Sid Meier's Civilization VI

 PC
User Score
7.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1628 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 947 out of 1628
  2. Mixed: 376 out of 1628
  3. Negative: 305 out of 1628
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. halldors78
    Jan 3, 2017
    6
    Started the game and it looks very good and plays greatly and all that but the main thing i have against it is that i can't use the num keys for unit movement wich has been possible in any civilization up till now, that just barely makes it playable on my laptop, except when im sitting in a very good position with a real mouse instead of the touchpad. and until they will fix this wichStarted the game and it looks very good and plays greatly and all that but the main thing i have against it is that i can't use the num keys for unit movement wich has been possible in any civilization up till now, that just barely makes it playable on my laptop, except when im sitting in a very good position with a real mouse instead of the touchpad. and until they will fix this wich should be this big of a problem i will not play the game.… Expand
  2. euu
    Oct 23, 2016
    6
    It's better than vanilla Civ 5 but nowhere near as good as Civ 5 with all the expansions. The main problem it suffers from is lack of innovation. Not a lot of things have changed since the previous title. Combat is the same, trade routes work the same, so does religion, enemy AI is just as stupid, etc.

    There are some areas where the game did some modifications though, the most    It's better than vanilla Civ 5 but nowhere near as good as Civ 5 with all the expansions. The main problem it suffers from is lack of innovation. Not a lot of things have changed since the previous title. Combat is the same, trade routes work the same, so does religion, enemy AI is just as stupid, etc.

    There are some areas where the game did some modifications though, the most noticeable being the Districts. This makes you "specialize" your cities as you can no longer build all types of buildings in the city and have to think very well what you build considering the amount of tiles you have available. The social policy system has been changed as well, for the worse in my opinion, as now you gain some social cards when researching a social policy and you can select the bonus of a number of these cards depending on what goverment you have. Again, like in Civ 5 there is no downside to any form of goverment and some of the combinations you make don't even make sense(for example you can drag the Rationalism Card to a Theocracy and you don't get any penalty).

    One thing that I liked is that you can boost your research of Tech and Social by making certain actions in the game. For example, building a number of Quaries can boost your Research towards Mansory, reducing the time you need to reserach this tech, or defeating barbarians can boost you research of Bronze Working and so on. This is the best addition in my opinion as you are no longer need to put a lot of effort in creating Science and Culture, especially if you like to play Military.

    I would rate this higher if it wasn't however for the horrible presentation of the game. I think everyone is already familiar with the horrible iPad graphics. Look, nobody expected this to have GTA 5 graphics and you can talk all you want about muh unique art style but there is no excuse for a 60 dollar game in 2016 to look like a Fremium iPad game, especially when it looks worse than its predecessor. The sound isn't any better either. The Main Menu theme is fine and the choice of Sean Bean as the narrator is excelent, but the music in the main game sucks. Previous Civ games had classical music to listen to as you built your empire. This game has the type of generic crap that you usually hear in Facebook games.

    My 2 cents? Wait for the price to drop or at least for some mods to show up.    … Expand
  3. gamerINchief
    Oct 22, 2016
    6
    In almost every way, this is a step back from Civilization V. It actually plays and feels like it should have come before Civilization V and not after.

    It really is hard to not compare VI to V. Civilization V (Vanilla) is such an exceptional game in its fundamentals, mechanics, combat, accessibility, replayability, learning curve, engagement, user interface, etc. The only aspects in    In almost every way, this is a step back from Civilization V. It actually plays and feels like it should have come before Civilization V and not after.

    It really is hard to not compare VI to V. Civilization V (Vanilla) is such an exceptional game in its fundamentals, mechanics, combat, accessibility, replayability, learning curve, engagement, user interface, etc. The only aspects in which VI outshines V is in a much deeper diplomacy. Almost everything else falls flat.

    The atmosphere in this game is non-existent. Wonders don't feel rare or great, or give you that sense of accomplishment after completing them. User Interface is absolutely terrible. I should not have to battle the UI when trying to play through the game. If anyone has spent at least 100 turns playing the game you know exactly what I mean. The game feels so dull and dare I say just boring. Who cares if the civic system is more "complex" than Civ V's social policy system if I can't even feign interest in continuing to play one more turn? The graphics is just inexcusable for a 2016 AAA series backed by a AAA publisher. I don't have a problem with the style but the quality is so poor. Its like the graphics were developed by a low budget indie developer. I'm a devout fan of Civ but any review for this game above a 7 is simply not accurate.

    You have to be able to draw and capture the interest of a gamer. This game is not at all accessible for new comers or even many old fans. It has a slow, complex learning curve, and for those with not the interest to keep playing the game they will never learn it because the atmosphere of the game is too uninteresting/unaccesible to get to the intricacies of the new features.

    I would go back to playing Civ V if I hadn't already spent the past six years playing it. I wasn't expecting VI to be exactly like V or to even be better than V. I was however expecting it to uphold the exceptional quality the series has made for itself. All of these perfect scores and near perfect scores from both user reviews and critic reviews I have to shake my head at. I can guarantee these are from die-hard Civ fans with just a slight bias. I'm as big a fan of Civ as the next guy on here but I will reiterate this again: any review for this game above a 7 is simply not accurate.    … Expand
  4. Violett
    Dec 25, 2016
    6
    Another Civilization ... Yawn
    Well, I didn't rate this game low, because actually the game is quite good for step-by-step strategy game - with one BUT. This game is great BUT only for those who play Civ for the first time.
    Graphics is good, the game has its depth, but we saw it already - in Civ 5, Civ 4, and so on. For me the best Civs was Civ 2 and 3 - Civ 5 was good also, but this is    Another Civilization ... Yawn
    Well, I didn't rate this game low, because actually the game is quite good for step-by-step strategy game - with one BUT. This game is great BUT only for those who play Civ for the first time.
    Graphics is good, the game has its depth, but we saw it already - in Civ 5, Civ 4, and so on. For me the best Civs was Civ 2 and 3 - Civ 5 was good also, but this is another Civ with updated graphics and slightly updated gameplay. AI is still stupid as a trunk. Same units, same technologies. I understand there is nothing to replace tank and spearman in Civ games, but why to make another same game then? What next? Civ 7, Civ 8, Civ 9?    … Expand
  5. tokonju
    Oct 21, 2016
    6
    I tried it, and i don't like it...
    Graphic is just bad, colors are not good at all, very low texture resolution, not very well drown if you ask me...
    I also don't like the map, mini map and fow... All in all step back from civ v... Sound is fine a guess. Gameplay is just boring, idk tbh, too much barbarians and no city bombardment, i really don't think that is realistic scenario...    I tried it, and i don't like it...
    Graphic is just bad, colors are not good at all, very low texture resolution, not very well drown if you ask me...
    I also don't like the map, mini map and fow... All in all step back from civ v...
    Sound is fine a guess.
    Gameplay is just boring, idk tbh, too much barbarians and no city bombardment, i really don't think that is realistic scenario...
    Nice features like districts, various bonuses etc...

    I hope that they will add more civs soon... and fix some stupid ideas along the way... Like someone said wait for GOTY :)...

    Also, one big "-" for all this great scores that game received, it's a joke as always... I only read user scores anyway, and even the high user scores are given from brain dead people or "bots", because there is no way that this game now worth 10... there are just too many little things that didn't mention that just looks and feels cheap...    … Expand
  6. TheWaffle
    Oct 22, 2017
    6
    Six years after Civ 5, I wish this game were more of an improvement. It's nowhere close to the massive step forward from Civ 4 to 5. And while some elements have improved, others feel lacking. I'm glad to see the return of the government system, but it feels underdeveloped, and the ability to simply swap out policy cards with no political blowback feels very out of place. You're ostensiblySix years after Civ 5, I wish this game were more of an improvement. It's nowhere close to the massive step forward from Civ 4 to 5. And while some elements have improved, others feel lacking. I'm glad to see the return of the government system, but it feels underdeveloped, and the ability to simply swap out policy cards with no political blowback feels very out of place. You're ostensibly rewriting the social fabric of your civ, and yet it's just pick and choose. I'd like to see more penalties for switching, and some synergies with certain governments and policies. While I appreciate the faster pace, the maps seem much tighter, with almost no neutral ground left after the first 50 or so turns. The religion mechanic is mostly unchanged, and still feels like an afterthought, with little decision making beyond send-moar-missionaries. There's even less difference between great writers, artists, musicians now, which is a shame. This really just feels like another game released with missing content just to force the player to buy the expansion pack. The district system is more of a gimmick than a new mechanic, since having more districts doesn't allow multiple production queues or anything. The AI is still mystifying, with the computer proposing horribly one-sided deals and rejecting perfectly reasonable deals, and they seem to love declaring war on me even when I have a massive army/tech advantage. Diplomacy victory is gone, there's no economic victory. If it weren't for the wonky new graphical scheme, it would be hard to pick Civ 6 apart from a Civ 5 expansion.… Expand
  7. HaloFever
    Oct 13, 2021
    6
    At least it is a Civilization game. When Civ 6 was released, I was skeptical of the ugly cartoonish art style and the district system. After playing on iPad and now on PC (technically Mac), I am still skeptical. Though not as bad as Civ 3, Civ 6 has some of the worst changes in the series.

    The game kind of looks like Civilization, but instead of playing as some kind of world history,    At least it is a Civilization game. When Civ 6 was released, I was skeptical of the ugly cartoonish art style and the district system. After playing on iPad and now on PC (technically Mac), I am still skeptical. Though not as bad as Civ 3, Civ 6 has some of the worst changes in the series.

    The game kind of looks like Civilization, but instead of playing as some kind of world history, global conflict simulator, the game plays like a board game that has a too few many rules. Instead of government, you have card that you play. Government is essentially meaningless. Choices are meaningless. What matters is using cards and board piece placement to maximize bonuses and then hitting end turn until you gain enough points in whatever to win.

    The district system is interesting and not in a good way. Instead of building improvements in a city, improvements are spread across the map. This means that wonders of the world like the Great Library will take up 100 square miles of land. (Maybe they need the space for parking.) It also means that if you want to build a library to increase science, you first have to build a campus and then a library. You can't just choose library and have the campus auto-built with it. (The delayed gratification if found throughout the game. Build a Missionary or a Rock Band and then waste its first turn giving it a promotion.) Need a quick boost to happiness? First you have to build an entertainment district before building an arena. How do the citizens feel about this? They have to drive 100s of miles to get from their neighborhood to the factory district. The whole district system is mocked by the game itself when builders have the options of making seaside resorts and solar farms without the need for a district.

    2K Games undercut the districts (and wonders) with the changes to how cities gain points for victory. Civ V went too far in the direction of fewer cities built big (tall gameplay). Civ VI goes to far the other way with no limit on the number of cities (wide gameplay). Every game benefits from investing in settlers to found more cities. Why build a district when you can build a whole new city? Why build an industrial zone when you can have more mines? The developers are hell bent on cost benefit so no mechanic is broken. But when every mechanic is nerfed, none of the mechanics matter.

    Civ 6 also kills many quality of life changes enjoyed in previous Civ games. A player cannot automate a city, so a world winning wide empire leads to toiling in tedious torment. Even in Civ V, which championed small empires, you could take over the entire world and set up all the captured cities as puppet governments. The a.i. would prioritize gold in every captured city and that was fine because gold is useful. Civ 6 doesn't even have an option to set the city to auto-generate projects like making more science.

    War is not great but it does include many of the strategic advancements from Civ 5. The barbarians in the early game are a nightmare. They always have the best weapons and generate 3 or 4 units at a time. It's like the early rushes from Aztecs in Civ 5, only now every game has a rush. Because builders must be rebuilt after every 3 uses, pillaging is a real pain in the ass. Units are so broken out by era that by the time you build an army to deal with a threat, it becomes obsolete. Meanwhile, the barbarians you marched toward for the last 20 turns are spawning the latest gunpowder units. Just so fun for players. And because 2K Games didn't know it wanted for strategic gameplay, armies are back.

    Did I mention the terrible selection of leaders? I like that addition of new and interesting leaders. I don't like the removal of old favorites like Caesar, Napoleon, and Lincoln. And please stop releasing games in a sad state only to sell the players more content with DLC packs. This is why I always wait so long to buy games. (Full disclosure: my son bought Civ 6 with all the DLC. I've been playing it through the Steam family sharing feature. )

    There are good additions. The district system means a player can plop down Golden Gate Bridge between two landmasses or dig a canal through a continent. Spies are more useful than Civ 5. Religious combat is its own thing (maybe too much its own thing). All-in-all, Civ 6 is the kind of Civ release that really makes you think "When is the next one?"    … Expand
  8. Braggi
    Oct 25, 2016
    6
    Flickering UI was in the end resolved by a simple driver update.
    First impression: a chatty tutorial that can not be saved (ORLY, Firaxis??).
    Very old issue: Lack of special resources still completely prevents combat unit production. Stupid. STUPID. My Civi immersion once died long time ago when being forced to build horse carriages instead of tanks ... Overall enough fresh ideas for    Flickering UI was in the end resolved by a simple driver update.
    First impression: a chatty tutorial that can not be saved (ORLY, Firaxis??).
    Very old issue: Lack of special resources still completely prevents combat unit production. Stupid. STUPID. My Civi immersion once died long time ago when being forced to build horse carriages instead of tanks ...

    Overall enough fresh ideas for someone who quit after III. Cities now grow organically over the map, no dedicated screen. Craftsmen with limited actions are ok with me, a consequence of playing on the main map only.
    I may tinker my own religion. There are now two trees to explore - science and culture, the second for social progress. Fine tuning your own government with policies is nice, the execution as text cards in boardgame style in not. Leaders are generated, providing small boosts but often needing very specific requirements to be triggered.
    Overall interesting dimensions, but too much micromanagement for the gain.

    There seems to be no limit to a civi's expansion, which IMO is a balance issue. Spamming settlers seems a valid strategy. Minor Civs to interact with, good. Initial survival pressure comes from barbarians roaming the lands, manageable.

    New techs pop up very fast from the start, especially as two trees trigger in parallel. Pacing feels strange.
    Treasury became an issue for me, with lots of tradeoff, felt ok. Compared to the old CIV also keept troop count lower, good. Units gain experience and may level with a small tree of improvements.

    AI seems stupid; sorry. Not impressed by diplomacy or war strategy yet.

    Overall: Tons of details, but hard to get the big picture.
    Will be a nice detraction to explore casually, but I don't see me spending lots of time with it.    … Expand
  9. micheldbruin
    Oct 15, 2017
    6
    There is a lot to like but also a lot not to like. The game takes forever load, go make that coffee meanwhile, the gameplay is fluent sometimes, other times a bit laggy. Very often the game won't close and I'll need to log out to get back to the desktop. The soundtrack, not very entertaining for long. I like the new featured which were introduced. Other players never respect anotherThere is a lot to like but also a lot not to like. The game takes forever load, go make that coffee meanwhile, the gameplay is fluent sometimes, other times a bit laggy. Very often the game won't close and I'll need to log out to get back to the desktop. The soundtrack, not very entertaining for long. I like the new featured which were introduced. Other players never respect another player's religion, even if they promise to do so. I never start religions anymore as a consequence. The other players are a bit tame for my taste and the barbarians far too aggressive. A barbarian camp will pop up and creates a barbarian every turn for 5 to 10 turns which forces you to keep an army. If you eradicate the camp it will pop up again even before your warriors have returned home. I'm fighting barbarians far more than other players. The units are less looking than in civ5 (boring legion and samurai). What's up with the weird world wonders! Not wonders at all most of them. Truth be told, I like civ5 better.… Expand
  10. Chucklenut
    Mar 28, 2020
    6
    An otherwise solid sequel hampered by DLC dependency and poor single-player balance. Civ 5 was criticized at launch for lacking most of the features Civ 4 had with its two expansion packs, making it feel like a shallower experience with prettier graphics until its own DLC was released. Learning nothing from this (or perhaps learning people will begrudgingly accept being nickel and dimedAn otherwise solid sequel hampered by DLC dependency and poor single-player balance. Civ 5 was criticized at launch for lacking most of the features Civ 4 had with its two expansion packs, making it feel like a shallower experience with prettier graphics until its own DLC was released. Learning nothing from this (or perhaps learning people will begrudgingly accept being nickel and dimed for their niche), Civ 6 suffers from this same issue and is anemic of past features, civilizations, and wonders in the base game. While it does feel like a complete game once you buy all of it's current DLC, are you really willing to spend the full $167 when for it? If you live and breathe Civ, maybe you are, but at the very least wait for a sale so you don't embarrass yourself too harshly.… Expand
  11. Moo-vies
    Nov 30, 2016
    6
    Civilization VI is just more of the same with bad AI, not enough variety, not enough particularities in the leaders skill and a pointless game design beyond the year 1000 AD.

    Plenty of people who can't handle change will complain about the graphics (who cares, they do the job and you will cut the animated leaders talking after a few games to stop being interrupted all the time). Like    Civilization VI is just more of the same with bad AI, not enough variety, not enough particularities in the leaders skill and a pointless game design beyond the year 1000 AD.

    Plenty of people who can't handle change will complain about the graphics (who cares, they do the job and you will cut the animated leaders talking after a few games to stop being interrupted all the time).

    Like all 4X wannabes these days, you will anyway have to wait 3-5 years to get the extensions, mods and a complete game experience. The game also lacks mod support at the moment besides a few UI fixes and customization, so we have to wait until mod tools are released which could introduce some rules variety in the gameplay).

    I had a lot of time to play Civilization VI since release and got rapidly saturated.
    More than anything else, the infuriating times between turns are absolutely awful when you go beyond a small map. This removed a whole point in the subjective grade I gave to Civ VI.

    The lack of variety between games is a huge downer. I think the game needs to go further into leader specialization and really think hard about the mid game slog that goes all the way to the end. To be honest, the only motivation to end a game is global thermonuclear war, but once you have done that once, there is not much reason to end a game.

    My biggest critic is the kind of dissociation between units and production / science. Moving your armies should go way faster so the player could actually DO something. Right now, producing units then moving them around is just a time waste considering how much else you could do with these turns in terms of development to your cities.

    I like the workers having only 3 charges by default, it introduces a bit of dynamism.
    I wish wonders could be built outside the 3 tiles limit of the city itself. Wonders should be restricted to the territory, not the cities.

    With time, Civilization VI will undoubtedly become a really good Civilization if Firaxis brings as much attention to it as they did for Civ 5, but we will all be paying a high price for the finished game again ...
    So yeah, 6, is generous.    … Expand
  12. gordonbays
    Oct 24, 2016
    6
    For all those bored of the past civ (Civilization) games, this version is perfect. Civilization 6 introduces new mechanics, new resources and much more.
    One of the greatest things that was upgraded is the screen panels. Taking the religion panel as example, now it shows how many followers you got and much more.
    The foes leaders interaction screen looks gorgeous now and more helpful. I    For all those bored of the past civ (Civilization) games, this version is perfect. Civilization 6 introduces new mechanics, new resources and much more.
    One of the greatest things that was upgraded is the screen panels. Taking the religion panel as example, now it shows how many followers you got and much more.
    The foes leaders interaction screen looks gorgeous now and more helpful.
    I felt the strategy more balanced and harder to create a snowball economy, witch is great.
    The main screen music is amazing, just like the new UI (user interface).
    Overall the game keeps its well polished concept, with decent graphics and perfomace.
    Im surprised that after several hours playing i didn't had any crashes.

    The dark side of Civ 6

    Although its very personal, i didn't like the new cartoon art concept, it makes me feel playing a cheap tablet game.
    Some new screens are confusing, poluted and the icons don't help the player figure out at a glance whats going on.
    The new leader interaction screen is very anoying, there is a long talk and the options take ages to fade on. Of course you can bypass this mess hiting ESC key but if you do this on a incorrect timing you close the whole screen.
    One change that shows the new face of civilizations its the promotion screen. Instead of a simple panel with butons like previous versions we have now a screen that obliterates all your vision and show less promotions than before. More cliks, less resources and all for sake of a better looking UI.

    Final conclusion

    The game went to a next level, thats sure, althoug i don,t like the new concept. The new mechanics are decent, and some old ones received great improvements.
    My biggest concern is about gameplay. There is way too much resources in this game made just for a better looking and tablet users instead of being quick and simple for desktop players. And a lot more clicks needed to do same tasks.
    The units, techs and strategic resources are reduced to a level that i never saw before.
    I hope that modding comunity and dlcs bring more content to the game and fix all the anoyances. Untill then im strugling to give it a score of 7 out 10.    … Expand
  13. kiptenbingo
    Oct 24, 2016
    6
    Initially I was excited and impressed with my first playthrough. A few of the features seem to work sporadically, music and animations have a tendancy to drop out. Graphics are okay but nothing special. Music is nice when it works. Game play is pretty slow and even after 300 turns you might be limited to making one click per turn. I do like the game but think we need to see a lot ofInitially I was excited and impressed with my first playthrough. A few of the features seem to work sporadically, music and animations have a tendancy to drop out. Graphics are okay but nothing special. Music is nice when it works. Game play is pretty slow and even after 300 turns you might be limited to making one click per turn. I do like the game but think we need to see a lot of improvements in the next few months. AI is terrible, lost count of how many times I have been invaded and outnumbered 10-1 but end up victorious in just a few turns and claiming multiple cities in the peace treaty. I know it is still early in the games life but I have to say that currently the potential outweighs the delivered content.… Expand
  14. TatsMcGee
    Sep 8, 2018
    6
    I have finally done it. I have finally purchased a gaming PC and I can finally start playing PC games. This is a game that I have owned for a long time but I could never play it because my PC couldn’t handle the mid game. Now that I have finally sat down and play through an entire game, I feel underwhelmed. Civilization V is one of my top 5 favorite games of all time and Civ VI just feelsI have finally done it. I have finally purchased a gaming PC and I can finally start playing PC games. This is a game that I have owned for a long time but I could never play it because my PC couldn’t handle the mid game. Now that I have finally sat down and play through an entire game, I feel underwhelmed. Civilization V is one of my top 5 favorite games of all time and Civ VI just feels lacking.

    I love the Art style and its still turn-based and part of the problem is I don’t know what I’m doing. I will continue to play it and hope eventually that the game will click with me. Civilization Revolution was the first Civ game that I played and it clicked with me instantly, Civ V was the first PC version and that was instant as well. This just feels off to me.

    I’ll keep at it and maybe expansions will help but for now, its not just not doing it for me.    … Expand
  15. cottandy
    Oct 10, 2017
    6
    I see just a raw version of Civ 5 right now. That's what the 6th is.
    Spent a great amount of time playing every previous Civ... but this time it made me sad after a few hours of game.
    Without doubt, the predecessor was just the best and it was way too difficult to outperform it! But what was the point of spending years to make the same old game with minor changes, which made it worse    I see just a raw version of Civ 5 right now. That's what the 6th is.
    Spent a great amount of time playing every previous Civ... but this time it made me sad after a few hours of game.

    Without doubt, the predecessor was just the best and it was way too difficult to outperform it! But what was the point of spending years to make the same old game with minor changes, which made it worse than it was? It's almost like the history with annual FIFA games.

    AI is poor! No, in previous versions it wasn't the best, but this time once again it's the worst ever.
    Even the graphics are better in the 5th than in 6th.
    Civ 6 is full of good ideas, but they didn't shape them up.

    Hope they will fix everything with patches and make it a better game. But right now it's not worth spending money. It's better to play Civ 5, because it's a finished fine game.    … Expand
  16. Dandy_Dust
    Oct 22, 2016
    6
    Under the restriction that this comes as a first impression: They said all the DLCs would now be implemented with the game from the start - OH REALLY??? --> No WORLD MAPS with TRUE STARTING LOCATIONS, no turning the city - states off, no handling distances between cities and so on and so forth.... I don´t like the PLAYCARD - LOOK of Politics, if I want to play tabletop - games I´d turn toUnder the restriction that this comes as a first impression: They said all the DLCs would now be implemented with the game from the start - OH REALLY??? --> No WORLD MAPS with TRUE STARTING LOCATIONS, no turning the city - states off, no handling distances between cities and so on and so forth.... I don´t like the PLAYCARD - LOOK of Politics, if I want to play tabletop - games I´d turn to Magic - cards or something. AI - REAL AI, that´s what I expect in the year 2016. I am disappointed.… Expand
  17. akbil
    Oct 24, 2016
    6
    AI is most probably the element of utmost importance in single player games. And look. Firaxis didnt get any lesson from Civ 5 by kicking out the AI team from the company. Gosh, god damn it. Who tests the AI feature of the game, is it the team that programs it or some really dumb guys. then answer is clear, "yeah yeah it is working just fine, just as it did in civ5". Examples; I have theAI is most probably the element of utmost importance in single player games. And look. Firaxis didnt get any lesson from Civ 5 by kicking out the AI team from the company. Gosh, god damn it. Who tests the AI feature of the game, is it the team that programs it or some really dumb guys. then answer is clear, "yeah yeah it is working just fine, just as it did in civ5". Examples; I have the military power x3 of one civ and he/she stills declares war on me. In real world, if you dont like superpowers you just shut the f.k up, dont declare war on them. Second, civs declare war on me but since they are dumb, i can turn around the war and they beg for peace. if I dont accept their peace offer, then I will be the warmonger. Shame on you AI testers, ALL of you.

    And shame on some sites too, including metacrticis who reviewed the game in less than 24 hours and give it 9-10. Congratulations, we can expect this much dumb AI in civ 7 now.

    And as for the religion, my holy city/religion was wiped out by foreign apostles etc, cant train any units of my original religion anymore. So I am trying to revive my religion with the help of Jerusalem :))    … Expand
  18. funnytrollolo
    Oct 28, 2016
    6
    I tried to love this game but at this moment I simply can’t. The game is not engaging enough and feels raw. I keep my fingers crossed that the reason to release it in this incomplete state was not to milk cash from us but rather to accelerate bug fixing based on inputs from broader audience. We’ll see in the coming few months anyways, but for now…
    1) AI is extremely stupid in single    I tried to love this game but at this moment I simply can’t. The game is not engaging enough and feels raw. I keep my fingers crossed that the reason to release it in this incomplete state was not to milk cash from us but rather to accelerate bug fixing based on inputs from broader audience. We’ll see in the coming few months anyways, but for now…
    1) AI is extremely stupid in single player game. I mean, we hear all the buzz about new technologies, artificial intelligence & machine learning algorithm that adapt to the user behavior – well, it’s not about Civ 6. I started playing at the King difficulty being experienced player of Civ 5, but the gameplay is too simple and not engaging. I announced surprise war to my neighbor who in the agenda hates this, by stealing the settler. AI had 5 times more army than I and pulled 7 units next to one of my cities where I had just 1 warrior. And guess what – nothing followed, apparently they came to have a party or something next to my city, just standing there and ignoring what was happening. In 10 turns and pulled in/build 4 archers and smashed that crowd. What the hell is that? Why do I need to care about diplomacy, city planning, trade what so ever, if I can simply skim through the game by doing bare minimum and still win?
    2) User Interface – holy cow, who designed that? The scaling of menus is extremely bad; the notifications during AI turn, so called “gossips”, simply stack at the middle of the screen covering the game window and other menus, and I always have to wait until they disappear. I don’t know if this is an issue of HD resolution but hell, my PC is not strong enough to play it on higher resolutions. The science and civic trees design is horrible and provide little to know information which can be a bottle neck for new players. Also I am missing Demographics report a lot, the new reporting options are oversimplified and does not provide comprehensive picture on where the player stand against the opponents.
    3) Some of the BASE content is missing, like Diplomatic victory mechanics. I mean it is there but it is simply disabled. I am 100% confident it will come in DLC to milk more cash… On top, I do miss the ideology mechanics which was extremely powerful tool in Civ 5 to backstab your opponents by converting several other nations to your ideology and smashing the happiness level of your opponent.
    4) The graphic design choice is questionable. Most people including myself don’t like it, too flashy colors, too childish and cartoony objects. It’s like playing Torchlight after Diablo 1. Anyways, I can live with that but I don’t really understand why the game is so demanding to hardware? Apparently the engine is simply not optimized.
    5) I don’t like the switch to city-level happiness and housing bottleneck. It forces players to go wide and tall empires are in disadvantage. First 50-100 turns now all about spamming cities.
    To wrap up, it’s not all so bad, it’s still good old Civ but as I mentioned earlier it’s far from being polished. I had a feeling that I am playing alpha version, not final release. The best improvement so far is by all means the districts mechanics. It forces you to build more specialized cities and avoid the MEGA city approach although this may be a disadvantage for people who enjoy 1 city challenge. I like the fact there are no overpowered Wonders anymore which eliminate the “rush mode” to get Pyramids or Great Library. The new government mechanics is also a good idea, although requires some improvements as well because at the moment you can overthrow your governments without any significant impact.
    Net, net, if the perfect game is 10, I would reduce it by 3 because of stupid AI and by 1 for the rest of the issues. Civilization 6 gets a 6 score from me.

    Ideal Civ game recipe from my POV
    Take from Civ 5:
    Visual Design
    AI (improve it to make more sophisticated)
    User Interface
    Culture Tree & Ideology
    Take from Civ 6:
    City Development
    Science
    Government
    Religion
    Military
    Barbs
    City States
    Diplomacy & Espionage
    Commerce
    Mix it altogether and release!    … Expand
  19. RodrigoLolli
    Nov 4, 2016
    6
    Civilization is my prefered game. I play it since civilization 1.
    I aways like to feel like I was in the game and been the comander of that people. But I think the caricature drawnning is not good for it.
    I expected more of the AI, graphics more realistic, imagens showing in the conquest of a city like in CIV2. The Palace been contructed by people happyness, and some think new, like    Civilization is my prefered game. I play it since civilization 1.
    I aways like to feel like I was in the game and been the comander of that people. But I think the caricature drawnning is not good for it.
    I expected more of the AI, graphics more realistic, imagens showing in the conquest of a city like in CIV2.
    The Palace been contructed by people happyness, and some think new, like newspaper telling the results of the wars. The concel of ministers should be more elaborated, with faces expressions like in the pasts civilizations.
    For me, Civilization 4 is still the best. and civ5 is still better then 6.

    I liked the roads and workes sistem, because we wast less time working roads.
    I will play civ 6, but I begin to wait for civ 7    … Expand
  20. Xxdaniels751xX
    May 13, 2017
    6
    I was looking forward to playing this new delivery since I found out I was going to leave. The advances that I had seen excited me, it seemed a good twist to a game that goes for the sixth installment and does not have a story to follow like those of other genres. I tried it and I must say I was quite disappointed.

    AI is schizophrenic. One shift asks you to send a delegation, you accept    I was looking forward to playing this new delivery since I found out I was going to leave. The advances that I had seen excited me, it seemed a good twist to a game that goes for the sixth installment and does not have a story to follow like those of other genres. I tried it and I must say I was quite disappointed.

    AI is schizophrenic. One shift asks you to send a delegation, you accept it but if you want to do the same, they will not let you. Five shifts hate you. At ten they declare war on you and you do not know what the **** you did to make them angry.

    The novelties, although I think they are noble in their proposals, they lack to be polished. The districts take too long to do, and although I understand that the idea is specialization, forcing you to do the aqueduct and the workshop (because you do not grow more) does not leave time for the rest.

    Religion is very annoying. If you do not fund an entry gives you much advantage, not to mention how unbearable it is to see hordes of missionaries bothering where they should not.
    The technological tree is the same as always. Eurekas are fine, but they help a lot to finish the tree quickly. If only they added more technologies ....
    The resources that are almost surplus, are very abundant, almost that you do not need to trade the strategic ones, and the luxury ones without the happiness lose much grace.

    Anyway, I hope they take out one or two expansions to fix it. Although it has good intentions in the changes, they are badly shaped    … Expand
  21. M3TAmeat
    Dec 5, 2018
    6
    Fact is, I just like the Civilization series and the gameplay too much, as that I could leave out a part. But unfortunately I am already thinking since the last two parts more and more to buy the game for the release.
    And sorry, normally I would give a 7 out of 10 for the initial teething problems, broken AI and mediocre balancing. But due to the growing, ridiculous DLC policy, I can not    Fact is, I just like the Civilization series and the gameplay too much, as that I could leave out a part. But unfortunately I am already thinking since the last two parts more and more to buy the game for the release.
    And sorry, normally I would give a 7 out of 10 for the initial teething problems, broken AI and mediocre balancing. But due to the growing, ridiculous DLC policy, I can not agree more than 6 in 10 for myself.    … Expand
  22. Babutto
    Oct 1, 2019
    6
    Pros:
    - graphics;
    - district system; - units, battles, promotions, research, culture, victories. Cons: - diplomacy is the same **** as usual. If you become strong, everybody hates you. They started using the system of diplomatic points, but you cannot win it even if you have more than others, guys will block your votes; grudge against others doesn't do much if you don't want to    Pros:
    - graphics;
    - district system;
    - units, battles, promotions, research, culture, victories.

    Cons:
    - diplomacy is the same **** as usual. If you become strong, everybody hates you. They started using the system of diplomatic points, but you cannot win it even if you have more than others, guys will block your votes; grudge against others doesn't do much if you don't want to start the war;
    - diplomatic relations themselves do not provide many options. TW series moves forward, here they stuck the same for YEARS. Your allies ALWAYS spy on you and even if you catch the spies keep doing it;
    - governors are useless, city states are less useful then in 5th;
    - AI, workers system should be upgraded for sure. Military engeneer to build railroads? Really?

    Overall: the game contains good ideas, BUT the series should boost their diplomatic side, improve workers, AI, maybe improve research that will contain alternatives that will affect you in a long term and make every discovery valuable.
    Beyond Earth by far is more interesting.    … Expand
  23. Pirocr07
    Dec 31, 2020
    6
    The game is enjoyable but the main thing with it is the AI and the difficulties in the game. There is a big change between “Prince” and “King”, not even going to mention how hard is to play in difficulties like “Inmortal”. Basically the AI is super dumb in all difficulties but it gets advantages from the beginning and in combat, which makes it very difficult to win a game in higherThe game is enjoyable but the main thing with it is the AI and the difficulties in the game. There is a big change between “Prince” and “King”, not even going to mention how hard is to play in difficulties like “Inmortal”. Basically the AI is super dumb in all difficulties but it gets advantages from the beginning and in combat, which makes it very difficult to win a game in higher difficulties, I feel like it is possible to do it with certain civilizations and it certain scenarios only. Science is super overvalued, the amenities system is a little bit complicated and the royalty system is a little bit annoying too (this last thing is optional). Apart from that is a good game, obviously if you are on pc you can make some changes and “fix” the difficulty problem taking away some of those crazy advantages but then you will probably end up playing like in prince difficulty. There are plenty of civilizations and there are multiple ways to win, some easier than others but still, it gives more options for you.… Expand
  24. tmsmith3
    Aug 3, 2020
    6
    Each component of the game seems to have no effect or of little consequence to all of the other components. Still very fun, and the dlc is worth it
  25. Oshiri_Maeda
    Aug 7, 2020
    6
    Great game, very pleasant to start your own empire. But God, it is so tedious later in the game, every turn takes sooo long, and there is no action. Just building stuff and waiting for it to be built
  26. buddookan
    Feb 12, 2021
    6
    Mega nieczytelna, bzdurne zasady, AI tragiczne, nudna i mnóstwo błędów. Najgorsza od czasów jedynki.
  27. KTheSlayer
    Jun 18, 2021
    6
    Much more casual and nice-looking in the first time, but very low in replaying potential
  28. PetyaBiszeps
    Aug 25, 2022
    6
    That's first CIV i'm playing in and it's interesting and immersive enough. It has it's own problems, bad optimization, some weird menu bugs. Also i have to admit, that my experience was interesting at the start until 60-70% of game, after you get tanks, airplanes and other stuff it's getting boring, maybe it's just me, i don't really know. But overall i would rate it something between 6-7That's first CIV i'm playing in and it's interesting and immersive enough. It has it's own problems, bad optimization, some weird menu bugs. Also i have to admit, that my experience was interesting at the start until 60-70% of game, after you get tanks, airplanes and other stuff it's getting boring, maybe it's just me, i don't really know. But overall i would rate it something between 6-7 and if i could i would rate it 6.5, but if i have to pick between 6 and 7 i will go with 6. It's okay but it COULD be better.… Expand
  29. Jenne
    Oct 25, 2016
    5
    Mechanically solid and complete game but I can't forgive Firaxis for what they've done to the art style and the general vibe of the IP. Realism has always been important for Civ games, feeling like a real leader of a real nation has always been something unique that other 4X games didn't have. Why then Firaxis chose to go for a this cartoony, goofy art style? They can't say it's justMechanically solid and complete game but I can't forgive Firaxis for what they've done to the art style and the general vibe of the IP. Realism has always been important for Civ games, feeling like a real leader of a real nation has always been something unique that other 4X games didn't have. Why then Firaxis chose to go for a this cartoony, goofy art style? They can't say it's just because the cartoony map is less cluttered and easier to navigate because the leaders are just goofy, cartoony caricatures of real people too. I understand that for most players the art style of a strategy game is not important but for me personally it completely ruins the experience of playing a Civilization game. The only consolation is it's not 2005 anymore, Civilization is not the only 4X game on the market.… Expand
  30. Skipnipper
    Oct 28, 2016
    5
    Its a decent game I suppose. As has already been said, the AI is ridiculous and nonsensical, at best. This really kills the game as there is no challenge anywhere to be had. Graphics and sound are ok I guess but nothing special.

    Save your money.
Page:

Awards & Rankings

10
#10 Best PC Game of 2016
9
#9 Most Discussed PC Game of 2016
20
#20 Most Shared PC Game of 2016

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
88

Generally favorable reviews - based on 84 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 79 out of 84
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 84
  3. Negative: 1 out of 84
  1. CD-Action
    Jan 12, 2017
    90
    You don’t want to spend your night in front of the computer? You have a wife and kids? You cherish your friendships and enjoy parties? Beware of this game. It’s that good. [13/2016, p.44]
  2. The Overpowered Noobs
    Jan 11, 2017
    90
    It's a more playful, fun feel to the franchise, perhaps, but all that's wrapped around a deeply nuanced game. If you've ever enjoyed playing a multi-layered, immersive and strategic board game with a bunch of funny characters, get in here.
    Read full review
  3. Games Master UK
    Jan 1, 2017
    74
    Firaxis has made some significant, exciting changes, but has also obscured vital information. [Christmas 2016, p.70]
See all critic reviews »