#civ 7

[eurodynamic]

Long regarded as a hero of the Philippines, José Rizal was a passionate defender of the dignity and autonomy of Filipinos. He first gained his reputation as a political activist in Europe, criticizing the Spanish rule of his homeland, and though he advocated for peaceful reform and equal rights, Rizal was eventually tried and executed by the Spanish. Yet his revolutionary spirit could not be contained, and has inspired Filipinos ever since.

JOSÉ RIZAL 🇵🇭 Sid Meier's Civilization VII (2025) dev. Firaxis Games

[dragon-in-a-fez]

the teaser trailer for Civ 7 looks amazing

[pyogokunk]

civ7: Niccolo Machiavelli

civ7: Augustus & Machiavelli

civ7: Augustus

civ7: Augustus & Machiavelli Alliance

While playing as Augustus in Civilization VII, I came across an interesting conflict, so I decided to draw it. I‘m allied with Machiavelli, but the other leaders are my enemies.😅

civ6 : Trajan & Gilgamesh Alliance (Otaku Heart meme)

Their alliance is both amusing and powerful.

civ6,7 : The Roman Leaders' Gathering

(Trajan was summoned to a Roman state meeting, only to find himself trapped in Caesar's endless love stories. Meanwhile, Augustus enthusiastically amplifies every detail, making the tale even more dramatic.)

[asha-mage]

which one of you nerds works at faraxis I just want to talk.

[swan2swan]

i'VE SEEN ENOUGH

Civilization VII is Game of the Year for 2025.

[complexcrow]

I know it's a small thing, and it's probably naive to get so hopeful about it at this stage of the game's development, especially with the history of how indigenous cultures are treated in western media, but just the fact that the Civ 7 Dev team is reaching out to an indigenous community feels like something that never would have happened twenty or even ten years ago.

Yeah, it's just a silly little sandbox game about nuking people, but it's nice to see the shift of putting action to words when it comes to treating non-western ethnicities, religions, and cultures with the respect they deserve.

Gives me a little hope that things are moving in the right direction, one turn at a time.

[cecilias-cool-stuff]

NAVIGABLE RIVEEERRRRRRRRRRSSSSSSS

[humormehorny]

It’s so wild to watch the civilization VII release, because like nobody likes it? Like it’s an ok game at best, but it’s not a good civ game. Even if you ignore all of the other issues, like poor tile color and contrast pallet(believe me this is important - one more turn ends really quickly if you’re straining you’re eyes for more than an hour, bugs that never should have left Alpha, and half baked mechanics you still have a game that doesn’t feel like civ. It doesn’t work as a civ game. It fails the vibe check. I just watched a YouTube review of the game and the background music was from civ 5 -> literally came out a decade ago. I’m not saying it’s bad, but I think a whole lot of YouTubers are way less likely to completely abandon Civ 6.

[druvjelly]

The reason queen Christina didn’t return for civ 7, was because if Frederick the great saw her. They wouldn’t form a gay lesbian alliance. Instead. He would see woman who likes women. He would just explode and then your computer would explode. Then a message would pop up saying “Frederick the great wasn’t gay because he loved men. But because he hated women”

My uncle works at Friaxis

[jesselouiscox]

How different IS Civ 7?

[mtstorrs]

Luigi could have saved Civilization 7

[mystic-lilac]

Patchacutis

There’s two of them >:)

[bryophytes-world]

Civilization VII, while being a good game, definitely isn't worth the price tag it has. HOWEVER! There is an achievement kind of thing that talks about Ea-nasir and I feel that indicates there's a developer somewhere on this website.

[someonefromsometown]

CIV VII; A defense of civ choices

I have seen significant backlash on the forums regarding Firaxis' choices in regards to what civs to include and not to include within Civ VII.

The image above contains the complete list of base game civs, as understood from official sources and leaks. The most common issues levied agienst the roster are:

No British Civ in the Modern Age

No Portuguese Civ in the Exploration Age

6 slots being dedicated to China and India

A majority of countries lacking a true "Historical" pathway

After mulling over the list for a long time, I eventually realized that I'm okay with the compromises made here, even if they lead to some occasionally strange results.

Let's agree on one fact to start: 30 civs was the maximum. Given the constraints of developer time and resources, we couldn't have gotten any more Civs in the base game. If that is the case, what needs to be prioritized when choosing what goes into the game. I would argue that the intention was diversity in game play.

When I say "diversity in game play" I'm not referring to capital D "Diversity", but rather the different play styles and a game allows. If a Civ game were comprised of only militaristic Civs, then the experience would be lesser. The game would either boil down to who can be the best at war or make war useless as everyone is good at it. Civ, despite being a symmetrical grand strategy game, needs asymmetries in the strategies a player would employ.

Civ VII seems to want to embrace all styles of play. Give the age goal mechanics, ideally you want to be able to choose a CIV in the next era that is able to capitalize on good science, culture, or what have you from the previous era.

That brings me to Britain and Portugal. Are they important historically? Yes! Do they bring something new to the table? I'd argue no. Britain is a shoe in for expansion and economics. An economic powerhouse built on a massive empire. Heartbeat of steam. That also all applies to America. Similarly, we have Portugal. Great navigator, colonizer, and empire builder. They sail off into distant lands with intentions to bring back as much as they can. And so did Spain.

The question for them is not "why not replace someone?", but rather "why America over Britain?" and "why Spain over Portugal". For the former I don't know, and honestly I find the decision to be one built mostly on preference. For the ladder I'd assume it's because Spain has a stronger military association with their actions in the new world, allowing them to be a naval civ with a military focus rather then the near total economic expectations that Portugal holds.

As for China and India, we find Civs that have very unique gameplay styles. The Ming live with a tradeoff of science for adaptability. The Chola are the highly diplomatic naval power. The Qing works as a land empire wanting international trade, with issues of falling behind on science. These are experiences that aren't in the game otherwise. Compare if we had a German trifecta, where we'd run into issues with redundancies with other military land based empires or diplomatic empires.

Oftentimes we'll find that the historical choices are going to run into issues of redundancies. While any given European power is not interchangeable, co-existence leads to similarities, both between eras and within an era. Venice is a civ I would love to see return as a path from Greece or Rome, but I acknowledge that it would be a similar experience to Chola. If this game has 30 unique civs, I don't want two of them to play the same. Even if that means that it looks a bit like a hodgepodge

This isn't all to say that these civs will never come, that there aren't other factors involved, or that I don't care about the history. I can't wait to see how they try to differentiate Portugal or Britain or any other power that's been left out. The Civ list does have issues; there's somewhat worrying implications to having no native modern era civs, South America doesn't get anything, and the middle east feeling strangely bear. But, all and all, I don't mind the list we've been given because it looks fun. And why else would I play CIV VII

[lastoneout]

[fuzzy-oooze]

wait, they're adding civ switching to civ 7? what the fuck? why? why would they do that? I hated it in Humankind and I'd hate it there too, if I pick to play as Babylon, that's because I want to play as fucking Babylon, not switch to something else partway through. If I pick china but an era passes or whatever and I have to pick a new one you better have a fuckin' genus historian on your dev team who can list every central east Asian civilization or I'll be offered to switch to stupid shit like Greece, which I'd reject out of wanting to play as what I picked as in the beginning, but something tells me that a lot of civs won't have more "advanced" counterparts (such as, say, the celts or carthage) and I'd be FORCED to change civs, but I DON'T WANT THAT, I WANT TO BE PLAYING AS WHAT I CHOOSE TO PLAY IN THE BEGINNING, THAT'S WHY I PICKED IT

"Oh but no civilization lasts forever-" yeah yeah shut you're fuckin' mouth because

1)-they're keeping the immortal leaders and having them switch civs with you so Gilgamesh is going to become British and evil

2)-what you said is just plan Dead Wrong because, well, China's stayed itself forever, Japan's stayed itself forever, India, the Congo, Aboriginal Australia, fucking Greece, I get what you mean but No one has ever went to sleep and woke up as a FUCKING MONGOL. Civilizations change due to outside influence such as foreign invasion and not just time, time plays a part, yes, but not to nearly the extent I think people think.

why can't they just have it so that you're not playing as a real historical civilization and instead you pick and swap cultural traits as time passes so that by the end you've made your own storied culture and civilization? I feel like that's such a no-brainer but no one has done that and it feels like so much of an easier and more generally appealing idea to have than civ-switiching.