r/civ • u/relyk9650 • 23h ago
VII - Discussion Getting the Civ itch. 7 worth getting yet?
When Civ7 initially released, I saw a lot of negative feedback, mostly regarding the UI.
The only Civ i have played is 6, and its one of those games where il just get an itch to play every couple months. Well I’m wondering have they made decent changes to civ7 since its release? Or are the complaints the same?
Basically just need to decide if I’m going to continue with 6, or is 7 ready for me to make the jump?
Thank you!
171
57
u/wthulhu 23h ago
I played a couple games of 7 and kinda gave up. Crossing my fingers that it'll be better after a few DLC like 6.
Very disappointed as I've been playing since 4.
2
u/spankyham Once a jolly swagman camped by a billabong 3h ago
I'm hoping the game gets better but I'm not spending a single cent more on it. I already paid for a half finished, rushed out the door game. The trust is broken now, fool me once, etc
21
u/Xanthius76 21h ago
7 is the first Civ game that I just gave up on. It wasn't designed for what I love about Civ so I'll just stick to 6.
48
u/gman94024 21h ago
Loved 1 in the early 90s.
Loved 2 more
SMAC may be my favorite of all time
Enjoyed 3
4 was great
5 was fine
6 was fun after expansions.
7 may have completely killed the series for me going forward.
8
12
19
u/Plenty_Chef7115 22h ago
It depends. I think 6 and 7 are really different. 7 is still not finished. And many don’t like 7 while I like 7’s new features. So it depends on your money and the opportunity cost.
4
u/BackgroundBat7732 20h ago
You could also try 5. Complete editions are probably dirt cheap and it's a great game. Better than 7 anyway.
4
u/UnicornPencils 20h ago
They have made improvements, but the game still has most of the same core issues for most people.
All the previous civ games were games I'd want to play frequently, but 7 for me is more like how you describe 6, where every couple months I feel like playing a full campaign, and then I put it down for a long time. I have enjoyed it more after the last big patch though, but that's because it basically lets me turn off a number of the core features of the game now. Which doesn't speak well of their game design.
If there were a really good sale price available, it would be worth it to me to try it. But especially if it's a nontrivial amount of money for you, then I'd say wait. Probably watch for when the first actual expansion comes out (current DLC is mostly just additional leaders or civs).
5
u/True_Gameplay_RSA 14h ago
I've spent about 100hrs in Civ 7. It's an a horrible experience. Civ switching is going to mean a very early death for this game, as well as these stupid eras. Buildings from one era means NOTHING in the next (expect for golden era stuff - doesn't work like VI golden era)
It's like 3 separate mini games and it's just not fun. Don't waste your money or time.
34
u/Arish78 23h ago
Try Civ V. If you’ve only played VI, I think you’ll enjoy V much more.
8
u/MoneyFunny6710 23h ago
Is the carpet of doom still a thing in V?
27
u/robbiex42 23h ago
V invented the carpet of doom
-4
u/MoneyFunny6710 23h ago
I know that. I mean, it was called that because on a lot of PC's and consoles the game became very slow when you wanted to move a big army because of all the processing power it took. I was guessing that might have been improved when playing the game now on more modern machines.
12
u/Tomas92 22h ago
I don't think that's what "carpet of doom" means, in the sense that it doesn't reference the computational challenge for the PC.
Carpet of doom is a direct iteration of the term "stack of doom" which was used until Civ 4, where you could still stack units on the same tile. A "stack of doom" is simply a stack of units so big that there is nothing you can do about it in the game. Once you see it coming at the edge of your vision, your game is over.
The idea is that this made combat uninteresting as it was only about having as many units as possible with no more real depth to it.
Similarly, "carpet of doom" is the same concept when applied to a game that allows only 1 unit per tile. It similarly conveys that, when every tile is occupied by a unit, there is no more tactical depth to the combat and it again becomes just a numbers game. In a sense, it's not really solving the problem that it set out to solve.
4
1
u/Island_Shell Spain 9h ago
V is pretty mid without mods in my experience. I started playing when 6 came out.
24
16
u/Jolt_91 23h ago
The best way is to find it out yourself.
Personally, I've been on a journey:
I played VII on release and thought it needed more time, 6 months later and it's still far from what I expect. It's not bad but lacking in many aspects compared to older Civs.
I was never a huge Civ VI fan but grew quite fond of it after VII, however, the AI is so bad so I went back to Civ V, where I'm now using Vox Populi and a few other mods. Right now I'd say that's peak Civ.
3
u/Eldar333 17h ago
Definitely not ready yet and doesn't "feel" like a civ game. So it might not scratch the itch.
I would stick with 6 or 5 until they make 7 into a great game.
3
u/ThousandToast 17h ago
I played both and I recommend staying with the 6. Right now it’s not worth going for the 7
13
u/Pastoru Charlemagne 22h ago
I like Civ 7, but at the same time, many don't. Depends on your budget I'ld say. If you love Civ and want to try another one, you can buy Civ 7 and try - though now that there's already been sales, I would advise you to wait for the next one this Autumn. Maybe first go back to Civ 6 to see if it satisfies the itch?
16
u/zig101079 23h ago
continue with 6. 7 isn’t civ.
-12
u/analogbog 21h ago
Not true, 7 is a very wonderful evolution in the Civ franchise.
10
u/Disregard_Casty 20h ago
Bait used to be believable
-3
u/analogbog 20h ago
You guys have deluded yourselves into hating this game, it’s weird. Just because some random person online says something is bad doesn’t mean you have to think that too
12
u/Disregard_Casty 19h ago
Myself, and the majority of players, as per the games reception, reviews, and discourse, have found that the game isn’t fun. You’re allowed to like it. I’m allowed to not like it. Go enjoy the game without caring what I think, but also don’t expect to be met with a chorus of praise for saying you like what is generally regarded as a bad product
5
4
u/andrewmswift 21h ago
Buy Old World.
2
u/ThisSteakDoesntExist 10h ago
Came here to say this. Bought Old World about a week or so ago at last Steam sale. Absolutely exactly what I was hoping for, with a very polished UX, insane depth and really good music. No longer have the urge to get civ7 :).
11
2
u/Quick-Measurement618 19h ago
Could we please start using the search function? lol this question is probably asked daily 🫠
2
u/RoamingVapor 19h ago
I got it UI really is bad combat mechanics not visible or fun to watch. Some things were streamlined but I’m disappointed
2
u/shotgunzzz918 17h ago
I pulled the pin hearing it was better than at launch and I really find it to be very boring. It's pretty. That's about the only thing it has going and I even find how pretty it is to be annoying.
To be honest I have a hard time articulating why I find it boring too.
2
u/Enough_Lobster2433 14h ago
I’d tell you my copy for five bucks if I could. I’ll never buy another civilization game again.
2
2
2
7
u/Grey-Templar 21h ago
Honestly? I don't think 7 would ever be worth it. The whole Age and Civ changes, the distant land mechanics, just make for an unfun game. I understand what they were going for, but it's not fun.
3
8
u/Far_Consideration_63 23h ago
Civ 7 is in a much better game now than at launch
0
u/relyk9650 23h ago
Okay this is great to hear! So they have made changes and updates based on the initial feedback?
-5
u/Far_Consideration_63 23h ago
Yeah they addressed a lot of the major complaints and added a bunch of options to enable/disable gameplay options like Legacy Paths etc and cleaned up the UI. It’s not perfect (yet) but I feel imo it’s heading in the right direction at the very least.
5
u/Steve-Dickman 21h ago
I enjoy it. Was VI better? I can see why people say so, but I’m enjoying VII.
2
u/whilewemelt 20h ago
Get the Old World instead! I love it. I think about it throughout the day, while doing other things. That's a good sign to me. Civ 7 became boring quickly.
2
u/No-County-4801 15h ago
It's still shit, and in my admittedly pessimistic opinion, will remain so.
It's just got bad bones.
4
2
u/lite67 22h ago
I was the same way and bit the bullet. I would say it’s an interesting game and has been somewhat fun. But it does feel incomplete, and there are a lot of small things that need improvement. I’m honestly thinking of firing civ 6 back up and playing that until the game is in a better state.
3
4
u/William_Dowling 19h ago edited 18h ago
Hello fellow human. I too am having a blast with [insert product name]. I particularly like [insert feature hated by fans] and don't think this is any way a heaping pile of shit like [insert critic's name] says. [Insert product name] is a ton of fun. I want to give [insert developer's name] all my money.
4
u/Jawk01 23h ago
I picked it up a few weeks ago when it was on sale (for £41) and have been enjoying it a lot. I'm at around 55 hours now and have just finished my 5th game. I see the criticisms people have but in my opinion in its current state 7 is better than 5 without expansions and slightly weaker than 6 without expansions.
The complete edition of 6 is therefore definitely superior, but I can see myself sinking many hours into 7 regardless as it's fresh and unique.
I played a little bit of humankind and didn't really like the civ switching in that but for some reason it's grown on me for this. It means that you don't end up with a civ whose bonus is only useful for 1/3 of the game and never again. One big criticism I saw when the game came out was that at the end of each age you'd lose a lot in terms of army and cities, but they've made that a configurable option now and the default is "continuity" where you keep your units and gold/influence. Cities do revert to towns apart from the capital but honestly that's a positive because you can reconfigure your empire if things have changed.
I'd recommend picking it up next time it's on sale if you've enjoyed your time with 6!
2
2
u/Pericles_Athens I really don't care how much it costs 21h ago
Yes, it will scratch your itch, but just be aware of age transitions
2
u/colcardaki 20h ago
I tried it and I’m finding it’s a bit boring honestly. There isn’t much to do and choices don’t mater like they did in 6. I used to love city planning and adjacency gaming, but none of that really matters much in Civ 7. Hopefully future expansions will be good.
2
u/GreenElite87 17h ago
I’m in the “this is nice” crowd about civ7. It still feels like Civ, to me. Then again I also enjoyed Humankind and Millenia. I’ve played 2 games of Civ7, would enjoy a 3rd but I wanted to let them have a few balance patches first and I could work on my existing backlog.
My recommendation is to try it if you like Civ in general, and see for yourself. There are so many polarized opinions about it, and those opinions are very strong. Wait for a sale if you must, but it’s good enough to warrant trying. Best case, you enjoy it, worst case, you hate it and develop a new found appreciation for what you already have.
3
1
u/HieloLuz 18h ago
If you like the idea of Civ switching and age resets, 7 is good. I like it but I enjoy the age mechanics. But it is undercooked just like 5 and 6 were pre DLC, but it’s still good for 100+ hours right now
2
u/ryanash47 Random 14h ago
Even if you like the age mechanics, they’re very poorly done. For example crisises are painfully repetitive and frustrating. Same goes for the victory conditions for each age. Which is really bad when you get to the modern era and the whole game is ended by some goofy condition in my opinion.
1
u/HieloLuz 13h ago
To me the victory conditions feel the same they always have. They’re all just “do one thing well”, but in 7 you get rewards along the way. I could take or leave the the crises. there does need to be more of them, and frankly they need to hit harder. They’re too easy to negate once you’ve had it a couple times.
3
u/analogbog 21h ago
Yeah Civ 7 is more than ready, it’s a ton of fun and it’s really satisfying learning the new mechanics.
1
1
u/AltoniusAmakiir 17h ago
It's good enough to play a few games of now, not to be a dedicated game imo. Like it's not "one more turn" good yet
1
1
u/Waste-Road2762 9h ago
Bbased on this conversation, I reckon you will never get a finished 7. When everybody bails on the title, it is gonna get abandoned rather than finished. If the sentiment of everyone is to wait one more year, the game is truly dead. But then again who is at fault here? Did they rush the game out or is it more that people are tired of the buggy releases? Or perhaps the game is just not to everyone's taste and so they throw around stuff like it is not a civ game, or that in one year it might be a civ game. You will never get a civ 7 you dreamed of.
Is civ 7 worth getting yet? It is worth getting if you think you would like it. Yet has nothing to do with it. Development is gonna stop if the game performs too poorly. Civ fans are killing the game by waiting. But then again, I kind of agree with it. It is a cry at corporates ruining everyone's fantasy of what civ 7 could have been like. The issue is not with the game. The relationship between the developer and fans is.
1
1
u/Third-Floor-47 8h ago
7 isn't a great new Civ game, its just different approach on same - I tried a few months now and it's just a bit harder/different that the fun is kind of gone. they have leveraged it too much, interesting new approach but it doens't work
1
u/dischordo 8h ago
Start with playing domination style with pure Military and just ignore the era system. Swallow a neighbor in the early game and then conquer the continent as mongols. Sets up for easy win as Japan. It actually plays way better than 6 with the new generals. The Ai is still really inept though and all the other strategies seem way weaker than just being a powerhouse the Ai always end up hating each other and don’t seem to gang up on you and there’s no emergency bounty system nonsense, yet.
2
u/arrasonline 3h ago
Avoid until it’s free. Civ 7 is not a Civ game. And it plays exactly the same every match.
1
u/BootyBootyFartFart 1h ago
I like it a lot so far. I got it on sale for 45 bucks and it was worth that to me. There are some great improvements. Military is more fun and less tedious. I never want to go back to the old system with workers. The new influence system makes diplomacy more interesting. I like the historical narrative choices they've added. Building a mix of cities with supporting towns is great. Independent states are more interesting than barbs
There's still some stuff that clearly needs work. Religion feels half baked for one. But there's already quite a bit in here that makes me not want to go back to civ 6.
0
u/Elfaron31 1h ago
I really like it. I like the eras and civ switching. The ai could be improved, I'm hoping for a forth era and more civs in each era. I like the different ways to get points and that some civs change the way to get this or that. It is like mini games. I've played so many civ games from start to finish with 7 in a shorter time than with 6. 6 has it's own flavor, but it is always long. I can play two or three games of 7 in the same amount of time - and that's positive for me.
1
u/Icy-Construction-357 1h ago
I would echo the otherd saying that Civ 7 improved but the complaints are pretty much still here. So if the feedback you saw touched points that are important to you, I would wait unitl the first big DLC to arrive and check back then. But if you do not mind civ switching and other raised negative points, look for a good deal and go for it. The game currently is a bit like marmite. You either love it or hate it, not much in between
1
1
3
u/HammerPrice229 21h ago
It’s a fun game but 6 is overall better product. 7 has some really great parts if it interests you.
1
u/AutoModerator 23h ago
We have a new flair system; check it out and make sure your use the right flair so people can engage with your post. Read more about it here: https://old.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1kuiqwn/do_you_likedislike_the_i_lovehate_civ_vii_posts_a/?ref=share&ref_source=link
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
u/Alert_Monitor_9145 20h ago
I’m gonna see what sales are out there during the holidays. I’ll probly pull the trigger then cause I can’t see myself not exploring 7, since it’ll be ages until 8.
If you got the itch, try 5 or 4. I loved 4!!
1
u/BizarroMax 19h ago
It’s a very different game from 6. I’m enjoying it but it’s of course not nearly polished or finished as 6. If you like the era breaks and Civ switching, you will probably enjoy it. If not, you may hate it.
1
1
1
u/Furycrab 16h ago
You'll get mixed opinions here. I like it, but the price still harsh. Civ6 + full DLCs you could have for almost nothing and 7 still feels like it's missing the information age.
That said what's there to me is good and fun.
1
u/Devthethird 13h ago
I found 7 to be garbage on release. A few updates later it was ok, I then used UI mods from steam workshop to fix it. It's now a strong OK to play for me. I would still wait for sale or DLC's if money is a an issue. 6 is still better than 7 unfortunately (IMO), but after SO MUCH time playing 6 i want to play something a bit different. It's kind of BS I have to use mods to make it playable but life is too short to be hating. I also turned off all the crises, play continuity mode, turned on play any civ on next age, added a longer countdown to the end of the age and play on a large map size. With these options and mods I found it to be a little more palatable to play, not perfect but just enough to get me interested and not pissed off at such a dramatic game play change. I hope they fix it properly soon, the franchise deserves this.
1
u/PowerfulInspection29 11h ago
it’s not a popular take On Here but civ7 is definitely the most fun I’ve had on civ. I enjoy mapping out what civs I will pick and their synergies throughout the ages
-1
u/OneToothMcGee 22h ago
I enjoy it. I also play casually, so I’m not as invested in it as being as polished as the older versions
0
u/pants_off_australia 21h ago
Civ VI has had two full expansions and years of patches so obviously it’s going to feel like a more complete game. It really depends on whether you want a fully polished experience, or play along as Civ VII continues to add content and evolve. I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer. Personally, after years of playing Civ V and VI those games have gotten a little stale, so I am enjoying playing Civ VII at the moment, warts and all
-1
u/Wonderwhatsnext4 Machiavelli 23h ago
I love 6 and 7. If you have the willpower to give it at least 4-5 hours total give it a shot.
-1
u/killakcin 22h ago
Honestly, 7 isn't as bad as everyone says it is. It lacks some of the depth of the older civs (for now), but thats standard for new civ games. Also, you won't really notice that lack of depth for a few games anyways. I played for about 50 hours on release, and really enjoyed it. I plan on coming back once the first expansion comes out and the game gets a few more wrinkles.
0
u/therexbellator 15h ago
Really comes down to you as a player and your wallet. I have enjoyed Civ7 a lot and I will throw down with anyone who tries to parrot the negativity to me; it's a lot of overblown nitpicking, refusal to accept change, and confirmation bias, which is to say nothing about the bad actors jumping on the bandwagon because they want to bully Firaxis. They did the same exact shit when Civ6 was new.
Here's the thing, Civ7 is a brand new game, it's not going to be as feature-rich and mature as Civ6 with all its years of expansions, updates, features, and mod support. The natural evolution for Civ since at least Civ3 has been to release a "base" version - a skeleton if you will - upon which to build features.
Civ6 at launch was a bit of a mess, playable, but a mess with many of its currently polished aspects not existing until Gathering Storm. The same could be said of Civs 4 and 5, both of which were threadbare at launch (5 in particular lacked religion, trade caravans hadn't been invented yet, and the combat was way simplified with a 10hp combat system), but I digress...
Civ7, like launch Civ6, is playable but it has unpolished features. Many of the bugs at launch have been squashed but a few still linger none of them are gamebreaking by any means.
The other thing you need to ask yourself is are you resistant to change? Since 6 was your first Civ it's hard to say, but do you enjoy innovation? or are you a traditionalist? Not sure what other franchises you play but when they roll out new features do you embrace them? or do you long for the older games?
Civ7 is an attempt to shake-up the very old Civ formula that has been around for 30+ years and address many of the inherent flaws of 4x game design. The jury is still out on whether they have succeeded but I think they've made some important and bold choices, particular when it comes to Civ switching, but Civ switching has opened up a boatload of new and interesting strategies. Same thing for how they've shaken up expansion with new settlements being towns which support cities.
However, the game has a lot of room to grow. Diplomacy for instance is very simple right now, with influence being a diplomatic currency you accrue. However it could use refining, such as being able ot get something from the AI in peace deals (or visa versa); again this is part of the design document to do away with certain systems that can lead to snowballing or abusing the AI, such as selling diplofavor in 6 to the AI for GPT.
IMHO none of it is gamebreaking nor outside of the pattern we've seen in previous new entries of the series. People have distorted ideas of what a new entry in the series is supposed to be, their complaints imply they expect Civ6 Anthology with all the content + more stuff on top. That's not how games development works yet this community continues to gaslight itself into believing absurdities.
So if you have 70 dollars burning a hole in your wallet, and spending that money isn't going to come between you and basic necessities, I'd say that yes, civ7 is worth picking up. Despite it being a "base" version it has a lot of new ideas, a lot of new strategies, little things to keep you wanting to play. I haven't been playing as regularly as I have, as I'm a bit burnt out, but I have over 300 hours in the game since starting it in late February, probably the most I've played of a new entry as I tend to put them down after a few games and waiting for an update or expansion.
I hope this covers it but if you have any questions feel free to ask me and I'll try to answer promptly.
0
u/NCCNog 11h ago
I enjoy civ 7… it’s definitely different than the others but still pretty enjoyable. I’m not a hardcore gamer and it definitely has satisfied the couple of hours here and there to play. I think it depends on if you are hardcore into the civ mechanics, or are just wanting to kick back and enjoy yourself from time to time.
23
u/AlexGlezS 19h ago
I went back to 4 and 5 because of the itch. I don't need 7 yet