Civ 7: Is it Good or Bad?

[@AnAngelineer]

If the previous civ games have taught me anything, it's : "the vanilla game always feels sketchy and incomplete, so I should wait a year or so before making my assessment and maybe purchasing". ...And I fully intend to do that this time too.

[@hangijzer17]

Agree. In fact, Civ 4 (Beyond The Sword), 5 (Brave New World) and Civ 6 all 3 turned into their best version only after the 2nd DLC. And ofc, with the much needed mods, which kept and keep on adding new/interesting variations, so the game feels refreshed from time to time.

[@zhuochen]

They should extend the age by a fixed number of turns when tracker hit 100%

[@Marbozir]

Yeah, there should be some kind of grace period, I agree. Even better - there could be an advanced game setting to have a grace period or not.

[@OneCreator87]

This is my #1 concern, ages seem to go by too fast. Civ 6 had the worst pacing/speed of the whole franchise, you basically skip 80% of the game content.

[@MarvelOfRain]

@@OneCreator87The age system kinda resolves that since in Civ it was because your science got out of control. That said yeah the previews make it seem like some adjustments are needed.

[@pallingtontheshrike6374]

Age progress can hardstop at each of the event thresholds, should probably have a max gain per turn regardless I'm not sure if extending the age is the answer because that breaks ludonarrative; it's supposed to be rapidly expanding crisis that drives a big reformation/revolution and changes the age. Extra turns in exchange for extra penalties during the start of the next age might work, but i'm not sure. If age progress hardstops at each of the events, that slows down the final burst while still keeping the flavor; until the crisis develops, you don't actually have the societal conflict that drives the age change.

[@zhuochen]

I haven’t play the game, but a lot of KZbinrs are complaining about slowing down their progress to time certain achievements in the last turn. I’m a min maxer, I will likely do the same thing which is annoying. If I have a 5 turn grace period, I can avoid this silliness. The game can easily implement this feature without breaking game balance, just call it crisis is climaxing…

[@smuratspace]

Devs: We are not priortize the UI. meanwhile game 50 percent even more about the UI, wtf?

[@ThomasPetermann.]

Wow, this feels like a beta, not a full game. I will hold off and see what happens with this experiment. Great review keep it up Marbz

[@romoc0p]

Still going to enjoy Civ 5 with mods until Civ 7 is like $20.

[@Crundmama]

Err that war ending with the age thing sounds extremely stupid and annoying.

[@lathamtk]

Almost a 54 minute video about Civ7... mmm I'm gonna enjoy listening to this while I eat my dinner.

[@DeadliestWarriorZZ]

You and me both!

[@Gunnl]

@@DeadliestWarriorZZ you and we three

[@richdouble4380]

Best review video I’ve seen so far - well reasoned with concrete examples and not afraid to be honest about the shortcomings without couching. Appreciate the honesty!

[@conred6635]

17 mins in and seems like civ 7 has gone backwards a bit... like guys do you know your audience? We will keep playing 5 and 6.

[@willzulu8844]

This was the most informative review I’ve run by, thanks so much I’m really bummed by the score timer, ages, UI, and map sizes. I think this is gonna be a wait until the modders get their hands on it

[@Kefkaownsall]

I already dislike it for the dlc practice so I'm waiting for a discount deep one

[@TheSurrealWolf]

Im really put off that there is already a difference in amount of content you get from base game to founders edition. I think its super scummy

[@NONO-hz4vo]

Personally I don't like a lot of the design but the biggest issue is the DRM, DLC, Grind for features (probably will be able to pay for these later), and clear lack of polish. I have played every civ game for thousands of hours each since Civilization which I got in 1991 for MS-DOS. Hopefully this version gets fixed but pretty lame they don't finish games before releasing them.

[@NeedyChris]

I hate the fact they are releasing this with SO MANY flaws that I’m 100% sure they are aware of and have the intention of fixing 1-2-3 years down the line with DLCs. I’m sorry but it’s a hard pass from me and I’ll only consider getting it when it’s 90% off with all DLCs in a few years. So disappointed.

[@boltuz]

The thing is that, after so many years in development, the project might face stakeholder pressure for economic accountability. Imagine investing millions of dollars into the production of a game of the size for so many years without any ROI during so long. As the game industry products become more complex to develop, many might release games in an “unfinished” state just to make ends meet.

[@gobogit4641]

The player: I will make the best possible strategy! I will choose the place of battle! Like Sun Tzu, I will be patient! I will make the best possible upgrades! I will create, upgrade, and put into battle the greatest legion ever created! The developers: Uh uh, yes, yes...of course...of course...ummm yes...that's right...yes...you choose how, where and how much to develop in the game... uh yes sure. The game: Turn 150. The era is over! Your time is up!

[@jean-baptisteroche2788]

Thanks you Marbz for your precision! I'm never commenting but I'm watching you since looooong ago (your civ 5 game as siam!)

[@2009worstyearever]

This is exactly how the Civ5 vanilla launch was. They put in new systems and the game came out incomplete, I played it for 10 hours or so and then gave up on it until the two DLCs came out and actually fixed the game. Really disappointed by Firaxis to continue its shody dev practices.

[@tw7998]

Thanks for a balanced look, that is neither rant or paid advert, it is appreciated

[@alexDD-j6e]

Been waiting for this review for so long :D :D You say you're not a reviewer Marbz but you should be. You absolutely should be.

[@jackthelad2691]

Actually a very informative video about the game and age mechanics ✔

[@ParadigmZwei]

I'm writing this at 21 minutes in (going to sleep now so I'll watch the rest tomorrow), but thus far I'm not too worried about the main issues, as they're things I've known about for a while now from watching various videos (including yours!) and have come to terms with. Performance issues are always a pain so I hope those get ironed out ASAP, but otherwise I'm not swayed from my excitement for this game. That said, I do hope Firaxis watches videos like this so they know what to focus on when they improve the game over time. They're the quickest and easiest way for the developers to see the issues people have with the game so they can do something about them.

[@kaknakful]

Very helpful, marbz. Well done.

[@ottawamonsterpocalypse7729]

Thanks for posting all of this. I'm definitely on the wait or possibly pass for this one. They removed a lot of what I liked from previous games and being limited only to a standard sized map is a deal-breaker for me. I'll still watch you play it if you post streams, but as things are right now, I would get very frustrated very fast playing it myself.

[@goshujin-g7k]

I will love to see this game fail. Literally none of these changes were necessary and the harsh age transition is a deal breaker for me. Makes me wonder what they were smoking. (Still, I'm looking forward to your LetsPlays of it, ha ha!)

[@Rebslager]

I have a feeling I will hate the switching leaders and the sudden closure of a time periode.... It almost feel like "What does most people like....lets skip that and make it weird"

[@riik3158]

You don't switch the leaders, you switch the civs.

[@famemolto]

I played the very first Civ game back in the 90s. A huge part of the fun was the historical theme (however silly the developer’s understanding of history and civilization actually was - go read some Oswald Spengler, and many others). This is really going to kill the savor for the history buff player base. But maybe that’s just a small minority of players; I don’t know. Also, grinding for features? Did I understand that right? Are there people who enjoy this?

[@chrissistarski]

Looks like they didn't learn from the EA star wars battlefront fiasco that no one wants to play for 2000+ hours just to unlock all the treats and goodies. Having lots of unlockable things is great but making it super grindy is facile

[@danjal87nl]

Counterpoint - games that do offer all options right away generally get criticised for being too overwhelming offering players too many options at the start. Meaning that no matter which route is chosen, comments like yours will criticise one way or another. And it'll never be good enough for you.

[@Emiltat]

It is quite different. If you would only start with 3 leaders and a few civs then yeah. But now you only gain a relative small bonus

[@chrissistarski]

@@danjal87nl I agree but that wasn't what I was suggesting

[@Kefkaownsall]

@@chrissistarski alternatively make them just cosmetic rather than key points

[@chrissistarski]

@@Kefkaownsall I like having some grind to achieve things but 2000+ hours is fine only for streamers and the ultra hardcore players. Making it tough but not a full time job is more reasonable - if an average player won't 100% it by the next games release it's probably a bit too much grind. I've got 60% ISH on civ 6 and I played less than 500 hours

[@Thr4xiu5]

Never liked the grind from single player games. Compare it to StarCraft, you could simply play with any of the races and with any part of their army without needing to grind them out. Personally grind feels like something to artificially extend the life of the game. Another thing that rubs me the wrong way is seeing a guy that looks roman, talks like a roman, has the clothing of a roman from certain part of the world and time period, but some how is from India. Even old Age of Empires 2 with all the limitations of the time had some distinction between civilization from unique units, building styles and voice lines. Even the new AoEII while keeping the generic units for everyone in terms of looks they expanded the distinctions between civilization even further. The entire thing has this feeling that is was made by people that where told what civilization was but never actually played it and is using some strange alt history university book as a base.

[@ldmrq]

I think this game is definitely not worth buying on release. There is too few maps, map sizes, no modding tools available at launch, the UI is bad, the game seems easy and too unbalanced...

[@michaeldanch3923]

Dont like the war stopping thing at the end of the era. Will def. frustrate me

[@derekd240]

Fantastic overview, I can see this being very helpful for people who are on the fence.

[@stevencass8849]

Devs: We didn’t prioritize the UI. Me: I can understand that; I mean, it’s only the very thing we USE TO INTERACT WITH YOUR GAME. Sigh

[@stephenboyett9505]

Good review, very informative. Appreciate the balanced perspective as well

[@Fractus]

The alignment on the legacy points tab is really triggering. Just have two columns and align the name right and the portraits and bars left. That feels like fundamental stuff really.

[@prospect2664]

age thing is fine for me, what im worried about are mods, since civ has always been about modding it Edit: nvm... ending the war is bad Edit: wait, score victory is always a thing ?? wtf.. i only play with domination on, i dont care about other victories, even if im 10 techs ahead of the ai Final edit: ok yhea... i dont really like these new systems and stuff... looks like to be another downgrade we already had from civ5 to civ6

[@Knight20006]

39:03 Positive starts here.

[@WoodlandsArchive]

Thank you for sharing!

[@joenarrf6501]

Thanks for the video! I think I'll wait at least a few months.

[@Ruija27]

Civ 7 can sit on the bench with Beyond Earth. Hopefully the turnaround time (and result) for Civ 8 is a bit better. But there could be a lot of pressure from 2K to profit off of this first...

[@Keygentlemen]

Beyond Earth deserved better. Certainly more playable than civ 7 will be.

[@lakrids-pibe]

I look forward to seeing you play it. Haha! I have no plans to buy it myself in the near future. I need to see more of it before I know if it's for me. I just can't get my head around it. Besides, my favorite part of previous civ games was the slow build up and exploration in the early game. It feels like civ 7 skips past that for the most part.

[@starsnmuffins]

while i think i'll enjoy the game itself when i get it (eventually. y'know, when the complete thing doesn't cost a solid quarter of my paycheck with which i could buy at least 4 other games...), the fact that the stuff like the dlc thing on top of base price hike, performance problems, their statement that they 'didn't prioritize the ui', etc. etc. exist at all is extremely off-putting to see and would be enough to utterly deter me if it wasn't a civ game. regardless, waiting and seeing for now. thank you sm marbs for yet another great info vid :D p.s. how the hell are the civs and their traditions not in the civilopedia lmfao that's just bonkers.

[@Kasaaz]

They could just add a little mark to a building to show it's ageless or not in all areas. A little hourglass or something at the bottom center of the circle. The idea that they 'didn't prioritize' the UI is infuriating to me as a technical writer and editor. Edit: There's a few reasons it could be like this, but the most likely is just that the UI isn't finished but they're out of time. That's pretty unacceptable to me. That's the way you literally interface with and play the game.

[@CruelDwarf]

I think that the whole thing about replayability is that it doesn't really matter if AI is as brain-dead as I suspect it would be. And even if they manage to achieve some sort of active multiplayer scene with VII once again, the multiplayer meta is an enemy of variety. The amount of synergies described setup will only make it worse in terms of how good some builds will be.

[@erykczajkowski8226]

Marbs, can you explain WHY the quick speed in Civ 7 works well in comparison to previous Civs? Just an idea for a separate video perhaps?

[@Keygentlemen]

"Imagine it's a campaign with 3 separate scenarios." Civ 8 waiting line, here we go! My god, that UI looks simply dreadful.

[@thomasw9019]

Heh, nice, saw Eurogamer 2/5 review and I was looking forward to your thoughts.

[@maxr9409]

Are mods even supported since it uses Denuvo? I guess something like workshop still works, but I've been worried about this since I saw the DRM being used. Edit: you answered that later in the video my bad.

[@EmeqPL]

Only guy on this platform opinion I trust

[@Commander2145Update]

I'd rather just play humankind

[@JohnDBarcaFan]

That game is unplayable for me lol. I tried to get into it but couldn't push past 40 hours.

[@BananananaWasTaken]

How about an increasing negative to gold or happiness etc, after the age was "meant to end", but the player gets to decide when to progress the age. This way you could complete some objectives, but still eventually be forced to progress

[@ashishkarnkarnashish]

Pre watch algorithm feed.

[@MrGiertych123]

Game features behnind grindwall are big no for me. I would feel compelled to grind for unlocks using some unfun, boring setup for hours because of fomo. I will stick to previous Civ games. Thanks for review :)

[@danjal87nl]

There's two ways to view this. The one you describe where you view 100% unlocked as the proper game experience. Making the grind a hurdle. Or viewing it as expanding your play options as you play more. Giving more value for money. Knowing also that games that do offer the full range right away generally are viewed as too overwhelming giving the player too many options...

[@JohnDBarcaFan]

I actually love that feature. It gives me meaning to playing the same leader. Makes the game more replayable

[@larryknerr60]

I bought Civs 1-4 (and Call to Power, &c), but decided not to buy 5 & 6 after trying their demos. (Too boardgame-y, disliked one unit per tile.) I'm still playing modded Civ 4. I think I'll probably buy Civ 7; I'll try the demo (if there is one) and see. (And wait for a discount so I can afford it -- a time which should also iron out the AI & UI and give us lots of mods.) Thanks for the information here, Marbozir. (Also: YT is loading this video down with a _ridiculous_ number of ads.)

[@Nation2345O]

There is always civ 5 am i right

[@rdm3990]

I've bought the founders edition and I don't want this capital palace. Am I able to disable it or am I obliged to play with it?

[@samadams2203]

Ages...end wars? I hate this alone, and I already disliked a ton of their changes. This entire game screams of "How many gimmicks can we fit into one game?". They are clearly going to re-work and add so much stuff with the expansions, just like every civ before, I'm very glad I've seen it and can just wait 3-4 years for it to be properly done.

[@horsthorstensen1277]

New Civ games are always a bit lacking in game features. But it seems civ7 pushed it a bit further, now we are also lacking UI, basic functionality and general polish.

[@hatimzeineddine8723]

I don't plan on buying it and don't plan on interacting with video/social media content of the game itself moving forwards. Basically I'm going to give civ 7 the humankind treatment and pretend it doesn't exist.

[@Funkadelic74]

The "Save the date for Civ7" in my calendar has been removed months ago after the first reviews . If I see the ugly UI and this step-by-step hassle to get essential information that is even more frustrating and underwhelming . Waiting for 2026 or 2027 ...

[@bushmonster1702]

I'm surprised the UI wasn't a priority. I mean it's quite important lol.

[@superguy911]

for me it needs a UI overhaul and some more civs so you have more logical transitions then I'll buy it. they have China -> China -> China but at the same time they have, egypt -> songhai -> buganda as historical paths which is pretty stupid to me

[@Imaging80]

Graphics are a real problem. While it looks great it is super hard to tell which unit ist where, for example. There is too much detail at the cost of clarity.

[@MysticEdge97]

Yea civ 6 looks good cause you can look at someone else’s city and see what there doing at a glance. Districts really stand out in that game

[@igorsviben611]

From your video it looks to me that obsolete buildings have red numbers next to yields, and ageless do not Could that be a hint the game gives you instead?

[@SoDeepSoFineCOD]

Reminds me a lot to Beyond Earth.

[@JohnDBarcaFan]

The UI stuff and lack of explaining is very concerning. I hope that all of it will be fixed with Day 1 patch.

[@briancallison]

I think I'll pass on this civ. Not my cup of tea.

[@paulsaint2366]

Same with me. I'm just gonna stick with Civ 5 & 6.

[@JohnDoe-xd9tw]

My god the archipelago map looked hilarious! Also why is there no bigger map sizes or pangaea map to play on? The map generation in Civ 7 is shockingly bad.

[@Marbozir]

Yeah, I'm not even sure if Pangaea can exist, because the map expands in exploration age, and the "new world" has to be reachable by ocean. And of course one of the major milestone tracks in Exploration Age requires you to bring treasure fleets back home (so again, by ocean). There's no map editor or modding tools at the moment, so I don't know if the edges of the "old world" and "new world" are all required to be ocean tiles or not, but with the way the game works, it seems quite likely to me that Pangaea cannot actually exist in Civ 7 (not the way it exists in every previous Civ game anyway). Oh and of course there's no Earth map either.

[@alexandervarga8090]

@@Marbozir Makes the game feel so railroaded to me, like every game will play out the same to some extent.

[@sphaera2520]

Depends what you mean by railroaded. Each age has the same objectives and mechanics to take advantage of, but that does not necessarily mean every faction/leader combination will approach each game the same way. This is equivalent to saying, older civs had the exact same tech and civics tree that railroads players into identical games. But that’s not quite true, different civs will engage with those mechanics differently or context of a game might force you to adapt your path through unlocks to deal with a pressing matter. Or more broadly, just because you went for tech victory 10x in civ 5 or 6, doesn’t mean those 10 games all played the same way. In 7, just because you’re always going to be exploring in act 2, and doing ideology stuff in act 3 doesn’t mean it’s all going to be repetitive.

[@user-pi4qo3zc2e]

The building system seems horrendous and the UI looks messy. So much scrolling already in early game to see your options, which cannot be changed later if you make a mistake. It was stupid back in Civ 6 with districts and this is doubling down on bad design on steroids for no reason. You'd be punished anyway by wasting time and resources on building something useless, no reason to rub in the salt by making the mistake permanent.

[@UnderKingDuck]

So do you still feel its best to do quick/online speed with longer ages? Idk if ill do that setting or just normal/normal for my first play though. As for a grace period for eras ending im pretty sure if a lot of people want this they can 100% add it in. Same with military units resetting. I am slightly concerned about the war support system but i need to wait until I try it really.

[@Marbozir]

I've been enjoying the game a lot more on Quick and Online speed. Age length is fine on standard, but long isn't bad either. One thing I should have mentioned when I talked about performance briefly, is that if you play on standard speed and standard map size, you can run into some significant performance issues, especially when there's a lot going on (regardless of what your PC specs are). I strongly suspect this is why we don't have map sizes bigger than standard at the moment...

[@UnderKingDuck]

@Marbozir this might be hard to answer but do you know how much longer the ages last if you change the settings?

[@sphaera2520]

⁠​⁠@@UnderKingDuck iirc from what the devs said, it’s not a matter that scales linearly. For example if the short setting takes 50 age points to end, normal speed 100, and long is 200. At first I expected this should mean 2x as long but that’s not necessarily true since things ramp up at the end of an age where bonuses have stacked and so it’s much easier to start completing milestones and earning those points. So even though long takes 2x the points, it’s probably not going to be 2x the turns. What you probably can expect though is on shorter ages, it’s more likely to end with score victories while the longer setting will give ample time for it to be more likely for someone to reach the end of a legacy/victory condition. The standard setting should then be a mix of either type of endings depending on how that game evolved.

[@AzureAlliance31]

ITV :why TB said not to pre-order.

[@flamspb1]

who needs ui, if you got full scale ingame grindwall for bonuses)

[@c-tothefourth4879]

Emulate the switch version. Don’t give them money

[@j.p.9522]

Why in the hell is Harriet Tubman a leader in Civ 7?

[@alexandervarga8090]

No idea. Makes zero sense. She should be a great person in the game in some way, but as a leader of the USA its bizarre.

[@f4ubricks]

​@@alexandervarga8090 Shes not a "leader of the US". I'm still a bit ambivalent on leaders being disconnected from civs, but one of the stated purposes for doing so is enabling them to choose people who weren't necessarily heads of state, like Machiavelli, Confucius, or Ben Franklin, who's still available if playing as Harriet Tubman is really so objectionable to you.

[@breadbaskets2772]

I got burned by civ 6 on launch, gonna wait.

[@JohnDBarcaFan]

Loved civ 6 on launch.

[@geertdepuydt2683]

Casual player. The only thing bothering me is the insane price tag.

[@ikelevermann1491]

That game won for me by getting rid of builders and to much micromanagement like Civ 6

[@alexandervarga8090]

This game overall seems to be GARBAGE. My initial impressions are its going to be a cash cow money grab. 1. How after this long are the devs still relying on "just give the AI bonuses at high difficulty levels because we are too lazy to make a good AI". I know its not a technical issue, becasue civ 4 and 5 had MODS that made the AI better at warfare... The fact diety AI in civ 7 just have a flat +8 bonus is embarassing. And if Marbozir who just started playing a few games already is dominating the deity AI, this game just seems pathetic. CIv 5 AI military was already useless, you're telling me civ 7 is even WORSE?. Not to mention a hiddeous UI, a game that feels like its a clash of class board game hyrbid and not an immersive world, DLCs upon release (LMAO). Jesus what happened to civ? CIv 4 was the last game I played where playing a hard difficulty was actually hard. Civ 5 was dumbed down but at least it was gorgeous to look at and fun after BNW and mods. Im so dissapointed and sad.

[@Triumph633]

the age system sounds like a progression reset that happens 2 times during a game. This seems super bad?

[@superguy911]

it's the most interesting thing about civ7 to me, this way you actually get to finish multiplayer games in a satisfying way when you play casually with friends

[@riik3158]

This system is also what appeals to me. Especially the different objectives in the legacy paths in each age. So that you aren't just playing one long science or culture grind from turn one.

[@michaeldanch3923]

they were not prioritzing the AI :-(( worse then Civ6 unbelievable. No wonder the AI gets such a fighting bonus on deity

[@danjal87nl]

Sounds like you should learn how to make that AI, and make games with it. Clearly a gap in the market with high demand.

[@JohnDBarcaFan]

These are bonuses, meaning they are not a necessity. It's just something to make the game more replayable. I don't get the uproar about this.

[@Kefkaownsall]

No Ghandi 0/10

[@lathamtk]

No nuke-happy Ghandi, 0/3598542*

[@superguy911]

funny the game that's all about unconventional non-head-of-state leaders doesn't have gandhi, who wasn't a head of state

[@veggiefish4017]

This is truly the "Veilguard" of Civ games. Same name and coat of paint as the franchise, but looks like it was done by a completely incompetent team. Harriet Tubman LOL. Why not use Martin Luther King, we have a national holiday for him and he's an icon.

[@poisonarc]

Not focusing on UI is insane because holy shit just copy CIV 6s' if you don't want to put the effort in. Really hard not to cancel my pre-order.

[@MysticEdge97]

Feeling that I’m just buying base. But all the flaws really adding up

[@SunShine-xc6dh]

Here the thing about all the variable choices if they all work then it really isn't a strategy and they are basically pointless, and if some are better than others that the majority of them will just be worse choices/intentional handicaps once you know

[@NikitaOnline17]

I think this is the review that's convinced me I should get the game, *later.* On a sale or something. Not a fan of how it almost seems like an EA status game

[@PaulRizzo504]

So think I will watch you play it and wait for Civilization 8. That age reset thing is just hilariously bad development from them. No clue what they were thinking with the war resetting stuff.

[@Calgaryman10]

I never bought Civ 6. Let's see what happens with this one.

[@zyrtor1]

Great video Marbz, I don't see anything that would be a dealbreaker for me. Civ 6 gave fits with the cartoony art, woke mechanics, and that awful Agenda system. This game seems to have none of that, so I am good to go. Most fans probably would have wanted a newer updated Civ 5 game, but I want to give the new mechanics a try. Also, they will add more maps to the game on expansion. They might even give us a map editor later.

[@einarcgulbrandsen7177]

If your description of the game is accurate and reflects the released version, it will likely receive very negative reviews.

[@knarftahw]

*Shrug* personally I don't care either way. The leader/civ mix and match and having to change civs is a major put off. However that's just me being a history enjoyer, it's why I play these types of games, for the historical theme/ skin. These changes aren't even alt-history, more like fan fiction.

[@Marbozir]

Yeah, I didn't mention this in the video, but what really bothered me wasn't even my own civilization, but the AI players. When you talk with, say, Augustus, and he's clearly wearing a Roman outfit, except he's actually, say, Mongolian. It just feels... very strange. There's basically no visual distinction depending on the civilization of any given leader. It's always the same. In some of the older Civilization games, the leaders actually changed their appearance depending on your civilization's level of advancement (Civ 3 for example).

[@c-tothefourth4879]

@@Marbozirthat is incredibly jarring. It should be an alternative history where they turned into the civilisation proper.

[@brianbrunt3636]

Doesn't matter if good or bad I'm not supporting greed

[@omother942]

Haven't listened/watch in full yet - just came across your channel randomly from your CIV5 Japan Deity playlist! Just wondering what the best CIV for longevity would be at this moment? Not going to pickup CIV7 for a long time probably so curious if 4 or 5 or 6 would be best?

[@spittlefish5208]

Just a random civ fan here but... Civ4 with all the DLC is the best and most detailed/complicated of the entire series, IMO. The only one that also has an interesting end-game state and the way religions/political factions compete feels the most natural. It also has a lot of really cool mods to go with it. Civ5 is more intuitive and easier to pick up and play - the one-piece per tile is a big change, but makes the AI armies not so threatening as you can out-maneuver them so easily. I do think Civ5 has the best 'scenarios' to play since Civ2. Civ6 I didn't like at all, but some people like it a lot so... shrug.

[@Hurbster2112]

GB locked behind a paywall? Nah, I'm not down with that. I'll take a look in a couple of years.

[@stevesmith4600]

Ugh ... scenarios. I hated scenarios when they were first introduced in CIV. I gave them a honest try, played many of them, multiple times. Conceptually, I see their positives, but I never enjoyed playing them. So when Marbs constantly invokes scenarios to draw a parallel to Civ 7, I cringe.

[@erykczajkowski8226]

You've just strenghtened my decision to no buy the game now. As for replayability, I have doubts - my experiences say, that if you have zillion various modifiers from zillion sources then either you can go all in into a certain yield/mechanic and break the game (which you already showcased), but this is something I do not find fun. Or, alternatively, you you can play a "balanced" game, but this means that your choice of leader/nation/policy has little significance, because if leader A provides yield A, but lacks yield B, then you just take policy tree providing you yield B. In result you'll end up with the same yields income regardless of initial choice and never feel any "weakness", because you can easily compensate for them. This gets boring really fast.

[@Mako2401]

Buddy I trust your review but everyone knows that you dont buy a Civ until its three uears after reelase with all the dlcs and expansions

[@darkholyPL]

It sure as hell isn't 300PLN for the poverty version good....

[@MOISECRIMI]

👌

[@edpistemic]

They peaked with V, imo.

[@ChristianvandeGraaf]

So.. 8.5 years in development and it still seems rushed. That doesn't bode well.