Sid Meier's Civilization VII

If you use modding tools for ANY game on your system, not even this one, you can now no longer play this game. Let me clarify, if you are not even using modding tools on this game, but have them on your system, it will not let you run this game.

I have played every version of Civ made. Civ I during High School right up to Civ VI while my kids are going to high school. While every version has differences they all had that 'Civ' feeling. I had faith that Firaxis would make a worthy successor. Paid for the Founders Edition, what a mistake that was. This is not a game you can get a feel of after 2 hours. I filed a refund request even though I knew it would be declined. Even if they had a Demo, it would have been at most one era and you still wouldn't get a real feel for the game. At it's core Firaxis made a brand new game. They did not make Civilization. It's should have been called "Era's inspired by Sid Meier's Civilization" or something like that. This is not a 4X game anymore, you follow a narrative and play to the end and no longer had the ability to play how you want to play. It feels like all the work you did during an era is gone and forgotten. As far as I'm concerned 2K/Firaxis should give users the option to get a refund. Of course they won't because of the amount of money they will lose. So they have to live with the tarnished image they have created, it's the last time I blindly trust a company based on their history. I have no desire to play this game. It's like they saw Old World, Humankind, Ara and others and tried making something everyone else was doing. I tried all those games and refunded them all, because they are not really 4X games in my opinion. They should've stuck with what has working for 6 version. I re-installed Civ 5 to get my 'One more turn' fix. I don't think any amount of patching will change the core gameplay mechanics of this game. I honestly can just imagine some old timers at Firaxis whispering under their breath 'I told you so'.

Thought it couldn't be that bad. Buyer beware: it is that bad. There are so many odd mechanical changes that I suspect this game is unsalvageable regardless if how many patches are released. Refunded. Just play Civ 5/6 as they're fundamentally better games. Better luck in Civ 8.

This new 2K/Take‑Two EULA claims rights to collect an extensive range of personal data, including but not limited to browser history, passwords, real name, email, phone number, geolocation, IP address, and device info. Basically a spyware. Don't buy it .

What a disappointment. After investing hundreds of hours into this game, I’ve come to the disappointing realisation that I was fooling myself into thinking it was great. In truth, I was in denial, unwilling to admit that the developers had taken it in a direction that simply doesn’t work. The introduction of the era system feels like a forced gimmick, likely designed to justify selling a “new” experience. But in practice, it resets the entire game every time, stripping away the sense of progression that makes strategy games so rewarding. The constant shift in leaders and civilisations feels arbitrary and breaks immersion. Many buildings feel pointless to construct because their value quickly becomes obsolete in the next era. I could go on for pages about what’s wrong, but honestly, I’d rather not waste more time. I’ve gone back to playing Civ 6, which is vastly superior in terms of depth and replayability. The only thing this game truly excels at is its visuals. It’s absolutely stunning. But beautiful graphics can’t save a broken design.

It's a good game, but imo, the biggest issue is that the ages systems makes it feel like three games in one, with each age sort of being disconnected from the other. For example, cities in one age will revert back to towns in the next, religion only plays a role in the Exploration Age and if you were suzerain of the independent powers, you lose that status in the next age. If they were to resolve this, make the game more fluid and connected between the ages, then it could fix a lot of the issues.

Unfortunately took me 8 hours to figure out this game is not worth purchase, dont be me and waste 8 hours of time or 100.00 on this absolute trash. I am quite certain I have never made a negative review in my life so congrats to Firaxis on that accomplishment.

Civ switching was just a horrible design flaw. I really liked the game until that point. Love some of the new concepts regarding about how you develop your cities. It would have been a thumbs up if you kept the same civilization and it just had three dramatic era changes, but changing your civilization twice each game... nope, never playing again. I would love to know how this got approved by the design team. Change simply for the sake of change and nothing anyone ever wanted or should have been predicted to like.

Playing CIV games for decades now. I am deeply disappointed in CIV 7. A CIV game where you switch your CIV and keep your leader is a tremendously stupid decision that probably will go down in history as one of the dumbest decision in games design. This and the soft reset you get are destroying your immersion completely. I'm baffled and I'm not hopeful that they are going to reverse their decision because it's such big design focus of this iteration. I fear CIV 7 is done for without a 180 turn in this regard.

The parts of Civ 5 and 6 that I enjoyed [to the tune of over 6000 combined hours] was the ability to prioritise exploration, lateral growth, and growth over time. I could build up my own narrative to accompany the growth of my own cities and the evolution of my own choices, again over time. I don't know what this game is, and it may not be a bad game, but it is not a Civ game. To echo one of the YouTubers, this is an Excel spreadsheet masquerading as a Civ game.

Man, I hate getting sucked into hype. I was so stoked for this game to come out. I thought that following Humankind's lead with civ swapping was odd, but maybe they can do better. One leader for different civs might be intriguing and could be well executed. So for several months, I waited and read about new leaders, civs, and features coming out. I kept falling for the hype. And then it hit... I don't think I can explain it can different or better than any other reviewer has already. I just wish I hadn't fallen for the hype and waited for the community to chime in. I am writing this after realizing that playing Civ VI last night and brings way more fun in five minutes than this game brings at all. I hope they can revitalize this game, but I am pessimistic. Maybe mods will save it, I hope they don't. We should let bad things be bad and not save them from themselves. All the parties involved in rushing this game out to us need to know. I believe there was no consideration as to what makes Civ games fun. They are still trying to capture the "coveted" (please read with extreme sarcasm) casual player who might like these games and failing the players who love them. I don't really know what else to say about it... Eat the rich

Game is an utter disappointment. They got too far away from the concept of the Civilization franchise we all enjoyed and tried to replicate too much Humankind which turned out to be awful to say the least. I have put this down after 2 campaigns after release and every time a patch comes out i review the notes but still not enough has been done to fix this trash game. I don't think it can be fixed at this point. Save your money.

I'm a long time fan of the series and I tried my best to give this a go. I was skeptical about civ 5 and 6 in the past and they very much caught on, so I wasn't phased about the changes they announced for 7. The sad truth though (for me, at least) is that this is a bad, half finished game. The UI is atrocious (really, where do the yields come from??), the age system basically means there's almost zero continuity across the game, map "generation" is a joke, and the whole leader unlock system does not appeal to me. I'd much rather try other leaders instead of grind a single one. Interaction with other leaders is flavorless, and city states are now a "click, forget, choose generic bonus" mechanism. A bunch of age related mechanisms are simply hollow, like religion, exploration or treasure fleets. It feels like I rush to some goals and then next turn they just become irrelevant. I love the voice acting, but there's so little of it. When the content is a few syllables it's hard for even a brilliant actor to make a mark. What I don't hate is the diversity of leaders and nations, or the ability to mix and match. I also think they're on to something with removing workers/builders. When I go back to previous editions they really seem like a chore now. Anyway, here's what happened: I forced myself to play a game to the end when this disaster launched, could NOT start a second game, and had this on my backlog since then. I could not go back. Civ 7 was pretty much and instant preorder despite my general reluctance, because I love the series. But they burned through all of my goodwill at a rate that I frankly did not imagine was possible. My entire experience was 10% appreciation of the new things they tried and 90% wonder at how bad they failed.

Currently (June 2025) this is an early access game with no disclaimer and a full-game price. Wait a year or two.

This game is unfinished mess, slapped together with ideas from other 4X games and totally lousy mobile gacha games UI. Far far FAR from the level of previous CIV games. I don't think it is salvageable, at least not without going back on fundamental game design decisions. But overall, I would like to thank the whole Civ VII development team - because of them I will not preorder another game in my life. Probably saved me decent amount of money down the line.

Civ is my favorite gaming franchise. I've been playing it since Civ 2 and lost countless days and nights as a child telling myself beautiful stories about the empires I was building and destroying. No other series has brought me more joy. Because of this love I have for the franchise, I can safely say that I have never hated a game more than I hate Civ 7. I have played worse games, sure—but I have never had my heart so thoroughly broken by one. I've only played 7 hours, and so far everything I’ve encountered has either insulted my intelligence, made me feel stupid, destroyed my suspension of disbelief, confused me, or outright disgusted me. I can’t go into full detail because it’ll make me lose my shit, so here are just a few examples from the first 10 minutes of a recent desperate attempt to enjoy myself: Can’t mouse over unique buildings or wonders (e.g. Songhai, Sanchi Stupa) in the leader selection screen Mementos system is bloated and indistinguishable; no guidance on picking useful ones Tutorial tooltips block all mouseover functionality, breaking the UI Tooltips in general are broken or missing—it feels like the game wants you to alt-tab constantly just to function Graphics barely look better than Civ 6, and massive UI design failures ruin the gameplay, making it impossible to distinguish buildings, units, or options So I'm done. I won't be playing this game anymore. I won't wait for patches or updates because honestly I think it's so terrible that it's truly unfixable. They took a wonderful franchise - one focused on creating a fascination with storytelling, history, warfare, human culture and science - and turned it into a giant, tedious, ugly brown mess. Like the worst board game I've ever tried to decipher, but I'm playing it all on my own. One of the saddest gaming experiences of my life.

You are not allowed to choose victory conditions. If you like nuking other civs, there are no thermonuclear weapons instead the completion of operation ivy is a victory condition. Modern Era wars are one of the best parts of the game and they have been really limited. Just stick with Civ 5 or 6 for now.

While this game does have some entertainment value, it is the worst core Civ game ever produced. They took good features in other Civ and eliminated them while creating new features, many that were poorly thought out or add little to the game. The maps are not very random like in Civ 6 and there are fewer map style choices. You can't name unit. Era changes may cause a player to lose units. The City and Town differences was unneeded. The overbuild concept is confusing when trying to decide if it would be beneficial. Diplomacy is actually worse (who thought that would be possible). With that said, that game is absolutely beautiful!!! The leader concept is an improvement and the ability to choose the hex when a city expands is nice. I gave it a thumbs up, but I do think Civ 6 is better.

I hesitated on reviewing this game and would have given it a "meh" rating if I could have. However, given the choices of recommending or not, I'll have to fall on the side of a _conditional_ not. First, Who do I think might enjoy this game? People who enjoyed Humankind _might_ find this enjoyable. People who played Civ on the highest speed or got frustrated that they didn't finish games of Civ. People who enjoy unlocks and meta leveling in games. Fundamentally, as someone who likes playing Civ on the longest settings, largest maps, victory conditions disabled, this is fundamentally not a game for me. From a gameplay perspective, the breakup into ages makes this 3 sub-games instead of one cohesive one. Each one has a start that is influenced by the last age, but with a lot of stuff reset, so it doesn't feel like the world has evolved in the meantime. With everything reset each age and rule systems to discourage anyone from getting too overpowering an advantage, there is no chance of most of the kinds of events that I remember from Civ happening in this version - there just isn't the ability to have the isolation and imbalances that lead to the most interesting situations. In regards to some of the actual systems or subsystems: + Excluding the influence mana pool and espionage system, I do like how most of the diplomacy system is set up. There are more options than in most previous versions and I would say it is already in a better state than most previous Civs. + Army grouping and interaction: This feels clunkier than Civ VI and the current grouping mechanism is not as nice as the Corp/Army method, but it works well-enough and feels like a system that has significant potential. + Rivers, especially navigable ones, are done better than any other Civ I can think of. They can be used as a proper defensive layer as well as a transit artery. + Accomplishment-based Civ unlocks. While I dislike the way they did the "play multiple civilizations" in general, I do like the "Meat this goal to unlock the civ" which feels more natural than any of the other methods. - Ages. As I mentioned before, this is the big minus. It breaks up the game and basically transforms it into 3 mini-games that only some of the stuff you've done carries over for, - Leveling / unlocks. This is a horrendously gamified concept that feels like something added by corporate to drive engagement. It could be dealt with by simply having an "unlock everything" button. But as-is, you need to play all the leaders multiple times to have all the configuration options available at start. - Required changing of Civs, but not changing leaders. Having the same leader through every age but requiring the Civ to change feels fundamentally broken. Rename the leader to "National Spirit" and it would make sense (It would also help deal with the issue of "interesting people" being chosen instead of leaders or potential leaders ("Spirit of Ada Lovelace" vs "Dictator Ada Lovelace"), but as it is, the disconnect helps break immersion. The required changing of Civs is not really done well, especially with the way Ages are set up. It doesn't feel like you naturally transition from one to another. Instead it is "sub-game A: Egyptian", "Sub-game B: Norman". - Crises are not nearly as impactful as they should be. Every Crisis I've played was a minor inconvenience at most - If they actually were devastating, the "end of an Era" would make sense, but instead, it feels like a failed narrative device. It feels like the "forced loss" battles you see in other games - despite knocking out all their health and not getting hit yourself, the crisis/boss is just so powerful that you lose. Because.. The game says you do. Overall, I've played this twice all the way through - the first time was before the "broken long game fix", so I gave it another chance. The second game was longer. But still shorter than I would have liked - maybe 20-30 hours instead of the 4-6 of the first game. I don't think this is a terrible game, and I wouldn't hold it against anybody who enjoyed it. But I don't see myself coming back to this version of Civ unless the core game is completely rebuilt. Does it poison Civ forever for me? No. But it does break the continuity of fun and Civ VIII, if it comes, will be the first major version that won't be an automatic get based on the strength of the Civ legacy for me.

Game is plain bad, even after all of the updates. Do not buy it, just play CIV 6 or 5

Until I can play any civilization from the beginning to the end I'm out, I find the ages mechanic halts my game and changing civilization just breaks any connection. Bland bland bland

I remember being so hyped for this game when it was first announced. I preordered the founders addition and everything. Even took off work so I could play it on launch. I have over 700 hours in Civ 5 and another 1500 in Civ 6. All this to say I am a huge fan of this franchise and have dumped thousands of hours into it, and was ready to sink even more time into the newest title. Boy was I blindsided… I am extremely disappointed in this latest installment in the series. This game lacks so many things on launch and many of the new features added to the game take away from the heart and core gameplay of the franchise (changing Civs and mixing around different leaders with different civs). I am not sure why Firaxis went this direction when it had already been done by others and yielded horrible results. I feel like I am forced to switch my strategy around multiple times during the play session and have to do wacky combos like Benjamin Franklin of Mongolia (why is this a feature?). And don’t get me started on all the bugs and glitches that ruined the gameplay. My friend and I tried play a multiplayer game on day two and couldn’t get past 3 turns without the game crashing. Not fun! I feel like I’ve been robbed! I understand that it’s a Civ game and that every installment has launched with issues, but this really feels like a slap in the face when they charge $130 for it. I mean I expected it to launch with issues, but I thought they would at least finish the game first ya know. I did enjoy the new graphics and the new military mechanics. The city state/barbarian overhaul also was a fantastic addition. There are some good parts to the game, but the bad parts completely overshadow them. All this to say I strongly do not recommend this game and encourage you to wait until it is fixed until buying it. In the meantime you can still play Civ 6 and 5 (finished games). I would try coming back to this game in a year or two once some overhaul dlc (like gathering storm and rise and fall in civ 6) releases to fix this atrocious game.

They did not make radical movement by changing game mechanics. I think they changed whole developer team and this new team does not understand what this game for and what are the dynamics! First : There are no victory condition settings. You cant event change how to win. Even you are the first some one always beats you on cultural or scientific race. Second: There are no Civ like Ottoman or the best leader like Ataturk. What the f*** its like playing football game without Brazil or playing NBA 2k without USA. Third: In each age epoch all of your army deletes and you have to make them again if you want to play for war. Then this game says you that dont, make army only make cultural or scientific race. This new dev team does not know this game + does not know history. Please Human source also make history tests and IQ tests when recruiting.

After 121 days here is what you need to know.. Pros: Graphics, Animations, and Soundtrack meet all expectations of a Sid Meier's Civilization franchise. (The teams behind these features should all have a spot at the table for Civilization 8) Cons: Game play, Leader choices, Maps, Interface, Content. (The teams in charge of the larger half of the game failed the Civilization community) Personal opinion: Heather Hazen (Studio Head), Ed Beach (Creative Director), Dennis Shirk (Executive Producer) have wasted a lot of time and money, not only for fans but the designers on this game who will not get another chance at it. Firaxis Games should take a deep dive into these peoples mindsets and really ask themselves, why are we implementing other brands strategy models into a franchise that leads grand strategy gaming? Why take steps backward in the year 2025? After the monumental success of Civ. 6, why abandon that model so excessively? Lastly: How can this be a Sid Meier game without an Earth map? Pitiful.

2k is afraid of the customers, if you have ANYTHING running on your computer that their systems thinks is you trying to cheat at their game, they will close the game and take you to the 2k website about "online" gaming code of conduct, EVEN when you are NOT playing online!! STAY AWAY from this game!

Firstly, I have to applaud Firaxis for their willingness to go in a different direction with Civ VII - it would be easy to just make some minor tweaks to what already works, and coast off people’s nostalgia of the previous games. Instead, they’ve made some bold changes to the core gameplay loop, and tried to tackle the process of civilization-building in a radically different way from what we’ve seen before. And I have to respect that. But it doesn’t work. Look at how few hours I have in this game. I could go on and criticize specific features and bugs and so on, but there are plenty of people more qualified to do that. I honestly never made it through a whole game from start to finish. I originally said I wouldn’t write a review until I had at least played all the way to the end, but I’ve put it off. I haven’t wanted to sit down and suffer through a game in its entirety. And honestly, I think that’s as telling as anything. The game is frustrating. Unintuitive. You have more choices now than in any previous Civ game, but none of them feel meaningful. For me, the Age mechanic just kills the momentum of the game and detaches you the player from what you’re trying to create. Everything you build, every relationship you make will just be ground down into incremental stat upgrades after you’re forced to restart. I don’t want to give the impression that Civ VII is a complete disaster - it’s not. But I just haven’t enjoyed it. And for a $70 game (with many, many paid DLCs to come), I can’t recommend it.

Played 1000+ hours and 2600+ hours, respectively of V and VI. Looked forward to VII, but was disappointed. I liked the new graphics and movement style of the game. I completely despise the settlement caps/penalties. I can't imagine playing this game beyond the tiny or small map. They totally ruin the game for me. The mixing of of leaders and civilizations and change of civilizations era is silly, if no plan stupid. Although I got used to it, I have mixed feelings about the leader experience system. I feel like the developers have taken control of how they want the game to be played without regard to individual players' styles.

Still no hot-seat :-/... Single player is OK for one play-through, after that it just feels small, boring and repetitive.

All the youtubers said it was great prior to release. They were wrong. Lots to say that others have already. First negative game review but felt the need to help ensure others don't waste their money.

Hundreds of hours in Civ V and VI (and Revolution lol) and yet since this game released I've only put a little over 3 hours into this title. I think that says enough.

having played all the other CIv games to date. I decided to buy this months after release to see for myself if its as bad as everyone lead on. After beating it twice. I feel like this is a step back in many ways. Previous titles were much better.

I have played every Civ game since the first one. I have loved all of them besides Beyond Earth which was very ok at the best. This game since launch has not felt at all like a Civ game and has felt like a copy cat studio trying to make a civ like game without being sued. Really the game just isn't fun. I don't really care about the leader as much as the Civ I pick and this game just feels empty to me. For the first time it really makes me want to play an older Civ game. I would not buy this game. Again like in BE and Civ6 when they ripped ppl off with the pre order editions which economically didnt make sense I feel ripped off by this game. It just isnt fun at all and if I could return it I would.

How could you screw up my favorite game like this? So many mistakes. The eras system is awful. Only being able to found 3 cities at the start instead of as many as you want is crippling. Why all the hand-holding? Why are you trying to dumb down the game and make it some kind of narrative and structured experience?

Wish I had never purchased this game. Worst Civ game in the series ever. I loved this series in the past and own them all but not happy with VII.

I tried play this game a few time, but for every game, once I finish an era, i lost interest to play next one. It's simply another mankind game, which force you complete tasks instead make your civilisation great or play your own style.

The game itself is decent at best, but the biggest reason not to touch this game is the EULA/Privacy update. Firaxis and 2K will be harvesting your personal data for their questionable uses, most likely selling it forward for highest bidder. So please, don't buy it.

Dear god where to begin. I've played every CIV game and have often gone back and replayed them time and time again. I've spent more time playing these games than I care to admit. All of them had a tried and true formula that made you want to play over and over again. Even if you didn't get to the end you enjoyed exploring, researching, developing, etc. This edition to the franchise has none of the fun that the others had. Ending the era feels like so much of what you did meant nothing as you start a new Civilization. You get the rug pulled out from under you. Combat seems almost tacked on. Not saying it was great in the other CIVs, but it was at least engaging. Development could be seen as improved to a degree, but it isn't fun. Its actually very tedious to do much of what this game offers and yet it seems streamlined. I may have played this for about 20 hours. And you might say, "well you got 20 hours of game out of it." But that 20 is from the nostalgia of all the other games that came before it. It was me wanting to love this game as much as I did the others. And frankly it seems as if someone was briefly explained how the other games were and then they tried to recreate it. I wish they had made this game as good as the others were, and hopefully the next will be redemption.

it's like building a sand castle on the beach, but mr meier insists you only build it his way. then every 2 hours he shows up to stomp on it, just so you can rebuild it exactly the same

Echoing what many "legacy Civ" players have already expressed (longtime Civ fan dating back to the '90s with the original here), not a fan of Civ7 after several games, a rest period until JOMT was added, and diving back in again. Spent three evenings playing with a friend this week only to have the game abruptly end again and then realizing the JOMT update only applies to single-player. Wow. Again, I feel like my time has been wasted and I felt the need to apologize to my friend for sucking them into a game that ultimately had no pay off. I was even declared the winner of said game, and still walked away from it unsatisfied. Not a fan of this new rails system at all. This isn't Civ to me. Aside from griping about it on a review, what makes the situation more annoying to me (PAY ATTENTION, TAKE-TWO) is reading condescending jargon from CEO Strauss Zelnick saying things like the "'legacy Civ audience' will come around the more they play" and "our legacy Civ audience is a little bit nervous about what they initially see and then they realize, wow, this is actually really incredible, and they dive in." As your new lowest approval rating on Steam indicates (Mostly Negative), you are wrong, and I as a longtime fan of this series don't appreciate the abrasive attempt at manipulating me into accepting something you think is so brilliant, yet I think completely stinks. You are out of touch with this fanbase. This new, horribly recalibrated system should've been an optional game mode for players who wanted to try something completely upside-down different. Forcing us to change civilizations multiple times, waste tons of money making all our cities into cities again (dumb), and abruptly ending the game just when things are getting good is completely backwards. A "classic game mode" needs to be added to Civ7 to allow us to play it the way we always have. In closing, to the dev team; there's clearly too many cooks in the kitchen on this game. You've over-thought this and lost sight of what Civilization is about. The fans have spoken, and continue to do so. No amount of fake positive reviews (just look at the accounts behind some of them) are going to undo this well-deserved negative backlash. Take it, learn from it, realize you are wrong and get better.

As a lifetime player of Civ since the very first one, it makes me so sad to see my favorite franchise kill its own game. The resetting of everything each era completely kills the continuity and long term planning of an empire. I can get used to the changing of civ's between empires, i kind of like the added dynamics this brings in, and i really like the combat in civ7, but that just makes the resetting of all your troops all the more frustrating. Having to replace your troops negates the ability to hold strategic locations on the map and really discourages early military actions until the final era. This feels like 3 mini games smashed together rather than 1... I was looking forward to this game so much, that i bought a new laptop just for it and paid for the early access. So it genuinely hurts my soul, what you have done to my all time favorite game... :-(

Game changed from previous too much. wait for next version when they get back to what made it great

Uninstalled after 120 hours. Haven't been this disappointed in a franchise sequel since Star Wars 8: The Last Jedi. The game is beautiful has some neat concepts (no workers, fantastic district building dynamic like unique districts and overbuilding), but the game feels as if any choice you make is just bland, boring, and pointless. Civs don't feel distinct for their specialty (a science civ doesn't feel science-y). The governments feel random, and exist only to provide a temporary boost to productivity. Religion is a joke compared to past Civ games and exists only in one age. The age reset and civ swapping kills the feeling of continuity that I have enjoyed tremendously since Civ1. No more empire building. I don't even care that the UI is inadequate. I can deal with poor UI so long as a game is good. But it's just not an enjoyable game on too many levels. Given that what I find fault with are core parts of the game, Civ7 isn't likely to be "fixed" in a way that would make the game enjoyable for me (eliminate civ switching, make optional ages, add real Civ5/6 style governments and religion, realistic and customizable world maps, take the game off those Legacy rails, etc.). Bring on Civ8, and hopefully a return to basics.

Disaster, treachery for CIV legacy and CIV community. I ve played since civ 2, oldschool here, but its not about just i am out of my comfort zone. I can tell 1000 detail that the game is broken, bad, absurd and not making sense.

I have played civilization all the way since the first one. This is the single worst game of the series or genre. The age system breaks the flow so horribly that it defeats the purpose of a 4x game. Not only do I feel cheated by the insanely high price of a substandard game but it means I no longer hold the developer as one to be trusted

Just doesnt feel the same as the other civs. The game feels more like I am doing chores than building my own country. Ive tried many games and I just do not feel that thing that hooks you in and makes you want to see the game through to the end. You can add this to the list of disappointments 2k seems to be dishing out.

I have given this game a chance. Truly. I preordered it because I loved Civilizations V and VI so much I couldn't wait to see how they expanded upon the franchise in this installment. After playing it on and off for a few months, ultimately there's nothing that makes me want to come back. They claim in this installment that your actions in previous ages have consequences in the current age, but I just don't see that at all. My best advice, if you're a first time Civilization player and the description for this one sounds good, go buy Civilization VI and the Rise and Fall and Gathering Storm expansions- you'll have a much more fun time with that game than you will this one. I feel like we were promised lots with this game but ultimately it failed to deliver upon almost all if not all of them.

Worst spent money ever. Big suggestion - DO NOT BUY this game. UI looks like on game from win98 and game is nothing like previous Civ games.

Just a bit boring. Definitely a huge step backwards. Hopefully it will improve with time

How can you sell a game for 70€ missing so many features from the predecessors and the AI still sucks a**

Boring, formulaic, and un-innovative. The age transition is especially painful: everything you plan ahead is rendered meaningless and useless once the new age begins. The victory requirement is also disappointing, and the updates on prolonged game-play is not helping at all: you still do similar things till the end no matter which civilization or leader you choose. A poorly-conceived game, especially compared with its predecessors.