Sid Meier's Civilization VII

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.

The game is not bad but i don't understand the age system. 1 minute you play as the Greece empire then you play as another empire. I don't know what the devs are thinking, i want to play as 1 civilization from old up to modern times.

always been a fan of sid meier civilization from the beginning of time . 1400 hours on civ 6 .........by far it was my favorite so i was excited to play civ 7 however i don't like the changes to the serie . the whole point of civilization is to take your civ to the stand of time battling wars, plagues, economic crisis, etc... but here you have 3 era..........your leader is not necessary your civ and worst you have to change your civ once the era change so i start with India, but midgame i turn out to be mongolia, and finally japan? on top of it . i was fighting another civilization . surrounded their capital, their capital was about to fall . just a matter of a few turns ....... boom . change of era.........and now what? all my armies are split . outside of my enemy's border and i am not even at war with them its like we were in a middle of a battle and overnight we forwarded 100 years and changed era units style and i have to do it all over again if i have to conquer my neighbour does it make sense to you? because to me IT DOESN'T !!! that does not make any sense to me . like you start with india, your units look like indian fighter and then the era change and boom .....its like you decided to switch civ alltogether legacy path...........basically quests ...........you need to do this to get this ......... where is my freedom of choice that i had in the other civ ? in the past if you plan to do a culture victory or religious you could change and go for a science victory etc but here you NEED to do the legacy path to get legacy point to spend later on. your CHOICE is gone ........... for me you end up losing your identity, and if i wanted to play a game with quest i would play something else very disappointed i give it a good try 148 hours 33 last 2 weeks because of the latest update yes sure they fixed some issues but the core gameplay is ruined because some idiot decided to change a formula that does not need to be changed did i mention that modern era last era has no jets? no nukes? why? probably because top executive plan to release dlc to complete this unfinished mess and hope to grab a few more $ from us i think top executive in video games publisher should be fired if they proudly say they are not gamers we can tell, we gamers can tell when your executive care only about $ and end up ruining a franchise ..... i think i will delete civ 7 for now and re install civ 6 ......... will be waiting to see if civ 7 gets some update and some things change but frankly i am not hopeful

Hyperaggressive anti-cheat kernel module on a single player game? Really? Flagging dev tools too? So I guess mods will be a no go as well. Refunded.

I have thousands of hours across every Civ title since Civ 3 and have extremely mixed feelings on 7. The bad: I absolutely hate civ switching; I tried giving it a chance, but it really ruins the experience. Age transitions aren't inherently bad, but I play civilization to invest in my civilization—to see a single civilization stand the test of time—not see it be remade and redefined every age. If something has to change between ages, it should be leaders, not civs. Legacy paths feel restrictive and need major work. Religion system feels like an afterthought. Maps don't feel unique or nearly diverse enough. The UI needs MAJOR work. The good: The artwork is good, striking an acceptable balance between the aesthetics of 5 (which I prefer) and 6. Combat is greatly improved. Commanders are a refreshing and fun addition that simultaneously enhance combat while removing frustrations. Naval combat finally feels worthwhile. Towns are a fantastic change. Love the American prospector unique—wish every civ had one; just enhance the American version. Overall: Aside from civ switching, the bones of the game are good. Updates are slowly moving many things in the right direction, but it's going to take a lot more work. Is it worth playing? I still think so, but would probably recommend waiting for more development.

Well, I wasn't going to write a review for this one, but the delusion level is too high. The fact that they want $70 for an unfinished game with a 30% all-time low score is absurd. At least have some dignity, and when you put your game on sale, make it like a 50% discount like other half-released games. I want to clarify something: I see players keep comparing Civ 6 with this abomination. This is nothing like Civ 6. They both had bad releases, but this one is a special kid. For some reason they decided to break the game loop of Civilization games. And they've stolen a system from Humankind, where you control different civilizations for each age. But there was a reason you control one civilization for each run—you want to see what happens to that culture in later ages. You want to exploit the civilization's bonuses and dominate other civs. But in Civ 7, you have to change to another civ for each age and only your leader remains through ages. You kill all the illusion of leading a civilization from the antique age to modern. This is a fatal mistake you can't recover from. The sad thing is, there are a lot of good systems that came with this game—but since the core loop is broken, it doesn’t matter. Don't buy.

As long as Denuvos system is running for singleplayer mode this game goes to the trashbin.

I like the game, but I honestly don't have much faith in it ever being redeemed like every other Civilization game, solely because some mechanic as so deeply ingrained into the blood of this game that removing them would leave nothing but a shallow husk. At that point you might as well ask for CIV VIII. Is this game good? Very much so, but I completely understand why some people don't like it whatsoever and why some of them will never try it, even when the expansions eventually release. It's a Civilization game, if you're a longterm fan, then you're probably used to the games being in a semi-complete state until the DLC's come out and make something out of the base game. The problem is that this game is so far from people's expectations that they don't really see it as a Civ game. The developers ripped out a lot of features straight out if a game called Humankind, which itself sits on pretty mixed reviews itself. I tried playing that game in the past; unfortunately, I didn't really enjoy it. It's by the same Developers that made Endless legend, and like Endless legend, the settlement system functioned on a regional basis, every area of the map was a region, and you could only place one city within it, it's a pretty weird approach, but it wasn't the worse thing ever. The cities themselves also function on a grid system, your cities don't remain within the exact tile that you founded them on. That's what Civilization took from them. Whether you think it's because Firaxis really enjoyed the features of Humankind, wanting to try their own vision for it in the hopes of making it better, or simply a greedy attemp of the devs to take this feature for themselves, that's up to you to decide, I'm not a massive pessimist, so I prefer to believr that It wae the former. Did they at least do a good job at it? Absolutely! It feels more interedting than Humankind, The way those tiles expand are also extremely cool, and I like seeing my cities slowly expand, top that up with having actual unique leaders to choose? Chefs kiss. I can play any civilization is so many ways with them! That being said, there's a lot of issues that I don't like, one of them being how compact they made the ages. It's no longer 7 like in Civ V or 9 like Civ VI, it's 3. In their defence, the eras are technically split into two periods each, but it still sucks. They also removed one of the most interesting ideas from Humankind: The Nenolithic Era. Seeing your civilization in a hunter-gatherer setting would have been an intetesting concept, but I digress! They also FORCE you to change civilizations each time an Era ends. Yes, Humankind allowed you to remain as the civilization you were playing. It wasn't good at all, but they still let you do it. Why not expand on that? I don't like this new pessimistic perspective of "each civilization must come to an end" that the devs have been forcing into this game. There's so many countries in the game that could have literally been around in all three eras. I hate pretending that the people magically turn into something else. If you really have to force a civilizational change, then please, add add more civilizations that make sense with one another. Mayan > Incan > Mexican makes zero sense. Some of the reasons for being able to inately choose some Civs, especially with leaders, is also extremely callous. Simon Bolivar can choose France because he was inspired by the French revolution. Okay, sure I guess. But then he can choose Mexico because 'He was born in the Americas'. Do you know how many options you should be able to have with every leader if you're being this specific? Please, if you're going to keep giving love for this game, make the civilizations make sense, China and India (Mostly) are like this, they're a slow and natural progression of their history. That's how everyone else should be, rather than becoming something completely unrelated. Civilization VII also suffers from Western bias as all their other games do. America has 3 leaders, France has 3, Germany has 3. Please, can we at least once get some Slavic representatiom that's not Poland or Russia? Bulgaria came with this dlc, the Turkic version of it, using middle eastern sprites, yet it confusingly uses a Slavic Bulgarian wonder. It's genuinely all over the place. The game forces you into a crisis near the end of an era, you have to choose negative debuffs until the era finally comes to an end, similar to Civ VI, except you're forced to no matter how well you're doing. I think it's extremely lame for me to suffer if i'm doing good. I much prefer how it was in the previous game. Thankfully, they fixed this, you can outright disable it. I still want it to be a part of the game, but make it like it was before! Ending an era also cancels all wars, resets your cities to being towns, which then need to be turned into cities again, change several resources for absolutely no reason, and shufflr your units all over your lands, even disconnecting them from your General. None of this is good barring the war peace out, i don't mind it, but I genuinely don't grasp the logic of the other ones. Sure, i it's a stratrgic resource that's complrtely useless with new tech? Get rid of it. But for anything else, please stop. The music is amazing! The game feels extremely alive, almost all units, even ships have unique animations depending on whether they're raiding, resting, fighting. There's an insane amount of cultural variety compared to the other games, unit skins are very nice to see. I honestly hope we see even more variation in the future, because labeling all of Eurooe as European is kind of dull. But I can't complain much, this is more effort than I expected. Genetals are also amazing, being able to place a small army into one tile is so helpful, It's hard even thinking if ever playing in a dense mountainous area in the older games anymore, that's how bad the general spoiled me. Faith is near non-existant, and the way you form a religion is also kind of weird compared to the other games. You can't even form one until the second Era. Have fun forming Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Christianity and Hinduism in the Late Medieval era! They desperately need to rework faith. The map generation is some of the worst i've seen in a civilization game. I really hope it gets fleshed out. The map envirinments and the addition of cliffs and navigable rivers is an extremely cool edition, but it doesn't matter if the game keeps generating absolute potatos. I want to believe in this game, I know it has potential. I would argue that it could even be the best Civilization game with enough love. But with it's new features being scoffed at by veterans, the the Anti-Woke crowd absolutely losing their mind because they decided to make Harriet Tubman a leader, the game really isn't doing good. 9k people daily. The record numbers on day one were 84.000. That's half as less as CIV VI, 2000 less than Beyond Earth. CIV VI definitely had an advantage with Covid? but that was long after the game released, and I don't think the Higher ups care anyways. The game will be perceived as a massive flop, and despite them promising to give this game love for at least 10 years post releasr, I honestly feel like this is something they will no longer be able to achieve. I want to be wrong, and I'm sure Firaxis does as well. But unless they make two absolutely insane Expansions that can bring both old and new fans, I think those two Expansions might sadly be the last piece of content we see. Do I recommend the game for you? Only if you're willing to approach it both with an open mind and with an understanding of the fact that this game is far from complete. It will still get you stuck in the loop of "just one more turn", but it will also find a lot of ways to frustratr you. Wait for a free weekend or a sale if you're really curious. And set the game speed to the fastest if you're planning to see if you want it or not.

It's just plain not fun. The way they've fractured the game into a few eras, forcing you to change civs every time. It just ruins the immersion, it feels like the city and army building is pointless as you lose troops when changing eras and your cities revert to towns every era. It looks pretty but all of the gameplay seems to abandon all that I loved about civ games. I was extremely excited for this release but couldn't be more disappointed with the results.

I've played on Civ since number 2 and fell in love with it ever since and persevered with the various bugs in each game, particularly number 6. So I was mega excited to be buying this one! Well ... consider me disappointed. The main thing that stands out is the three different ages. I've tried and tried to get used to it but it just doesn't work. And takes far more away from the game than it adds. But there's also little annoyances. For example, I've noticed an Ai player will only ever ask for an alliance in order to pull me into a war in the very next turn. You say no and their enemy asks you and so on and so on. So the diplomatic part needs help. There also a feeling that the speed of the game is just broke, due to the three ages, once the first age is done - you are done with everything in that age, you can't continue etc it feels like a reset. When you do reset into the next age, your capital city remains a city and everything else reverts to a town, meaning all the gold you spent on getting them to city status was half wasted. There is of course still the little bit of magic in the game that keeps you clicking next turn. But after 150plus hours of game time, I'm ready to uninstall ... which is disappointing considering I spent 3000 hours on CIV5 and 2000 hours on CIV6!

Almost forgot I bought this game even though it's only been a few months. I've been playing Civ for over 20 years now. Civ 7 is a completely forgettable entry into the Civ series. It's amazing to me that after all this time Firaxis insists on making Civ games with the most easily manipulated AI in the strategy game genre. The sense of challenge is what makes or break a good 4X game and yet they insist on reinventing the wheel instead of polishing and perfecting what they got. If I can get to the end of a game, completely steamroll the AI on deity, and then completely forget I've played the game a few months later, I'm just not spending any more time on it no matter what DLC come out, even with how nostalgic I am for the series. Until I read the words, "This is the smartest and most challenging AI ever made for a Civ game", I'm done with Firaxis and this entire franchise.

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

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.

At just over five months since launch, the base game has $85 worth of DLC of which is required to expand the pitifully small and uninspiring cast of leaders and civilizations. There's many more meticulous men and women than who can expound the other QoL, UIX, and more issues with the overall experience. So I will keep it short. This game, and its leadership, deserve to fail. The only plausible situation is that a hostile civilization's spies infiltrated Firaxis and 2k to sabotage the game. Our only hope is creating an AI complex enough to give us Civ 8, the true Scientific Victory.

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.

It's disappointing. Mostly just find it boring. I have over 900 hours into Civ VI. I'm having trouble keeping Civ VII open for longer than an hour. I wish I could get my money back

Civ 7 starts strong. It looks fantastic, the music is great, and the early turns feel like classic Civ—scouting, expanding, building toward something bigger. I also really like the new city expansion system and commander level features. But then the first era ends… and the game shows its worst flaws. The new era system, in my opinion, is a disaster. Imagine: you’re deep in a war, setting up a massive play—and BOOM, new era! War’s over. Pack it up, boys, history’s on a timer now. No peace deals, no aftermath, just poof. Why? Because a few civs hit some vague legacy goal? Playing “correctly” means ticking off an era progression checklist and negotiating peace at 98%—which feels completely unsatisfying. I often find myself ending the run at one of the era changes because I feel disconnected from my civ’s progression and story. I’ve never once had a “just one more turn” moment in Civ 7. Usually, I’m just relieved it’s over. And that’s the saddest part and the most dramatic departure from Civ 6. There’s still a great game buried under it. I’ve enjoyed most of the time I’ve spent with it—it just gets repetitive fast, and the era changes break the progression. If the devs can rework how eras halt and add a more dynamic era progression list, Civ 7 would be easy to recommend. But as it stands? Civ 7 keeps interrupting itself every time it gets good.

As it stands right now in July 2025, Civ VII is... not great. I am very frustrated with myself for pre-purchasing it; I feel I paid for the privilege of being a beta tester, there were so many bugs on release. I keep coming back every month or so to see what has been fixed, but even with bugs being slowly worked out, I am now realizing the game is just not fun for me after the ancient era. It feels disjointed with the eras, the multitude of leader/civ/momento combinations are overwhelming, and you cannot even hover to see which hex belongs to which city and all the urban hexes look the same. The map is beautiful but not intuitive. The UI is rough. Civilopedia is also somehow useless? I hope to be able to come back and change this review in the future to be more positive, because I love Civ. I have played civ since III, and have an embarrassing number of hours on record on civ VI.

I bought this game after literally spending 2000+ hours in civ games starting from 4 to 6. The full deluxe pre-order. I was so sure that if ever a pre-order was warranted, it was for this game. Civ had never let me down before. Well, I am just a big effing idiot.

During my teacher's training, a strong piece of advice was that you don't always need to reinvent the wheel when designing a lesson. Firaxis hasn't heard of this yet. Pro's: - Good music - Commanders reduce unneeded unit micro - graphics are noticeably better than Civ VI Cons: - voice acting is quite boring - progressing an age acts as a soft reset. A lot of building effects are strongly reduced and you armies are deleted and replaced by fewer units of that age. - combat animations only last until you pass turn. - the age mechanic feels clunky, unnatural and overal poorly implemented - There are no clear historical age choices for many civs. The game only has Meji japan, but no Yamatai Japan (cfr. Himiko) or Ashikaga/Tokugawa Japan. This breaks any possible immersion. In addition, recommending an entirely different civ becuase it was "on the same continent" feels like throwing salt in a wound. - ages get progressively more complex and somehow boring as you go on. - Resource management for cities is incredibly tedious - There are no counters for national disasters, e.g. rivers flood, but you'll never be able to build a dam. This was present in civ VI, so there's no excuse for not implementing it here. Aside from the game, the marketing was incredibly deceptive. When you pre-ordered the founder's edition, you were promised to recieve the first 2 DLC's for free in return for 120EUR. What's in these DLC? A few leaders, nothing more. There are many more points but the overal effect of this is that you have to convince yourself to continue playing and - after a while - even start a new game. When this is the case, there's a severe problem with the game. I've had the game since early release and I simply can't bring myself to play a minute more. It's not that I don't enjoy civilization. I've played since civ IV, including Beyond Earth. All of them simply eclipse Civ 7 in quality. I sincerely hope Firaxis turns this around. Civ 7 was hyped beyond belief, but right now it's been the biggest disappointment of the entire franchise. Conclusion: come back to this store page in 2 years and see if it's improved at all. If it has, great! If it hasn't, I'm sorry but I'd recommend skipping this civ game. Score: 2/10

If they replace the age and legacy system with what we had in the every other civ edition, then I might consider coming back and changing this.

The game is fundamentally flawed and cannot be fixed. I preordered this game and seriously regret it, its such a shame because I thought Firaxis wouldn't be like other devs and release a half baked product, but they have. I have 700 hours on Civ6 and like 400 hours on Civ 5, and I do not think I will be exceeding 100 on this. The core issue is the ages system, which is such a core mechanic in the game that I do not think they can remove it, but I actually cannot complete a game anymore. I enjoy the antiquity age, but as soon as that end of age screen comes up I can't continue, it entirely ruins the flow that Civ has been known for. I have managed to get into the exploration and force myself to complete a game, but I just find the victory conditions to be just box ticking exercises - how fun! (s) Other reviews go into much more detail on this, I could go on but honestly I will just be repeating what others have already said. Such a disappointment :(

I took a chance on this game thinking: "how bad could it really be?" It's REALLY BAD given the price. It's mostly playable, but feels like Beta testing. It may eventually be a great game, but they clearly rushed it to launch to start raking in that $70/copy. Strongly recommend you just play Civ 6 and wait at least another 6-12 months to see if Firaxis/2k are interested in shipping a finished product. A few lowlights: 1) I was actually interested in the new Ages system, and thought people were just too wedded to the first Civ games. But it's actually as bad as everyone is saying. I'm all for new Age mechanics-- maybe resetting resources, different quests, different strategies to succeed by Age... but why would I be forced to switch entire Civilizations? How is Rome still my Capital when I'm now playing as Spain? The ONLY possible explanation for this insanity is that it enabled them to add more civs and sell more DLCs later. Otherwise it's inexplicable. 2) There's no in-game explanation for many of the mechanics, so be prepared to live on Google and Reddit if you actually want to understand any of the new things going on. And it's a lot, because this is very different from previous Civ games as others have stated. Could have been a good thing except it's a TERRIBLE tutorial/advisor mechanic. 3) Basic functionality and QoL/UI components are missing. One of many examples: there's no way to see a list of your units. 4) A lot of the in-game explanations are clearly unfinished, and some are so confusing and poorly worded (English language version) that... see #5 below. 5) I would be SHOCKED if they have professional play testers on staff. It's understandable that game designers can't see their own blindspots pre-launch, but that's why Alpha/Beta testing is a thing, or why you hire it in-house. Clearly they didn't build this into their roadmap. 6) Also... I've quit the game three times so far, and all three generated "Firaxis crash reports". At least they're consistently bad. In summary: wait 6-12 months and it COULD be a great game. Way too unfinished/frustrating to spend even $20 on right now. And honestly it's not even the money, it just feels shameful that a major studio/IP feels like this is acceptable, taking advantage of a loyal fanbase's devotion to a series by releasing something so half-baked. Rant over, you've been warned.

TLDR Version: Zwei zentrale Designfehler ruinieren ein ansonsten technisch starkes Spiel. Trotz toller Performance, schöner Grafik und spannender Ideen wird Civilization VII durch ein seelenloses UI und ein erzwungenes, unausgereiftes Zeitaltersystem ausgebremst. Besonders letzteres reißt den Spielfluss regelmäßig komplett auseinander – inklusive erzwungenem Nationenwechsel bei jedem Übergang. In der aktuellen Form: leider nicht empfehlenswert. Detailierte Kritik: Als jemand, der seit Civilization II dabei ist und Hunderte Stunden in jeden einzelnen Teil gesteckt hat, tut es mir weh, das zu schreiben – aber Civilization VII ist aktuell eine der größten Enttäuschungen der Serie. Positives: +++ Karten-Design: Die Map ist atemberaubend schön, detailverliebt und flüssig. Selbst der „Nebel des Krieges“ sieht fantastisch aus, und das aufdecken des selbigen macht aufgrund des visuellen Feedbacks, dern man beinahe taktil erfühlen kann richtig Spass. +++ Performance unter Linux: Läuft wie ein Traum. Deutlich schneller als unter Windows. Ladezeiten sind absurd kurz, das Spielgefühl butterweich. +++ Einige Gameplay-Features (z. B. Nationenwechsel bei Age Transition) sind gut gemeint und teils interessant umgesetzt. +-+- Interessante Idee die Nationenleader zu leveln. Hat was. Stand 28.06.2025: Mit den letzten Patches wurden bereits einige sinnvolle Verbesserungen vorgenommen. Aber dann kommt das große Aber: --- Das UI ist eine Katastrophe: Steril, seelenlos, klickintensiv, unübersichtlich. Kein Vergleich zu den früheren Teilen. Selbst Civ II auf Windows 95 hatte ein funktionaleres UI. Die Designlinie des Logos – eine Mischung aus Steampunk und Imperiumsluxus – wird im Spiel komplett ignoriert. Das hätte ich gerne gesehn im UI, besonders cool wäre gewesen wenn das UI sich gewandelt hätte mit Civilisation und/oder Zeitalter. Schade um das Potenzial. So ist es leider nur Konsolencatering (No hate gegen Konsolenspieler by the way) was in einem Drögen, leblosen und Informationsbefreiten UI Geendet ist. --- Age Transition ist ein Spielkiller. Das neue Zeitalter-System fühlt sich aufgesetzt, forciert und unausgereift an. Kein Schalter, um es zu deaktivieren. Warum? Wer es nicht mag, muss es trotzdem spielen. Spielerautonomie: null. Es nimmt einem Mid Game völlig den wind aus den Segeln, man freut sich nicht mehr auf die Age-Transition, man fürchtet sich davor. Furchtbare design entscheidung. Die Möglichkeit, bei jedem Age Transition die Nation zu wechseln, ist eigenartig und fühlt sich irgendwie nicht richtig an. Vorallem weil man teils nationen wählen kann, die nichts miteinander gemein haben. Die intention hinter der Mechanik ist mir durchaus bekannt, ich versteh es. Man möchte bei den Age Transitions ein "Even Playingfield" erschaffen, das es Spielern die nicht im lead sind ermöglicht auzuholen. Nur leider saugt das momentane System den Spass aus dem Spiel. Ja bei Civ 6 wurden viele Mehrspieler Partien frühzeitig abgebrochen, weil es sich anfühlte, dass der lead nie eingeholt werden konnte. Aber da wäre es schlauer gewesen dem lead einen Malus aufzudrücken für den restlichen Spielverlauf, anstatt allen eins mit dem Holzhammer über zu Braten. Ich will kein Hater sein – bin ich auch nicht. Ich erkenne die guten Punkte an, aber das UI und das erzwungene Zeitaltersystem haben bei mir so viel Spielspaß gekillt, dass ich nicht mehr weiterspielen will, obwohl technisch und optisch vieles stimmt. Civ VII fühlt sich an wie ein solides Spiel, das an zwei zentralen Stellen so danebenliegt, dass es den gesamten Rest überschattet. Wenn das UI grundlegend überarbeitet und das Age-System optional gemacht wird, ändere ich diese Review gerne. Ich will dieses Spiel mögen. Aber aktuell: Nicht empfehlenswert. Spielt einen der älteren CIV Teile und Spart euch das Geld. ===================================================================== ENGLISH ===================================================================== TL;DR Version: Two major design flaws ruin what is otherwise a technically impressive game. Despite strong performance, beautiful visuals, and some genuinely interesting ideas, Civilization VII is held back by a soulless UI and a forced, underdeveloped era system. The latter regularly breaks the game’s flow – including a mandatory nation switch with every age transition. As it stands: not recommended. Detailed Critique: As someone who’s been playing Civilization since Civ II and has spent hundreds of hours with every single entry in the series, it hurts me to say this – but Civilization VII is, at present, one of the biggest disappointments in franchise history. Positives: +++Map design: Absolutely stunning. Visually rich, fluid, and filled with detail. Even the fog of war looks gorgeous, and uncovering the map gives you a sense of tactile feedback that’s genuinely satisfying. +++Linux performance: Runs like a dream. Way faster than on Windows. Load times are practically nonexistent, and the overall gameplay is butter-smooth. +++Some gameplay features, like the idea of shifting nations during age transitions, are interesting and show potential. +-+-Leveling up leaders is a nice touch. Adds personality and a light RPG feel. As of June 28, 2025: Some recent patches have already addressed a few key issues in meaningful ways. But then come the major issues: --- The UI is a disaster: Sterile, soulless, click-heavy, and confusing. No comparison to earlier entries. Even Civ II on Windows 95 had a more functional interface. The game's logo hints at a steampunk/imperial-luxury aesthetic, which is completely absent in the game’s actual design. A UI that evolves along with your civilization and age would have been amazing – but instead we get generic console-friendly blandness (no hate to console players, by the way). The result feels lifeless and devoid of meaningful information. --- The Age Transition system is a game killer: The new age mechanic feels tacked on, forced, and clunky – and there’s no way to disable it. Why not? If you don’t like it, you’re still stuck with it. Player agency: zero. It wrecks the midgame pacing. You don’t look forward to the transition; you dread it. The required nation switch at every age change is strange and never feels quite right – especially when you can end up with civilizations that have nothing in common. Yes, I get the intention. It’s meant to level the playing field, to give players who are behind a way to catch up – a known issue in Civ VI multiplayer matches where early leads often led to snowballing. But this system drains all joy from the game. A better solution would’ve been to apply a scaling penalty to the leading player, rather than hitting everyone with a hammer and resetting progression. I’m not here to hate – I really want to like this game. And I can see the good parts clearly. But the UI and the forced era system kill so much of the fun that I just don’t want to keep playing, even though technically and visually the game shines in many areas. Civ VII feels like a solid game buried under two fundamental design decisions that drag everything else down with them. If the UI gets a major overhaul and the age system becomes optional, I’ll happily update this review. I want to love this game. But right now? Not recommended. Play one of the older Civ titles and save your money.

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.

this shit is ass, so many menus and decisions while the UI looks like placeholders the game uses so many ideas (pandemics, civ focuses, civics, diplomacy, city states, etc.) but none of them feels fully developed or like they work with each other graphics and battle animations are nice tho

The era system did not work for humankind, it still does not work here. The crisis system is just painful, the age changes do not make any sense. Civilization is not the same as culture, it is insane that they used so called 'historians' as a basis of such nonsense. I am sorry but Greeks did not become Spanish, and you are not doing mankind a favour by considering any civilisation as interchangeable. Also colonisation and slavery are terrible part of history, but they are part of history. Stop trying to present mankind as this "all loving species" which never did anything wrong. While previous civ games were amazing tools to learn about history, its bad and good parts, this game is just a stupid re-writing, wearing nice pink lenses, thinking its players are too dumb to understand what is ethical and what is not. So disappointed, even after the first few patches... Maybe stop listening to youtubers or influencers and just make a real game for the players, like what you used to do...

🛑 Do not recommend – massive letdown Civilization VII is a technical disaster. Constant crashes, bugs, and graphical glitches – all of which were present at launch and still haven’t been fixed months later. Performance is awful, the AI is a joke, and the new visuals feel half-baked. Instead of enjoying the game, you’re fighting it every turn – not because it’s challenging, but because it’s broken. As a long-time Civ fan: stay far away. Civ VI (or even better V) is still miles better. Thumbs down.

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.

My first Civ game was Revolution and I’ve been hooked ever since. Civ 7 however is a mockery to the franchise, absolutely disgraceful. They are charging more for less, a lot less and lower quality at that. Please save your money and consider playing the older games. You can get them pretty cheap, don’t get scammed

Simply not enjoying the game. You build a civ and it feels like restarting every time an era ends and it simply takes away the momentum and flow. No satisfactory or fun.

Honestly, a really low-quality game. Just doesn't have any appeal like its predecessors did. At first I was all excited but the AI is just SOOOO screwed up.

My cousin and Uncle got me into Colonization as a kid. From there I sought out the original Civ and ultimately ended up on Civ 2. I played that game for an absurd amount of time. Borderline embarrassing. I did much of the same with Civ 3, 4 and then slowed down a bit with Civ 5. All those games were amazing. I loved each and every one. Civ 5 was the last true Civ game in my opinion. The game designer and programmers, artists... the entire team were all amazing. They even brought on a big Civ fan by the name of Ed Beach who contributed to some expansions/DLC. Little did I know at the time that Ed Beach, a boardgame designer would be taking the lead for the next two instalments. Something I later learned that was clearly out of his scope. So along comes Civ 6 with a team led by Ed Beach. I pre-ordered. I got the big box and all the goodies inside. Loaded up the game.... it was TERRIBLE. Most of the players I knew that grew up playing Civ, as well as many others on forums such as Civ Fanatics didn't care for it. We all went back to Civ 5. But Civ 6 was available on EVERYTHING (even your phone!). And Civ 5 had a lot of good advertisements that were resurfacing that helped the popularity of Civ 6. So, a metric ton of new players to the series started with Civ 6 and were unaware just how great this series used to be. They liked the game. But not many were as fanatical about it as previous entries. Again, I despised this game. There were very few elements I liked about it. The game felt like it lacked soul. It was joyless and felt like a chore. So, I wrote the game off and waited YEARS for Civ 7. Finally Civ 7 launches. I'm super excited. Since about Civ 4 reviews were harsh early on. I liked all Civ games up to 5 in their launched form. I think all got better with DLC's as well though. So when I saw some negative reviews I didn't worry about it. But I did worry that people were a little too defensive of the game. I've seen it happen before and its often from people who regret their purchase but have to defend it so they feel justified in their mistake. I was aware of the new "ages" mechanic. I was aware of many of the other changes. I wanted to see how it worked out. Nothing worked out. Its terrible. I absolutely hate the little reset between ages. I hate changing my civ as well. Especially since often there is no true link. I don't like the new leaders. Many do not belong. But the real deep issue is the game has been simplified to the extreme. There is nothing going on in the front or backend. Its so basic. Leader interactions used to have deep impact. They have never been perfect, but declaring war and bringing others with you into battle was amazing. That is removed. Cities used to be important to their leaders. Now, you can start a war, never actually go to war and the Civ will give you a handful of cities to stop the non-existent battles. Resources used to be needed to produce things. No oil? No tanks. This was important for trades too. A Civ without access to something like oil or another resource needed for their wonders or what-have-you would be willing to trade so much more. Now resources have no impact. You can trade them, but it barely changes a thing. They are no longer required for anything really. Its another little points mini-game. You can also have an agreement with another leader to receive gold out of thin air. Thats right! You can both just go "We want more gold" and then get it out of nowhere for several turns. All your actions with the leaders are assigned points. You have to choose what to select based upon these points. The text beside them is in most cases irrelevant. Its just "ooOOooh I can select this option and it'll improve the relationship!". No thought behind it at all. It affects other civ relationships, but its so easy to balance. I could go on much more about how they failed this aspect of the game. The whole economy is simplified too. Just everything is! I enjoy the graphics. I think districts are almost there in terms of being good. But they still suck and require very little thought. If you're stressing out about what to upgrade or not you're wasting your time. This game is not deep and does not require a lot of concentration or tactics. I've only played about 25 hours. I have beat the game several times and sadly used the same tactics each time. I don't like that I would get a victory before I truly wanted one. I would try to delay the victory but its so hard. Even on higher difficulties. I miss the epic/marathon games of before where I could spend days or more working on my civ and expanding. I missed the nuances and how the world would just change due to a couple mistakes, or an unhinged AI. Now all AI's are unhinged. There is no logic behind it. If you want to win you only need to concentrate on gold and happiness. And both of those are easy to be successful with. Everything else, science, military, it all comes into place. I typically start of expanding early, then I place a few military units around the cities. Other civs declare war but never attack due to my literally "just standing there" army. They ask for peace, they give me cities, I keep growing. I get to the next age, rinse and repeat. Then the game ends too early because I win before I even want. I don't even have to aim for a win condition, and if I do, I still win another way. The only challenge in this game is to avoid winning in a manner you don't want too. Ed Beach has killed Civ for me and many others. He has finally fully transformed this game into a full on boardgame. Civ has always felt like a boardgame to some extent. But not like this. You used to feel a lot going on behind the scenes. There were a lot of moving parts. Now its just a bunch of basic incredibly watered down points games. I don't think any expansion or DLC can save this game. It has deep rooted issues right to its core that need to be tackled. And the fact they are selling DLC before the game is even technically done really pisses me off. Its sad that this series ended with 5. Hopefully they can bring on a game designer to lead for the next iteration. I will not be excited for civ 8. I will not be waiting for it. I will not be pre-ordering. If they want me to get excited, bring someone back who actually gets how PC games are supposed to work and the advantages they can have over a boardgame. Bring back Soren Johnson. Bring back Jon Shafer. Bring back Sid himself. I don't care. Just bring back a game designer please. And maybe then I will keep an eye out on Civ 8.

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.

I was hesitant to purchase at first, and now I realize these reviews are bogus. It is a great Game. I actually like the age system, and I thought it was a create addition to give it checkpoints and unique game play without making it feel like the exact game we have had for over a decade.

People say the same things about Civ games every single time. I remember when CIV 6 was absolutely getting trashed on for everything, and now it's referenced as a Godly game, as all before. The game is good, and gets better with every update. A lot of things in reviews have been fixed, or will be added in the update thats gonna launch today. It's good to be critical, but don't let it deter you from this game. I think the criticism is valid on rushing out beta games, but that's not something recent to this franchise, and people are acting like it's a new thing every time. If you dont want to play the Open Beta, don't buy it, and otherwise you can fund its continuity, and enjoy the game, which is fun. It was hell on launch, but only a few months in already and the game is now in a very playable state for everyone. UI has seen tremendous updates, Food isnt useless anymore, we can finally select victory conditions, map isnt trash anymore. There are still a lot of issues and features missing, but I think currently, it's not something that will make you gauge your eyes out, and more of like a 'sad it's not implemented yet'. Overall I think the ages are really good as well. I had my doubts over the course of the time I have been playing, but the more updates in I and some pacing adjustments later I can now say it's been a good idea. You don't snowball to a position of instantly winning the game at turn 200. Now there's still chances for you to get toppled, but you're still positioned in a favourable position, so you have a bit more time to play. I am still sad about the military victory condition, though, as nukes are kind of just removed from the game. There has never been an instance so far where I could every really use it. By the time you have a nuke, you are already winning the game by waiting till the manhattan project is finished, so there is not really a point to the nukes anymore. I think that is my biggest criticism of the game so far. I hope they rework this victory condition. Finally, Game is fun and unique, but not without it's issues. However, a lot of very important issues have been fixed, and it will continue to get better over time. Play it, its fun, but don't think it's gonna be like civ5, or civ6. It's its own civ and plays in its own way. People used to hate on districts, now they love it, and I expect the same to happen with 7. I think 7 has the most interesting combat for example out of all of the civs. Commanders are the best thing to ever have happened.

The game isn't terrible. It just isn't fun. I regret paying $70 for it, but I wouldn't have cared as much if 2K / Firaxis had actually finished the damn thing instead of releasing a buggy, DLC-locked mess that's going to take at least a year of updates to be playable.

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!

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.

This one misses the mark for me. The removal of units at the end of an age makes absolutely no sense. So many little things that make this not fun. Graphically it's pretty. I love the addition of some of the new units based on culture, etc. And you aren't one nationstate throughout? Overall Sid Meier removed some of the best elements of the previous Civ game(s) to add in terrible choices in this one. All these game reviewers... I wonder how many other versions of Civ they played before playing this one? What a shame overall.

I get the complaints, but I have had a blast, and the game keeps getting better!

The only even remotely pleasing thing about this game is the opening when you first launch the game. The choices for leaders seems so odd, almost to the point of pandering. There is no little variety in anything at all, it is as if they forgot this is a Civ game and just tried to make the most low quality product they could in terms of gameplay. Ships taking damage when at sea and not glued to the coast seemed neat at first, but grew ever more tedious as time went on. Having so few options to interact with your cities, or even develop with them missed the mark entirely. If you love the series, this game will break your heart. Nothing that fans of the series love is in here. It comes off as if they decided to just take all the goodwill they have garnered over the years by making good games and squander it on this dumpster fire. Would that I could return it.

I figured I would try this game despite the mostly negative reviews. While the negative reviews seem valid, I thought maybe playing the game with a different perspective and avoiding comparisons to Civ 6 would produce something new and interesting. And then the game crashed on startup. After spending a few hours trying all the fixes, the game never proceeded beyond the initial settings screen. It seems many people are having this problem. I'll probably come back in a year or so for a second chance when they finally release a production quality experience.

I’ve played over 130 hours of Civ VI and was really looking forward to Civ VII, but it’s been a big letdown. The game crashes randomly, and when playing online, everyone has to quit and rejoin just to keep going. It ruins the experience. On top of that, the gameplay feels completely different from Civ VI—and not in a good way. It’s confusing, poorly explained, complicated, and just not fun to learn. This isn’t something that patches can fix. Want a good Civ experience? Play Civ 5, or 6. I hope that Civ VIII is better but I am losing hope.

just don't not worth the money they really messed up the game feel and the freedom of the game

Game is truly a horror show and is honestly sad considering how good the last one was. All they had to do was give us CIV 6 with no more cartoons but, they did not. In fact they shipped what is now to date the WORST CIV experience ever made. The Age Transformations gimmick is what truly kills the game.

I've been playing Civ since Civ3, and I really wanted to love this one too. Sadly, it's gone too far in a new direction that isn't want Civ was, as far as I see it. Old timers, I'd say stick to your old favorite version. If you're tempted, then just buy the base version, and see what it's about. All the DLC that showed up so fast to get you spend $50 to $100 extra on things that once upon a time would have been a part of the base game are things I'll never discover; because the game doesn't draw me in the way Civ always did historically. Sad day.

I guess every great civilization falls...this one was sad though. Logged thousands of hours into the series, this one is trash. Uninstalled.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kfR2UqnXM4 GIVE US COOL MAPS BACK. FIX YOUR GAME. YEP, some featuers are cool. BUT THE GAME IS MISSING soooooo MANYYYY featuers mechanincs systems etc.... i think the game is 20% done.