Civilization 7 is in development

[Brian Shanahan]

I've just read Sullla's report on the Cathy Culture game and the state of the game at this stage is pure sad. They really picked a pig in a poke with the eras system (and I think the original plan was to sell players multiple extra eras, both after the modern age and shoved in between the earlier ages [there are obvious gaps]). But the way they went about balancing the game is purely ridiculous, other games that have cost escalations in them tend to build production escalation mechanics to allow players to scale up their empires.

PS, this is a bit nitpicky, but why does Catherine in the game look nothing like her in real life at the relative age depicted? (Link to painting IRL) Though it does speak to the slapdashidness of the game that one of the franchises core leaders is reduced to CGI (or worse LLM slop) blandness.

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2026/02/i...tics-back/

The devs of Civ VII continue to try to salvage the game. In summary, they're vaguely adding hotseat mode (still baffling why this was never developed), frantically backpedaling on civ-swapping, and, in more encouraging news, totally rethinking victory conditions and legacy paths. I'm on record as not minding civ swapping at all, though it's what the reddit community is most mad about, so giving players the option to not swap civs is meh. But the legacy paths railroading every game into being played the exact same way was the biggest killer for me (that and terrain not mattering - all terrain was equally viable...so why bother agonizing over city placement or improvements? The result was every city was the same, while you pursued the same goals in every game, so...every game was the exact same). So the devs trying to think their way out of this one suggests that in a few years, Civ VII may be a passably mediocre game.

Some choice quotes:

On hotseat:

I asked about two oft-requested features: a city connections view, and the classic hot seat local multiplayer mode.

Beach said a connections view is in the works, though it will come after the big spring update. As for the hot seat, he said that “there are some key members of our development team who feel passionately about getting that out.”

Shirk promised hot seat is coming too, but declined to say when.

That might let the community here actually attempt a multiplayer game?

On civ-swapping:

“I am a huge fan of British history, and so going from the Romans to the Normans to a Great Britain, that feels very natural to me. But it’s not natural to everybody,” Beach said. “As soon as you introduce those type of civ changes and the mixing and mashing with any leader, all of a sudden I think there’s an immersion element.

I mentioned prior big changes, like the switch in Civ V from the series’ classic “stacks of doom” military gameplay to a more granular, one-unit-one-tile approach to combat, and asked why the changes in Civ VII were so much more divisive than something like that.

“The difference… was the immersive storytelling versus the mechanics,” Shirk explained. Features like one-unit-one-tile “were mechanical changes that did not impact the immersion, the emotional storytelling that you’re telling yourself in your head.”

Starting with the Test of Time update, players will have the option to play one civilization through all three of the game’s ages. Each civ will have an apex age when it will have access to its full kit. In other ages, it will keep some of its kit, but it will also gain an age-appropriate culture tree, and the player will be able to use a new system to grant their civ access to unique units or infrastructure from another civilization that would call the current age its apex.

At the start of an age, AI leaders will follow the player’s lead—if the player decides to stick with their existing civ, the others will stay, too. If they decide to switch to a new one, the AI will be able to do the same.

The idea is that this allows players to not only pick which approach suits their preferences, but to change their mind mid-game, without a lock-in from the game settings at initialization.

On fixing the victory conditions and legacy paths:

Additionally, Firaxis is removing the concept of legacy paths from the game completely. It will be replaced with a new system called “triumphs.”

Firaxis’ goal here is to make the gameplay more of a sandbox like prior titles, with less rigidity in how players work their way toward success.

Instead of following a preset sequence of goals, the player will pick and choose from a large menu of possible accomplishments, each of which is associated with the six leader attributes: cultural, military, economic, scientific, diplomatic, and expansionist. Completing a triumph will either give players an immediate reward or a card they can use to set themselves up at the start of the next age.

Examples include milestones like reaching 200 population, being the first to build a university, claiming most of the world’s natural wonders, or being at war with every other civilization.

Beach explained his thinking on triumphs. “We purposely set it up so, rather than like pathways through an age, we’re looking at it sort of like as a constellation of objectives, and you choose four or five of those guide stars to move towards,” he said. “But they’re varied enough and they’re difficult enough that there’s no way you can complete all of them.”

That last one is the biggest reason to hope for me, although we'll still have the problem of same-y city development.

[LKendter]

But the legacy paths railroading every game into being played the exact same way was the biggest killer for me (that and terrain not mattering - all terrain was equally viable...so why bother agonizing over city placement or improvements? The result was every city was the same, while you pursued the same goals in every game, so...every game was the exact same). So the devs trying to think their way out of this one suggests that in a few years, Civ VII may be a passably mediocre game.

Wow, I didn't realize the terrain was that generic. 3 & 4 that I have the most play time with terrain really matter. Finding a spot with bonus food was so useful.
Civ3 with deer on forest for extra shields that pay for themself. Finding an area where you could irrigate lots of grasslands to support hills for a killer production city.
Civ4 with a gold city support one or two more cities early on until you get the improvement going. Getting some use from Tundra because multiple bonus seafood tiles.
The race with the AI with a great spot between your borders.

So much of the early game was the fun of a great city spot. Lack of that weakens the fun.