Tag: civilization

Civilization VII does not get it audience.

Civilization 7 is a game that seems to forget what made the previous games, in spite of their changes, worthwhile to play. By making us switch our civilizations in three mini games, the game no longer has the same gameplay loop which has gave rise to the phrase, “One More Turn”. It is this phrase which gave Civilization such staying power that many other games do not have. This is why Civilization has been so successful for so long and yet it seems failure has finally overtaken the mighty Civilization series.

Civilization VII’s peak Steam player count has stagnated under 100,000 while Civilization VI was around 162,000. This is a clear sign that Civilization VI was in better shape than Civilization VII at the same time of its release.

We also have to understand that Steam had a smaller userbase in 2016. While it was much bigger than in 2010, when Civilization V was released, it was still before the Coronavirus hit the industry and would be affecting many work flows in companies. Such delays were causing quality dips in many games, and we can clearly see that with Civilization VII.

However, it seems that in this time, companies are more willing to hide the incompetent nature of their jobs on a game. Firaxis Games, which used to be making incredible games, were now spending their time trying to make a political instrument, which one could see creeping in since Civilization V.

However, in Civilization V, this political activism is largely kept to the sidelines, largely in its manual, which talks about environmentalism.

By Civilization VI, it seemed that they decided to hide activism in more subtle ways, such as warmongering penalties, but Civ 6 seemed to be more of a return to form as the game did not explicitly attempt to demean European civilization.

Civilization 7 basically has India and China have three civilizations for each of the three mini games. England wasn’t even added until the latest patch and they did not even have the right leader for it. Choosing Ada Lovelace is not the right approach as he was not even a political leader in England at that time. Victoria was used in Civilization VI so another leader that could have been used could have been King Edward VII or King George V, however, they chose a woman wasn’t even influencing political events in the country in that age.

Civilization VII does not understand that its audience is largely male and is highly engaged in learning about history. Casual fans are not who make this franchise profitable in the eyes of the corporate people. It is the hardcore fans, who are a tough group but are the ones who support the series in a way that casual fans are not interested in the same way; they view Civilization as a means of recreation but do not have the same ties to it. The Civilization Revolution games, are a

This is one of the reasons why Civilization VI seemed like a return to form but Civilization VII saw the series return to the mobile game and console centric gameplay. This game was released on more consoles on release than any other title which is not actually helping it. By releasing it on so many platforms, the game is not polished on the platform which actually matters, the PC platform.

It is clear that Firaxis Games does not understand its own audience.

The need for game companies to grow beyond their fanbases is a double-edged sword in actual practice. We have an issue here where the video game industry is going through a cultural change. The game industry is more influenced by what they see on the app store than anything that one would have seen at the legendary conferences of the 1980s and 1990s.

The video game industry at this time is more about pleasing an invisible audience than anything sustainable. This is why many post-Covid games are flopping. Many companies simply have no passion and are throwing the sink at the wall in order to gain the biggest possible audience. They have forgotten the artistry and as a result many games are suffering because of it. Civilization VII is one such game and will be considered the “Dark Ages” of the series.

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.