Of all the big reveals made this week as part of GeoffsCom, none spoke to my soul more than the first proper look at Civilization VII, the latest instalment in a series dating back to 1990. And after looking, then looking some more, then reading some previews from people who looked even closer, I have some thoughts!
I wrote about Civilization VI quite a number of times at the Old Site, firstly in somewhat glowing terms, then in less glowing terms as the years marched on. In short: I don't think Civ VI aged very well! It made divergences from the series' fundamentals that led players away from Civ's strengths and towards an abstract numbers game, which is a very serious and boring critic's way of saying I fucking hated the district system, which over time became Civ VI's "meta" in a way that wasn't very Civ. The game's AI also sucked, though it was also pretty dire in Civ V, so who knows, that may just be an issue with the series' move from squares to hexes on the game map.
Civ VI has also been out forever. Eight years at time of posting this, and by the time Civ VII is released in February 2025, it'll be nine. That's an eternity in video game years. During that span, a whole catalogue of credible 4X competitors have for the first time reared their heads, from Amplitude's Endless games and Humankind to the excellent Old World to, less successfully, Paradox's Millennia. For the first time in series history Civ hasn't just had to iterate on itself, it's had the opportunity to learn from and be influenced by others as well.
And it appears to have done so. Civ VII's big change seems to be the introduction of Ages, which break each game up into three distinct eras, allowing the player to change the civilization (but not the leader) they're playing as they move through each one. An example given in this IGN preview, for example, describes a progression from Roman to Norman to English. It'll be interesting to see how Civilization handles this, because it sucked in Humankind, robbing every faction in that game of any sense of identity or continuity.
I'm also a bit unsure about the new city system. Specific districts are gone–thank God, you will not be missed–but they've been replaced with something similar, albeit modular, where you just place urban or rural hexes on the map then specialise those tiles from there. How this works exactly I don't think we'll know until we play it, but there's one consequence of it I already don't like: it removes builders from the game. They're gone! No more little guys to move around building roads and districts, and if there's one thing I've made very clear is a long-standing Civilization bright spot, it's moving little guys around. RIP, little guys. You will be missed.
One final gripe: I don't like these new leaders. Civ VI's rulers were an animation masterclass, and its successors here just don't appear to have the same character. I get that each game strikes a slightly different tone, and that in the months to go until release they might change, but as they appear in these trailers, I don't like 'em.
Anyway, I don't want to let this get too bogged down with negativity, so let's move onto stuff I do like. I love the map. I looooovveee the map. Civ has always had a board game feel--it's based on a board game, after all!--but Civ VII takes this to another level, with its unexplored hexes looking like premium Catan tiles, and the world itself going for a decidedly model train scenery vibe (something the game's own marketing picks up on). And I mean that in the very best way, the world looks crafted.
Diplomacy has also had a big overhaul. The old system, largely unchanged since the very first Civ, had well and truly run its course; it was overly simple, and competitors within and outside this genre have long been doing it better. Influence in Civ VII is now a resource you generate and can spend rather than just trading stuff from a menu, which will hopefully make for more dynamic--and less intrusive and repetitive--interactions.
Speaking of things being less repetitive, I like the little quality of life tweaks found within the game's trailers and previews. Scouts being able to traverse rivers on a boat and not on foot, for example, doesn't just let you explore faster, but is much more realistic! Also promising is a town -> city system, similar to what Humankind offers, where not every settlement has to be developed into a sprawling metropolis you need to constantly manage and build stuff from. In Civ VII only cities let you run proper production lines; if you leave a settlement as a town it'll just generate gold and let you go about your day, which will make admin much easier for those who prefer sprawling empire.
One final thing that sounds neat is the way expansion is handled. Most Civ playthroughs (or playthroughs of competitors, for that matter) are always conducted with one eye--even in the game's earliest phases--on exploring distant lands, because we know from the hindsight afforded by the 21st century that's how history went down and was how people got access to more space and more resources. But it's not how anyone in ancient (or even medieval) times lived! Civ VII sidesteps this by devoting a whole Age to exploration, which causes the map to expand and introduces more territory and states to interact with. This is something that's bugged me about 4X games forever, so it's cool to at least see it addressed here, regardless of whether it actually works or not.
That's about all I've got to say. I'm normally very much against video game previews, they tend to be overly-positive and ultimately pointless for the reader, so I hope my review of other people's previews, as filtered by my own pessimism and thoughts on the series' recent past, has been at least a little bit useful. While I have concerns, I'm also cautiously optimistic! Civilization VI clearly ran the series down a dead end where big changes were necessary, and it sure looks like Firaxis are swinging for the fences here.
