Sid Meier's Civilization VII

Wow, this game looks so beautiful! I sure do hope they don't lock Great britain behind a 4.99$ paywall, have even more limited modding capability than Civilization 6 and have the game remain to be in a bland state after one and a half years since launch!... oh wait.. Civilization 6 may have had a weird cartoonish style which nobody asked for, but at least it felt like the game still had some sort of a soul.. (Key word "Some sort")

문명6하다가 사람들이 하도욕해도 그래픽 발전한거좀 구경해보고싶어서 사서해봤는데 걍 역대급 ㅂ;ㅅ게임맞음 ㄹㅇ임 문명6하다가 이거해보면 클베도 이따위로 안할텐데 라는생각이 드는수준의 완성도임

Well. thank you for letting me play this game for free. Started playing CIV games when I was 9 years old with Civilization 1 on my Amiga. Then played 3,4,5 and 6 on PC. I had 7 on my wishlist, but due to the negative reviews did not try it so far. Now, after trying I can finally remove it from the wishlist. I cannot imagine what the game was at launch, if currently it's not playable for me. Graphic is strange, UI is not intuitive, you do not even select the CIV at beginning of the game, you select a leader. Should it be then still called Civilization, or maybe "BeALeader" game? Anyway, I started the game, build first scouts. Encountered some minor nations. They were attacking me, so I though ok, new barbarians, let's destroy them. I found their camp/village/whatever that is called, conquered it and... nothing happens. Where is the logic? Then I read, that next year you will be able to play 1950-2050. Seriously?

So there are certainly things to love and adore about this game, but there are also a couple of glaring "what were they thinking moments". It might get better with more development, but Firaxis should get to the drawing board on couple of items ruining the experience. The good: 1. The early and mid game could be quite fun. There's a lot of Civ in this Civ game a lot of what has been moved from the previous games is still solid. 2. The new resource system is pretty good with two exceptions - the UI dragging is quite buggy and tedious to manage. The last era factory resources are extremely underwhelming and underpowered, especially for the required investment. 3. The new leader tree is fun and it feels like you're creating a build. 4. The new generals are fun although I'm not entirely sure it significantly reduce the micromanagement. 5. With the new towns/city concept gold is always useful and no matter how much you make you feel like its never enough. The bad: 1. The era transition mechanic is just rotten to core. It's like you're starting an entirely new game each time and it diminishes what you've achieved in the previous era. It was a bad idea and bad execution. If they really want to do eras, they should take a note how Millenia was doing it. 2. The UX and UI are just "I've never played strategy game" terrible. I would call it AI slop except that AI nowadays can do a far better UI than that. 3. Late game is just boring end turn cycling without many meaningful decisions. It's not like this problem is unique to civ7, but here the problem is more severe than most games. That's combined problem of poor balancing, AI and just the simple "number grow big" win conditions. As a result in my playthrough I spent 10 hours 1st age, 6h in 2nd age and 2h in the last age (moslty waiting for AI processing end turns). 4. The quality of leaders models and animation is on the level of 2003 3d game. 5. Unnecessary meta progression - I know several strategy games have tried this, but it doesn't work, not in this genre when a single playthrough can take 20+ hours. Very few people play enough campaigns to make this progression in anyway meaningful.

Worst Civ, dont buy it. 2 thumbs down. Why you might ask? its not fun, simple as that. If you enjoy spending hours and hours playing one game, maybe its for you. i have completed ONE game in 78 hours and half played 3 other games. Why do i have so many incomplete games? because its not fun. Wherever Sid is, i hope hes pissed at whoever made this heaping pile of crap. Thanks for wasting my time, keep the change ya filthy anuimals.

It's so different with Civilization VI, and it's in a bad way.. I've played Humankind and Civilization VII copied Humankind gameplay, which is hated by many. The ever changing civilization is really bad. Like why Isabel has Egyptian civilization? People hated Humankind for it, but the Civilization decided to copy that bad gameplay. And why pick non-leader people as the character here? Harriet Tubman? Ibn Battuta? There are many historical world leaders to choose from, so why chose them? Some people played Civilization game because they wanted to do some roleplay with historical world leaders. Civilization VII failed to give what we want. I've played Civilization game from Civilization V. That game made me occupied with Civilization's franchise. Civilization VII is too different from its predecessor. Between Civilization V, VI, and VII, I can conclude that Civilization VII is the worst sequel. I will just wait for Civilization VIII. I hope they will fix the game mechanic.

Game seems to be getting a lot of flack. I will admit was not there at the start. But really enjoying the game. This is the first civ game I purchased. Also got it for switch for portability. I also decided to get 6 5 and 4 for pc. So far 5 and 7 seem to be my favourite. Struggle to get on with 6 so far dunno why will give it another go at some point and yet to try 4. But the people saying it’s not a civ game seem really over dramatic. It possibly was before the test of time update but this game easily gives you more flexibility and choice over all the others now. That being said 5 is really good I got stuck playing it for ages this also has that effect for me.

半成品 UI超爛 設計又大幅簡化 簡直退回第4代 身為歷代粉絲要玩是可以玩 但總是會有地方讓我玩到一半就不爽一下 尤其兵種設計很難理解為什麼會變這樣 還有6代UI這麼優良為什麼7代可以退化這麼多 明明有這麼多前代的經驗 到底是哪個天才想把以前改善好的地方都拿掉的 完全神人