scenario's that it sadly did not have to many of
Kia ora my friend. I've just started playing CIV6. Thank you for all the work your doing and tips and hearing someone from NZ doing it is refreshing. ✌️
Random thing I noticed on the Switch eshop that the game listing indicates a storage space requirement of 4.8GB, which seems like the kind of info that would only be known if the game was releasing pretty soon.
Civilization VII will definitely have vampires. If you want proof of this, look at the logo of Civilization VII.
Slavoj Zizek would make a good narrator
YES 😅
I've played every game since Civ3 and really hope they can keep the magic going! Would be super nice if they can more deeply integrate the map and the natural world into gameplay. Force difficult choices with weather and natural events
January 2025 I reckon. I hope there is an alien invasion in the game
And advanced a.I.
You mean august 2025 at earliest…
Simultaneous releases on consoles not just PC is a bad sign - Civ Revolution ultra-cartoony style is not where most of the loyal fans want this to go. Expectations are low if they stick with Civ 6s trajectory, Civ 5 was prime.
Agree, I hate that 6 is a shitty kids game
Let it be much more improved Civ IV with significant better AI
Hope it will be the realistic graphics
Having played since the original… my body is ready!
I see a lot of people talking about civ 5… I think they should take parts of civ 5, but civ 6 is more fun in my opinion
I dreamed that I was playing CIV VII and that it was amazing.
I wonder what sound tracks would each civ have. Will there be space travel? We'll never know until then.
One problem with this game is that it kind of demands that reviewers give it 9/10 or at worst 8/10. So it will be hard to tell if the game is any good based on the first wave of reviews.
Hopefully Jumbo will deal us straight.
It would be cool if the leader for the UK would be Elizabeth II. Either young or middle aged
No Districts
No Clash of Clans artstyle
No weird drag-and-drog Policy slots
No tiny texts, overcolored buttons, and cluttered UI
I think they shouldn't change it. The gameplay in 1 and 2 is the best.
They can keep making improved versions of this game like Civ 2 was of Civ 1. It was called the ultimate version of the best selling strategy game. Even Civ 3 is crap because there is no benefit from trying to conquer cities or the world which is the onjective of the game!
Civ 7 should be a modern improvement of Civ 2
Everyone would buy it !
One thing: Please don't be just a Civ 6 with Civ 5 graphic
I want it to have all the best feature that both Civ 5 and Civ 6 has and if possible introduce the brand new mechanic that's unique from Civ 7. If that actually happening both Civ 5 and Civ 6 would have been irrelevance very quickly.
Or Alternatively, just make so that you could switch the gameplay back and fourth from Civ 5 to 6 or Civ 6 to 5, Because it's quite 50/50 from the audience stand point. Civ 5 players love their own Civ 5's mechanic and vice versa!
But all and all though, it's mostly likely that it's gonna be overprice, unfortunately ;(
4MONTHS BABY! (From august)
While I might receive some backlash for this, I genuinely enjoyed Civ VI. As someone who has been playing since Civ IV, I appreciated the new elements it introduced, such as unstacking cities and the ability to personalize gameplay based on the surroundings, which added freshness to each gameplay. However, it's undeniable that at launch, Civ VI lacked the depth that its predecessor, Civ V, had accumulated over time. Personally, as a huge fan of Civ V, I'm hopeful for a return to more realistic graphics in future iterations, as it's one of the few aspects I find lacking in the current iteration of Civ VI.
I just realized, that Sid Meier was named after Siddhartha Gautama - most commonly known as Buddha.
Pretty excited but I hope it doesn't take 3 years of dlc and mods until it doesn't feel like a downgrade of 5/6, which is how I felt about 5 vs 6
I really enjoyed civilization 4
I just really hope they've gone for a more realistic artsyle - would make or break the game for me. I've kept with civ V mostly over the years.
not gonna hold my breath... so used to delays and terrible releases by now. 2026 early access maybe?
i loved civ 5 and swapped to Endless legend--which is still my favorite 4X. I tried old world but couldn't get into it and bounced off humankind too. Didnt bother with civ 6 cuz i didnt like the art style. Age of Wonder 4 is pretty fun at the moment but I'm hopeful Ara:History Untold is good and Civ 7 too!
Old World is perfect!
Civ 6 is the best Civ ever, and ive played them all since 2 when they were released. The district system changed the game for the better - it made cities unique, organic things with personalities.
I saw the comments building up and feel like im in crazy town...
One more turn, please!
Hopefully the baffoonish Civ VI cartoons and wook commentary will disappear. LONG LIVE CIV V.
cant wait
hope the graphics look like civ 5
I wonder if theyre sticking to Sid's only 25% new methodology again. From the looks of the logo theres one thing we can confirm at least, we're sticking with hex tiles
Have any of the CIV games not used HEX tiles?
@@crw662 they were square until we got to civ 5
@@Veles343
I guess I just forgot that. I loved civ 4 the most, but I guess I just assumed it was hexes.
If the Soviet Union isn't a playable nation I'm gonna cry
Maybe I'll have to learn how to mod
Russia is in all civ games. What more u need ? USSR is just Soviet Russia. Go have fun with it.
The thing is, the Soviet Union was very short-lived, only 70 years. Also, I notice the devs like to keep leaders pre-WW2 (with a few exceptions like Ghandi), which really cuts down the options for the Soviet Union. Realistically, it can be thought of as the old Russian Empire, just under new management.
@legoword8125 the USSR is such an insignificant country compared to any other potential candidate.
@@Spugler2 What candidates are there?
I can see that many people have forgotten the civ 5 and 6 model. You release the bland version and then when they get the 2 upcoming major expansion. Then the game is really good.
I enjoyed a lot Civ V except multiplayer games because it had a lot of bugs.
Will this be like the early Civ games where you traded a hard earned research tech to another country, and then they quickly traded it to every other country?
Making your research efforts meaningless.
Man. I have been waiting for civ 7 to come out ever since about 2 months after civ 6 came out and it bacme clear that the game sucks. But honestly if they just ditch the climate change thing from civ 6 and not make cleopatra black again it will be a massive improvment in gameplay and realism.
They either need to make the ai capable of managing a one unit per tile army or get rid of one unit per tile. I don't follow the virtue of including game mechanics that don't result in gameplay. I'm done playing civ games where I crushingly win every war. It's boring. Oh! Sending an invading force you say? No problem, let me abandon my garrison and randomly smear my units about the map while you pick off my cities one by one.
Remember playing Civ I, and have played each iteration. Six was by far the least fun, hopefully they get VII right.
alien races to choose from
Firaxis should ditch havok engine and embrace unreal engine. I'll not surprised if civilization 7 have a buggy and crashing problems like civilization 6.
Hoping they can make the bots better at combat, they're way to easy to beat and make so many dumb decisions
what about xcom 3
No more districts!
Yes!
I am not excited. I don't give a damn about any modern triple A game and that studio that made Civ 6 is as shitty as everyone else. Civ 6 is a joke and Civ 7 is gonna be bad too.
Hate to agree with you but I do. VI was terribly disappointing
but you will click on a video about it's reveal? 🤣🤣🤣
@@historish165 Yes, yes I would. I do this to fight for your dignity because I really care about you guys. I fight for the dignity of gamers. You guys are gonna have some standards.
Gamers will start having higher standards soon, or they won't be called gamers anymore. Ig you live civ 6 , you ain't a gamer, your a fking consoomer
From how serious looking the trailer looked it I have a gut feeling that combat might take a higher role than previous games. If they end up having some sort of 4x style of total war that would be awesome. To have actually have massive armies and strategic warfare added in would be a dream come true. That's been my only big gripe with civ games is that the combat always seemed boring. But im probably wrong and im still going to play the ever living shit out of it.
Noice
Prediction is start of March. Right about the time tax money is coming into peoples hands.
03:13 "the E3 walkthrough is released. It's not like a trailer, but also not just a let's play"
So, it is a WALKTHROUGH video you say???😂
I pray to god that they REMOVE DISTRICTS
They won’t. But I think they will tone them down
The trailer was BLAH at best, maybe 4/10. The whole "sparrow on rails flying past non-gameplay elements from history narrated by random fake-accent ladies" is over.
But the mediocre trailer is irrelevant to whether or not the game is any good. I'm looking for two contradictory things:
1. new gameplay mechanics
2. simplification of gameplay mechanics
For new gameplay mechanics, maybe you get one civilization per game (with certain bonuses), but you cycle through leaders, each with different bonuses.
For simplification of gameplay mechanics, the current excruciatingly slow build-war-unit-slowly-move-it-on-the-overall-map makes it difficult to combine and coordinate your army units. How about any war units you build go into a non-map box somewhere, then when you declare war your box of units and their box of units get put on a smaller war-map where you battle things out (separate from the overall map). You still have to make the interesting decision as to how much industry to allocate to war units, but you avoid the 500 year wars of uncoordinated units marching around.
Thats like a game within a game, maybe you should be playing something else 😂
You are describing a game that consists of none-connected systems. Civs appeal has always been that everything is visible at once and occupies the same space. Your armies, cities and land all interact directly with each other. One glance at the map tells you everything about the game state. You try to innovate for innovations' sake, when the core gameplay has always had simple interactions with complex interconnectivity.
All the pessimism is uncalled for, civ 6 wasn’t my favorite but the civ series has objectively never released a bad game, some just took a couple DLCs to hit their stride. Plus if the trailer and 404 image are anything to go off of it looks like the feel of Civ 5 is going to make a little bit of a return.
I’m excited to see what civ 7 holds.
Empty 5 mins 😂😂