Sid Meier's Civilization VII

https://civilization.2k.com/civ-vii/buy/

by doener • 1 year ago

87 135 1 year ago

civilization.2k.com

bryukh• 1 year ago

I'm biased about this game as the first Civilization was the first game I saw on PC beyond ZX Spectrum. So now there are a lot of discussions in the game dev community about whether it is ok to publish such a raw game or not. Yes, not all of Sid's games were perfect at the start, but for me, Sid Meier was always the " quality stamp, " so I think they should be more careful about this release.

GEBBL• 1 year ago

Very excited for this - think the age transitions is a great way to spice up the middle game, which often turned into a slog.

esskay4• 1 year ago

Any real non paid reviews people recommend? Seeing the usual suspects with overly positive reviews that clearly arent representative.

boleaux83• 1 year ago

Check the Steam page for reviews. Seems like the consensus is that a lot of the game mechanics were stripped out so they could be sold as DLCs.

HDThoreaun4• 1 year ago

The consensus is that the UI sucks and a few features have been stripped but overall I think the core gameplay has done quite well in reviews.

skibz• 1 year ago

I found this one to be quite impartial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B67vadCC1gg

robertlagrant4• 1 year ago

IGN gives Civilisation 7 a 7/10 7 days ago! The most IGN thing ever.

supernes• 1 year ago

Verdict is that core gameplay is a big improvement and a lot of fun, but the UI gets in the way too much. High price and questionable DRM make this a "wait for sale", maybe after some expansions/DLCs land or at least after the first patch next month.

esskay4• 1 year ago

Yeah saw a few shots of it on Steam Deck, looks like they forgot the resolution there as theres more UI than map!

Bairfhionn• 1 year ago

Eurogamer gave it a 2/5.

They basically said "it looks good and sounds good but it is just dull"

leprechaun1066• 1 year ago

These days it's usually better to try and find players on youtube or twitch than to read text based reviews.

orwin• 1 year ago

Negative: Civ7 is right now a bit too simplistic, i didn't find hidden gameplay, some theorycrafting will be needed but so far, playing diplomatic and getting city-states seems really overpowered imho (especially against AI, i would guess that MP make the game more interesting), and the IA is still shit at military (Civ5 VP really put the bar high, but this is worse than 6). Map generation is as broken as it was for civ6, perhaps worse. The "realism" make its hard to differentiate buildings, and the town/city mechanic are really weird (civpedia is here though)

Positive: The new way units and general work is great, i like the sim possibilities with the way building and specialists work (even though the UI is really getting in the way imho). The "souvenirs" (sorry don't have the translation) mechanic is a really good idea for solo play, the game is really, really stable (more than Civ6 and half of paradox games), i want to try a MP game with someone from South Africa or australia to see if the MP stability issues are still present in 7 (maybe MPH won't be necessary now). Civpedia is as usual, great.

Overall: if you really like civ-like 4X (humankind, endless space, or even millenia), especially solo, you should try it now. If you don't, wait a bit. If you like those, but like competitive multi, wait a bit (it's not as unbalanced as Civ6 was on launch, but close i would say). I'd say that for a new 4X player, it's better to play civ7 than civ6

_Algernon_2• 1 year ago

Honestly, they should just remaster Civ 4. It's still the version that I return to when I want to play Civ.

One unit per tile ruined the game.

incrudible• 1 year ago

Stacks of doom are worse than 1UPT, but not every player experiences it that way. Joining units is a decent middle ground. The new mechanic (commanders) does not get this right in my opinion.

_Algernon_2• 1 year ago

Disagree. Stacks can easily be moved as if they are a single unit. 1UPT requires micromanaging each unit individually.

Also it is fun to scorch an enemy tank with 100 kamikaze warriors.

haunter3• 1 year ago

Steam reviews https://store.steampowered.com/app/1295660/Sid_Meiers_Civili...

MortyWaves• 1 year ago

I've seen the map generation looks dreadful compared to previous versions, here's some examples: https://www.ign.com/wikis/civilization-7/Civ_7_Map_Settings

NoboruWataya3• 1 year ago

That's bizarre, they look so unnatural with all the straight coastlines. That would have been so easy to avoid I assume it must be an intentional design decision?

lupusreal6• 1 year ago

Probably some novice playtester felt shafted by the terrain disfavoring them so the designers took an axe to it trying to assure some kind of "balance".

ogig• 1 year ago

I've played most Civs, enjoyed most of them, but quality has been in a downward trend since Civ IV. This one, at that price range, 70€-130€ for early access, and mixed reviews on steam, marks where I'm not a loyal franchise customer anymore.

Aeolun• 1 year ago

Civ 5 was fantastic though? Certainly a whole lot more approachable than 4 ever was.

NoboruWataya3• 1 year ago

Some people get really worked up about the lack of unit stacking in Civ 5+. (Not sure if that's the case for the person you're replying to, but it's why a lot of people see Civ 4 as the pinnacle.) It's the 3.5mm headphone jack of Civilization games. I can see how, if you played and loved Civs 1-4, changing such a fundamental game mechanic would be jarring. But I don't think anyone who came later to the series would miss it.

maayank2• 1 year ago

approachable != better

antupis• 1 year ago

Has Civs fixed any point of the static nature of the game after begin? I like paradox games like Crusader Kings where the game throws curve balls and the whole game world feels alive.

mr_toad• 1 year ago

6 has golden and dark ages which add a bit of dynamism to the game. But you’re not going to find real curve balls, like the Mongol invasion in Total War, or the civil war in Rome.

ben_w• 1 year ago

Has Civs fixed any point of the static nature of the game after begin

What do you have in mind? How do that changes in the Gathering Storm expansion pack feel? Volcanoes, storms, climate change, floods, and droughts, changing the productivity of tiles?

(Personally, I miss that in Civ2 engineers could level mountains).

sixothree2• 1 year ago

Yeah. I’m going to balk at the price too. For me civ is a “solitaire” time waster and not an epic journey.

And the real problem is Major Lords still exists. And that’s where I waste time.

lores2• 1 year ago

Get Old World! Made by Civ IV's lead dev, Christopher Tin soundtrack, great mechanics, and a team that's still dedicated to improving the game years after release. It's my favourite 4X of all time, right besides Alpha Centauri.

sien• 1 year ago

This is what the average of the reviews on Metacritic also says.

Civ IV is at 94.

Civ V is at 90.

Civ VI is 88.

Civ VII is now at 80.

Civ Revolution is also at 80.

Pannoniae4• 1 year ago

(Almost) everything wrong with modern gaming in a neat little package.

  >unfinished base game
  >81% on metacritic, 52% user reviews on Steam

  >Misuse of the term "early access" to indicate advanced access 5 days early
  >5 content packs on release already
  >oh wait not all of them are included in the Founders Edition, some are just promises for later content packs

  >mobile game UI, a huge mess (maybe because Luigi wasn't there to fix 25% of the UI bugs like in 6....[0])
  >mobile game artstyle, Civ4 looked better than this in *2004*
  >they switched from Lua to JavaScript since civ6

  >horrible performance, crashes, stuttering and ridiculous system requirements
  >skin-focused, leader-focused pseudo-RPG "gameplay"
  >who needs engineers or auto-explore in a Civilization game anyway?
  >empire switching straight stolen from Humankind but worse
  >obligatory quests included

  >Denuvo, gimped modding "support" (just the usual)
  >Atomic Age stripped from the release deliberately, to be sold back to you as DLC later
  >AI? that doesn't sell DLCs....
  >storefront disguised as a game

yeah this game is a disgrace to Sid

(apologies for the formatting, I'm not good at this)

[0] https://preview.redd.it/thanks-for-your-contribution-to-civi...

BoorishBears2• 1 year ago

I don't envy anyone trying to make games for people like this. It must be demoralizing.

Pannoniae4• 1 year ago

Hey, it ain't too hard! There are many amazing games out there :) They are just usually not made by huge studios.

rsynnott8• 1 year ago

81% on metacritic, 52% user reviews on Steam

This _always_ happens with new Civ games, though. Definitely back to Civ 4 anyway (I don't remember Civ 3, though I assume it existed); I think Civ 2 _was_ seen as kind of perfect on delivery.

lupusreal6• 1 year ago

The issue is not so much the user scores, but the delta between users and critics. It strongly indicates the publisher is paying off critics (for instance, with access if not cash.)

Hence "everything wrong with modern gaming"

mcv7• 1 year ago

Of course Civ 2 had to be perfect on delivery, because there was no online patching back then. Modern tech had made it easier to release unfinished games to test the waters and patch them up later. DLC also didn't exist back then.

Jensson2• 1 year ago

It doesn't, civ4 got excellent review scores on release. This is the first one that is significantly below 90%.

warpspin• 1 year ago

horrible performance

Cannot support it has horrible performance. Civ 5 and 6 were notorious for having minutes-long turn change times in later eras. Civ 7 seems to finally have fixed that problem for me.

There's some annoying things in it (and also the way they basically copied Humankind leaves a sour taste) but performance it's not, for me at least. It's finally a Civ again with acceptable performance and I hope it stays that way.

readthenotes1• 1 year ago

I can support it.

On my laptop it takes minutes to load and hung on turn four. I never got past that because reloading also took 5 minutes.

On my desktop, it simply would not run.

I requested a refund as my 5 minutes of gameplay had only measured 49 minutes in steam so I was under the magical 2 hours of frustration limit

mrtksn2• 1 year ago

macOS system requirements are min: M1 8 Core 8GB RAM, recommended: M2 Pro 10 Core 16GB RAM.

Does this mean that the game is Mac optimized? Previous versions also have Mac support but wasn't exactly optimized much IRRC.

nikanj• 1 year ago

Does a game like this really need much per-os optimization? I would guess the graphics are not the bottleneck, and the AI/sim code is not really that platform dependant

mrtksn2• 1 year ago

After you have plenty of units on the map the performance drops significantly. Also, when the devs don't make accomodations specifically for the OS some UX issues can appear like showing OS UI when you move your cursor up to the edges. On top of that, macOS has some interaction conventions and gestures that might not exist or work in a different way on Windows and when those are not implemented the macOS way it gets very annoying.

rsynnott8• 1 year ago

I don't _think_ Civ 6 ever got an ARM build (or, well, not for MacOS; it did for iOS); it works okay on the Mx chips, but is certainly doing a lot of unnecessary work.

loopdoend• 1 year ago

It runs on Metal!

nc• 1 year ago

Probably the best turn based strategy game out there. Spent a few hours on this latest edition over the weekend has all the same core mechanics as 6 with a new ages system. Feels pretty fun so far!

supermatt• 1 year ago

Aside from the series become a DLC-fest, what has changed in terms of general gameplay since Civ 4?

foldr• 1 year ago

If you really mean Civ 4 then that’s easy to answer: hexes and one unit per tile.

haunter3• 1 year ago

https://old.reddit.com/r/CivIV/comments/lfq173/how_does_civ_...

OskarS2• 1 year ago

I've put around 20 hours into this game at this point, and I think the criticisms are way overblown. The UI is a bit clunky in spots, but the game is very solid, and very fun. I've played every Civ since IV, and mechanics-wise, this is my favorite one (actually, Alpha Centauri... but this one is a close second). I have not found it particularly buggy (as opposed to clunky).

It feels like with every game release there's this army of perpetually pissed of gamers just waiting to pounce on anything, and when you play it it's like "this is what people were so mad about?". Same thing with Dragon Age a few months ago: everyone talked about it like it was some disaster, but I played it, and it's... fine? I mean, it's not the greatest game ever, but it's not terrible. It's not as good as Inquisition, but better than Dragon Age 2. It's certainly nowhere near as bad as Mass Effect: Andromeda.

Semaphor4• 1 year ago

and mechanics-wise, this is my favorite one

* Did you ever play V with Vox Populi (fka Community Balance Patch fka Communitas)?

* How did you like VI compared to the earlier ones?

I’m asking because V + VP is peak Civ for me, and because Civ VI was a complete disappointment for me (not helped by there being fewer modding possibilities).

theshackleford• 1 year ago

I was big into civ5 and a bunch of mods including Vox populi. I enjoy 6 equally after the expansions.

Equally, I don’t enjoy five any less.

OskarS2• 1 year ago

I liked VI better than V (the districts were fun!) but never touched any mods. I think some of the ideas that were maybe a bit half-baked in VI comes together really nicely in VII.

rsynnott8• 1 year ago

_Every_ Civ game is loathed on release, and beloved a few years later (generally after a bunch of expansions). It's how it works. I think Civ 2 was the last one for which this was _not_ the case, tbh (it was so clearly better than the original).

(I had missed that there was a new one out, might have to give it a go, so that I can moan about how it's worse than VI, and then forget about that in a couple of years.)

mcv7• 1 year ago

I think Civ 2 was the last one for which this was _not_ the case

Good addition. I just wanted to say I was pretty sure Civ 1 and 2 were immediately loved upon release.

I skipped 3 and 4, but I do remember plenty of complaints about 5 and 6, but they're great.

I almost never buy games on release day, but this is Civ. Maybe I should just get it right away. I keep starting new Civ 6 games for some reason.

lupusreal6• 1 year ago

Civ 2 was great. I mostly skipped 3 and completely skipped 4, but have played 5 a fair bit through the years and still feel that Civ 2 was better. Not graphically, obviously, but the game mechanics evolved relatively little from 2 to 5 and in some cases not for the better (unit stacking??) Worse, Civ 5 games all turn out smaller and shorter than what I used to do in 2. Fewer cities, fewer units, smaller and shorter wars. Pity it's such a pain in the ass to run Civ 2 these days.

austin-cheney• 1 year ago

I never got into Civ6. The rules were too different from the prior games and I fail to adapt. My favorite is still civ5 but I also really liked 4. I did try playing civ2 again recently and it now feels too unstructured.

isaacremuant3• 1 year ago

Your entire second paragraph is a strawman based on your subjective and unfounded "it's fine" opinion.

Unless you address actual points at face value instead of dismissing people as "perpetually pissed gamers" your entire point is moot. You just want to dismiss criticism.

I have no opinion yet on civ VII because I haven't tried it but there are legitimate concerns. Often times, companies have heard the concerns of their player base and reacted accordingly (not the loudest ones, but simply listening and evaluating if they might have a point and if driving your base away is worth it for an unseen/unproven growth)

Edit: my conjecture is that Civ switching is what is likely to make or break it for me. Either I like it due to refreshing gameplay or I hate it due to roleplay/continuity reasons.

anon22981• 1 year ago

The people dismissing criticism are the worst.

A fine case example is Cyberpunk 2077 at release - the game was ridden with bugs and several of them gamebreaking. That on top of failing to reach what it’s marketing had promised.

I enjoyed the game ok then and a lot more after a lot of patches - it’s a good game atm imo.

But the criticisms were more than valid yet there was no shortage of very vocal defenders. According to them the critics were haters, complaining about nothing, they themselves didn’t encounter any bugs (or maybe two in twenty hours) etc. It’s baffling how some people want to defend shortcomings in products - wouldn’t it serve them too if the products were better? (Some goes with any brand fanboys, not just games)

rat9988• 1 year ago

I mean, Inquisition itself was terribe compared to origins.

michaelt2• 1 year ago

It feels like with every game release there's this army of perpetually pissed of gamers just waiting to pounce on anything, and when you play it it's like "this is what people were so mad about?".

As I understand things, the norm in the game industry is for even expensive, well resourced games from veteran studios to launch with numerous major bugs and performance issues: https://youtu.be/DPW6fkcM-14?feature=shared&t=46

If you're like me, you never see this. I play perhaps two games per year. I play games once they're being sold at 40% off and they've got 50,000+ positive reviews, I've got no interest in early access games or pre-orders. Either the bugs and performance issues have been ironed out, or they haven't and the reviews let me avoid it.

But just because I never see the bugs and performance issues, doesn't mean they weren't there on day 1 :)

Volundr2• 1 year ago

I think the criticisms are way overblown.

The game lost me as soon as the long fought war I was on the verge of winning was suddenly over at the end of the age. Units just gone hours down the drain. What supposedly happened narratively? The clock struck midnight and everyone decided to switch to farming?

HDThoreaun4• 1 year ago

this isnt a narrative game. Its a strategy game. Having a clock makes for better strategy imo.

JohnFen• 1 year ago

Here's a question I've been having trouble finding a clear answer to -- do you have to let it talk to the internet at any point if all you want to do is play single-player?

isaacremuant3• 1 year ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1iolpfn/steam_reviews_...

And more on that thread tell the story you tried to bury with the "gamers are toxic" narrative.

robbie-c• 1 year ago

Both 5 and 6 were quite weak titles on launch, and they improved massively over many years. It seems like the starting point for 7 matches this trajectory.

There is some criticism that features have been removed to be re-added as DLC. I wonder if this is just that it is really really difficult to make a great strategy game, and putting out an imperfect title and iterating is the only way we know how.

michaelt2• 1 year ago

Given that the strategy game has 7 in the title, I think they've had a good few iterations at this point.

More likely they've noticed that DLC prints money, and there's plenty of fools eager to pre-order without seeing a single review.

rsynnott8• 1 year ago

Given that the strategy game has 7 in the title, I think they've had a good few iterations at this point.

Of late (at least for 5 and 6; I haven't looked at this one yet) they've been using the new versions to make _major_ changes which would clearly break the old game, and then iterating via expansions.

Possibly in a parallel universe there's a Civ game that's just Civ 2 after 29 years of iteration (Civ 2 being the first one that really received universal acclaim), but that's not they way they've chosen to go (though arguably that's kinda what Freeciv is).

ivan_gammel• 1 year ago

they've had a good few iterations at this point.

They probably have some learnings about the previous iterations, but it’s not a reusable code or even a reusable requirement. This game isn’t as polished as late Civ 6, but the core is good and it’s ok to have UX and few other things catching up later.

Just one example: in Civ 7 the selection of the map is just a switch with the names of the options. In Civ 6 it evolved into a more visual component and they added more types of maps eventually.

Could they work on a better release? Maybe. Should they have done it? Absolutely unnecessary.

there's plenty of fools eager to pre-order without seeing a single review

There are people who discover and people who follow the crowd. I often come to an empty restaurant, sit there and then people start coming. I have seen people avoiding empty restaurants as if they were plagued. Isn’t it foolish to entrust your life to reviews or others? If those who go first are fools, why their review would be important?

Nekobai• 1 year ago

Interesting. I love 5 + Brave New World, I think it's my favourite Civ. I bought 6 on a sale (so it had been released for a while) and I found it awkward and clunky so I never really managed to get into it and went back to 5. Are you suggesting the game improved after that? In what way?

numinix• 1 year ago

I fell for the €30 upsell so I could play it this weekend and get the extra maps and civs. Unfortunately, Steam errored the transaction, so now I'm out my money with no game, waiting for support to resolve it. I was glad for the macos release and wanted to support (and play!), but I've learnt my lesson on handing over control before the product is delivered. I'll wait for the UX/UI updates and a price drop, still plenty of fun to be had in civ5.

makerofthings• 1 year ago

It's alright. I played a couple of games. It's very pretty. I don't like the age system, just seems like throwing away your progress each time it resets. 4>5>6>7

EduardoBautista2• 1 year ago

No comments about the VR version?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lavuwKvZki8

Curious to see how well this will run seeing that it will launch on the Quest store only, so no PC VR?

esskay4• 1 year ago

That feels like a massive misstep. Who on earth thought putting a chunk of development time into VR was a good idea for a Civ title.

robertlagrant4• 1 year ago

It might've got sponsored by Meta.

ethbr1• 1 year ago

I think it's a great idea. God games (back to Populous) were always intended to be viewed through a window from the sky.

Civ shorned off some of the more direct interactions, but is still essentially in the genre.

I think it'd be really cool to look down on ones civilization in VR.

lores2• 1 year ago

Someone receiving a large chunk of cash from Meta, no doubt.

HDThoreaun4• 1 year ago

Completely disagree. Civ seems like a great VR game. Controls easy to use on vr, top down makes sense in VR. Imo the biggest advantage to VR gaming is that its easy to play in bed or on a couch where a monitor would be tough to set up which works well with civ.

tjpnz• 1 year ago

Couldn't imagine myself playing it like that for more than 20 minutes at a time. Multiple hours must be complete agony.

Lanolderen• 1 year ago

Not sure Civ is a good idea for a VR title. The games take too long for most people to put up with the headset and the controls look like it'll be just normal Civ with two mice. I'd try it because I'm a VR simp but yeah..

JKolios• 1 year ago

The release day of Civilization n is always the best time to buy and play Civilization n-1.

EduardoBautista2• 1 year ago

Also when all DLC have been released, bundled into one package, and on sale for at least 50% off.

morepork• 1 year ago

Like now, where Civ VI Anthology which I think includes all the DLC is currently on sale for $9 on Fanatical (activates on Steam). It's always much cheaper to game a generation behind.

https://www.fanatical.com/en/game/sid-meier-s-civilization-v...

mcv7• 1 year ago

Civ 6 was free on Epic a couple of years ago. And free for keeps, I mean. That was the best time to get it.

robertlagrant4• 1 year ago

But you had to install the Epic installer!

foogazi3• 1 year ago

Got a good deal on Civ6 a month ago, and it's free on Netflix too with all DLC

snickerer• 1 year ago

What is wrong with me?

I tried several modern Civilizations but I keep coming back to Freeciv. Freeciv from 1996 with its Civ II ruleset is more fun for me than Civ 5 or 6.

I never thought of myself as conservative or sticking-to-the-old just because I am used to it. Or am I?

faltad• 1 year ago

Is it objectively more fun? If you actually ask yourself if you're used to it, you could list the positives and negatives of both games and compare, maybe it could open your eyes (or confirm your suspicion)

dragonwriter2• 1 year ago

Is it objectively more fun?

Fun is subjective, nothing is objectively (more, less, or unmodified) fun.

ormax3• 1 year ago

and here I am still playing Civ II MGE

https://github.com/FoxAhead/Civ2-UI-Additions

piyuv• 1 year ago

Will this come for iPads? I really liked playing VI on iPad

foogazi3• 1 year ago

It's my go to platform for Civ6 too - don't know how long it will take to port 7 to it

Will be playing on steam for now

ltbarcly32• 1 year ago

The main issue I have with Civ games is the atrocious AI. (Ive played every release since Civ1) On higher levels the computer civs get basically unlimited free resources, free unit spawns, start with half a dozen settlers, etc etc and still barely put up any resistance.

I heard on Youtube reviews this is improved in VII, but no details? Does anyone know whst the situation is there?

Pannoniae4• 1 year ago

it's even worse than 6's AI

ltbarcly32• 1 year ago

That is incredible. If you watch the computer with fog of war off it will make it hard to ever play the game again, honestly.

sixothree2• 1 year ago

My complaint for precious versions was similar. Instead of making the Ai more lifelike they just give it unfair advantages. It creates impossible situations that just feel unfair.

I think given the price, the reviews, and the alternatives, I’ll be skipping this one. I’m still enjoying manor lords as my spare time game.

p0w3n3d• 1 year ago

From Sid Meier's I played only Colonization and I'm still crazy about it. An the music!

  Kiss pinky ring / Hold SmellyTown fur party 
  Not a penny for those heretic swines
  Very well, we shall withdraw our forces!

And trading with Aztecs!

Andrew_nenakhov• 1 year ago

Loved Civ1 & 2, suffered one playthrough in 3 & 5 and then I discovered paradox games like EU4 and CK2 and just couldn't get back to Civs.

haunter3• 1 year ago

7 - 6 - 5 UI https://i.imgur.com/23AopFf.jpeg

Feels like they wanted the modern flat design in 7 but it just doesn't work in a game like this

Semaphor4• 1 year ago

What's the complaint? I prefer V for familiarity, but VII looks better than VI to me.

pikelet• 1 year ago

It's boring, grey, and flat. It takes up too much space on the screen for very little reason (and I'm a fan of whitespace used well). It's generally unpolished with various elements misaligned, squashed together, lacking padding, or in other cases randomly too much padding/margin. It's just a big mess... IMO. I think the actual game underneath the UI looks great at least. I really like VI, and V has plenty of character too.

robertlagrant4• 1 year ago

Excellent Civ YouTuber PotatoMcWhiskey (yes, really) did this duo of reviews with the good and the bad parts:

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLm8D6tN6GA (good)

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFIIt8b_jsA (bad)

oliwarner• 1 year ago

Surely we know the rules by now! Only play a Civ game when its successor is launching.

Gives them time to re-release with all the DRM and you get to play a relatively complete, relatively bug-free and balanced game. Much, much, much cheaper this way too.

srid• 1 year ago

As someone who has always enjoyed the likes of Age of Empires / Age of Mythology, is there a reason to play Civilization style games?

Izkata• 1 year ago

From an old fan of Starcraft: No.

Civ 6 was on sale on the Switch for like $2 a few months ago, and I'd heard so much about the series in general I decided to see what the hype was about and if it could fill that RTS gap despite being turn based.

Shockingly clunky controls for being 6 and I had to turn on auto-turn-advancement because otherwise I'd be sitting there most turns just hitting next... next... next... waiting for things to complete. Even then the bot players took a while so I couldn't do anything while waiting for them.

After the tutorial I did one full game, won it with a religious victory (even after fooling around for 100 turns not sure what I should be going for), and haven't touched it again.

seefer• 1 year ago

They've had decades and over 7 iterations of the game to learn UI lessons. How come such insights still result in UI/UX 101 fails? Do they kill of UI staff between instalments?

waltercool• 1 year ago

Are we using Hacker News for corporate advertisement now?

pragmatic• 1 year ago

Been playing since Civ I on windows 3.1.

I've played every version but it wasn't until I set a goal of beating diety that I really started loving it. Civ 5 was the first (hated on release) then Civ 6 (hated on release).

Civ 6 on iPad is nothing short of amazing. It supports mods and retina resolution (stylus is better on high res)

Civ 7 seems to be less hated. Usually the patches and DLC seborrheic everything out. Plus the mods for UI irritations.

I think this one is very promising.

foogazi3• 1 year ago

I've been playing Civ6 for a couple of years and vowed to keep playing it

But caved last night and got the Civ7 founder's edition

Sid Meier's Civilization VII

Related Stories