Sid Meier's Civilization VII

not as good as civ 6, not reflected how history should have progressed, the happiness system is very boring

Simplemente el peor de toda la saga, he jugado mas de mil horas al VI, pero esta solo con menos de 40h me ha decepcionado mucho, no especifico los detalles, que cada uno saque su conclusión, lo que espero es que se mejore con futuros parches.

还行

The game seems fine at first, but age transition is an almost game breakingly awful. Also it seems they've gone the same extremely greedy route with expansions as many other companies, so I don't think I'll be considering supporting them again in the future.

Background: Was hyped for and prepared for Founders Edition pre-order. Withheld purchase based on initial reviews. Followed the game, then finally gave it a shot with the free week offer. I had to sit on this a little to be as objective as I could. Firstly: WARNING! If you are photosensitive, excise caution. You will be immediately accosted with high intensity flashing with the intel splash on boot. In game, the menus/pop-up notifications are very brightly lit and colored in a sharp contrast to the dark game world. I played three games: the first, as developer intended at launch. The second, utilized hybrid settings to my own tastes. The third was as a more traditional civ game. All on Standard difficulty. My experience in the first game was slow, learning new systems, familiarizing myself with this iteration. I was finally getting into a good groove with it when the first era ended. That was the first moment it became frustrating. I lost player agency just as I was moving from learning to play states. The second era arrives, this is where this game committed the most egregious sin of all in gaming- it bored me. 4X- Explore, Expand, Exploit, Exterminate. By era two, You are no longer able to do 3 of those things for roughly half the tech tree if you have not exterminated homeland competition by that point already or found one of the possible four ways across the ocean early via the seam islands and excessive turns spent healing between. It's not fun there. Which brings me back to extermination. This part is actually where I will say there was a positive improvement. At it's heart, it is a war game. Unit management is minorly improved in so far as moving units and controlling the type of great generals you have, where it fails though is unit cost. The turn cost of a single unit is still relatively the same as if units leveled up themselves which runs counter intuitive when your troops are supposed to be treated more disposably. Exploitation is a roulette at best. One era you may exploit well, the next, you lose it all. What really bothers here is that exploitation directly ties to every core principle in the game. I frequently found over my playthroughs that the resources I needed did not exist or the means to add more where I needed, also did not exist. Which brings me to Expansion. Settlement cap is the worst means of curbing a players snowball. This was the greatest problem I ran into. Stability is entirely dependent on resources, which may or may not exist, and settlement cap which is amendable through hoop jumping that you have to chart a course through as soon as you start, turn one era one. With all of that in mind, you enter era two, and for half of the tech tree, gameplay is throttled. You are forcibly put into a situation where your pace of play has dropped to a crawl. To counter this, you can up tech and culture, the caveat, you up either one too much and you enter a situation where you are now racing a turn timer that is inversely proportionate to your tech and culture income, which influences your production, growth, and gold capacities. It's jarring, janky, and quite boring of a process to go through... twice. Era three being the victory era is lackluster. Every playthrough I was met with a surprise culture victory, this is despite gunning for other victory types and actively trying to neglect culture on one of those runs. My overall thoughts and experience: It is evident that the studio got spooked by Humankind, the game they clearly based Civ 7 on. They not only failed to deliver on "doing Humankind but better" but actively exposed themselves as inexperienced developers. They took the focus off their namesake, Civilizations, and moved it onto the leaders and their customization, cut out all of the massive improvements in gameplay made in 6 (loyalty, diplomacy, win con balance, growth and production) and gave us an inferior experience by removing player agency to control the flow of play to their style or preference. This game is a year and a half plus post launch. It's a mess that really shouldn't be called Civilization 7 but instead Leaders of Humankind. I'd give more effort to explain more but that would require more cost to me to tell the developers what's wrong and I'm not being paid to write that novel.

After launching the game, I had one question: where did you guys leave the spirit of civilization? Good thing I didn’t buy this for $80.

I have been a fan of this franchise since Civ 5, and I'd love to tell you why I love Civ 7. First.. through a lens of its criticisms: COST and AGE REGROUP rework. COST TLDR-- Love that Firaxis hasn't paywalled the playability of this game through its additional content/leader pack DLC's, and committed to free improvements/updates. Buy what you can, or wait for a sale--the gameplay remains the same for all! COST:: I actually really like the way that Firaxis has chosen to release this game. Largely the comments about this game being overpriced come down to the content packs/DLC's that have been added. What is nice, is that I think the game is completely playable without any additional DLC's. The added content at release is overpriced, I agree, though they are completely unnecessary in enjoying the actual game. I felt like Civ 6 was largely not enjoyable until AFTER its first major expansion was released that added more gameplay functionality. It's reassuring that Firaxis has added multiple updates for free (one major game update already, and another now, at the time of this review 9/15/26). If you can afford the DLC's, feel free to support the game, otherwise wait for a big sale.. but I do like that the core game's additions aren't paywalled, which is what MOST other games do, and what most fans expect when purchasing additional content. AGE REGROUP TLDR-- FIRST this is already addressed in the first major game update: They reworked the game by breaking it down into three ages: Antiquity, Exploration, and Modern ages, which I REALLY like. It makes the game bite sized with each age feeling like its own playable short segment of the game. (I can do a 3-5 hour session with one age instead of having to marathon an entire playthrough with 14+ hours, OR come back to an increasingly hectic game days or a week later). It focuses civ abilities within each so all civs are relevant at every Age that you play in too! AGE REGROUP:: Apex Age: All civs are classified into Aniquity, Exploration, or the Modern Age making their abilities relevant at each stage of the game. You CAN play any civ in each, but Apex civs get their bonus units and abilities within their respective age. ((No more playing as America with a unique P-51 plane and film studio which you don't get to until the end of the game! In Civ 7, you can play them in the modern age after progressing through two other civs respective Apex ages. Remember you CAN change this option)). If your abilities work for the session you are in, you can keep your civ and unlock other abilities through the same civics tree through a new mechanic called 'Syncretism', OR pick a new Apex civ. This makes abilities (mentioned below) like religion or planes more relevant for the age they exist in. Length of Ages-- I started SO MANY Civ 5 and 6 games that I only got halfway through because city management, and worker and unit actions just got SO HECTIC. I can't play for 14+ straight hours, so digesting each one in its own play session keeps me engaged through the end, every time for me. And the reset isn't so bad. It makes each era feel fresh and relevant with new strategies. ((Maybe I was losing Antiquity militarily and I can progress from Greece to the Normans, which are a scientific AND defensive civ having fortifications bonuses?? )). This does majorly disrupt the traditional way to play the game in previous CIV titles, but I think it improves where Civ 5 and 6 just.. dragged on. HERE IS WHAT I REALLY LIKE:: Cities and Towns: I love how the settlement cap works within cities and towns. You only have to manage a handful of city's build actions in Civ 7. Everything else starts out as towns that can later be specialized to help cities grow via farming or mining towns, increase culture or science yields as urban centers, improve trade and happiness bonuses as trading outposts and resort towns, OR function as strategic/defensive military settlements as fort towns. Gone also are workers and endless (and quite frankly, kinda pointless) micromanagement. Every population bump in a city/settlement either adds another yield tile, or adds a specialist to an urban 'district'. Settlements RANT:: I HATED the Civ 6 expansion strategy of frantically just trying to wood chop out a settler to expand to the perfect spot, because early military was just SO costly to try to capture an opponents settlement if he got there first (and the advantage of early settlements meant you had 10-40 turns of population growth to a city). You can only get to half the map in the Antiquity in Civ 7 anyways, so it DOESN'T MATTER. Focus your cultural yields! Focus your science! If you're a military civ, it's not a huge impediment to your own growth to go take another settlement if your neighbor overextends and has a weak approach to military strategy. It felt like Civ 6 punished you for military expansion if someone else had the technological edge on you with a higher tier unit. Combat felt like it was far weaker than just simply having a better expansion strategy, SO YOU HAD TO DIVERSIFY WITH ALL THESE SPECIAL MILITARY COUNTER UNITS. Combat in Civ 7 is much simpler, and it is self contained within each age. I've spent the Antiquity pummeling my neighbor, just to ally and trade with him in Exploration Age as we both go off in opposing directions to settle distant lands. Military:: Oh wow! It's refreshing that this isn't overly complicated, yet still tactically engaging and WAY MORE FUN. They reworked Great Generals into Army or Fleet or Squadron Commanders. Now you have simpler unit types that are either enhanced by Army Commander Abilities or civics abilities (which makes civics so relevant from a defensive perspective). Yes, the unit types are simpler, but it's not impossible to hold off an attack with an earlier tier unit, OR conquer and hold a settlement if you're technologically behind. Army commanders make combat WAY more strategic by allowing you to withdraw/deploy units more flexibly, exercise special combat tactics, or maneuver terrain to overcome positioning. It focuses the combat from just reaching higher tier units to a dynamic tactical strategy by multiple types of commanders. Religion: Because the game is split into multiple ages, it makes everything more relevant. Religion in Antiquity is a basic bonus applied to settlements with altars.. In Exploration you have missionaries that can convert other cities for your specific purpose (you select one specific way to acquire relics for culture, and then a yield type that focuses science, culture, or maybe a military enhancement). It's no longer a win condition and sits on the side as an enhancement you CAN pursue, or something that you lean on to give you a big leap. You can't get locked out of a religion like you did in Civ 6, and you don't reach end game basically "fighting" another version of combat for a religious victory via "religious combat". Triumphs, Dedications, and Victory Conditions:: Seldom mentioned, but this is what the game is really about! You get a list of triumphs to achieve within each Age that unlock dedications you can select in the next. Some give immediate bonuses, and others allow you to plan some of the next age's strategies. I like that Civ 7 also unlocks WHICH civs you progress to in the next era conditionally. If you settle next to a bunch of mountains, you unlock the Incas, which can work mountain tiles in Exploration (before Modern). Dedications are bonuses that make each game feel more focused for YOUR strategy. There is so much more, but I think this game does so much right! It mitigates hard RNG factors in Civ 5 and 6 and makes the game more flexible and exciting to play. I play above middle difficulty, and would say it's got an easier learning curve for new players and deeper strategies for veterans. All around, I think it's the best installment in the series and it is only getting better.

They're not competing against other strategy games - they're competing against Civ V. A pretty game but the amount of pop-ups makes it feel like navigating a cluttered inbox. For my taste, there's a reason why less graphic detail is more thought provoking and engaging. If they reboot Civ V - I would say a very *light* refresh of the graphics and a culling of what works and doesn't work about the franchise would be the move. Let's be honest, these games are going to have to be playable on worse and worse computers because of part scarcity / price. Please, for the love of god, do not go full wharrgarbl and make shiny Blizzard level reboot (unless it's cute kawaii Civ V, i'm on board with that)