Sid Meier's Civilization VII

ゴミゲー

It's fun for a free weekend but will never be worth spending money on. Until it and its DLC are are a bundle of maybe 60$ this game is not worth the price. Even playing the base game through twice I've seen everything. There is not enough content for the base game for this price even with a deal.

First off, Steam only allows you to say Yay or Nay - but I want to say Meh. So, regarding the question of: do I recommend the game, I have only selected "No" so that my criticisms are heard. Until Steam adds a "Meh" option, unfortunately you have to pick a side. Ultimately, at some point this review will be outdated and I will delete it. But whether I am actually saying whether you, the reader, should buy the game or not, depends on if what I criticise is also an issue for you. If not, you may still find a lot of enjoyment here. I'd rate the game at about 5.5/10. Not going to bore everyone with how many hours I've spent on Civ 6, or how much I hate change. Overall, I like the civ swapping as well as the regroup settings. It makes logical sense - you don't have modern day Romans or ancient Americans. All it means, is that in each age, you have to regroup your strategy, which makes the game more interesting. I cannot understand why the game got so much hate over this, with people claiming it is not a real Civilization, because it is, and these changes do not alter the gameplay as much as people claim. The same is said for the regroup settings. I am on board - a snowball victory is boring, where you know you are going to win, the AI cannot outpace or outstrategise you - then why play against any opponent at all? It would be boring. With regroup, you have to do a bit of rebuilding at the beginning of each era. However, even I find the harsher settings too generous. You get to keep way too much gold, influence and units on era transition. I would like it even more restricted. I also really like the settlement limit. By adding one, it prevents a snowball victory by you being able to greedily gobble up the whole world. If you exceed the limit, all your settlements suffer a happiness penalty. If a settlement is too unhappy, it can revolt and join an opponent's empire. If you plan to go to war, you should try and increase your limit so that you can capture some settlements. Now, razing has a significant impact. You don't want to capture too many settlements and go over the limit, so if an AI settlement is in your way and is of low value, it might actually be an advantage to raze it, but doing so affects your influence for the rest of the age, significantly lowering your diplomacy if you're a war hungry settlement destroyer. This was an excellent touch of balance. But now, here is my beef: GAMEPLAY: ultimately this game has not grown from 6 in terms of how a match is going to play. And years later, the same issues exist. - the AI is not good. It cannot play a strategic game. Instead, it relies on cheats as you increase the difficulty. Instead of creating optimised cities, it gets free handouts of science, culture, armies, gold, etc. Ultimately, you are not playing against an opponent, but against a timer. - the victory conditions cannot be altered. Once I reach immortal difficulty, every match plays the same. During antiquity and exploration, you build your empire. Once you reach modern era, the victory decay drops so much by around turn 70 that one of the AI with their inflated cheat stats will trigger a victory. I have been unable to play a peaceful game and outpace the AI cheats via yields alone, the only option is to get aggressive and go to war. I have attempted to try various game settings, change the map, amount of players, game speed, but ultimately each match plays the same: build, build, build during the first 2 eras, modern era victory triggered around turn 70 by someone unless you go to war. But if you do go to war, it is still difficult to win via science/culture/economy because your dominion skyrockets while the runner up's plummets, creating a huge score gap and triggering a domination victory. - choices are superficial. I want civic/science choices to be branching, more dynamic, and when you select one branch it should lock you out of another. Instead, if your yields are good, you can research everything every era. So you're not making choices, you're just clicking items in a different sort order. - no unit selection. Luckily some good modders have addressed this. - overall, a lot of the game's UI looks like a website developed in 2000. It lacks a sleek, modern polish using powerful colours that help user accessibility. For instance, the resources screen wastes too much vertical space, the yields should be on the same line as the city name, thus flattening the list and allowing for more items on screen. It is difficult to compare cities when only 2.75 fit on screen. - having said that, I have experienced all I can from the game, and no future patch will address the AI issue. The game runs the same as 6, that is a dumb AI that relies on cheats instead of optimisation leading to the same experience. BUGS: even on patch 1.4.1 there are multiple unaddressed issues - hotkeys: because I play on Boosteroid, I have to remap these every session. But the issue is, if you remap any hotkey to a number 0-9, it does not show this in the UI. The UI displays stale data, and you must exit & re-enter in order for it to update. I reported the bug during 1.4.0, but it was not addressed in the next patch. - the same issue applies when you use numerical input in renaming cities - additionally, renaming cities is bugged. When you click edit, the text highlight immediately cancels, meaning you have to reselect the text again and delete it. If you type immediately after you click edit, nothing happens. It is a bug. Alternatively, you can click, edit, cancel, edit, and then it will correctly highlight the text allowing you to type over it without manually highlighting it with the mouse - back to Hotkeys: the defaults are complete nonsense. The number row is completely unused, but for some reason they map F1, F5, F6 and F9. Why use F-Keys when there is a free number row underneath, that doesn't need an additional Fn key press to activate? Modern keyboards have changed, but the game is following outdated status quo legacy, it's been the way it's always been practices, instead of thinking laterally. Again, why F1 and F9? My right hand wants to live on the mouse, and my left hand wants to remain on the left-hand side of the keyboard. Why map keys all the way on the right-hand side, when SO MANY unmapped keys are on the left. Again, Boosteroid user: remapping is every session practice. I do not remap the whole game because of this. - hotkeys: some hotkeys do not remap properly on 1st attempt. For instance, when I remap Yield from Y to U, I have to remap it twice before the game listens. - hotkeys: Many devs are following this non-sensical practice, of instead of mapping the game ergonomically, i.e. mapping the most pressed keys closer to WASD, instead they map alphabetically: i.e. Y = Yields, P = Pause. Sure, that makes sense if you play in English, but if you play in another language this system falls completely apart. Instead of creating an environment most accessible to the user, you try too hard to use a word that matches the key. Truth is I don't want to press Y or P because they are on the right-hand side of the keyboard. - the directional keys constantly get stuck mid-game. This happens several times every session, where you might press left and then the game is permanently scrolling left. You have to mash other directions in order to unstick it. This one is really annoying. - disappearing tile tooltips - requires reload to fix. I do commend the devs for working hard to address user criticism and releasing major patches this far down the game's timeline. Compare this to EA when they released Anthem and it didn't turn out to be the instant cash cow they expected, it was abandoned in months. The issue is that people turned their attention onto the wrong issues. And the issue I am criticising, is unlikely to be addressed in future series. I hope for the success of the Civilization series and that it evolves in future to be around for a long time to come

Not even free with it compel me to stop playing Civ6 after experiencing what ever that was

Civ 5 or 6 is by far better. I'll change my review when they add another age, give us a earth map, make unit management UI even a thing, and put more relevance in using nuclear weapons. The wonder completion scenes are so so. It does look good in some aspects so not to be all negative.

很好玩，很有趣，不要听那些狗屁评测。

I tried playing this game for free. They got rid of Auto Explore? and Builders? Early game pirate ships AI are everywhere in archipelago. The UI is ugly and all over the place and difficult to read. Why did I have to pick a Leader and then pick a Civ I want to play that leader as??? are civs no longer tied to their leader? Where are all the cool leaders?? The loading screen sucks that I forgot I was loading a game. Why isn't Sean Bean not narrating this game?????? This reminds me too much of the failure of a game that was Humankind. All these changes are confusing, they threw out decades worth of similar ui playstyle for something that is totally different and difficult to read/understand I kept wondering why the tech tree is hard to understand as well as the civic. I'm sure there is more but I don't have patience to play more of this crap and not worth my time. Play Civ 6 instead

ｌｏａｄｓ　ｏｆ　ｂｕｇｓ