Just to clarify, this isn't me raging against Civ 7 or saying how you should feel about it. Personally, i'm very much looking forward to the game, appreciate the hard work that's gone into it and love that we will soon be playing a new entry into a series that means a lot to us all. I know not everybody feels that way and, of course, that's cool too. This is an emotive topic! As someone who is usually very positive about Civ i felt it was right to give my thoughts on a situation that many consider to be less positive. Thanks for watching. I know it's easy to get carried away online, but please keep things respectful Alex 🙂
Do you have any sources from the controversy? If you don't source it then you just participate in a bad PR for a future game nobody touched yet, which is weird. Because looking at CIV communities on discord or r/civ everyone seems mostly positive. Not sure why you cope about stuff we know already and accept.
@@PierreInTaipeiFrom the content and comments I've seen, two teams exist. Basically either people absolutely love the new ideas or absolutely hate them. The interesting thing is, that they seem to be pretty isolated, I've so far basically only seen content with positive/negative regards and none where there's a mix of reactions. This may also explain how one could be unaware of the criticism.
@@PierreInTaipeihe gave the source of the dev speaking about it in an interview... Personally I'm okay with it ending around The Cold War if the game is good. I think Civ VI dlc added too much crazy stuff I didn't care about, rock bands, disasters, world congress etc... But they needdd dlc to flesh some things out still. So i would rather have a well rounded game that extends over time. Civ games are long enough anyway!
So they ripped out the Civilization core mechanics ("Build a civilization that stands the test of time") and turned Civ 7 into a Humankind clone, because they realized the monetization potential of the Humankind mechanics, and then realease an incomplete game Diablo style at a ridiculous price to make at least one DLC a "must buy" item. Sorry, neither is this the Civ I loved for its mechanics from Civ I and II on, nor is the price and monetization model within the realm of ethical behaviour.
Honestly the information age in civ 6 was never that important to me anyway, its the endgame and doesnt really introduce any major new mechanics. I would rather the first 3 ages be completely done and polished before an information age is even considered.
I bet that most people dont even finish single games. Late game civ 6 always felt kinda missing something plus also felt tedious all the management with the districts, doesnt have the same magic feel as the ages before. Even tho ages are missing here, they seem to be trying to have the current 3 ages more polished and with more meaning, especially the exploration age.
@@antdj2546 just imagine if they plan to add a system of satellites to the Information age. I would be glad they take their time to get it right instead of releasing an incomplete game. Honestly, there will always be people to complain. When some features are excluded from a game because the scope is already huge, people will complain the game is incomplete and that the devs try to monetize everything. When the game includes all these features but are not polished, people will complain about the greed of the studio that releases a game in alpha state. So far, I am really happy about what I see from firaxis.
@ You are totally correct, the devs even confirmed the statistic, and thats why they are doing all this ages stuff. Over 50% of everyone who played civ 6 never finished a full campaign
I don't feel like Civ as a franchise has had a DLC issue, 2 big content packs and a couple smaller civ/leader focused ones after to keep the fanbase occupied until 7. Not only does 7 bring over most of the dlc mechanics from Civ 6 but it adds a bunch of new mechanics that we haven't seen before. While I want there to be a 4th age given that each age basically is its own game with different mechanics and civs I can see why a new age would warrant its own DLC, especially since every age seems to build upon the complexity of the last.
Civ 5 is worth it indeed, as are all previous Civ games. 6 is meh; I'll wait and watch a few gameplay videos before I buy. IF I buy. While it looks better than 6 I'm not so sure if the gameplay is better as well..
I hate that content is being locked behind DLC, not just in Civ but games in general; but I get it. The games industry has become increasingly volatile with studios closing left and right. The cost of making games has also increased drastically while their shelf price hasn't really changed in a long time. I remember paying about $20 for new games on my Sega Genesis in the '90s and now, 30 years later, new games cost $60. I don't think we appreciate how little the price of games have risen over the decades. Without DLC's, new games would take twice as long to develop and cost 3 times as much, then none of us would be able to afford it. I think the bigger issue with Civ 7 is not that they lock content behind DLC, that was always going to be the case, but rather that they announced it before the game even launched. In my mind a studio should charge for a full game, then charge for additional content to allow them to keep working on that game. Not create a game, break it into pieces and sell it in shares.
Thats why I don't buy from those studios anymore. Its all about out with the old and welcome the new now, with better practices and values towards gamers. Indie studios are the ones to support these days.
Listen, Im as cautious as the next person when it comes to game series that I like put out a new entry. But, gamers really seem to have a way to be angry at games they’ve never played or seen post launch reviews. I honestly think the gaming world has lost its ability to actually be happy and excited for new releases. You can be excited for a new release as well as cautious at the same time. I am pumped for Civ VII. I cannot wait to get through my first game. And if it sucks, I’ll be upset. But, if that is the case, I’ll have Civ III to play. I’ll probably give Civ VII 2 or 3 play throughs before having a solid opinion on the game.
Ppl are angry when companys trying to exploit them. KCD2 is coming few days before civ7 and you wont see ppl geting angry like here because they are not exploiting fans. When they showed civ7 for the first time youtubers said it have only 3 ages its not like other games that had 5 ages and that was bad, but gess what, it was a lie, civ7 will have more then 3 ages we just dont know how much, and we will have to pay extra for it
@@dejanjovanovic9364 KCD2 has a 200 dollar collectors edition just like civ7 and is also cutting out content to make a premeditated expansion pass as part of the gold edition. I really don't understand your argument that KCD2 isn't ripping off fans even though they are employing the same strategy (albeit at a slightly lower price).
gamers have not lost anything but trust. and these practices used today are simply not trustworthy. it is the creators of games that have lost common sense and the love for games, exchanging it with various woke tendencies and the love for money.
I just have 2 fears with Civ7: I hope dlc would not cost a lot and I also hope Civ7 won't be too much like an "Civilizationed" Humankind (it's not against Humankind, i love this game)
Humankind sucks, everything weve seen in civ 7 is some kind of an adaptation from humankind, especially changing civs. Humankind really was the civ killer, just not how they visioned it.
I'm not buying it because I didn't want Humanity 2, but now this ensures I won't even be waiting for a sale. This is the first Civilization game I am skipping.
The past few have been easy passes for me. Civ 2 is still the king of civilization games. The last few killed the franchise badly with the greedy dlc and prices, especially seeing the price of this one. Hard pass!
First time since playing Civ from Civ 1. That I feel they going the monetary route and I am sitting on fence about buying it now or wait till sale where it is 50% off.
Ive never liked a civ game at release anyway, so I'll wait. With that said, the dlc policy is,at this point, not profitable. Look at total war. Look what happened there.
The only issue i have is them not telling us if the 2 personas from the founder pack can be bought even if you dont get the founder. Imagine you will allways miss 2 personas if you dont get founder, is just stupid. Oh and would be cool if they actualy would tell us what personal will we get...
Adjusted for Inflation this game is Cheaper then Civ 1 was when released. Feel free to look that up because I am not posting the various hoops I had to go through to figure that out.
Yea, i'll just stick to civ 6 until I see everything released for myself, it's not right for me to spend that much money on something when I don't even know what it is yet.
"Industry standard". See those words getting thrown around a lot and that is a non-issue and we as consumers shouldnt be petty...If the governments keep printing money and make inflation worse, just because it is an "industry standard", should we as tax paying citizens be content? Think about it. Just because something is considered a standard doesn't automatically make it good. Can't believe this needs to be pointed out. I shall follow the "wise consumer standard" of waiting a full year to see how the game performs and for sales to come up. One standard always leads to another. Cause and effect. Sitting on fences used to be a hobby. Now it's a wise precaution.
Wait 2-3 years. They will fix game breaking bugs, roll out DLC, give game updates and patches, and the game and all DLC will be like $20 bucks I’d bet. I won’t touch it until then
Also, it’s feasible that they could sell several future / alternate history Age DLCs. Eg the Information Age. The Space Exploration Age(s). The Post-Apocalyptic Age. The Alien Invasion Age. The Dark Age. And so on!
Personally, I just feel like I’ve waited a decade or whatever, and now I only have time to play once in a blue moon, so it’s no bother to wait it out till it’s like a 50% sale on Steam.
Honestly, gonna pay for the founders pack and not think twice about it. Civ releases are a far and few between. They're a small team considering. I appreciate the work they do, and don't mind spending my hard earned money. This is still, very much, THE 4X game to be playing, no question.
founders edition in Canada is close to 200 with tax...that being said i still bought it. I've played civ since civ 3 and i trust them i have enjoyed every civ even beyond earth, so for me its a worthy investment especially with 900+ hours in civ 6.
I'd say : Give it a try. I mean, I started with civ 5. When civ 6 appears, I was regretting civ 5 at first. Because mecanics changed and especially graphics. Too much as cartoon. But in the end (and with extentions such Rise and fall, and gathgering storm), it is a really good game. And now I prefer civ 6 to civ 5. When I saw civ 7 at first, I was chocked. NO MORE WORKERS, I thought. No more campus +8. Shit. But honestly ? I think ages will give something unique to avoid a "tunnel" effect. Because it gives you middle terme goals. It gives more motivation and focus on your game instead of a long terme goal : your win condition.
Yeah the greed has been getting worse each release. I had to skip out since civ5 because quality went downhill and ton of greedy dlc. You cannot beat civilization 2!
Civ 7 looks conceptually really nice and like a breath of fresh air if it wasn't for the greedy DLC model this game is obviously built around. They want a slice of that Paradox grand strategy DLC model which itself is on thin ice lateley. If Civ 7 was at half the price they might get away with it too. But Denuvo combined with all the DLC's which will have content that SHOULD be part of the base game makes this a game I will sail the high seas for when it eventually drops. If they remove Denuvo I might consider purchase, but a a heavy discount.
The DLC on day 1 is definitely greedy. I think that i will buy the game eventually- but to be honest since i started playing the game (civ 1) i have primarily played TSL games and played for the sandbox experience. I also play my home civ (england/britain) far more than other civs and England/Britain appear to be absent from the game. The way the player changes civilisations breaks my TSL gameplay and the new mechanics make the game feel far more.. curated than a sandbox. I am sure others will love it, and the game will be a hit but i will wait until it is in a sale as 'civ 7 complete'.
I am definitely not buying Civ 7 on release. Just the security impact on performance does it for me. I don't like the "ages" concept - it seems like features for the sake of being different rather than taking Civ forward as a simulation of human existence. I don't like the end of workers. So I am not sure if I will be buying it at all. I did buy Civ 3 and 5, but never played a single game through on these releases. I have enjoyed Civ 6 except for the disastrous New Frontiers free DLC - I am not into zombies and soothsayers and vampires and walking my troops into volcanos and into global warming that creates asteroid storms and horses that can fly over city walls and rubbish like that.
I don't think they're getting rid of eras, information would be the last era of the modern age. Keep in mind Cuv 6 DLC added the future era, the information era was already there.
Honestly this stuff happened before civ 7. Everything about civ 7 is what I wanted and honestly I very much disliked civ 6. I just wanted civ 5 remastered. But I can say right now exploration age is going to be my favorite and that content alone has my heart on civ 7.
As usual, it looks to me like another Civ game that falls short & incomplete until a few expansions are added. I'll save my money this time & wait a couple of years before I consider buying this one.
There’s lost time at the end of the first two ages I feel like if anything the three ages will get extended to fill that missing time and with them the third one will also grow longer
I’m sour about it being $70 base edition. There’s games that come out and delivery a quality next gen experience still costing just $60. So that’s painting my experience with the game negatively as a whole. People also learn from past experiences. Civ 5 and 6 launched in broken states and heavily rely on their dlcs to patch up missing holes. I genuinely hate when people scream “Don’t Preorder” do what you want with your money. But personally I’ll be waiting for a sale in a year or two.
Buying game later when they're in sale is always smart. For me the Civ see is es is the greatest game series of all time and the only game I pre-order.
Civ7 is the first civ i don't buy from the start. I refuse to pay 100 pieps for a unfiniahed game. Not to release a whole age with the bade game opens the door for civ8 to be paid foreach age individually. Im happy to buy it on sale xmas25 and play others in the mean while
I had high hopes for Civ VII since even though Civ VI has some merits especially in the early game like district planning (still I was not the fan of this mechanic) there was still something missing what I liked in Civ V especially in the later stages of the game when you push towards your ideologies and the game with AI can be spicy, turning your allies into enemies. I am very disappointed in which direction of this franchise is going and mind you I started as 6-7 yrs old with Civ 1.
Lets simplify this: if youve been playing civ for the majority of your life and are a big fan, the founders edition will offer the most value. If you just like the game or played civ 6 and want to try 7, get the base edition. If your crying about the business model, dry off your tears and don’t buy it
Not an issue. Game prices have been suppressed for years. So, breaking it up is not as much a money grab as it is a way of widening access. The full game should probably cost 100 to 120 at release. Break a part of it down into a dlc lowers the cost of the base game. More people have access to the base game than would have before. You have to pay for games everybody.
Yeah people just do not understand that when adjusted for inflation games are actually NOT more expensive now. They are actually cheaper. You are dead on correct!
So, why is this a concern? All this is is a game plus a season pass. Literally, every game dev does this. It's not likely pay x now to get the dlc early. it's pay x now and get base game, plus the dlc that we will likely sell seperate, you get for free or pay Y get base base game and season pass containing 2 dlc. We see this all the time. There is no hidden meaning to this. You dont want to pay that much? I get it, I dont want to shell $130 until I know I'll enjoy it either. Thankfully, there is a solution. Just get the base game. The only real value for paying more upfront is threefold. 1. Early access. This is a new thing that devs do. Pay the extra or wait the week. Me, I'll wait the extra week. Thanks. I would like to not fall into an Ubi trap. 2. Maybe you'll get the dlc at a discount compared to those who get the dlc on release. But as the game is new and might not be to your liking because of the changes, perhaps it is worth paying a little extra and waiting on the release of the dlc. 3. A few extras like alt ruler setups or cosmetics.the standard flare of buying a season pass. At the end of the day, they might not be giving full early access to those dlc on launch. It is likely just a base game + season pass. It's not abormal. It's not greed. Heck, i wouldn't even call it shady marketing. It's more likely a knee-jerk reaction by some who likely have been stung by other companies in the past (cough, cough, ubisoft, cough, cough) or some troll who just wants to doom and gloom the devs. Having said that, again, I ask what the issue is? This is literally the industry standard now. If you're uncomfortable shelling out that much, like me, then wait, get the base game, and then if you like it, get the dlc on release. This should be a non-issue
I'm getting the founders edition. I love the civilization franchise and even though I don't want to actually pay more money, I'm still going to support it because I'm such a fan.
hefty price indeed. i bought the founders edition, BUT i really do hope they lower prices - civ should be enjoyed by as many players as possibble why not just sell exclusive cosmetics to get those extra dollars? (the answer is yes, they have - the dlcs appear to be additional pressure) lets just hope they dont go too far... lower prices will come (and you can already get it for cheaper by either buying a key from a third party website OR by buying TF2 keys via third party -> selling them on the steam market (free 19% profit) -> optional: additionally buy the game in a foreign country with a lower price (20%-40% you can save here)) we're lucky they're not adding loot crates, haha...
not getting this. and im a long tim civ fan but this feels like a huge scam to lock more civs and leaders behind the most expensive edition. and of course half the game has been cut out to sell us later as dlc
Civ 5 is still my favorite civ but on release it was bare bones and awful without religion and trade routes... which didn't come until dlcs...... So it's nothing new for them to be honest with you guys. Look it up.
When I play Civ, I rarely play past the Middle Ages. If they release an Information Age DLC, I doubt that I’ll be interested in it. Nor am I interested in the other DLCs: I plan to buy the base game.
@@Antonio-lt1sp Neither, I think. The later part of the game doesn’t appeal to me. Either I win early, or I just quit and start another one. With Civ 7, they’re trying to get me interested in the later part of the game. I don’t know how much they’ll succeed. But I doubt that I’ll want to pay extra to play the Information Age.
I have already purchased Civ VI. I refuse to pay more for CIV VI with crap modded content. that is all I have seen so far of CIV VII does not constitutes a new game .
I have no problem with paying the extra money for extra content. Seems like a perfectly reasonable proposition to me. It's not like they're not letting us know that if you want the extra content it isn't free and I'm a believer in capitalism, so, why should I expect them to give me extra content for free?
Meh..this is a non issue..the dlc was the same with civ 6, except for the missing age. I preordered the $130 version. It will actually work out cheaper than buying the dlc seperate.
Ima get the biggest edition. 1. Game looks and sounds really good and promising. 2. I’d rather play the game on the actual release date (6th) than a delayed launch.
I brought Civ 6 and all the DLCs, and found that it was absolutely unreal with zombies and vampires etc etc I went back to Civ 5 and am happy playing that. I was burnt by City Skylines 2. I will wait for the general consensus that Civ 7 is worthwhile before investing my money, and hop[efully there will be a sale weekend to make it a more reasonable price.
Use of terms like "monetization" and "paywalls" boils down in ordinary English to the fact that they are going to charge you money to play their game, then a bit more money to play a version of their game that has more civs and leaders. Should any pure luxury, such as this game, ever get distributed for free, on a non-monetized basis that doesn't lock them behind a paywall? And, as pure luxuries go, this game is going to cost the people who play it way more than most luxuries in terms of the time the Civ addicts among us are going to devote to it. I have thousands of hours in Civ 6, so the $60.00 I paid for it in 2016 dollars is the smallest drop in the bucket in comparison to the total human cost I have paid for that earlier version of the game. Oh, and the $60.00 I paid for 6 in October 2016 is worth $78.31 in November 2024 dollars, so at an asking price of $70.00, Firaxis seems to have come up $8.31 short in its monetization scheme for 7, compared to 6. They've gone Mother Theresa on us.
You know how they could sell me on the information age being its own dlc? Make a crisis mode where you need to stop skynet. In multiplayer mode, maybe one player can become skynet and then everyone needs to put aside their differences and fight it. Don't just bring a new era with the dlc, actually give a new game mode that isn't available in previous eras as well.
Civ7 sucks i was excited until they revealed Humankind 2.0 gameplay bullshit i already bought that and wasted 80 aussie bucks im not going to to repeat that mistake this style of gameplay is boring and dumb and isnt a true Civ game im sticking with my first civ game wich will be my last ever civ game if they dont return to civ 6 style bc Civ 6 is superior Civ 7 is lipstick on a pig and the last age not in base game just confirms my saying naah eff off firaxs & 2k
Oh, back in time this was completely different. We were pretty happy getting a full game at lauch, without paywalls. I've been playing Civ since Civ 1, and I can assure that.
what SHOULD civ 7 monetize? New and expansive DLC? It likely will do that. Should all DLC be free? ok, lets assume alternate reality where it is free. Where does money come from? Funny hats for the leaders? No one's gonna buy that. I don't know how 'they cant charge for that' crowd expects companies to generate revenue. Ubisoft tried doing mostly only paid cosmetic stuff for their games, and now they've lost so much money that they're about to be bought by the chinese military.
Playing Civ since 1995, this one will be a hard pass, since I don't agree with these shady practices. I really feel bad for people who can't control their FOMO and will accept to be exploited with an expensive and unfinished game, but I guess that's life.
I think Civ 7 will be a total fail unlike its previous installments as it will be similar to Humankind. Leaders will be mostly non-reigning including Machiavelli and Lafayette. Would need a new laptop - Acer Helios Neo 16 RTX 40 series with Intel Core 14th generation processor.
Just to clarify, this isn't me raging against Civ 7 or saying how you should feel about it.
Personally, i'm very much looking forward to the game, appreciate the hard work that's gone into it and love that we will soon be playing a new entry into a series that means a lot to us all. I know not everybody feels that way and, of course, that's cool too.
This is an emotive topic!
As someone who is usually very positive about Civ i felt it was right to give my thoughts on a situation that many consider to be less positive.
Thanks for watching. I know it's easy to get carried away online, but please keep things respectful
Alex 🙂
game is doa then when they realize it too late they will put discount after its dead
Do you have any sources from the controversy? If you don't source it then you just participate in a bad PR for a future game nobody touched yet, which is weird. Because looking at CIV communities on discord or r/civ everyone seems mostly positive. Not sure why you cope about stuff we know already and accept.
@@PierreInTaipeiFrom the content and comments I've seen, two teams exist. Basically either people absolutely love the new ideas or absolutely hate them. The interesting thing is, that they seem to be pretty isolated, I've so far basically only seen content with positive/negative regards and none where there's a mix of reactions.
This may also explain how one could be unaware of the criticism.
It's not rant. It is pure common sense.
@@PierreInTaipeihe gave the source of the dev speaking about it in an interview...
Personally I'm okay with it ending around The Cold War if the game is good. I think Civ VI dlc added too much crazy stuff I didn't care about, rock bands, disasters, world congress etc... But they needdd dlc to flesh some things out still. So i would rather have a well rounded game that extends over time. Civ games are long enough anyway!
The comments are filled with people justifying the greed lmao.
Sell a game at $70. Day 1 dlc is bullshit.
I skipped the last few because of predatory behaviour. I haven't seen a good civ game since the fourth, and I still play civ 2 over that one.
Civ V sold for $40, 15 years ago. Go ahead and apply the inflation rate to that. I'll wait.
So they ripped out the Civilization core mechanics ("Build a civilization that stands the test of time") and turned Civ 7 into a Humankind clone, because they realized the monetization potential of the Humankind mechanics, and then realease an incomplete game Diablo style at a ridiculous price to make at least one DLC a "must buy" item.
Sorry, neither is this the Civ I loved for its mechanics from Civ I and II on, nor is the price and monetization model within the realm of ethical behaviour.
Honestly the information age in civ 6 was never that important to me anyway, its the endgame and doesnt really introduce any major new mechanics. I would rather the first 3 ages be completely done and polished before an information age is even considered.
This
I bet that most people dont even finish single games.
Late game civ 6 always felt kinda missing something plus also felt tedious all the management with the districts, doesnt have the same magic feel as the ages before.
Even tho ages are missing here, they seem to be trying to have the current 3 ages more polished and with more meaning, especially the exploration age.
@@antdj2546 just imagine if they plan to add a system of satellites to the Information age. I would be glad they take their time to get it right instead of releasing an incomplete game.
Honestly, there will always be people to complain. When some features are excluded from a game because the scope is already huge, people will complain the game is incomplete and that the devs try to monetize everything. When the game includes all these features but are not polished, people will complain about the greed of the studio that releases a game in alpha state.
So far, I am really happy about what I see from firaxis.
@ You are totally correct, the devs even confirmed the statistic, and thats why they are doing all this ages stuff.
Over 50% of everyone who played civ 6 never finished a full campaign
I don't feel like Civ as a franchise has had a DLC issue, 2 big content packs and a couple smaller civ/leader focused ones after to keep the fanbase occupied until 7.
Not only does 7 bring over most of the dlc mechanics from Civ 6 but it adds a bunch of new mechanics that we haven't seen before. While I want there to be a 4th age given that each age basically is its own game with different mechanics and civs I can see why a new age would warrant its own DLC, especially since every age seems to build upon the complexity of the last.
Civ has always had the 2 expansion model since 3 at least?
they can see what works and what doesn't and make the 4th age even better!
It's going to be like the world Congress in civ 6 interrupting everything to read a bunch of stuff
Civ has replay value . You can have 1000+ hours . Civ is totally worth its price .
But Civ 7 looks like it will not be. (as must as Civ 5 / 6) And the DEI BS with it is also and issue not just the price.
Civ 5 is worth it indeed, as are all previous Civ games. 6 is meh; I'll wait and watch a few gameplay videos before I buy. IF I buy. While it looks better than 6 I'm not so sure if the gameplay is better as well..
@@clinthenness7186 - Sounds like a "you" problem, not a "game" problem.
@@clinthenness7186 What dei bs lol the game seems fine to me
@@tritan3900 the man hates harriette tubman
I hate that content is being locked behind DLC, not just in Civ but games in general; but I get it. The games industry has become increasingly volatile with studios closing left and right. The cost of making games has also increased drastically while their shelf price hasn't really changed in a long time. I remember paying about $20 for new games on my Sega Genesis in the '90s and now, 30 years later, new games cost $60. I don't think we appreciate how little the price of games have risen over the decades. Without DLC's, new games would take twice as long to develop and cost 3 times as much, then none of us would be able to afford it.
I think the bigger issue with Civ 7 is not that they lock content behind DLC, that was always going to be the case, but rather that they announced it before the game even launched. In my mind a studio should charge for a full game, then charge for additional content to allow them to keep working on that game. Not create a game, break it into pieces and sell it in shares.
Thats why I don't buy from those studios anymore. Its all about out with the old and welcome the new now, with better practices and values towards gamers. Indie studios are the ones to support these days.
Listen, Im as cautious as the next person when it comes to game series that I like put out a new entry. But, gamers really seem to have a way to be angry at games they’ve never played or seen post launch reviews. I honestly think the gaming world has lost its ability to actually be happy and excited for new releases. You can be excited for a new release as well as cautious at the same time. I am pumped for Civ VII. I cannot wait to get through my first game. And if it sucks, I’ll be upset. But, if that is the case, I’ll have Civ III to play. I’ll probably give Civ VII 2 or 3 play throughs before having a solid opinion on the game.
I'm very excited for Civ 7 and I appreciate your balanced approach.
It was a topic I wanted to discuss 🙂
Ppl are angry when companys trying to exploit them. KCD2 is coming few days before civ7 and you wont see ppl geting angry like here because they are not exploiting fans. When they showed civ7 for the first time youtubers said it have only 3 ages its not like other games that had 5 ages and that was bad, but gess what, it was a lie, civ7 will have more then 3 ages we just dont know how much, and we will have to pay extra for it
@@dejanjovanovic9364 KCD2 has a 200 dollar collectors edition just like civ7 and is also cutting out content to make a premeditated expansion pass as part of the gold edition. I really don't understand your argument that KCD2 isn't ripping off fans even though they are employing the same strategy (albeit at a slightly lower price).
@@RIPDixie1865 Yes, future games will be affordable for the liberal elites.
gamers have not lost anything but trust. and these practices used today are simply not trustworthy. it is the creators of games that have lost common sense and the love for games, exchanging it with various woke tendencies and the love for money.
I just have 2 fears with Civ7: I hope dlc would not cost a lot and I also hope Civ7 won't be too much like an "Civilizationed" Humankind (it's not against Humankind, i love this game)
Eras is a direct rip from Humankind..and that's OK..I really enjoy Humankind.
Humankind sucks, everything weve seen in civ 7 is some kind of an adaptation from humankind, especially changing civs. Humankind really was the civ killer, just not how they visioned it.
I'm not buying it because I didn't want Humanity 2, but now this ensures I won't even be waiting for a sale. This is the first Civilization game I am skipping.
The past few have been easy passes for me. Civ 2 is still the king of civilization games. The last few killed the franchise badly with the greedy dlc and prices, especially seeing the price of this one. Hard pass!
First time since playing Civ from Civ 1. That I feel they going the monetary route and I am sitting on fence about buying it now or wait till sale where it is 50% off.
Play civ 5, trust.
@@LeoMajor1 Weirdly i have been playing CIV 5 and ras quite a bit.
Ive never liked a civ game at release anyway, so I'll wait.
With that said, the dlc policy is,at this point, not profitable.
Look at total war. Look what happened there.
The only issue i have is them not telling us if the 2 personas from the founder pack can be bought even if you dont get the founder. Imagine you will allways miss 2 personas if you dont get founder, is just stupid. Oh and would be cool if they actualy would tell us what personal will we get...
Adjusted for Inflation this game is Cheaper then Civ 1 was when released. Feel free to look that up because I am not posting the various hoops I had to go through to figure that out.
Yea, i'll just stick to civ 6 until I see everything released for myself, it's not right for me to spend that much money on something when I don't even know what it is yet.
If I had only Civ 6 to play I'd give 7 a try at launch. But my favourite is 5, so I wait.
"Industry standard". See those words getting thrown around a lot and that is a non-issue and we as consumers shouldnt be petty...If the governments keep printing money and make inflation worse, just because it is an "industry standard", should we as tax paying citizens be content? Think about it. Just because something is considered a standard doesn't automatically make it good. Can't believe this needs to be pointed out.
I shall follow the "wise consumer standard" of waiting a full year to see how the game performs and for sales to come up. One standard always leads to another. Cause and effect. Sitting on fences used to be a hobby. Now it's a wise precaution.
Wait 2-3 years. They will fix game breaking bugs, roll out DLC, give game updates and patches, and the game and all DLC will be like $20 bucks I’d bet. I won’t touch it until then
Also, it’s feasible that they could sell several future / alternate history Age DLCs. Eg the Information Age. The Space Exploration Age(s). The Post-Apocalyptic Age. The Alien Invasion Age. The Dark Age.
And so on!
The Civ game me decades of joy and many thousands of hours of fun. I don't mind giving several hundred dollars for the brand. It is worthy.
People wine way too much about every little details. Some of y’all really need to take a shower and go outside
Personally, I just feel like I’ve waited a decade or whatever, and now I only have time to play once in a blue moon, so it’s no bother to wait it out till it’s like a 50% sale on Steam.
Honestly, gonna pay for the founders pack and not think twice about it. Civ releases are a far and few between. They're a small team considering. I appreciate the work they do, and don't mind spending my hard earned money. This is still, very much, THE 4X game to be playing, no question.
Everybody is talking about humankind, that hand is dope has potential and is more narrative than civ, combined with civ it’s perfect in theory
founders edition in Canada is close to 200 with tax...that being said i still bought it. I've played civ since civ 3 and i trust them i have enjoyed every civ even beyond earth, so for me its a worthy investment especially with 900+ hours in civ 6.
I'd say : Give it a try.
I mean, I started with civ 5. When civ 6 appears, I was regretting civ 5 at first. Because mecanics changed and especially graphics. Too much as cartoon.
But in the end (and with extentions such Rise and fall, and gathgering storm), it is a really good game. And now I prefer civ 6 to civ 5.
When I saw civ 7 at first, I was chocked. NO MORE WORKERS, I thought. No more campus +8. Shit. But honestly ? I think ages will give something unique to avoid a "tunnel" effect. Because it gives you middle terme goals. It gives more motivation and focus on your game instead of a long terme goal : your win condition.
I bet additional DLCs will sell in the range of $40 - $50, on top of the base price (with goodies) of $130. Insanity abounds.
Civ V is my most played Steam game, at well over 500 hours. Civ VII will get even more. I find value in ANY game that costs a dollar an hour or less.
Yeah the greed has been getting worse each release. I had to skip out since civ5 because quality went downhill and ton of greedy dlc. You cannot beat civilization 2!
@@travisv6408 I will have to get out "2" and try it. Thanks for the tip !
Civ 7 looks conceptually really nice and like a breath of fresh air if it wasn't for the greedy DLC model this game is obviously built around. They want a slice of that Paradox grand strategy DLC model which itself is on thin ice lateley. If Civ 7 was at half the price they might get away with it too. But Denuvo combined with all the DLC's which will have content that SHOULD be part of the base game makes this a game I will sail the high seas for when it eventually drops. If they remove Denuvo I might consider purchase, but a a heavy discount.
The DLC on day 1 is definitely greedy. I think that i will buy the game eventually- but to be honest since i started playing the game (civ 1) i have primarily played TSL games and played for the sandbox experience. I also play my home civ (england/britain) far more than other civs and England/Britain appear to be absent from the game. The way the player changes civilisations breaks my TSL gameplay and the new mechanics make the game feel far more.. curated than a sandbox. I am sure others will love it, and the game will be a hit but i will wait until it is in a sale as 'civ 7 complete'.
I am definitely not buying Civ 7 on release. Just the security impact on performance does it for me. I don't like the "ages" concept - it seems like features for the sake of being different rather than taking Civ forward as a simulation of human existence. I don't like the end of workers. So I am not sure if I will be buying it at all. I did buy Civ 3 and 5, but never played a single game through on these releases. I have enjoyed Civ 6 except for the disastrous New Frontiers free DLC - I am not into zombies and soothsayers and vampires and walking my troops into volcanos and into global warming that creates asteroid storms and horses that can fly over city walls and rubbish like that.
I don't think they're getting rid of eras, information would be the last era of the modern age. Keep in mind Cuv 6 DLC added the future era, the information era was already there.
I'll be happy to stick to CIV V and VI
Honestly this stuff happened before civ 7. Everything about civ 7 is what I wanted and honestly I very much disliked civ 6. I just wanted civ 5 remastered. But I can say right now exploration age is going to be my favorite and that content alone has my heart on civ 7.
As usual, it looks to me like another Civ game that falls short & incomplete until a few expansions are added. I'll save my money this time & wait a couple of years before I consider buying this one.
The "information age" speculation as an extra age down the road, is no different from gathering storm, rise of tides etc. For the previous games imo.
There’s lost time at the end of the first two ages
I feel like if anything the three ages will get extended to fill that missing time and with them the third one will also grow longer
I will buy the maxed edition of the game. I never seen a bad Civ game, not expect to see one on the 7'th edition either
Let's hope so! I'm very much looking forward to it.
Makes sense on why they kept it as America instead of the United States if there is an Information Age
The OST for America is called colonial America. Wouldn’t be surprised if a bunch of civs get renamed once the Information Age kicks in.
I’m sour about it being $70 base edition. There’s games that come out and delivery a quality next gen experience still costing just $60. So that’s painting my experience with the game negatively as a whole.
People also learn from past experiences. Civ 5 and 6 launched in broken states and heavily rely on their dlcs to patch up missing holes.
I genuinely hate when people scream “Don’t Preorder” do what you want with your money. But personally I’ll be waiting for a sale in a year or two.
Absolutely people should do what they want! I'll be pre-ordering but appreciate that not everybody wants to. 🙂
Buying game later when they're in sale is always smart. For me the Civ see is es is the greatest game series of all time and the only game I pre-order.
Yes, but don't pre-order it anyway 👀😂
Civ7 is the first civ i don't buy from the start. I refuse to pay 100 pieps for a unfiniahed game. Not to release a whole age with the bade game opens the door for civ8 to be paid foreach age individually.
Im happy to buy it on sale xmas25 and play others in the mean while
I had high hopes for Civ VII since even though Civ VI has some merits especially in the early game like district planning (still I was not the fan of this mechanic) there was still something missing what I liked in Civ V especially in the later stages of the game when you push towards your ideologies and the game with AI can be spicy, turning your allies into enemies. I am very disappointed in which direction of this franchise is going and mind you I started as 6-7 yrs old with Civ 1.
I'm going to wait for Civ VIII, then Civ VII will be on a deep sale.
Still have, still play, still happy with V. No game is worth 100 especially incomplete Humankind.
I already pre ordered founders so im all in, I think DLC is fine and well worth the money
Lets simplify this: if youve been playing civ for the majority of your life and are a big fan, the founders edition will offer the most value. If you just like the game or played civ 6 and want to try 7, get the base edition. If your crying about the business model, dry off your tears and don’t buy it
You're wrong they are all part of it.
Not an issue. Game prices have been suppressed for years. So, breaking it up is not as much a money grab as it is a way of widening access. The full game should probably cost 100 to 120 at release. Break a part of it down into a dlc lowers the cost of the base game. More people have access to the base game than would have before. You have to pay for games everybody.
Yeah people just do not understand that when adjusted for inflation games are actually NOT more expensive now. They are actually cheaper. You are dead on correct!
Rage against the NOT released detected!
So, why is this a concern? All this is is a game plus a season pass. Literally, every game dev does this. It's not likely pay x now to get the dlc early. it's pay x now and get base game, plus the dlc that we will likely sell seperate, you get for free or pay Y get base base game and season pass containing 2 dlc. We see this all the time. There is no hidden meaning to this. You dont want to pay that much? I get it, I dont want to shell $130 until I know I'll enjoy it either. Thankfully, there is a solution. Just get the base game. The only real value for paying more upfront is threefold.
1. Early access. This is a new thing that devs do. Pay the extra or wait the week. Me, I'll wait the extra week. Thanks. I would like to not fall into an Ubi trap.
2. Maybe you'll get the dlc at a discount compared to those who get the dlc on release. But as the game is new and might not be to your liking because of the changes, perhaps it is worth paying a little extra and waiting on the release of the dlc.
3. A few extras like alt ruler setups or cosmetics.the standard flare of buying a season pass.
At the end of the day, they might not be giving full early access to those dlc on launch. It is likely just a base game + season pass. It's not abormal. It's not greed. Heck, i wouldn't even call it shady marketing. It's more likely a knee-jerk reaction by some who likely have been stung by other companies in the past (cough, cough, ubisoft, cough, cough) or some troll who just wants to doom and gloom the devs. Having said that, again, I ask what the issue is? This is literally the industry standard now. If you're uncomfortable shelling out that much, like me, then wait, get the base game, and then if you like it, get the dlc on release. This should be a non-issue
I'm getting the founders edition. I love the civilization franchise and even though I don't want to actually pay more money, I'm still going to support it because I'm such a fan.
SIMP
@TRH2243 Grow up lil man. I don't tell you how to spend the few pennies you get.😁
@@One17Seven didn’t tell you how to spend your money. I described your behavior.
hefty price indeed.
i bought the founders edition, BUT i really do hope they lower prices - civ should be enjoyed by as many players as possibble
why not just sell exclusive cosmetics to get those extra dollars? (the answer is yes, they have - the dlcs appear to be additional pressure)
lets just hope they dont go too far... lower prices will come (and you can already get it for cheaper by either buying a key from a third party website OR by buying TF2 keys via third party -> selling them on the steam market (free 19% profit) -> optional: additionally buy the game in a foreign country with a lower price (20%-40% you can save here))
we're lucky they're not adding loot crates, haha...
not getting this. and im a long tim civ fan but this feels like a huge scam to lock more civs and leaders behind the most expensive edition. and of course half the game has been cut out to sell us later as dlc
Civ 5 is still my favorite civ but on release it was bare bones and awful without religion and trade routes... which didn't come until dlcs......
So it's nothing new for them to be honest with you guys.
Look it up.
When I play Civ, I rarely play past the Middle Ages. If they release an Information Age DLC, I doubt that I’ll be interested in it. Nor am I interested in the other DLCs: I plan to buy the base game.
Either you're too good or too bad at it then 😂😂😂😂😂
@@Antonio-lt1sp Neither, I think. The later part of the game doesn’t appeal to me. Either I win early, or I just quit and start another one.
With Civ 7, they’re trying to get me interested in the later part of the game. I don’t know how much they’ll succeed. But I doubt that I’ll want to pay extra to play the Information Age.
@@jonathan.palfrey fair enough 👊🏻
I have already purchased Civ VI. I refuse to pay more for CIV VI with crap modded content. that is all I have seen so far of CIV VII does not constitutes a new game .
You haven't been paying attention. It's a HUGELY different game.
Still has denuvo. So no
I have no problem with paying the extra money for extra content. Seems like a perfectly reasonable proposition to me. It's not like they're not letting us know that if you want the extra content it isn't free and I'm a believer in capitalism, so, why should I expect them to give me extra content for free?
Meh..this is a non issue..the dlc was the same with civ 6, except for the missing age. I preordered the $130 version. It will actually work out cheaper than buying the dlc seperate.
Ima get the biggest edition.
1. Game looks and sounds really good and promising.
2. I’d rather play the game on the actual release date (6th) than a delayed launch.
I brought Civ 6 and all the DLCs, and found that it was absolutely unreal with zombies and vampires etc etc I went back to Civ 5 and am happy playing that. I was burnt by City Skylines 2. I will wait for the general consensus that Civ 7 is worthwhile before investing my money, and hop[efully there will be a sale weekend to make it a more reasonable price.
$130
no
Use of terms like "monetization" and "paywalls" boils down in ordinary English to the fact that they are going to charge you money to play their game, then a bit more money to play a version of their game that has more civs and leaders. Should any pure luxury, such as this game, ever get distributed for free, on a non-monetized basis that doesn't lock them behind a paywall?
And, as pure luxuries go, this game is going to cost the people who play it way more than most luxuries in terms of the time the Civ addicts among us are going to devote to it. I have thousands of hours in Civ 6, so the $60.00 I paid for it in 2016 dollars is the smallest drop in the bucket in comparison to the total human cost I have paid for that earlier version of the game.
Oh, and the $60.00 I paid for 6 in October 2016 is worth $78.31 in November 2024 dollars, so at an asking price of $70.00, Firaxis seems to have come up $8.31 short in its monetization scheme for 7, compared to 6. They've gone Mother Theresa on us.
You know how they could sell me on the information age being its own dlc?
Make a crisis mode where you need to stop skynet. In multiplayer mode, maybe one player can become skynet and then everyone needs to put aside their differences and fight it.
Don't just bring a new era with the dlc, actually give a new game mode that isn't available in previous eras as well.
Civ7 sucks i was excited until they revealed Humankind 2.0 gameplay bullshit i already bought that and wasted 80 aussie bucks im not going to to repeat that mistake this style of gameplay is boring and dumb and isnt a true Civ game im sticking with my first civ game wich will be my last ever civ game if they dont return to civ 6 style bc Civ 6 is superior Civ 7 is lipstick on a pig and the last age not in base game just confirms my saying naah eff off firaxs & 2k
fans are never happy
Oh, back in time this was completely different. We were pretty happy getting a full game at lauch, without paywalls. I've been playing Civ since Civ 1, and I can assure that.
what SHOULD civ 7 monetize? New and expansive DLC? It likely will do that. Should all DLC be free? ok, lets assume alternate reality where it is free. Where does money come from? Funny hats for the leaders? No one's gonna buy that. I don't know how 'they cant charge for that' crowd expects companies to generate revenue. Ubisoft tried doing mostly only paid cosmetic stuff for their games, and now they've lost so much money that they're about to be bought by the chinese military.
Playing Civ since 1995, this one will be a hard pass, since I don't agree with these shady practices. I really feel bad for people who can't control their FOMO and will accept to be exploited with an expensive and unfinished game, but I guess that's life.
Greed is always their first DLC.. 😜 Going to stay at Civ4...
Good idea. Very Good idea ! ! !
Game looks ass
Seriously? By FAR the nicest looking Civ game. Are you on drugs?
Depends how you feel about ass.
@ graphically yes the game looks very nice. Mechanically it looks bad
I think Civ 7 will be a total fail unlike its previous installments as it will be similar to Humankind. Leaders will be mostly non-reigning including Machiavelli and Lafayette. Would need a new laptop - Acer Helios Neo 16 RTX 40 series with Intel Core 14th generation processor.
This would be the first civ to disappoint me. Only 4k settings have high recommendations. You could even get the steam deck or play on a console.
THIRTY ONE civs at start. They're a business. If you don't like their business, THEN DON'T BUY THE GAME. Jesus...