Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Early this morning, a banner briefly went up on 2K's website before suddenly being removed. The banner said four simple words -

"Sid Meier's Civilization VII"

As stated, the banner was swiftly removed. But an official announcement was made later in the day at the Summer Games Festival. A teaser trailer has also been released -




The game will be released next year, and more information will be released in August. Aside from that, nothing is known yet.

Feel free to post below about why your favorite version of Civilization is the only one that's worthy of existence, and why all of the other versions should be confined to the dumpster fire of history.

Civilization 1 was the greatest Civ. All other Civ's need not apply.

I'm interested to see what they do this time.

Started off Civ with the Xbox game and moved to PC with Civ V thanks to the Yogscast. I like Civ 6 in a lot of ways the art style just never sat well with me but I think there's a lot of interesting mechanics. Global Warming was actually quite a meme deliberately ruining the planet and leaving for space.

 Snrub wrote:
Civilization 1 was the greatest Civ. All other Civ's need not apply.

Flashbacks to losing a rifleman and two armor to a single enemy settler.

Honestly? I think they just keep getting better.

I don’t miss army stacks.
I like having districts. It keeps all cities from basically being copies. You need to diversify.

Diplomancy, religion, disasters. It’s all good and keeps improving.

Looking forward to. And seeing what they do.

Was it Call to Power that was not offically Civ for some reason but went farther into the future? I did enjoy space habs, grav tanks, and orbital drop infantry…

 Nevelon wrote:

Was it Call to Power that was not offically Civ for some reason but went farther into the future? I did enjoy space habs, grav tanks, and orbital drop infantry…

I think so. There was also one called Test of Time that came with an extended main game as well as a science fiction scenario and a fantasy scenario.

 toasteroven wrote:
Flashbacks to losing a rifleman and two armor to a single enemy settler.

Oh the joys.
It was always a source of great amusement when something, anything, attacked a caravan and came off second best.

One of my favorite memories is using an Axeman stack to destroy tanks and modern infantry.

 Snrub wrote:

 toasteroven wrote:
Flashbacks to losing a rifleman and two armor to a single enemy settler.

Oh the joys.
It was always a source of great amusement when something, anything, attacked a caravan and came off second best.

Ha, oh yeah, I think I had that happen to me more than once. There were a couple of times I think the numbers worked out in my favor, I think, but not as often as the other way around. At least, that's how it felt.

Honestly though Civ 1 was my first, Civ 2 was always my favorite. I used to play the WWII scenario over and over.

In Civilization Revolution I once lost a submarine to a trireme...

 ZergSmasher wrote:
In Civilization Revolution I once lost a submarine to a trireme...

Was it the Oceangate submarine? Because that would actually make sense.

 toasteroven wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

Was it Call to Power that was not offically Civ for some reason but went farther into the future? I did enjoy space habs, grav tanks, and orbital drop infantry…

I think so. There was also one called Test of Time that came with an extended main game as well as a science fiction scenario and a fantasy scenario.

There was ALSO Alpha Centauri, Which was pretty much Civ 2 in space with a bit more depth to it. Pollution really causes issues.

Almost there, it’s Feb. Release date is the 11th. Anyone hear any last minute reports? I’ve not been following the news on it, as I’m pretty much sold on a launch day purchase, but curious what’s coming up. What should we be looking forward to?

 Nevelon wrote:
Almost there, it’s Feb. Release date is the 11th. Anyone hear any last minute reports? I’ve not been following the news on it, as I’m pretty much sold on a launch day purchase, but curious what’s coming up. What should we be looking forward to?

I've been following it pretty closely, but it looks to be a major revamp. Probably as big of a shift as when they first went to hexes. There are 3 ages, and each age, you choose a civilization. So in one game, you might guide the Greeks on their journey to becoming Mongolians and eventually French. This is going to be a major adjustment, but should lead to some very cool combo building, and the ability to react to other civilizations in major ways each age. Beyond that, diplomacy has become a resource like gold, and treaties and trade contracts have a cost you pay to initiate them. The focus was on making a game more people would finish, so I'd expect a shorter, faster paced game.

 Gitzbitah wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Almost there, it’s Feb. Release date is the 11th. Anyone hear any last minute reports? I’ve not been following the news on it, as I’m pretty much sold on a launch day purchase, but curious what’s coming up. What should we be looking forward to?

I've been following it pretty closely, but it looks to be a major revamp. Probably as big of a shift as when they first went to hexes. There are 3 ages, and each age, you choose a civilization. So in one game, you might guide the Greeks on their journey to becoming Mongolians and eventually French. This is going to be a major adjustment, but should lead to some very cool combo building, and the ability to react to other civilizations in major ways each age. Beyond that, diplomacy has become a resource like gold, and treaties and trade contracts have a cost you pay to initiate them. The focus was on making a game more people would finish, so I'd expect a shorter, faster paced game.

That does sound like fun. It always felt like a bummer to get an early civilization and have your special units become irrelevant once you discovered iron. Changing Civs is a major shift, but I think could be fun.

A faster game is fine to a point. Having a slow build and watching your empire grow helps you get vested in it. But I get it. Once I fire up Civ, I know that’s what I’m going to be playing for the week. There is room to tighten it up.

It was a bit immersion-breaking to be playing the USA in the Bronze Age, and like Nev said it kind of sucks if your unique units are only relevant in the ancient era and so you just get generic stuff in the mid to late game. Problem is, my PC is stuck in the ancient era and probably won't be able to handle the new game (it barely handles 6). It's long past time for an upgrade, but plastic crack and my car kind of have priority for my funds at the moment.

Bit torn on this one. It feels like a much needed shake up of the franchise to add in some gameplay mechanics like the 3 ages but it can be a bit jarring. Also, unless you go down the economic legacy path, your cities all revert back to villages in the next age. I read a review that sums it up nicely - it seems like you are being actively punished for accomplishing anything. I played a game last night where I was on good terms with every other Civ, including alliances and joint agreements for two ages and then immediately as the last age started, every single Civ declared war on me - no preamble, no build-up, no explanation just straight out war. Still have no idea what I did wrong or what I did to provoke them and the UI makes finding that information difficult. Things like that are harder to explain or justify.

I know I shouldn’t be shocked at the price, but I am. Despite me planning on a launch day grab, I’ve got other games I could be playing. I don’t need to wait for a deep discount, but think I can hold out for a 15-20% to take the edge off.

 Nevelon wrote:
I know I shouldn’t be shocked at the price, but I am. Despite me planning on a launch day grab, I’ve got other games I could be playing. I don’t need to wait for a deep discount, but think I can hold out for a 15-20% to take the edge off.

I've played the gak out of Civ 6, but I can wait until I either get a lower price for this, or some more DLC included for the price they're offering now.

 Nevelon wrote:
I know I shouldn’t be shocked at the price, but I am. Despite me planning on a launch day grab, I’ve got other games I could be playing. I don’t need to wait for a deep discount, but think I can hold out for a 15-20% to take the edge off.

The regular one is steep enough, but I can't get my head around the deluxe or founders editions. Double the price for 8 additional leaders/civilisations/wonders seems a bit steep. I'm used to the deluxe edition games coming with some kind of tangible collectible.

I'll get it eventually, especially since I discovered it's going to be available on the Switch. I can't help but feel the gameplay may be a bit different on handheld though.

I haven't played since maybe Civilization IV but I lost weeks to CivNet/II/AlphaCenturi back in the day.