I played Civ 7... Its breathtaking... Heres what I Loved and Hated - Sid Meiers Civilization VII

[@Z0eff]

Timestamps: (Use Ctrl+F to find what you're looking for) 0:00 Intro: Paid trip to Firaxis, b-roll footage not his own. 1:15 Civ7 is not like previous Civ games, will bother lots of people. 2:18 Initial impressions on arrival at Firaxis. Benjamin looks like a reanimated irradiated undead testicle. 3:34 First impressions trying out the preview build. Min-max'd my playtime by not poopin'. • 5:02 Now going through the *THINGS THAT I LOVED*, slowly progressing to things I hated 5:10 First S-Tier: Independent people. Mashes City States from Civ5/6 and Barb Clans from Civ6 all into one. 8:47 Art style of terrain and buildings is a real evolution forward. (Excluding leaders) 10:23 Leaders not always heads of state IRL, massive step forward. 12:00 Leveling leaders is awesome, maybe great people are gone. That might be fine? 12:45 Districts. Layered gameplay system for city development. Unique districts if both UBs in same place. 15:17 Some units have extra abilities. Scouts have 2 abilities, reveals goodie huts in FoW. 16:29 Goodie huts, so many different kinds. 16:44 Scout second ability gives +1 range with a watchtower. 17:02 Great Generals promote instead of units. Can store units inside them. Has cool upgrades. 19:03 Reinforcements mechanic with Great Generals. Is by default slightly faster than moving units by hand. 20:06 Multiplayer combat will be wild. Curious to see what CPL players will do. 20:45 Civs have unique research options. Masteries for techs. • 21:51 Things that I have *MIXED FEELINGS* about. 21:53 Builders being gone. Less micro, but loss of mini-game. No citizen management either. • 22:58 Back to things I love: Changes to diplomacy system. More nuance. How diplo influence works. • 25:00 Now things I felt *NEUTRAL OR AMBIVALENT* about. 25:13 Improving resources more in depth, not unlike the great works screen in previous games. 27:09 Civ5's global happiness is back, Civ6's government cards are back. Combined into a single system. 28:01 Specialists have been changed. Flat bonus on top of enhancing their district. 28:45 Era transitions. Didn't get to that part in the game. Worry this could feel contrived. 29:25 Soft limit on number of cities. Penalty to happiness when over limit. 30:16 2 tiers of Cities. Town becomes a city. Can specialize towns, "bread basket" area of towns feeding cities. 31:39 Civs changing between eras. Unsure if it will work out in Civ7. Cautiously optimistic. 34:16 Narrative/random events. Will never read the flavor text. Long event chains with big outcomes will have to be memorized. • 37:28 The *HATRED SECTION*. 37:39 The UI. Strongly negative reaction. Presumably will be overhauled before launch. 38:33 District spam. Too much sprawl. Carpet of doom cities. 39:49 Missed the vibe of units leveling up. 40:42 Miss builders too. Was a fun mini-game. (Same as 21:53) 42:37 Religion is missing in the build I played. Fond memories of Yogscast Duncan's "My Balls". 43:46 Leader models. They look sick/unwell/have pox. 45:20 Leaders facing each other feels wrong. • 47:23 *THINGS I WORRY ABOUT* 47:35 Launching on PC and ALL consoles including Switch. A lot to go wrong. • 48:41 Concluding remarks. Cautiously optimistic but skeptically critical.

[@choopie08]

17:57 suction button. I really hope they use that as the sound effect ingame

[@Z0eff]

@@choopie08 Schleeup.

[@RobertLey60]

Thanks Papa Z0eff, Papa Bless

[@Z0eff]

@@markos50100 Saw several people made one afterward I was done, it was probably just the first one potato saw

[@misterbeach8826]

Thank you. I completely agree with the ugly UI and the changing of civs. I also find the terrain reveal map extremely ugly. It could become the first Civ game I wait for to be discounted. The changing of civs is what troubles me the most. If it is like in Humankind, then Civ7 is doomed. The problem is that just when you start to like your Civ after a few years, Civ7 gives you the finger and forces you to... choose a new civ that will require many years/turns to develop a relationship with, essentially: you will need again time to care about it, if at all. Imagine Starcraft, where you are forced to change factions every few levels. Imagine WoW, where you have to choose a new hero every 20 levels because he has better stats. This stupid idea does not come from an experienced game designer.

[@markadams7046]

One of the thing with civ 6 is scouts were basically for going into the fog, but once you go there, an enemy unit might be there who can kill the scout in an instant. the fact that you can hold back a movement to look into the fog, I find useful.

[@thephantomchannel5368]

Quite honestly it seems like a great mechanic and I'm surprised it took this long to be implemented. Hoping this feature can be modded into previous games because it actually makes sense for a scout.

[@gomer7353]

@@thephantomchannel5368 Why do we need scouts like workers? Make a button, press it and see everything in the 3rd radius, press it again and see in the 4th radius, and so on. Isn't that ideal for Civilization 8?

[@SenorHomeslice]

@@gomer7353 I don’t see that being good. Then you never move and explore. You just push a button thirty or so times at the beginning of the game and you see everything. “I’m setting up camp here for a few months to do more extensive exploration of this area before I move on” seems better thematically as well as mechanically.

[@cass7448]

@@gomer7353 If you're next to an ocean or a big mountain range, congratulations you wasted a button press revealing unusable terrain. Physical scout units allow you to prioritise what you reveal. And if scouts didn't exist as a unit, people would just use other units instead.

[@Bluecatte]

in most games scouts are a waste to begin with. just scout with military, forehead

[@Ellimanist15]

Influencers trying to get a dev drunk so he would spill his secrets is such a vibe. XD

[@PotatoMcWhiskey]

Our powers are brutal

[@silvermknight]

Ive done that with voice actors in New Orleans.

[@Phaxify]

Well I guess if you invite strategy fans, you have to expect them to look for weaknesses in the system :D

[@jrm78]

Carl looks like he can put a few back and not feel it, which is why they had Special Agent Potato on the case

[@PhoenixianThe]

Their power was strong, but his liver was stronger.

[@woesmaro]

Civ 5 had the best leader designs, hands down. If they brought that style back and combined it with a new throne room, the leader screens would be absolutely incredible! I also hope the music returns to Civ 5's level-Attila's war theme was something else.

[@COMMANDandConquer199]

Civ 5 was the best in the series imo. I didn't like 6 at all compared to 5.

[@joeyr88]

​@@COMMANDandConquer199 5 map looked better too. Aesthetic wise.

[@victorstrh]

My first civ game ever was a civ v game, and the first leader I met was alexander. Just perfect.

[@Phillip-y6d]

v suxed

[@Ksen-pg7se]

@@COMMANDandConquer199 On balance I prefer Civ 5 as well. But in some areas Civ 4 or even older ones are better. Civ 5 mostly has a calming flow to it, Civ 6 just feels like a struggle.

[@mcpherson1222]

“I want you to be prepared for social media to suck for a while.” Isn’t social media sucking the norm for social media?

[@michaeldwhelchel]

Visualize it as it is now as the baseline. Normal, even. Now assuming this new normal, imagine it sucking. 😰

[@lracseroom8286]

Slow down there Captain Originality. Your cutting edge insights are truly revolutionary stuff.

[@proddreamatnight]

very good

[@LilyMoonWitch]

@@lracseroom8286 Way to prove his point.

[@craigdoc6656]

@@LilyMoonWitch 😂😂 didn't they just

[@farphos]

I think you're being unfair to Benjamin Franklin. He really has that true-to-life syphilitic look that I always longed for

[@goldenhate6649]

Yeah, I don't think the Irishman realizes how ugly ben franklin actually was. He's also gotten pretty accustomed to cartoon characters, so that's a thing as well.

[@twistedconversations782]

Oh yes. Ben Sack chin Franklin

[@iloveyou3367]

Hahaha

[@MunchKING]

@@goldenhate6649 And yet he still managed to bang his way through most of the women in France. :p

[@stevevalentine6860]

At least they didn't make him look like Michael Douglas! 😄

[@Tig3r4ce]

One thing I liked about the idea of the Settlement system is that it seems like it could benefit both players who play wide AND players who play tall, in different ways: wide players can expand their territory (relatively) quickly without necessarily having to micromanage everything until they're ready, and tall players can get access to more resources without having to commit to actually having more cities. Super excited to see how this turns out 🤞

[@TheSjuris]

Looks like they are focusing on tall cities again. Fewer major cities, but more small towns supplying them. Aleta like real life. Food isn’t really grown inside of a metropolis in the real world either.

[@lloydlim1055]

​@@TheSjuriswhich is what i like about it, sinxe irl through out history alot of civ have their bread basket city/settlement/place that fees their empire. Or smth they rely it on other civ who are more food focus. And the ability to trade resorces also removes the awkwardness of having a low population, high production citie, and high poppulated low production cities. As both citys can trade with each other to have balance.

[@g_oduofthenorth9618]

I do like the city change, because even in civ where the kinda tried to show urban sprawl, I did always feel like... to cover the amount of space of an actual country, I'd either have a ton of major cities with way too much space in between that I'd have to micromanage, or I'd wind up with a wide country with a few cities dotted along it, and a bunch of wilderness in between. It never felt like it accounted for towns that are large enough to see on a map, but maybe are moreso just epicenters of industrial or agricultural sprawl that feed into a major city. I just kinda hope that there's some flexibility so you can have like.... I dunno, things that serve different purposes, like if I wanted to put all my science in a campus district in a town in the outskirts, or maybe have a Versailles to move all my government to. I kinda find it weird that civilization never had a mechanic around dealing with nobles or oligarchs, or other powerful people like influential tycoons, or the rich people today that occasionally have sway for different reasons and have to be dealt with as a kind of... potential advantage, probable obstacle kinda thing.

[@TaewonKian]

Only buying Civ 7 if potato is leader of Irish civ

[@ericbrown8916]

LOL

[@blkstylion7173]

Hilarious

[@mythicfolfi4652]

Only buying if I can play Karl Marx of Ireland as well

[@mythicfolfi4652]

@@TheJrcattle Take your political views aside, it would be sick as hell!

[@joshuabarker5703]

@@TaewonKian and @SpiffingBrit is leader of England 🇬🇧 ☕️ 🫖

[@rstarks1125]

The fact that rivers are navigable up to a certain point is a game changer for ocean fairing cims like Dido

[@BradTheAmerican]

I'm just shocked that they added something I've been wanting for years.

[@lloydlim1055]

@@rstarks1125 It will vastly improve the naval combat which civ 6 has downgrade it much.

[@MedjayofFaiyum]

I wonder if they'll be rivers that will be poison or be ruined during a climate crisis

[@UrsusUrsa]

Viking Civ mains rejoice

[@rygarthebrave2249]

The leaders look like Sims. Both in their art style and just how they move around.

[@BobbyH59]

I think they should have made the inverse decision and had you pick a Civ and then you change your leader throughout the ages. Each civ gets 6-7 leaders and you get to randomly select from 3 each age. It's functionally the exact same system but to me it seems more cohesive than just changing entire Civs.

[@niggo9366]

The leader is the personification of yourself. Not even talking about the whole process of creating so many leaders with own animations, outfits and effects. And if those are not changing, what would be the reason to change the leader? Also a cultural change is kinda more logical because people back then are just as people now the only difference is the culture they grew up in

[@KissellMissile]

To me, this is much more realistic of actual history, where a thread of culture binds together civilizations that are distinct.

[@awesomeguydj8810]

Problem is that's a lot more work

[@sasori9624]

@@KissellMissile meh

[@MidlifeCrisisJoe]

@@awesomeguydj8810 They're being paid for their work. In theory they love their jobs. Saying "X is more work" is a bad excuse.

[@s0lid_sno0ks]

"mildly positive" somehow becomes "breathtaking"

[@BostonBeerSnob]

access journalism is the goal

[@chuckm1961]

Remember, you must assume that anyone with access is not credible, and anyone without access is credible. You must think like a four-year-old. There are “good” and “bad” people. :)

[@are3287]

@@chuckm1961 Thats not true, bunch of people without access aren't credible either. It's financially good for Sir Potat if Civ 7 ends up being popular regardless of he has access.

[@shaunholt]

0:00 Intro 1:15 Be prepared for some changes 2:16 Setting the stage, first impressions 3:22 Prickle of excitement 5:11 Things I love, independent people/city states 8:48 Art style, terrain, gorgeous environments 10:24 Leaders 12:46 Districts 15:17 Unit abilities, scouting 17:03 Army commanders, unit promotions 20:46 Research, tech tree 21:51 Builders, bartering, micromanagement 25:06 Things I'm neutral or iffy about, resource slots 26:11 Trade 27:10 Happiness, government cards, specialists 28:45 Cities 31:39 Eras 34:16 Random narrative events, potential massive problem 37:39 Things I hated, the UI, but it may change 38:33 City and district sprawling 39:50 Not promoting units 40:43 Builders and tile improvements 42:38 Religion is missing for now 43:45 Leaders 47:27 Releasing on all platforms 48:42 Outro

[@Flowerz__]

Pay this man his shmoney

[@ripred178]

Here, have a pat on the back.

[@shaunholt]

​@@Flowerz__ 🎉

[@shaunholt]

​@@ripred178😊

[@maxsteigauf8179]

I am excited to see navigable rivers! As someone who lived in St. Paul MN the Mississippi River has shown me how important rivers can be to nations and empires and I'm interested in learning more about that feature

[@jasonreed7522]

In NY like 80% of our state history is tied to the Hudson River and the Erie Canal. Navigable rivers are indescribably important in history, and we built our own.

[@michaelflippo5425]

"A Trojan horse pinata of violence" SENT me 🤣🤣 I had to pause I was laughing so hard.

[@prottimus2396]

Oh so when a Great General stores units inside himself it's "a great feature" but when I do it I'm "ruining board game night"

[@ravencrovax]

@@prottimus2396 depends on how/where you decide to store them inside you.

[@alex13690]

Not enough likes on this

[@crossroads8370]

Its such a huge improvement to the civ games that I'll for sure be buying it just for that one feature. one thing I never liked in civ games was having to move 50 different units each turn It got old real fast.

[@Chicky_Lumps]

Unit linking basically served that purpose though? Although it was annoying that linking didn't give embarked units the same movement points as a naval unit.

[@Megalomaniakaal]

@@ravencrovax Certainly not pockets.

[@lestertarcenio001]

The best leader screen is in Civ 5. They are like the animated version of their most famous painting. Epic and beautiful.

[@craftsmenMC]

I much preferred 6 over 5, but one thing I absolutely missed was the diplomacy screens. Montezuma was always awesome to encounter specifically for his diplomacy screen.

[@DarkFlowerXD]

Yeah, civ 5 felt like you came to an audience with them.

[@MrBrock314]

Civ 2 council is what I want back - I want actors yelling at each other in over-the-top Shakespearean fashion. BUILD CITY WALLS!

[@TheVanillatech]

Shogun Total War had the best leader screens. The servants and ambassadors bowing and fauning as they shuffle in and out of the "potential death" room. Need More KOCKU!

[@MarcusHelius]

5 had the best art style in my opinion, from the Art-Deco UI, the pleasant colour scheme, to the 'classical portrait' style of Leader Screens.

[@shanelund4794]

I’ve played Civ 4, 5 and 6 and by FAR the one change I need in Civ 7 is the Leader HAS TO talk to ME! I want to be a part of history and having the Leader talk directly to me was one of the most influential immersive experiences in CIV! Developers please fix before release 🙏🏼

[@lesterjdb]

They need to go back to Civ 5 leader art. Montezuma staring down at you from a fire platform, Sejong looking with dignity and grace from his scholarly throne- they had character.

[@MrBrock314]

I also want my castle/throne upgrades from Civ 1/2. :) Where's my hidden home castle with treasures in it?

[@kinagrill]

yeah they all had that 'portrait come to life' feel back then that made them all so interesting cuz they were 'at home at their native soil' so to speak.

[@WatchThis-ek2og]

I miss being able to choose between playing as a male or female leader. I just don't really like the idea of playing Queen Victoria as England for every civ game or a female pharaoh for Egypt again, etc. I get that some civs have never had a female leader before especially the modern ones like USA but I'm pretty sure I remember civ 2 getting around that somehow.

[@kinagrill]

@@WatchThis-ek2og That part never bothered me personally, but having a switch between two historical (or more) Civ leaders of differing genders and each unique so it's not just 'plays this nation and no difference between avatar type'.

[@WatchThis-ek2og]

@@kinagrill yeah I'm very curious about how this civ switching mechanic will work. I always wanted the ability to switch between civs in a game but I envisioned more like your old empire is still there and the AI takes it over type of thing. For example it would be cool to start as the Ancient Greeks then switch to the Romans to conquer the Greek empire you built.

[@redeo1475]

When it comes to builders, one of my favorite things about Civ V was automating builders (yes I know it's not the "correct" way to use them) but seeing them run around and inprove resources and slowly build roads made my civilization feel real and lived in. I think having some sort of slow automatic sprawl or decisions to put production towards road building/resourse improvement would help me feel like I'm truly making decisions to improve my city and the people who live there.

[@CityState_of_Valletta]

@@redeo1475 yeah I never played 6 (mostly) because I LOVE my workers. Getting them early, unlocking specific techs because of your worker + pathing (ie getting mining just as your worker makes it up the hill), and like you said putting them on auto for the mid/late game and just watching them run around is so deeply satisfying. Dodging barbs, making roads to an enemy Civ for later conquest, covering tundra in trading posts or getting crazy yields with Unique Improvements- probably 30% of my enjoyment of the game comes from Workers

[@elomellow1623]

@@CityState_of_Valletta It did feel very satisfying when you would add an improvement over one of those crazy yield tiles. I liked Civ 6 workers a lot more than the civ 5, myself. Since on Civ 5, they would end up needing to be fortified all over the map or deleted at some point. On Civ 6, it made the builder charge bonus a very nice reward to unlock.

They opened a lot of gameplay opportunities, like declaring war on a city state or another civ just to steal their workers and pillage the improvements. Or building a road network up to a geographical chokepoint, build a fort there and fortify units for a defensive war. Workers are nice because they allow you to think more about what you want from the game. That's why I hated the builder charges and automatic roads on Civ VI.

[@jaripeltola]

In M.U.L.E. , a game released by Electronic Arts some four decades ago, one could concentrate on farming or mining, redevelop land, scout the planet and even go for a drink. A lot of the action took place at the stock market, as both the land and all the products were means of trading. One could take the route of individual wealth or concentrate more on the overall success of the colony. And all this ran on 64kb of memory space. I played the M.U.L.E. on an emulator some time ago, and it made me realize that if the game idea is truly good, everything else is somewhat secondary.

[@bozimmerman]

Ah yea, back when EA was a powerhouse of Quality, and I mean that. BTW, did you know that Civilization was ported to the C64 -- you should check it out. :)

[@andybreckenridge4461]

The stock market mechanic in MULE was fantastic. It was quick, and was kinetic. Not sure if it makes sense to have in civ. Another good mechanic from MULE were random events that affected production, e.g. after you make decisions on production there would be random events that affect output, and swing the game (like inc. solar output). Civ could use something like this, to swing the games later. (E.g. a later technology is discovered randomly, and civs.have to barter for it or wage war). Maybe a comet hits, or there's intense volcanism. Aliens make contact? A barbarian city state grows in power and alliances need to be created to fend off.

[@alwaysgooglethedatasheet4980]

Just in case no one else has mentioned it - at 12:57 there's a discussion about the leader's tree replacing Great People, while the background footage at this time lists one of Egypt's bonuses as the ability to recruit a unique Great Person (the Tjaty). It seems a safe bet to me that these are two different systems. I would guess that the leader tree shown at 12:29 is instead a condensation of the governor system from Civ 6, as the trees we are shown (and the coverage of the different yield/victory types) looks a lot like the ability trees for Pingala/Amani/Reina/Magnus/Victor, just collected under the name of one leader empire-wide this time rather than assigned to a handful of different governors in different cities.

[@justclickingthroughyoutube7132]

100% agree with the leader issue. The leaders need to talk to the player, not to the avatar.... We are playing through history. We aren't watching it.

[@AmodajuFitness]

@@justclickingthroughyoutube7132 I totally agree the point of view and changing civilizations that are none related is an immersion killer smh

[@shishourokiryoku4024]

What was that quote that Firaxis had in the trailer? Something about "will you build an empire that lasts the tests of time?" But then Firaxis goes on to change the diplomacy animations, removing the illusion of the player having any agency--the AIs are not responding to the player. The diplomacy animations have effectively turned the player into a passive observer.

[@kierkegaardrulez]

You’ll get used to it. They all look great, IMO, except Augustus looking a bit weird. But maybe he actually looked weird in real life?

[@ashwalkerson1934]

I came here to say this, too. I think that's one reason I didn't stick with humankind. It felt like monster city sprawl and then when civs would talk to me, they weren't talking to "me" they were talking to each other. It took me out of it and left me feeling disconnected from the civ story. Re: Augustus - I think the lighting is off. The ladies have softer lighting with what seem to be warmer tones, while Auggy and Ben have harsh white lighting like they're on a studio stage.

[@LaikaLycanthrope]

@@justclickingthroughyoutube7132 Well, I didn't like how in 6 the Great People are no longer products of YOUR glorious civilization - they just sorta sprout like mushrooms and choose what kind of human to be from there 🙄

[@ChRW123]

Thing about having both leaders on the diplomacy screen is that my leader doesn't reflect MY reaction. Instead, I am watching someone else's... even worse, an NPC reaction that 99% of the time will not match with mine.

[@Kymlaar]

One thing I'll miss concerning workers is the ability to gather a herd of them and send then to a newly settled city and develop the land long before I have the population to exploit it.

[@tannisroot]

@@Kymlaar but you waste upkeep costs on unworkable tiles

[@Kymlaar]

@@tannisroot at the point I can do that, I'm not too worried about a little upkeep that fades away. I'm not going for peak efficiency, just keeping myself from forgetting. xD

@@tannisroot what upkeep costs? There has never been upkeep costs for farms or mines...

[@KissellMissile]

I like the added realism personally.

[@mrthor3061]

it costs 2 food to work EVERY TILE.

[@csrjjsmp]

“I love that leaders can finally be any historical figure even if they didn’t rule the country in question” Meanwhile Gandhi, who has been in every civ game so far 😶

[@PotatoMcWhiskey]

Gandhi lead parliament iirc

[@JWK1101]

Also, Civ 2 had a male and female option for each Civ, which meant in some cases people who were never leader of the country were offered as an option, such as Susan B Anthony for the US.

[@Ravi9A]

@@PotatoMcWhiskey he didn't. That's a different unrelated gandhi you are probably thinking of.

[@jdraymon]

he was still effectively a political leader, as opposed to a cultural or scientific visionary

[@samuelconnolly347]

Lots of Gandhis in Indian politics (the Nehru-Gandhi family are major players). Indira Gandhi was prime minister, but no relation to Mohandas. Mohandas (Mahatma) was never a government leader, and unrelated to anyone in government. Obviously, however, he was still of major political significance.

[@AcePrice]

If I can't turn off civilization switching for all civilizations and I cant start as any civ as I want off the bat, I probably won't be playing. I don't personally care how historically accurate it is, I want MY civilization to make it to the end and I want my continued rival of France to perpetuate throughout time.

[@VirusVanquisher]

@@AcePrice 💯 The civ switching has me infuriated. Sad that Civilization has only went downhill after Civ 5.

[@Goremize]

@@VirusVanquisher New devs and designers keep coming in and wanting to insert their "vision" causing constant changes that no one asked for is why Civ 5 is more popular today then Civ 6, and by the looks of it Civ 7. They had a winning formula with Civ 5 and all they needed to do was expand upon it. Instead..... we get this.

[@sigstenbockgard8080]

@@Goremize Civ 6 literally has twice the number of monthly players that 5 has

[@MegaAlchemist123]

@@VirusVanquisher agreed. Civ5 Was peak. Will probably still try civ7, but civ6 was such a massive downgrade that I fear that civ7 will be nothing for me.

[@VirusVanquisher]

@@sigstenbockgard8080 only because it is newer imo. I have over 1200 hours in Civ 5 and about 550 in Civ 6. Cannot stand the tedious and what feels like punishing district placement that is far to difficult to min max. It just does not feel clear enough regarding possible bonuses of district placements, as in would X district over time be light years better than Y? This can change drastically as new buildings are placed. Not sure I am articulating this well but hopefully you know what I mean.

[@Z0eff]

Forget changing civs, 5 players max in multiplayer is ridiculous

[@nathancatalano2480]

@@Z0eff Also, NO HOTSEAT MULTIPLAYER! I just can't believe it.

[@NetworKrakle]

@@nathancatalano2480I don’t the hotseat feature is used that much anymore.

[@thecolombian8909]

@@NetworKraklemy hotseat 😔

[@danilooliveira6580]

that is one of my biggest problem so far (maybe behind how the leaders look). because i really like the changes. the evolving nation I still want to see, but I'm completely in favor of the Millennia style city development and removing builders.

[@Mythriak_]

I don't think I ever played a civ multiplayer game with more than 4 human players...

[@WabaStreams]

Timestamps Video start 0:00 Video End 49:55 Hope this helped 😂

[@light370]

Timestamp are indeed missing... it's quite annoying on a 49min video.

[@incoherenot]

wait but its 49:44 long

[@clanpsi]

Mine ended at 49:44.

[@peterl.104]

Mine ends at 49:45. Some of us are experiencing missing time. Must be a new feature of the game: Hidden alien abductions.

[@samuelbonell8850]

10 seconds have been removed by the state, stay vigilant, you could be next

[@Stuffandthimgs1357]

can i just have a new expansion pack to civ 5 that fixes bugs like krakow, adds like 20 new leaders, 5 new map types, and the ability to move units as a group. thats all i want

[@TheEnecca]

The missing religion looks like they are already planning the first expansion.

[@belhariry]

Just like they how had it in base civ 4 and added it as an expansion in civ v gods and kings. what's old is new again!

[@odioaleman]

They have talked about having pantheons on the ancient era. Wouldn't mind if religion starts on the second era as it is a lost feature when playing. On high difficulty, but yes probably dlc

[@S23K]

But religion isn’t missing. From what I understand it will be more important during the second age. (Don’t worry though I’m sure there will be way too much dlc!)

[@Thyrwyn]

(From the Civ 7 official site) The Shawnee get a this unique unit: "Hoceepkileni: Missionary replacement Unit. Has increased movement, and Rivers do not end movement."

[@TheEnecca]

@@S23K It still seems weird that at the age where you would build shrines and temples there is no religion at all.

[@MuchuutheSensible]

Diplomacy between (Russia) Rasputin and (America) Edgar Allan Poe: "In the shadowed halls of Russia’s court, there dwelt a man of dark renown, Ra-Ra-Rasputin, the lover of the Russian Queen, whose presence cast a chilling frown. A feline specter, now but a whisper in the night, had vanished from our sight, Ra-Ra-Rasputin, the greatest love machine, whose deeds were shrouded in the moon’s pale light. Alas, the shame of his relentless pursuit, a tale of sorrow and delight"

[@pokemata1035]

👏👏

[@EventHorrorEyesOn]

@@MuchuutheSensible Your vision is beautiful.

[@BlackShardStudio]

oscarsaudienceapplause.gif

[@DeviMotion]

I am saving this forever

[@davidjockin6654]

If America would have Edgar Allan Poe as president, I would love to see William Shakespeare as leader of England.

[@ZoltronLaser]

I also thought Civ switching in Humankind was weird. I'm surprised they are trying it. There's a much better way. Leader transitions in each era. So you start the game as one Civ, and you pick a temporary starting leader, gaining a unique civilization bonus for that leader choice. Then you go to the next era, your Civ stays the same, but you pick a new leader, with a new unique civilization bonus. These bonuses last the entire game, and by the end, you can have several unique bonuses, depending on how many eras they want the game to have. Your leader could be from any historical civilization, you wouldn't be locked to a single one. For example, in the first era you might choose Nebuchadnezzar as your leader and get something like a farming bonus, but then you could choose Alexander the Great as your leader in the next era, and get some kind of military bonus. The leaders you could pick from would not be locked to any nation, tribe, or race - though there could be certain restrictions for gameplay reasons. Like if you picked one type of leader in a previous era, it might block other leaders from being picked in the next era, while unlocking other different leaders instead, like a sort of decision tree or a skill tree in an MMORPG. Also, only one civ could pick any specific leader per game, so if you're going for a certain build, and another civilization beats you to the next era and picks the leader you were planning, then you'll have to adjust your strategy and pick a different leader.

[@Kingslayer513]

Leader changes instead of Civ changes per era is a good idea. I would still prefer they enforce historical accuracy with locked leader pools per civ. Or just keep the Leaders/Civs the same throughout and let you evolve the abilities each era instead. Changing Civs was bad in Humankind and the majority of people disliked it. Very surprised they want to try it. It completely destroyed the sense of identity in each match.

[@Bu-bo-Bu-bo]

Yeah, i was thinking of plenty other things, too. But, well, it is what it is, and we can't change it, neither can they at this point. So the best we can hope is that it will be good, of, if it isn't, it will be corrected. Some people love to hate. I'm not. I really hope that i will love this game. But i can't be sure. Hence the hope.

[@PotatoMcWhiskey]

First person to do timestamps, I'll pin it, go get your 15 minuts of fame love you, I been working continously for like 12 hours

[@PenguinJack]

00:00 - Video Starts 49:44 - Video Ends

[@Mytelefe]

No you are !

[@SylviaRustyFae]

Thank you for your service ​@@PenguinJack

[@SebiSuper9mil]

@@PenguinJack 🫡🫡🫡

[@GermannDude]

​@@PenguinJacko7

[@user-mk3rw8lf8m]

Absolutely agree on the civ diplomacy screen, I want them to declare early, game ending wars by screaming in my face

[@jammingend3781]

@user-mk3rw8lf8m "well well well.... what I'm moron I'm talking to now, maybe next time invest in an army instead of pumping everything in science, loser." -- ghandi declared a surprise war

[@CPPpotkustartti]

I kinda hoped they would had made return of Advisors from Civ 2. Military Advisor: Sire, we need Barracks to train troops to take over our neighbours lands! Foreign Advisor: I disagree my lord, we should seek friendly relationship and trade with them. Economy Advisor: I disagree. 'he says while admiring shine of gold coin in his hand' Culture Advisor: Sire, you need not heed words of this brute! Little bit of bickering would liven up your court.

[@WatchThis-ek2og]

The best part was when they would all yell at each other in anarchy mode.

[@NONO-hz4vo]

The live action was up there with the CnC performance of Tim Curry.

[@Alex-os7iu]

The reason for seeing your own leader avatar is a 100% because they wanna sell skins (or as they call them "personas")

[@danielw5466]

I think its good because we rarely saw our own leader - which is now more Important because players need to identify more with the leader because of changing cultures. Also, i think it makes diplomacy more fun in my opinion. Doesnt Take you out of the game.

[@JJAB91]

With how separated Civ 7 looks to be with isolated eras(even including different MP counts), leaders and civs disconnected, switching of civs making each one more single era focused, the removal of hotseat MP and the already insane preorder and fancy edition prices in some countries I 100% feel Civ 7 is going to be a rather greedy platform for DLC(leaders, civs, eras etc.) and monetization moreso than a full game. As such I would not be surprised if even modding support took a large hit because it would take away from monetization potential. As an example see what happened in Halo when they went from Halo MCC and it's modding support on Steam to Halo Infinite's near complete lack of any.

[@adam422]

​@@danielw5466 this game used to be about history and historical figures... History ain't changing, what changing is developer's/publisher's greed.

[@danielw5466]

@@adam422 But now we will have probably much more leaders and each civilisation will have its maximum potential at the current age.

[@adrianbeer8475]

Personally, I think it's nice that you get to see your own leader more often in the game. What I really liked about Civilization 3 and 4 was that the different leaders of the civilizations adapted their wardrobe and appearance to the eras in the game. I also find the idea of changing from Egypt to Japan (or another civ) when changing eras rather questionable and would welcome the "force historic" option mentioned in the video. But if you like to change your civs wildly... if you could then see your leader in the appropriate wardrobe and style of the era (maybe Hatschepsut in a Kimono) - that would be a really nice detail. For my part - I liked that part in Humankind.

[@gabebaker89]

Look if I don’t have cleopatra telling me I’m a worthless worm ima be sad

[@MichaelOswalt]

real

[@u2b891]

@@MichaelOswaltbot

[@adreaminxy]

@@u2b891 bot

[@sham8127]

@@adreaminxy bot

[@BeerBreath702]

@@sham8127bot

[@bugaboo_daisy9000]

I really like the appearance of the board and map tiles, but you are right - those leaders are a bit gnarly.

[@darkrhyno1859]

Thank you Potato for not being like every other KZbinr and “fanboying” over the next iteration of a game. I understand Civ is your bread and butter and keeps you fed and the fact that you’re not praising the devs just to further your own needs goes a long way in my book. Thank you

[@wverms]

My personal take is that a new game shouldn't be just a patch/expansion with better graphics of an old one. There should be things that are substantially different otherwise why make the new one at all? Of course that means I won't always enjoy a new game in a series, but that's fine, that's what the old ones are for.

[@Peatingtune]

I'm prepared to never play a game newer than 5 considering 6 was really not my thing and 7 appears to be headed even further in that direction. If they release a "Civ: Classic" that basically *is* an expansion of, say, Civ 4 with better graphics and a few modern QOL features then I would buy that, and I think so would a lot of other people. I won't hold my breath, though.

[@TurtleLover69527]

I started playing Civ 6 about 2 years ago and I felt like I had mastered it after a year, so I'm excited to learn a new game, but also, I hate change! I have such anxiety about the big changes when the only Civ game I have to compare it to is one of my favorite games of all time!

[@mattking3106]

@@TurtleLover69527 Telling you rn civ 6 is a breeze i beat deity within a month multiple times its not fun but its quite simple keep peace and only declare war when plausible and have alot of money, went back to civ 5 which i havent played since i was 13 and im struggling to keep up on warlord definitely miss the challenge cant wait to beat deity on 5

[@NopeNene]

They are making this game for the money. They have no other considerations. To me it's quite the opposite. The making of a new game with the same title only for it to be a completely different game altogether is one of the dumbest things in gaming and personally I just call it false advertising. Why would I want to buy Ninja Storm 4 if the gameplay is going to be that of a completely different Naruto gaming Franchise? Then I will buy that other game right? There have been ruined so many great gaming franchises because of it and it's probably even one of the main reasons gaming franchises die. The newer version ruins everything. And often times you can't say just plug in the older game for so many reasons. A dead multiplayer if that is actually part of the game for example. Still not over the fact that Mass Effect 1 was one of the best space games in existence. And with Mass Effect 2 we got a horrible game that worried about balancing single player so that it could become a big multiplayer thing. They don't care about artistic sentiment. They only care about $$$$$$$$.

[@folx2733]

​​@@NopeNene use your brain for a sec. If they only cared about $$$$ then why make any controversial changes or redesigns? If they only wanted money they would resell CIV 5 with a new coat of paint to hysterical suckers like you every year. Just listen to yourself lol. "HURRR DURR it's false advertising to sell a sequel with different game mechanics!!!!"" Literally just a demented old man complaining about new things in general

[@adamn.1294]

I feel like the civ swapping will be a feature that ages extremely well. Once people learn the unlock conditions, it will open up a ton of flexibility for a given playthrough. Everyone will start with the historically contextual progressions, then start experimenting on a third or fourth run with a given leader. Also, I get what you're saying about the narrative events; it's a tough one because RP gamers will absolutely love them. Someone will make a mod if there are secret chains that require specific answers. And I'd like to see tiny builders working on the roads and constructing new buildings. Just an homage.

[@bramvanherck4107]

I also did not like augustus. augustus looks like he is gonna call me a mudblood. He looks like if i enter his home on Christmas i'm gonna be walking into improvised boobytraps. He looks like the rich bully in a kids movie.

[@bertanderson2548]

I misread "improvised" as "impoverished."

[@rycolligan]

History can definitely support him being the rich bully in a kids a movie.

[@peterfox1380]

So you're saying the devs did their job

[@andrewklang809]

He looks more like he's supposed to be Caligula.

[@Haggler84]

He looks like ralph from happy days

[@computer__eyez]

46:10 -> I agree, leaders should look at you during diplomacy. It kind of goes against one of Sid Meier’s well known quotes *”always treat the player like the star”*

[@MrMartinNeumann]

I fear the change was made to sell leader skins.

[@Zetimenvec]

I think amenities were an enigma box of incoherence that nobody understood how they work outside of specific civ-specific mechanics. I think it was salvageable, but I am not unhappy to see it go.

[@kevmclarty]

Same, they could easily rework this system in the future in a far more meaningful way

[@joestone9834]

Well Happiness is the substitute I thought? Probably wrong, casual civ fan not a diehard like some.

[@DjValor209]

I really liked the idea and Implementation of housing as a mechanic in civ 6. But amenities made me want to claw my eyeballs out trying to understand how they work.

[@SilortheBlade]

They aren't any different than happiness, and very clearly laid out with how many amenities you need for a city.

[@samuelconnolly347]

The thing that confused me is I've got this luxury resource and it's mysteriously distributed around my empire providing amenities. To me, it was never obvious how this worked. The game doesn't tell you. There's also no option to micro amenity distribution. For example, I could want to go all Hunger Games and put all my amenities in one major city and let the others suffer because having better yields in my capital is more valuable.

[@stewartgames6697]

I've seen a pretty convincing argument online that Civ VII won't have mods due to the simultaneous platforms launch. I'm worried about the suspicious lack of mention of mods in the initial announcements.

[@frankiecedeno3724]

oh shit

[@medflix9993]

This would be one of the dumbest decisions they could possibly make. Mods keep the game alive for years, decades even.

[@Somebody374-bv8cd]

@@medflix9993 I get the feeling many game studios (and more importantly their publishers) are very anti modding these days.

[@wolfsruhm]

@@Somebody374-bv8cd firaxis throughout there existence were pretty much pro-mods so far, but we will see, let's not forget they are owned by take 2, andthese are almost as anti-mod as nintendo

[@drunkenhobo8020]

@@medflix9993 Civ IV had such amazing mods they even included them on the disc for the Beyond the Sword expansion pack! They're such a core part of the Civilization experience.

[@crashstarr6531]

I know I'm late and also not really up on my civ games in general, but the words 'navigable rivers' sent a shiver down my spine.

[@davidfuller06]

Here’s my question. Why do they have you change civilizations? Wouldn’t it be much more seamless to change leaders? Just have a list of famous leaders of that civilization in the given era? That way you can still determine which direction your civilization is going at the beginning of the era while it not being so unnatural. Leaders rise and fall through ages irl. I feel like they got so close to something good, and the slightest change would make all the difference. I don’t know if I expressed my idea right, but I think the solution to much of the controversy surrounding this change could be so simple

[@PotatoMcWhiskey]

I don't know, I'll add this to my list of questions I need to ask them (if I ever get the chance) and I'll try to come up with an answer myself.

[@Tchnfrq]

gameplay wise there would be little difference i think, the change influences your bonuses where you get those from matters only aestetically. and i think changing civs is closer to reallife then changing leaders since those would not life an age anymore then 3 but „nations“ changing after an age was the norm for most of history. tbh i think they decided to change the civ and not the leader because that means less models to create and animate.

[@davidfuller06]

I also feel like if they did that, the crisis would be a bit more seamless, too. As civilizations grow they tend to become more unstable, and fall apart, normally until someone is able to bring the nation together to revolt against the old system to fight for a better system. I’m sure it wouldn’t be perfect, but I get the impression that people would be a lot happier with it.

[@cerdic6305]

@@davidfuller06 personally I don’t like the sounds of the new system there, but the obvious problem with changing leaders rather than civs is that many civs (such as America or Brazil etc) have no possible leaders for some or most eras.

[@SirValoso]

Well if we take something like the Aztecs for example they don't really have a leader for each different age but you could argue Mexico was built on top of this fallen civilization So in the end I think it's a sort of arbitrary decision but since it's about the rise and fall of civilizations they went with changing civs I guess

[@kokilai401]

Yes! Having leader talks straight to me helps with the immersion, it makes me feel like I AM the leader. Not someone who observe the leader of a civ. Very good point!

[@digitalworms]

I can't wait for this!!!! Don't let us down guys! And I was gonna say congratulations on the challenge mission on civ 6 caught that today!

[@BigSco88]

TimeStamps 0:00 - 2:19 - Intro [Positives] 2:19 - 5:12 - First impressions 5:12 - 8:49 - Independent Peoples 8:49 - 10:24 - Game Art 10:24 - 10:47 - Leaders 10:47 - 15:17 - New District Mechanics 15:17 -21:00 - New Unit Abilities and Mechanics 21:00 - - Miscellaneous Positives 21:50 -23:00 - Builders 23:00 - 25:00 -Changes to Diplomacy [Neutral] 25:00 - 27:11 - Resources 27:11 -28:02 - Happiness & Government Cards 28:02 - 28:45 - Specialists 28:45 - 29:26 - Crises 29:26 - 31:40 - City Limits 31:40 - 34:18 - Eras 34:18 - 37:30 - Narrative/Random events [Hatred] 37:30 -38:33 - UI 38:33 - 39:50 - Building Spamming 39:50 - 42:35 - Unit leveling/Builders 42:35 - 43:45 - Religion 43:45 - 47:17 - Leaders [Worries] 47:17 - 48:42 - Platforms [Outro] 48:42 - 49:26 - Outro 49:26 - 49:44 - Socials Hope this helps, keep up the great work @PotatoMcWhiskey look forward to Civ 7 content!

[@Plummchild]

we are never getting anything close to civ 5 leaders screens again are we......

[@Lapantouflemagic0]

i remember them saying how ridiculously expensive and time consuming that was. same thing for the city views of HoMM 5, it was absolutely gorgeous, but the amount of time it took was beyond absurd.

[@corey2232]

@@Lapantouflemagic0 There's no way it's anywhere near that difficult with today's engines... You have independent people who can make full length CG movies on blender or remake old games in Unreal 5 from home.

[@josej.martinez4054]

@@corey2232 With a lot of hous, work, dedication, effort, and as a long-time project. I don't know why everyone thinks Unreal Engine is like chatgpt that you can get anything done quickly.

[@hellogoodbye3786]

@@corey2232 are they using today's engine's tho? (Genuinely asking)

[@Valrokius]

Would you be interested in a trade agreement with England?

[@danielv6906]

Love the enthusiasm infusion! 🎉 Tnx for a great video. Just what I needed 😊

[@MontharKragan]

To me, Augustus looks like a dorky teenager.

[@mark-jf5ik]

Exactly, I think on the other end of the spectrum we have Benjamin looking way too old. With Civ 6 I actually really liked they evened-out the age to be around 30-40, with even the older leaders looking fresh like wilfrig, gandi, and pericles.

[@LMarti13]

he was

[@CGunnels93]

He just looks really punchable, like alexander in civ 6.

[@Sealionborn]

As well he should.

[@RabidHobbit]

...3, 2, 1 until the conspiracy theorists arrive to complain that Firaxis has a woke agenda, intentionally making white men look incapable. (Aside from the undead complexion, I think Ben Franklin actually looks good and is a fun choice for an ahistorical leader.)

[@daviqwerty]

So you want Victoria to tell you " Would you like to be in a trade agreement with England?". I would like to hear her.

[@JWK1101]

You mean Elizabeth I, right?

[@lasloapollo4312]

@@JWK1101 no Queen Anne

[@daviqwerty]

@@JWK1101 Oh yes it was Elizabeth I.

[@MrJoel9679]

Yeah, Civ is going schizophrenic aka woke.

[@illykitten]

A lot of the text and the way the UI is shaped is reminding me strongly of Beyond Earth. It's the same font as BE even

[@mbeavis2587]

"After that initial shock, I ate some cookies..." - is there anything that eating cookies can't solve?

[@pumpkinpartysystem]

cookie allergy

[@medicalricky]

​@@pumpkinpartysystem It would "solve it" in a way.

[@jasonarthurs3885]

Dwindling on hand cookie stocks comes to mind.

[@ianperley233]

@@medicalricky I was gonna say diabetes, but yeah, enough cookies would solve that too. Truly they are nature's miracle cure!

[@VexylObby]

Debt

[@olegoleg258]

I honestly love hearing someone who is obsessed with a game and has thousands of hours in it nerd out over upcoming features. thank you for the video potato, and I hope to watch you play the game sometime in the future!

[@JasonFooDesign]

I'm looking forward to Civ 7, and all the new things. But I'm going to wait as I'm not willing to pay the ridiculous prices upfront at launch, especially as times are still tough.

[@twrampage]

"I was elected to lead, not to read" - President Potato McWhiskey (2024)

[@andrewwilson201]

What a slogan! Haha I love it 🎉

[@timrit]

the simpsons xd..

[@martylund8411]

The idea of evolving civilizations makes sense. Developing independents is great. Changing civs at era-end is a bad approach that will set people off, though. What they _should_ do is give you Options to Evolve your Civ at the end of each era. If you fail to emerge from a Dark Age you experience a Collapse, and you have to change your civ and leader. If you make a normal age, you get to pick a new era-specific building / unit / bonus to replace your defunct ones. If you ride out a Golden Age, you get Premium unique options. Outside of a Dark Age Collapse you are never FORCED to abandon your base civ name, colors, abilities, or leaders.

[@MrBrock314]

Yes, I do like the idea of having a dark age collapse end your civilization and thus be preventable. I think there should be an achievement for purposely causing your civ to collapse and bringing its successor to a golden age. I also think it would be fine (for single player at least), to have some civilizations be "harder" and likely to undergo a dark age collapse. For example, perhaps the Aztecs would have a rough collapse scenario where it would be likely to collapse but was possible to prevent (especially on easier difficulties). So, if you want Aztecs on the moon, that will be a difficult achievement and not feel like a regular game. Vs. The transition from Gaul to Franks to France I feel would be an example of an easier transition. For large countries like China you could collapse from one dynasty to the next like in history. So, you don't stop being China, but you do stop being the Song Dynasty for example in a dark age collapse. England could collapse from the Normans to the Elizabethan era. I think it would be good to have the dark age collapse mechanic be scalable to difficulty so on, say, Prince difficulty, it wouldn't be that hard to avoid collapse while on Deity, it would be considered one of the greatest challenges in the game.

[@az095929]

i like how random ppl in the comments have more insight than the devs. damn shame

[@TheLoneTerran]

Only three eras? In a game of civilizations climbing through eras throughout history? No deal.

[@lukapetrovic8040]

I like to see new games come out, especially if they're completely different than the previous one they're based on. So seeing CIV 7 having all these different features implemented just makes me love it more! Can't wait for you to start dropping videos! :)

[@cee_ves]

i like how you all decided the best course of action was to get carl drunk at work

[@MuppetZombieFever]

Awesome breakdown potato! I've been eagerly waiting for news about Civ 7 not just cuz I've been playing the series since a friend at my mosque gave 8 year old me a copy of the Civ II on floppy disk but because believe it or not I interviewed with the team back in 2022 and was even offered a dev role (which i had to decline for personal reasons sadly). I could tell that they were up to something big and ambitious and I'm not at all disappointed on that front. I think I share most of the same concerns as you do, but I also remember that I just about every new entry of Civ felt significantly worse than its predecessor! We've been getting a lot of awesome content for Civ 6 which is an 8 year old game at this point and, despite buying the game pretty much at launch , I was still mostly playing Civ 5 until Gathering Storm came out and the game really hit its stride for me. I imagine it will take a couple of expansions for Civ 7 to really work out all the kinks with the new systems. Looking forward to getting my hands on the game in February still! Cheers

[@ashwalkerson1934]

I think the leaders not talking to me through the 4th wall is one reason I didn't stick with humankind. When civs would talk to me, they weren't talking to "me" they were talking to each other. It took me out of it and left me feeling disconnected from the story I was writing. Re: Augustus - I think the lighting is off. The ladies seem to have softer lighting with what also seems to be warmer tones, while Auggy and Ben have harsh white lighting like they're on a studio stage getting washed out because the color guy didnt balance with stage lights. And that doesnt match the background which makes it seem fake and unnatural.

[@markfarmer7534]

The most important thing I need to know about civ 7 is (and it's probably not something you know yet, but if you have a hunch I'm all ears): Will the multiplayer be stable, and will modding be more accessible? Any and all other information regarding the game, is relatively futile if these problems persist. Commanders look cool though.

[@PotatoMcWhiskey]

I know nothing about MP

[@markfarmer7534]

@@PotatoMcWhiskey I really hope it works this time 🙏

[@ashamahee]

@@markfarmer7534 its kinda sad they didnt have as stable a mp as in civ 4 in later titles where if one player dropped out they could just rejoin and continue on.

[@markfarmer7534]

@ashamahee yeah, thinking back, I think civ 6 has had the worst multi-player of any civ title I've ever played, and it's purely a stability issue. Take me back to civ revolution if that's what gets multiplayer working again 😂

[@TylerWardhaha]

Me and my brother can’t play a game with out it desyncing every 5 turns seem like.

[@colemangeiger8757]

Thank you for all the hard work!

[@Nickunparalleled]

3:00 "Benjamin Franklin looks like a Zombie's Testicle. And then I ate a cookie." #OnlyImportantTimeStamps

[@slwrabbits]

Cookies are very important!

[@ScooterDugnutt]

Did they keep the "pet your dog" button for the scouts? I don't see it and I feel this is a HUGE step backwards for the series.

[@mariaanissimowa4626]

just picked up civ 6 last week and that button really irked me. no feedback, no indication that you clicked it. I hope they ignore stupid bullshit like this and make an actually good game

[@vincer7824]

I didn't even know that button existed, however I don't make scouts all that often so far. Just got it last Thursday.​@@mariaanissimowa4626

[@slwrabbits]

Has anyone made a mod to pet your cat? Or is there a way to revert to the dog? I need to pet my animals.

[@neige_lotus]

@@mariaanissimowa4626well the feedback is just that the unit pets the dog…

[@d-.-5180]

For the builders I think it should be like, you can't move them, but like they would be there, like if you are building ona tile, and a barbarian is near, they could steal your workforce by moving into said tile if they choose to, but you could like evacuate those builders in any turn, but that would halt your production.

[@Baleur]

Title "its breathtaking" Video "i came away MILDLY positive, but uneasy"

[@Deeble17]

I suppose breathtaking doesn't have to mean in a good way 🤷‍♀

[@garflied]

that's youtube titles for you

[@ryanhodin5014]

It is breathtakingly pretty compared to other Civs, at least. If they get the gameplay right this could be a brilliant entry. I'm optimistic - The way things go with Civ is that the initial release has promise, but doesn't live up to the last game so everyone's disappointed, then by the second DLC it's eclipsed it's predecessor easily in the eyes of most. So maybe not right away, but eventually.... If 7 can outgrow 6 the way 6 outgrew 5, it'll be a tremendous game.

[@Nothing2150]

Am i the only one that remembers that civ 4 had these random events and even gave quests for you to work through during the ages? Isnt this just that again ?

[@Ottocide]

I LOVED random events in civ4, 'it's a really great tool for modders too.

[@kristianwest2049]

There just need to be enough of them to not feel repetitive.

[@Ottocide]

@@kristianwest2049 very true, there has to a wide variety for it to work well

[@thorinbane]

I miss being rewarded the way civ 3 did.

[@Ottocide]

@@thorinbane Did civ3 have events?

[@ebensteven8138]

I appreciate this video Potato, its very detailed which we need. Having said that, it's a tad nitpicky for being the first look, but will likely help the developers towards decisions moving forward. Every new Civ game seems different and some aspects worrisome at first but it will all workout in the end. And don't forget about updates and DLCs which the later is done better than any other game I've ever played. I will subscribe to your channel and wait for additional videos in the future.

[@Baleur]

I started off loving, but ended up hating the age-civ-swap mechanic in Humankind.. Because you are just always gonna pick what you LIKE, in terms of your own style (i love food heavy tech civs). So EVERY time i played the game i just ended up choosingg almost the exact same civs over and over, becuase if i started with Civ X good at food, then my next civ NEEDS to have good production and military stuff (because tahts the pace i play at, after the first age i start focusing on military). Then after that, in the next age i NEED a civ with good science or whatever, then that ends up always being Korea or whatever. It made every playthroughh feel the exact same. Despite all the choices. Being "locked" to one civ for the whole game like in Civ1-2-3-4-5-6, actually makes each session feel DIFFERENT. Im really worried Civ7 will ruin that and just homogenize everythingg into one hhappy boring globalist melting pot. I dont want to see Egypt become Korea then become USA. The furthest stretch i want is Egypt to become Mali then become Jerusalem, fine... But the worry i have is, if most civilizations are NOT in the first age (statistically they wouldnt be, since there are more ages after the first one), we might end up with a Civ7 launching v1.0 with like only 5 actual first civs.... So if you never like to play as Rome, you will NEVER see the later age civs "related" to Rome... My point is, this system runs a very large risk of making the game feel very content poor... Otherwise, the devs have to make 3x the civs they did for Civ6, but on release day, BEFORE any DLC.... And i cant lie, no matter how good the game is, if i see Civ7 release with LESS civs to choose from (in antiquity age) than Civ5 & 6 launched with, im gonna feel ripped off, like waiting for DLC to finish the content... Thats why im worried about the "pick civs as you age up" mechanic.

[@TheSjuris]

You’re not going to have that much control. You’re going to develop your civilization the way you want and then the game is going to give you 2 or 3 options based on the direction you have chosen to go.

[@earthbit.]

The great thing about this series is that the games don’t become obsolete. There isn’t any forward progression through the series like with many other franchises, just lateral shifts. They’re all the same concept, just different in execution. Each new installment reinvents the wheel in its own unique way, and that’s fantastic. It means that if you don’t like the newest title, that’s perfectly fine. The older games are still alive and well and going strong with mods and other community driven support. There’s absolutely no pressure to keep up with the latest game if it isn’t to your taste. Unless you’re a Civ KZbinr, that is. Me personally, I’m very, very skeptical of some of the things I’ve seen so far, and that’s fine. I’ll still give it a fair chance when it comes out and hope that my skepticism finds itself feeling foolish. And if it’s just not right for me, well, it’s been several years since I last played Civ 5. It’ll almost be like a new experience if I go back to it. And I’ve never played 4 or earlier games. Could be the time.

[@derbaumtoast]

I really love this comment. I myself played mostly civ6 and in the first gameplay i thought to myself how could this be any good but then i watched more and more content and everyone has had some problem with one or the other thing and i think it is really great that they really take these big steps. If civ 7 would feel like a dlc for civ6 it wouldnt be good. Also i really must say that the changes seem to fix the issue of basically knowing who won right around the renaissance.

[@Crazy_Diamond_75]

Civ 4 might finally be sunsetting. It's only 20 years old.... It's amazing the longevity these games have for the exact reasons you describe. CIv 4 is still my favorite btw and I still play it every once in a while.

[@zizou00_]

I think the thing that really changes is that each different Civ has learnt from not just the good and bad of the previous Civ, but also the good and bad of games around it. Whilst every Civ has had its own feel and own idea of what a historical-inspired turn-based 4X should be, the one thing each has done is improved on the user experience. Like the mechanical things that in previous editions added tedium, time wasting or caused micro-manage-y friction. A little bit of micro min-maxing is great, but when it becomes something you end up spending a lot of time on (Civ 6's weird trade table CPU min-maxing, Civ 5 BNWs expanded artifact system) and it crosses into tedium, it's good to see they've either come up with ideas themselves or copied ideas from elsewhere that help streamline some of the nonsense and improve the user experience. I personally like Civ 5's gameplay more than 6, but I cannot deny that Civ 6 is a much better experience to actually play thanks to improvements in the way they handle UI/UX and the gameplay decisions made to allow those improvements to happen. From what Potato's said, it looks like they've definitely continued to do that, so whatever way the game actually goes, as long as that continues, I'm sure it'll gain some popularity and make learning this game a pleasant experience, which is something 4Xs have always had trouble with due to how dense they can end up being after expansions and reworks and additional features.

[@maxi1ification]

Your take is as reasonable and healthy as it is gonna get my good man. Kudos for your levelheadedness. Too much people take this kind of stuff way too personally and forget to just enjoy what they do have.

[@joestone9834]

Wow a civ fan can be logical well done to you

[@Hhyyghíkttwwqwf]

Hello potato. I love your video. I found you after I stopped playing civ 6 but you made me want to play it again and I did for some time but now I haven't played it for a while. If potato says civ 7 is worth ill buy and play it even if it maybe be for 20 hours in total

[@TorIverWilhelmsen]

Can't wait to buy it at 90% off in a few years time.

[@dr.sbrule5817]

all DLCs included 90% off for the low price of a kidney!

[@Bread-kun]

Pretty much how I feel. Everything ive seen about this game just feels so underwhelming and more or less -not- want I want from a civ game. That and I mean 5 and 6 were both pretty bad compared to the previous game at launch and only took all the expansions to finally actually become a pretty good game. At this point why not just wait a while and get everything at a discount when we all know its not going to be great at launch. It might be fixed up by the time the expansions come out.

[@NopeNene]

Civ 6 is still not worth a 95% discount so don't get your hopes up.

[@pin00ch]

I love Civ V and don't need another unfinished version like VII will likely be.

[@Skyblade12]

The male leaders have a problem that plenty of HD character designs have. It's something you can see in the WarCraft III Reforged avatars as well. The need to add detail where none is wanted or needed. It's like they have a problem with just smooth skin, so they put SOME texturing there, resulting in pores and wrinkles that are way off from how people would normally look, and it does cause extreme uncanny valley effects.

[@han8285]

@@Skyblade12 I feel like this is a general media problem too - female characters are wrinkle and blemish free, smooth skin, full hair, exaggerating a LACK of flaws, whereas male characters have emphasised texture, pores, scars, etc. In reality, both male and female leaders and figures throughout history had imperfections and I would prefer they either remove those for both genders, or make them equally as ugly. I think CIV 6 did it well, capturing the notable facial features and body types of each leader without too much disparity between male and female characters.

[@vincer7824]

Civ 6 has a good balance of subtle detail but strong overall iconic, expressive presence for their leader designs imo.

[@meow7983]

It’s possible. They did port civ 6 to Apple iPad in 2018(I think). So I guess they are using the experience on that port for switch

[@MostafaHaque]

Time stamps: 00:00 - 00:48 - Intro Part I 00:48 - 01:06 - Carl 01:06 - 05:12 - Intro Part II 05:12 - 25:03 - Loved 25:03 - 35:34 - Neutral 35:34 - 47:23 - Hated 47:23 - 49:44 - Worried

[@j-mc2144]

Thanks

[@markos50100]

Much simpler than mine.

[@Real-cq1wj]

I don't mind the videos late, I'm happy it's done right

[@billnard]

Rubber Meets the Road > Neutral

[@AlexChec]

"After that initial shock, I ate some cookies." Oh hey, we have similar trauma responses.

[@white_boy_sean]

Simple and smooth and moving multiple ppl at one time is gonna be amazing

[@BanditoBurrito]

I think one of the best changes is that we will have units in "combat" instead of just hit and runs, and the fact you can combine multiple units into one "army" is really cool. I think it'll make some of the bigger wars look very cinematic. 18:00 like even that, so much better

[@BlueWizi]

I always found it weird that they got rid of armies after Civ 3, so it's nice to see them return in an expanded way.

[@gabrielandy9272]

you think it will make cinematic? HAHAHAHAHHA you are forced to disable the animations to play online otherwise you have a disvantage =P real time turns is a disaster

[@Nutty31313]

@@gabrielandy9272 Many people don't play multiplayer, you know?

[@MrBrock314]

@@gabrielandy9272 Most civ players are single player. The MP group is ~20% of the player base according to achievement tracking stats.

[@spacemanifestdestiny3542]

I think the issue with the civ/leader disconnect is how it was presented. If they had presented it as something new you can do if you choose, maybe as a special rule or game mode, everyone would have loved it. But since they presented it as the default option, it feels unfamiliar and uncomfortable.

[@rohangondor6250]

I think it is the default option. Even the “historical” option is a completely different entity

[@TheSjuris]

@@rohangondor6250 they kept mentioning campaign mode over and over. Multiplayer is in 1 era. Might have an option for that on single player or have only one human in a multiplayer game.

[@martinandersson6903]

@@TheSjuris What makes you think multiplayer is 1 era only? Steam says: Multiplayer matches can be epic multi-Age campaigns, or take place in a single Age so you can enjoy an entire game in a single session.

[@fooliishnessmusic3621]

New drinking game Drink every time he says “Rubber meets the road” 😂 Great video !!!

[@eatenpancreas]

Honestly this reaction is brutally honest, the most brutally honest ive seen so far from the content creators that also went. And i'm here for it.

[@MrBrock314]

Overall, it was pretty positive with some reservations. The hatred items were more things he didn't like (aesthetically) rather than game-breaking. With an audience as vast as civ's, you're bound to get a lot of different aesthetic responses. Like, in my case, I personally wanted to know more about wonders because I've loved wonders ever since Civ 1. :) If you have a good wonder video/animation, you'll win me over. In terms of gameplay, I worry about the workers but not because I liked making tile improvements exactly. I ended up building dozens of military engineers because I want civ 2 railroads back. Even if it's not unlimited movement, the ability to terraform and build railroads across whole continents was amazing. I still miss terraforming and civ 2 railroads. I know some of it was game-breaking (esp. for multiplayer I can assume - never did that) but boy did you feel op changing a mountain into plains and railroading from your civ to the Russians in 1 turn. I also miss civs begging for their lives and, in rare cases, breaking a massive overpowered empire into 2 by capturing its capital. Those playthroughs were epic.

[@drsamloomis9564]

Random events and narrative events is going to be incredible, games would feel unique and interesting.

[@Solitude102]

That's what I'm saying 💯.

[@alaron5698]

As Potato said, it really depends on how many there are and how they are implemented. If there are like 5 scenarios, it will get stale rather quickly.

[@a.j.camacho8202]

I feel like such a Baltimorean recognizing the restaurant in the photo. I feel like I may have passed y'all without even noticing. Hope you enjoyed Charm City, Potato!

[@infinament]

"Like the, like the thing, and the, and awww, duuuuude." I love how excited you are about it. Looking forward to seeing more about Civ 7. I really wanna like this one this time around.

[@RememberingStars023]

9:39 As a Welshman, this is all I needed to know.

[@a.e.w.384]

The most important new design for me is seeing combat and units get a major overhaul. I have been hoping for this for decades having played this series from the beginning. Bravo Firaxis!!

[@Baleur]

17:40 WAIT WAIT WAIT Does the "convoy style marching armies in 1 tile mode" mean that we can ambush armies on the march, forcing them to autodeploy in unadvantageous positions? The Gaul dna in me is giddy with glee.

[@SephirothRyu]

I hope moddability allows the addition of Asterix and Obelix as leaders of a Gaul civilization (who can potentially become Germany in the modern age).

[@OmikronTitan]

The game board looks lovely.

[@mattnidzwayko3656]

I never really got over the very cartoonish style of VI, especially after playing V, so I'm glad they went back to a more "realistic" looking style.

[@alaron5698]

@@mattnidzwayko3656 I'm in the opposite camp; 7 looks rather dark and drab to me, and if I'm going to look at a game board for hours and hours, I would like it to be vibrant and uplifting.

[@uzzy1364]

9:19 civ 7 feels like a perfect blend of civ 5 and 6 art style. I feel like this is what civ 6 art style was intended to be like but just never worked out due to limitations with iPhone & switch users

[@mattcroft]

2:58 firaxis going for historical accuracy

[@MuchuutheSensible]

"....I still find them ugly and off-putting" +1 You got my thumbs up, sub, bell notification!

[@djoulestar]

TY for the review, really interesting ! can't wait to play civ 7 :)

[@danielkinney6518]

You're absolutely right about memorizing quest decisions, Potato. Civ Beyond Earth had a narrative quest system and it lead to exactly this. It was to the point where one of them (the Institute quest where you can either choose a free tech or a science yield bonus after building an institute) became part of the universal meta for getting the tech for your Affinity's victory wonder. The quests did help explain the BE lore a bit better, but from a strategy standpoint, it was pretty much just "click the one that gives better yields for your build," or "click the one that you know will give you XP for your Affinity after 2 more decisions because you've already done it several times." By the time I got a couple hundred hours in Beyond Earth, I'd already seen the vast majority of quests, and that really takes away from the game's replay value. Conversely, I have over 900 hours in Civ VI and still enjoy optimizing my policy cards and city planning, because those mechanics are very specific to the exact map and strategy that you're playing.

[@therealchriscunningham]

Beyond Earth had one of these for absolutely every single thing you could do. I excuse it because BE was a tech demo designed to experiment with mainline Civ things while blooding future devs, and making money by cheating people into thinking that it was a spiritual rather than purely optical sequel to Alpha Centauri.

[@Shane2020xxx]

I’m happy someone else saw this and thought of Beyond Earth. I was thinking I could maybe go for one more Beyond Earth playthrough.

[@blockmasterscott]

I have several thousand hours in Civ 4 and never played 5. I started playing Civ 6 actually this evening. Can you please tell me what big differences there are from 4 to 6?

[@SongokuJidai]

​Been years since I played 4, but the big difference is hexagon movement over square movement. Then there's also cities being spread out like a folded dice, rather than a point on the map. V had normal cities with hex maps. Religion in Civ 6 is far more hands on and while you CAN ignore it, it might sneak up on you as a loss if you're playing to win another way (especially domination). I've lost a few games due to dominating a bunch of civs and accidentally converting too many of my cities to an enemy religion by virtue of owning them now. Best way to learn the differences is to just play Civ 6. Play quick games with no intent to win until you feel you've got a good amount down, then you'll be able to ask for more specific advice and understand it better too. Have fun 😊

[@DarthDre]

- Intro 00:00 *POSITIVES* - Independent People 5:25 - Map and Environment Art Style 8:45 - Leaders 10:20 - District System 12:45 - Units 15:15 - Commanders 17:10 - Tech and Civic Tree 20:40 - Builders and Workers 21:50 - Diplomacy 23:00 *INDIFFERENT/MIXED* - Resources 25:10 - Trade 26:10 - Happiness and Government Cards 27:10 - Specialists 28:00 - Crisis 28:45 - Settlements 29:25 - Eras/Ages 31:40 - Narrative Events 34:15 *HATED* - UI 37:40 - Urban Sprawl and Building 38:35 - Unit Leveling 39:48 - Builders 40:42 - Faith 42:30 - Leader Art 43:50 *WORRIED* - Crossplatform Launch 47:35 - Conclusion 48:42