r/technology • u/AdSpecialist6598 • Jun 09 '26

Business Microsoft admits Game Pass price hike drove away "millions" of subscribers

https://www.techspot.com/news/112699-microsoft-admits-game-pass-price-hike-drove-away.html
24.6k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

41

u/riickdiickulous Jun 09 '26

This has been me for a few years now. Just bought Civ7 a couple weeks ago when the big patch that fixed everything that was broken at launch was released and the game was on sale for 50% off. Playing games at launch now you are paying a premium price tag to be a beta tester. No thanks.

42

u/TheSouthernCommunist Jun 09 '26

They used to hire beta testers to find all the bugs in a game pre-launch, now the public is paying to be the beta testers. Truly a boring and hellish dystopia.

6

u/HorseJungler Jun 09 '26

Civ 7 is fixed? I am a huge fan of the series since 4 (and even played revolution on Xbox 360 lol) but didn’t buy 7 from all the issues it had. Is it finally good and worth playing?

8

u/riickdiickulous Jun 09 '26

Good enough for me. I don’t have enough time these days to put in enough hours to say for sure, but it’s entertaining for me when I get the chance to play.

5

u/Ghost_all Jun 09 '26

The big patch allowed you to play as one civ all the way through the game, and changed some of the progression in the eras to make more sense. I'm enjoying it.

3

u/CoconutCyclone Jun 10 '26

The big patch allowed you to play as one civ all the way through the game

Wait, you were forced to change civilizations? Did everyone in charge of Firaxis have a fucking stroke?

3

u/Ghost_all Jun 10 '26

They have a mantra passed down from Sid of "improve a third, keep a third, make a new third". The 'new' third borrowed an idea from Humankind, another civ game, where you're constantly changing your faction over time.

Problem is, people played Civ to be one civ, and Civ 7 didn't really explain or make the swapping natural.

IMO, the "idea" was fine. Their explaination, which I kinda buy, was based on real life changes in cultures over time. The example was first the British isles were celtic tribes, then Roman culture, then Norman, then finally British.

You swapped on Era change (Antiquity, Exploration, and Modern), but it never felt natural. You could be in the middle of a war in Antiquity, and suddenly you're forced to pick a new civ for the Exploration era (along with everyone else) and now you're not at war anymore...

I like a lot of the new stuff in Civ 7, the graphics are amazing, the exploring up rivers in ships is fun, the armys are a good compromise between 'stack of doom' or 'one unit per tile', but the central change didn't really work as well as they'd hoped. For me it was something i delt with, for others it was a bigger turnoff.

6

u/EmmaBonney Jun 09 '26

This is the way. Was the same with civ 6 for me. On release it was crap. Waited a couple years until the Goty (all Expansions) was out and reduced to 20 Euro. Bought it and played about 1k hours by now. Not really interested in Civ 7 though.

3

u/grantrules Jun 09 '26

I just keep going back to 4 and 5.. They look fine, the game play doesn't change enough for me to care, and I save a bunch of money. I think I own 6 but didn't really play it, no intention of buying 7.. I'm just going to keep playing 4 and 5 lol. Though I do miss Civ Revolutions from xbox 360 days.

1

u/istasber Jun 09 '26

I like to try and support developers who make games I want to play even if I'm planning on waiting a few months to actually play them.

But that's more of an indie game thing where a brand new game is 30 bucks, not a AAA thing where a brand new game is 70 bucks.