PC Gamer Summary of changes in civ7 (2024)

AriochIV said:

Yeah, but I kind of wonder what sort of "bonuses" they could do like that in a game that can be played multiplayer. That sort of thing is usually relegated to some sort of cosmetic or quality-of-life feature.

Click to expand...

That's how I interpreted that--something cosmetic to do with your "profile customization" that they keep referring to.

One other option is it might unlock optional, custom gameplay bonuses/handicaps that are linked with your profile... Humankind actually had that. You could set up different "traits" for each avatar (+5% Influence, stuff like that).

Big J Money said:

I hadn't heard anyone else mention yet that culture no longer expands cities; now it's population.

I tentatively like that. I feel that population is that most important stat a city can have.

Click to expand...

Isn't this how Civ Revolution actually handled things?

pokiehl said:

One other option is it might unlock optional, custom gameplay bonuses/handicaps that are linked with your profile... Humankind actually had that. You could set up different "traits" for each avatar (+5% Influence, stuff like that).

Click to expand...

See Also

Custom Practice Test - 23-Aug

Oh god I hope not. Civilization really doesn't need rogue-lite mechanics. Each playthrough takes long enough that I don't want to have to do multiple to be able to play a "complete" version of the game. I think RTW2 had it that you couldn't play as every faction from the start and you had to unlock some of them in a first play-through. That seems to have been universally hated, and quickly patched out.

Battlehelm043 said:

My biggest concern is the era jumps. I fear it is going to turn into a mess similar to Humankind where it was a mad dash to get the Civ that you desired.

Click to expand...

I don't think that can happen in civ7. Unlike in Humankind, all civs progress to the next Age at the same time. So you do not pick a civ on a first come, first serve basis. Also, unlike Humankind, you will only get to choose from a list of civs that are historical or based on your gameplay choices.

SupremacyKing2 said:

I don't think that can happen in civ7. Unlike in Humankind, all civs progress to the next Age at the same time. So you do not pick a civ on a first come, first serve basis. Also, unlike Humankind, you will only get to choose from a list of civs that are historical or based on your gameplay choices.

Click to expand...

As I said, I hope they don't create a similar issue with Civ 7. I see a potential for it if you have two similar Civs which can branch the same way. If that happens then it could create an issue of who gets it first going into the next era. We wont know until we see the later eras.

Leaders not being heads of state is not a change: Civ3 had Joan of Arc, for instance, as well as Gandhi leading India. Civ 6 had Eleanor of Acquitaine "leading" the English which was not quite accurate..

The crisis element sounds interesting!

Battlehelm043 said:

As I said, I hope they don't create a similar issue with Civ 7. I see a potential for it if you have two similar Civs which can branch the same way. If that happens then it could create an issue of who gets it first going into the next era. We wont know until we see the later eras.

Click to expand...

In that situation, it would make sense if the first to pick was the empire who did best in the previous Age, the empire with the most "points" or whatever they're using to measure the victory paths (I can't recall if we've been told). That would be the most sensible way, imo.

Mr Jon of Cheam said:

In that situation, it would make sense if the first to pick was the empire who did best in the previous Age, the empire with the most "points" or whatever they're using to measure the victory paths (I can't recall if we've been told). That would be the most sensible way, imo.

Click to expand...

Or, if they want a rubber band, do it the exact opposite! Although that might encourage anti-gaming mechanisms from the player. In practice, for SP, I'll 100% expect the human player to pick first.

Olleus said:

Or, if they want a rubber band, do it the exact opposite! Although that might encourage anti-gaming mechanisms from the player. In practice, for SP, I'll 100% expect the human player to pick first.

Click to expand...

Yes, true enough! Although there has to be plenty of reason/incentive to do well in an Age, I guess. And we must not forget those "dark possibilities", or whatever Ed said.

Personally, I feel like it's pretty likely that multiples of the same civ will be allowed. With how restricted civ selection is, it would be entirely possible for a player to not have any civ to pick from, which would break the game. There are likely to be several paths that branch and overlap with each other, Rome for instance could be the founding civ for so many other civs.

They do also have civ-specific wonders, which would be an oddity if only one of each civ is allowed. It's just your guaranteed wonder? With multiple, the players who are the same civ would be competing for it, like other wonders.

Shidan said:

Personally, I feel like it's pretty likely that multiples of the same civ will be allowed.

Click to expand...

I think they said as much, but I wouldn't imagine a "disallow duplicates" toggle will be added sooner or later. They also released Civ6 without one.

pokiehl said:

I'm sure it was made clear on hover or some other way. I've never seen a strategy game with a random event system that doesn't tell you the outcomes. That'd be frustrating.

Click to expand...

Stellaris, one of the most popular and commercially sucessful strategy games of the past decade, is filled to the brim with narrative events and storylines where you often don't know the outcome of your choices until you try, and the outcomes can be as bad as losing entire planets (equivalent to cities in Civ).

Anyway, narrative events of the style described in the article are nothing new to Civ. They were in Civ IV's expansions and worked the exact same way as in the example that was given. I'm glad to see them return, they add a lot of flavour.

Takfloyd said:

Stellaris, one of the most popular and commercially sucessful strategy games of the past decade, is filled to the brim with narrative events and storylines where you often don't know the outcome of your choices until you try, and the outcomes can be as bad as losing entire planets (equivalent to cities in Civ).

Anyway, narrative events of the style described in the article are nothing new to Civ. They were in Civ IV's expansions and worked the exact same way as in the example that was given. I'm glad to see them return, they add a lot of flavour.

Click to expand...

I stand corrected. Forgot that about Stellaris. I did see the outcomes on hover in the B roll footage though, so it seems like Civ will have the choices clear.

Takfloyd said:

Anyway, narrative events of the style described in the article are nothing new to Civ. They were in Civ IV's expansions and worked the exact same way as in the example that was given. I'm glad to see them return, they add a lot of flavour.

Click to expand...

Hopefully, the event system will be implemented better in VII than IV's. IV's event system was highly unpopular, but at least it was optional. IV had some "narrative" events as described, but also a lot of negative events that were immediate. I rarely ever played with events on unless forced to like in a GOTM (which very rarely had them on anyway) or some shared game. Not saying that can't be good though in VII.

AriochIV said:

Yeah, but I kind of wonder what sort of "bonuses" they could do like that in a game that can be played multiplayer. That sort of thing is usually relegated to some sort of cosmetic or quality-of-life feature.

Click to expand...

As others have said, being a game that can be played multiplayer don't really limit what you can do with that, as it can be easy to have a setting when starting a mp game that don't allow those bonuses to be used or a parity.

Personally, I don't mind then existing, but also unlikely to replay so much the same leaders to care about it.

Shidan said:

They do also have civ-specific wonders, which would be an oddity if only one of each civ is allowed. It's just your guaranteed wonder? With multiple, the players who are the same civ would be competing for it, like other wonders.

Click to expand...

From what we see, there aren't wonders that are unique for a civilization, but instead that are much easier to be done by that civilization, like here on Egypt the Pyramids can be unlocked by their unique civics tree, but likely also by a normal tech/civic others can also get. But this make it so Egypt can generally have it available earlier than others civilizations so they are more likely to build it first. There may also be a bonus to production or some other things that makes it easier for a civ do end up building their associated wonder.

I know HK and Civ BERT provide choices that certainly sound like narrative events. I usually gravitated to specific answers consistently, but I like them well enough.

I have to admit though, that one time I got hit with the flooding event in HK was rough, esp when I thought I could keep my gold and weather the negative outcome (I could not weather the negative outcome).