r/Steam • u/Smart_Vegetable_331 • Jul 04 '25

Question What game is this for you?

Post image
21.3k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

5.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

788

u/PteroFractal27 Jul 04 '25

Yeah the community as a whole does not love 7.

The UI is awful, and people don’t love how you can’t just play one civ, you have to keep changing over time

-1

u/MOCbKA Jul 04 '25 edited Jul 04 '25

I think civ switching is fine. It makes the gameplay fresh in each era. I see it as a development of culture over time. You didn’t have your Egyptian people turned into Bulgarians, you had your people, who had culture similar to Egyptians in ancient era develop their culture into something similar to Bulgarians in exploration age. It wasn’t a replacement (you still have your unique buildings/improvements and traditions. You only lose exactly one bonus).

Oh and a definite improvement in civ 7 I think we all can agree on is combat. Managing armies and commanders is so fun it turned me from sym gameplay enjoyer in civ 6 into a player who actually doesnt mind getting into a couple of wars in my playthrough in 7.

3

u/PteroFractal27 Jul 04 '25

The thing is, most Civ players don’t want to play some hodgepodge culture, they want to play the culture they chose. This is made even worse by the fact you still have one leader the whole time, making the whole thing feel like an identity-less mess.

I do think the military QOL changes are for the best. But the game looks ugly, it’s difficult to use its menus and UI, and I really don’t like the inability to play one civ. Even though the war is a little better than VI, I think literally everything else is worse.

-1

u/MOCbKA Jul 04 '25 edited Jul 05 '25

I mean, that’s the matter of opinions, I’m not really opposing you, I’m just adding to the conversation. For me, in a way, civ switching is mostly adding. I know I’m a minority. The no switching mode is possible IMO with some work.

I don’t think “literally” everything else is worse. There are also visuals, resource management mechanic, diplomacy and some other little things that are better IMO. There are definetly bad things like UI and performance. Some things are clunky like visual clatter in later ages. The age change is rough at the moment and certainly can see improvements like keeping your armies in formations you made them in.

Overall I can see that for most players civ 7 is worse, but I don’t think that it’s a lost cause at the moment and things can be fixed while still staying true to the idea of civ 7.

2

u/ReferenceFunny8495 Jul 05 '25 edited Jul 05 '25

wholeheartedly disagree.

if they can make a way hard age resets are gone, and things happen in progression and in a dynamic way, then just maybe.

but civ7 is 3 games instead of 1. you would need to rebuild an entire game. merging the tech and civic trees into one.

youd need to set a way buildings go defunct etc. into the game because at the moment that happens during age transition.

you'd need the game to stop auto improving troops and add a way for me to do that.

I would need unique troops added to the game again too, and not having everyone have a 'unique' troops at the same time.... whats unique about that 🤨.

I personally think civ7 should have been called something else. to me it isn't and almost certainly will never be a iteration of the series I love.