Civilization VII is set for a major update that finally let players stay as one civ through all Ages, as the boss of parent company Take-Two has admitted: “we got it wrong.”

Civilization VII is over a year old now, and has fewer players on Steam than both Civilization VI and the 15-year-old Civilization V. When Civilization VII launched, players highlighted issues with the user interface, a lack of map variety, and a lack of features they’d come to expect from the franchise. But some veteran Civ fans also didn’t get on well with the dramatic changes developer Firaxis made to the game.

At launch, a full campaign in Civilization VII was one that went through all three Ages: Antiquity, Exploration, and Modern. Once the Age is completed, all players (and any AI opponents) experience an Age Transition simultaneously. During an Age Transition, three things happen: you select a new civilization from the new Age to represent your empire, you choose which Legacies you want to retain in the new Age, and the game world evolves. The Civilization games had never had such a system, and it proved divisive.

While Firaxis launched a number of key updates in a bid to turn sentiment around, and Take-Two boss Strauss Zelnick indicated to IGN that he was confident Civilization VII would eventually prove to be a successful project, developer Firaxis suffered layoffs in September, and the game is still stuck on a ‘mixed’ user review rating on Steam — its core platform.

Speaking to Game File now, Zelnick took responsibility for Civilization VII’s struggles.

“Every time there’s a new Civ, the team at Firaxis thinks about: ‘How do we push the envelope far enough that it makes sense to buy this new game? And how do we preserve what people love enough so that they’re not disaffected?’ And we got it wrong with Civ VII, but it wasn’t for want of trying. And again, I take responsibility for it,” he said.

“So we’ve made a bunch of fixes. We’ll continue to make fixes. The game is a really good game. And it’s certainly a profitable enterprise for us. But this is one where I think what we tried to do was a bridge too far, from the consumer’s perspective.”

all 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 26 points 4 months ago (5 children)

There hasn't been a civilization game that wasn't borderline unplayable without updates and dlc since civ III


  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Civ 4 slander? On my hexbear? maddened

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago*

    See thats the actual take. CIV 6 was okay for maybe 10-20h while you figured out the basic systems but it needed at least 2 expansions to become what it is today. Which was also the case for CIV5 really and to a degree CIV4

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    blob-no-thoughts I liked Civ 6 because the Maori were in it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    humankind looks better and plays more fun

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Humankind is ok. But I legit think its one of Amplitudes weakest games. Both Endless space 2 and Endless Legend 1 and 2 feel more interesting to me. Amplitudes strength never were systems or mechanics but the worlds they create for their games and just doing civ but slightly different felt like a great waste of amplitudes actual talent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    I'm not too knowledgeable about civ 6 (or 7) to comment on the similarity, but it definitely played bigger, had a clearer tactical and strategic view, while the balance was wonky it was fun to go through the motions, I felt like early game was really fun for example, I like wars, how Mongols worked, the fact we could pick our path depending on situations, also I really fucking liked it having 3d terrain, i kinda just want to paint the map

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    All the good ideas firaxis stole from endless legend 1 for civ 6 have now been iterated upon much better in endless legend 2 than in civ 7. Its still a little minimal right now with only 5 factions but the bones are strong. The tidefall mechanic keeps the map fresh with new territory to explore throughout the game. It really cuts down on that late game boredom in most 4x games where you divy up the map early and spend the back half micromanaging either your economy or army until the clear winner from early on grinds to a win condition.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    until the clear winner from early on grinds to a win condition.

    Not enough rubberbanding mechanics or mechanics that drive the rest of the players to gang up on the leader efficiently.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    The problem has never been changing your civ from one age to the next. The problem was always that the transition between the two was so poor with things like units literally disappearing.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago*

    The problem has never been changing your civ from one age to the next.

    aside from being humankind's least popular game mechanic, and there being plenty of time for Take-Two to notice that before stealing the mechanic

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    Oh, word?

    goes back to playing Age of Wonders 4

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    Ironic that Humankind ended up being the "civ killer" not because it actually was better than Civ, but because Civ 7 copied it without thought and made their game very unfun to play.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    I think civ6 (and by proxy civ7) are the worst games in the series (except the UIs in civ6 are great).

  • source