I am yest to see a Civ game (or clone) that's worth the purchase at day 1. Most seem to only get more feature complete with expansions like this.

eperorsfist:

I am yest to see a Civ game (or clone) that's worth the purchase at day 1. Most seem to only get more feature complete with expansions like this.

With exception of some older titles, all new ones have cut content, which is gradually added over the years. So actual release date of a game (as it was with Civ 5, and now Civ 6) is 2-3 years after the "official" release date.

FWIW, for any 4X enthusiasts that haven't played Civ 6 yet, I can't recommend the title. I've sunk close to 400 hours into the game ( not much for a 4X, admittedly) so far but while slick externally it's fundamentally broken in many ways, even more so than previous titles. I could probably write a rather substantial review of the pros and cons of the title but the crux of the negatives, for me, are... The AI is useless even by Civ standards. It can't handle trade, while diplomacy and war declarations feel more or less random and annoying. Higher difficulties still only introduce more starting resources and resource gains for the AI, which forces very specific playstyles yet does nothing to keep the game interesting once you're ahead in the race. Firaxis doubled down on the most annoying aspects of religion of Civ 5, namely religious combat and manual spreading of religion. I enjoyed Civ 5 more without the expansion, this is even worse. Critically, for me, Marathon game speed is completely broken and has been since the game released. No one tests this but it's the only way I play the game so... sigh. I wanted much larger map support for Civ 6, in reality the maps are actually smaller than Civ 5. In addition to that the map generation is terrible, for example "continents" is actually "double pangea", "island plates" lack elevation and Civs and City States get rather strange and clustered placements. The "continent" mechanic, a way to implement continental bonuses for pangea-style maps, is very obtuse in-game. Ridiculously slow patch deployment. Obviously there are numerous minor bugs and balance issues, like natural wonders being screwy (those replacing natural tiles are worse than what they're replacing, since they can't be worked in any way and lose the general resources, while those granting bonuses to adjacent tiles are usually great), hilarious Civ imbalances, conflicting in-game information etc. The first expansion did nothing to address the base issues of the game and from what it looks like this one won't either. Don't get me wrong here, it's not a terrible game. It's just... not good. I'd strongly suggest waiting 5-6 years, or a year or so after Civ 7 releases, before picking up Civ 6 and looking into what the mod community might have fixed by then. Or waiting for 75%+ discounts.

cryohellinc:

With exception of some older titles, all new ones have cut content, which is gradually added over the years. So actual release date of a game (as it was with Civ 5, and now Civ 6) is 2-3 years after the "official" release date.

Only the 1st Civilization didn't have expansions (and it by far did not have a lot of content), and people saying that current games have "cut content" either do not remember previous games, do not understand how much more difficult and expensive current games are to make, or simply want to believe what they want to believe so they can feel they are being shafted. One of these days game developers are just going to stop releasing after-game release content, in the form of paid content, or free content, due to all the whining. I don't think i have seen anywhere else other then gaming where people complain that a product is supported long after its been released with an idea that they own the product and should determine what is in the base product and what is extra, non-required products for the base product. Games have become more and more expensive as time has gone, and either they make a "smaller" game for the typical $59.99, with expansions, or games get more expensive. Gamers? They don't want either. Nor do they care they are paying less today then they pretty much ever have. Half-Life released in 1998 for $49 and was a marvel of its time, that game today would have cost $76.02 with inflation. And, since it cost a lot less to make then current games, that 76.02 is less then what games should cost today, regardless. But again, gamers don't want either, they just want what is in their head as a "i want it as cheap as possible with as much content as possible and as little bugs as possible, i do not care about the developers cost, i want all 3 items on my list, otherwise they are screwing us over!" This is one of the main reasons FF7 remake is being split up into multiple games: How much more complex and expensive the game is to develop today then it was when released. All this pro-consumer, anti-developer/publisher nonsense is quite honestly just sad. We want it all, but we don't want to give anything.

I´ve got the game and i played it a bit but i prefer CIV5 much more than this one. The only gameplay change that improved the game was the districts mechanic, everything else was the same or worse. Specially the workers that disappear after a number of instant!? builds and the roads that are made automatically by traders, i hate those. Also the AI remains stupid as ever... So more than release expansions they should fix the game core mechanics. Aura@ don´t forget that 10 years ago a game selling more than a million copies was an huge success and nowadays selling the same amount is a failure for most. The vastly increased number of games sold today compensates by far the steady prices of games. Most content sold in separate is just for profit/greed not because they are needed for game companies to survive.

oh so its the Libtards edition....

It is a shame they don't make an addon to civ v and vi that logs all the play information from people who have invested many hours in to the game, this is the sort of game that would benefit from some real world trained AI. I'm sure people would happily contribute if they knew that it was going to benefit future releases.

Aura89:

Only the 1st Civilization didn't have expansions (and it by far did not have a lot of content), and people saying that current games have "cut content" either do not remember previous games, do not understand how much more difficult and expensive current games are to make, or simply want to believe what they want to believe so they can feel they are being shafted. One of these days game developers are just going to stop releasing after-game release content, in the form of paid content, or free content, due to all the whining. I don't think i have seen anywhere else other then gaming where people complain that a product is supported long after its been released with an idea that they own the product and should determine what is in the base product and what is extra, non-required products for the base product. Games have become more and more expensive as time has gone, and either they make a "smaller" game for the typical $59.99, with expansions, or games get more expensive. Gamers? They don't want either. Nor do they care they are paying less today then they pretty much ever have. Half-Life released in 1998 for $49 and was a marvel of its time, that game today would have cost $76.02 with inflation. And, since it cost a lot less to make then current games, that 76.02 is less then what games should cost today, regardless. But again, gamers don't want either, they just want what is in their head as a "i want it as cheap as possible with as much content as possible and as little bugs as possible, i do not care about the developers cost, i want all 3 items on my list, otherwise they are screwing us over!" This is one of the main reasons FF7 remake is being split up into multiple games: How much more complex and expensive the game is to develop today then it was when released. All this pro-consumer, anti-developer/publisher nonsense is quite honestly just sad. We want it all, but we don't want to give anything.

Someone is highly triggered by the looks of it. In regards to your rant - Nonsense all of it. Production is always compared to modern times, not what it used to be. Tools are different, skillset is different, the market is different, the audience is different. Lack of content, lack of polish, will to appease "everyone" and especially shareholders instead of core audience - make games shallow, narrow, and empty. Pay 300$ per game for all I care, not everyone lives in US. Civ 6 is a step backwards, won't spend a dime on it in its current state. There are countless fantastic more polished titles at a fraction of a cost.

ViperAnaf:

oh so its the Libtards edition....

oh my god get out of here troll

ViperAnaf:

oh so its the Libtards edition....

I second this awesome comment hahahahaha

Mysteryboi:

I second this awesome comment hahahahaha

You wouldn't be the first to take pride in your own ignorance, anyway.

ViperAnaf:

oh so its the Libtards edition....

Baffling when you see this nonsense on a tech forum... "I love computers, but I denounce evidence-based science", its about the equivalent of "boats are my favorite! But the I don't believe in water". o_O

Climate change, LOL

I am a big Fan of RTS game.And i played almost every Famous RTS games.I want to buy Civ 6 with gathering storm but Gathering storm is neither in Deluxe edition nor Gold edition.They selling this expansion separate more expansive than Base game.And i hate this.I will wait for next sale when they put this new expansion with bundle not separate.

I've played the Civ series from 4-6. As a moderate 4x fan, with about 2000 total hours in the genre, I'd recommend for you to wait at the least. There is no way I will buy this game, barring majestic 9.5 reviews from critics and from users. Civ 6 is a putrid game with extremely incompetent AI that will lose every singe war it faces off against you unless you're less than 3 hours into the genre. The lack of respect for modding support, and how they can't even share the minor details necessary to make quick changes when the UI is completely useless unless you use a UI mod, and then, you have to wait weeks after every auto-updating patch from Civ for the modders to play catch up and tweak their code. The charge based workers, the monumentally slow build times, the exact same endgame playstyle regardless of victory, the necessary military, and the AI's inability to defend or attack properly. The political SJW slant imposed by the devs and/or the publisher to win brownie points for people who don't even play their games. Stick with Civ 5 complete, or stick with Civ 4 which is my personal favorite.

i've owned all of the civ games. civ v and beyond earth (Alpha Centauri remix) are by far my favorites. civ 6 tries to be more child friendly in the stupid cartoonish animations while it suffers from poor gameplay. i will check out the expansion, but i doubt i'd buy it. if they revamped and remastered civ v, that would be a slam-dunk.

SamuelL421:

Baffling when you see this nonsense on a tech forum... "I love computers, but I denounce evidence-based science", its about the equivalent of "boats are my favorite! But the I don't believe in water". o_O

[youtube=McdMMmclGVc] :D 😀 oh btw they are using GPS satellites(!) to prove that the Earth is flat

Noisiv:

[youtube=McdMMmclGVc] :D 😀 oh btw they are using GPS satellites(!) to prove that the Earth is flat

This is saddening.

I like how likes speak for themselves. If government went full retard, guess you have to educate people with games.