Censorship on terrorism

[Vince278]

I went with being against the inclusion of terrorism. On the Civ-sized scale of things the actions of individuals is mostly irrelevent. Sounds like too many people here are swinging too far in favor of including something that happens to be affecting our lives now. Civ does not reflect real life events, nor does it have to.

[Mace]

It's not about people swaying to events that are happening right now. It's more about people keeping features/game options that were in there in the past. It's more about allowing the full gamut of strategy options, from being a dastardly evil "suitcase nuker" or a Borgia poisoning people to a peace-loving builder.

That's what it's about. And the considerable majority agree with the above assessment. Now, having said that, I am not so sure these type of espionage and terror options needs to be in stock Civ4. As I said in the other thread...mod it in. If Civ4 is going to be so open and moddable, we'll see those things in....so everyone can have the Civ they want. That would be nice huh.

[Vince278]

I wouldn't mind a terrorism mod. We could either decide to use it or not use it to our hearts content.

[DarkCloud]

Hmph. 'terrorism' has always been a part of the Civ series- I don't see how a 'game' that has existed since 1992 and can actually portray genocide (in that you destroy an entire nation) can be more 'troubling' to people for including mere options that don't even show anything (eg: poison water supply, 'pocket nukes' destroy construction on a building- have been around since civ II for certain [1996] and since Civ I, I believe [1992]) than games such as quake where blood splatters all over.

There is absolutely nothing insulting about real-life problems. That's why civ is a historical game.

blah- hypocrisy, and american self-censorship- the game companies and media impose a sense of censorship farr worse than the government has or can. The chilling effect of being labeled 'anti-american' or 'anti-pc' is too great. Blah. I don't like where this trend is headed.

[DarkCloud]

I just think it sends the wrong mesage to some young people who will be playing this game. Yes, it's only a game, but some people are impressionable even if it is only a game

So what? It's always existed. It's an abstraction game.

What wrong message? That terrorism exists and can kill people? I think we all already knew that.

I fail to see how continuation of inclusion of terrorism options harms anyone.

I fail to see how a society based on fear can survive and prosper. Confront problems. The more freedom and openness, the less fear and more ability to meet problems head-on. The more dialogue, the more solutions.

Indeed, the more viewpoints and freedom of expression, the more truth that can discussed.

---
Markos- that shirt is tempting... all I can hope though is that it has a Civ logo somewhere on it, or else it could cause problems in airports

[DarkCloud]

"Terrorism" as state sponsored- (done by diplomats) I see no problem with... as 'barbarian' units, I also see no problem with it- so long as they are rare.

As for the more radical implementations, I'll state that I'm against them- more because massive terrorism is rare, and that civ never had anything like that sort of thing in it- than for any other reason.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Vince278
I wouldn't mind a terrorism mod. We could either decide to use it or not use it to our hearts content.

I'd be happy to see one, but the problem is that it wouldn't be considered "Standard".

You can't really rank up different games which use different rule sets...

Unless, say, we at poly decide upon several mods that will be considered "native" (ie - used by everyone)

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Hmph. 'terrorism' has always been a part of the Civ series- I don't see how a 'game' that has existed since 1992 and can actually portray genocide (in that you destroy an entire nation) can be more 'troubling' to people for including mere options that don't even show anything (eg: poison water supply, 'pocket nukes' destroy construction on a building- have been around since civ II for certain [1996] and since Civ I, I believe [1992]) than games such as quake where blood splatters all over.

There is absolutely nothing insulting about real-life problems. That's why civ is a historical game.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by BigFree
No.

I just think it sends the wrong mesage to some young people who will be playing this game. Yes, it's only a game, but some people are impressionable even if it is only a game.

As opposed to a computer game which demonstrates how fun and enjoyable warfare is, where conquering powers can obliterate cities, impose their culture/religion on defeated foes, et cetera....


It's not like any of the Civ games have demonstrated the effects of war on civilian populations realistically- marauding disorganized gangs of soldiers or mercenaries, the brutal oppression of captive peoples, famine, epidemic disease, food riots, genocide, ethnic cleansing, mass rape as an instrument of terror, execution of civilians...

...all a few of the realistic consequences of war missing from the games.

[Tattila the Hun]

I'd love to see my foreign intelligence agency set up terrorist groups, who would then conduct random acts against certain civ... Leaving evidence, that another civ is behind all of it.

Similar to MOO framing for espionage and sabotage... That worked quite well, actually. Implement MOO!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by molly bloom
As opposed to a computer game which demonstrates how fun and enjoyable warfare is, where conquering powers can obliterate cities, impose their culture/religion on defeated foes, et cetera....

all good, wholesome fun!

[Mace]

Originally posted by DarkCloud I fail to see how a society based on fear can survive and prosper. Confront problems.

(Right on! You need to talk to Mr. Schroeder and Mr. Chirac about that!)

[Skawpya]

hmmm occurs to me that the main effect state sponsored terrorism would have would rarely be any real damage, but instead either increasing corruption of city, representiing the effects of crack downs, poor business, etc, and/or the number of unhappies in a city.

A related form of modern warfare would be export your citizens to the cities of others countries and thus getting free intelligence, a slight portion of that city's funds, or an easier time committing espionage or taking a city through cultural conquest.

[KyuuA4]

NUCLEAR DESTRUCTION > TERRORISM

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
all good, wholesome fun!

And people wonder why I ran for President.