Category: video-games

Is Civilization VI still worth playing in 2025?

I think that Civilization VI is superior to Civilization VII in many ways. The game is simply lacking in respect for the formula which gave the series so much staying power. Civilization VII simply does not understand how to harness the goodwill of so many fans across the decades and instead decides to go after people who are casual players who are not interested in actually playing a complex game where you have to use your brain. Many aspects of Civilization VII, from its UI to the 3 mini games hiding behind the base game, Civilization VI simply outshines it.

Civilization VI is better than Civilization VII and it is also cheaper in comparison to it.

Civilization 7 is the worst game in the series.

Civilization 7 is the worst game in the series. There are some who want to say that it has new ideas and not recycled ideas. I am guessing these are casual gamers or people who are easily swayed by marketing because this is basically SimCity Societies from 2007 in a Civ Game.

The issue is that the players who played the older games before Civ V have been seeing the changes and that it is becoming very much like Angry Birds and other forgotten mobile games, just a brand to put on mediocre gameplay and hide it with marketing.

The UI is terrible and when compared to Civ 1, it shows the generational changes and the maliase we are currently in this culture.

The Civ switching was a concern of mine earlier on and I see that Fraxis was lazy and put in a bunch of leaders who are not leaders but Great People.

The game does not have England in the game but hides behind a DLC and puts in a person, Ada Lovelace, who was not a political leader, phlisophical, or spiritual leader in any sense. The leader of England should be a King or Prime Minister. I would recommend King Charles II of the Restoration Era.

The Shawnee were put in the game for politics and yet Confucius can rule them. Do not use the CIV has never been about history. It has a tech tree which contains many of the most important technologies in human history. This is not a very good argument to using here.

The crisis system is lazy and does not provide context for what is happening. Having every Civ move into the same age is silly and makes the game too easy. There needs to be consquences to not being able to catch up in tech or economics. Having a reset does not make the game challenging. The Civ Switching doesn’t even stop the snowballing that they say they wanted to not have.

It is clear that the game has increasingly become attached to politics in America more and not just a game about history.

The map generation is terrible and worse than 20 year old games.

The positive reviews are people who generally enjoy simpler, easier games. While Microsoft is no saint of a company, they have made AOE 4 into a game that appeals to casuals and power users. They even encourage people to improve their tactics while also being a great platform for teaching history about multiple cultures, without being myopic about it.

Civilization 7 is the worst in the series. Civilization V was a strange experiment on launch but they did not railroad the player into 3 mini games.

Todd Howard and the ”upgrade your pc” comment

Starfield has only been officially out for a single day and the game is already making waves across social media. It is clear that the game has made a great amount of money for Bethesda. Some five million copies have already been sold and the game is selling like hot cakes. This is a testament to the Bethesda’s ability to actually ship a game on time instead of being like Star Citizen and milking the funders for the project by having people buy spaceships that do not have any real purpose outside of giving the creators more of your hard-earned for no reason.

However, there seems to be some controversy surrounding a comment that Todd Howard made about the game. He stated that people who are having trouble playing the game should upgrade their computer. Now, I understand what he is trying to say. Starfield is a very demanding game and people should not expect miracles when trying to play it on poorly optimized or outdated hardware. 

I have a MSI laptop when playing this game and I am getting 40 to 60 fps with this game at High settings. It is one of the best experiences that I have ever had with a gaming computer. I totally agree with Todd Howard that in order to play this game properly, you are going to need some reasonable specs. The Steamdeck is too weak to play this game so I recommend trying it out on the Xbox and the PC. I believe that both experiences will greatly meet people’s expectations.