I don’t know why Ars Technica has so many civ 7 reviews. Previous one was 2 weeks ago.
TLDR Verdict
The good
- The ages system helps to solve many longstanding problems with the overall arc of a Civilization game
- Influence yield makes diplomacy better than it’s ever been
- Tweaks and additions turn building city districts into the full realization of what VI was hinting at but never achieved
- The visual presentation is excellent, with sprawling, intricate cities and detailed leaders
- Several additions streamline annoying busywork the franchise is known for without curtailing depth
The bad
- Content is light even though systems are robust; there are no scenarios at all
- The final few turns of an age end up feeling wonky
- You can’t rename your cities for some reason
The ugly
- Some launch-window bugs and other issues might make it worth waiting a few weeks before digging in
Tbh I’m a bit torn with Civ7, as while I really like the mechanics and all, the game seems pretty empty content-wise with such a small number of civs (and the 4th Era that will be in the 1st expansion)… But on the other hand civilization has constantly been a game I’ve enjoyed hundreds of hours, and it seems I’ll enjoy this one at least just as much!
I want to reward Firaxis from making good games and give them money, but I don’t want to reward 2K games with their business tactics (especially with Denuvo…).
Everything will be a DLC…
I remember 5 became a good game after the first expansion pack “Gods and Kings”. I guess it will be the same here, we will have to wait a bit more. (I didn’t play much with 6, I didn’t like the cartoon style, so I don’t how it was there)
VI is also very barebones without the expansions. Seems to be par for the course for Firaxis. It’s a shame because I want to play but I will definitely be waiting for the bundles rather than buying the game and expansions as they come out.
Not Firaxis, 2K is the one forcing shitty practices on the franchise.
Sid must be okay with it, he’s walked away before.