Second Leader in a Civ

[sophist]

Originally posted by Solver
Just like there was a Fascism mod for Civ3, I'm sure there will be plenty of custom leaders for Civ4, including Hitler. Personally, I'd rather not see him.

At least with Stalin, Russians can look back and see something positive in the victory over Germany. He was a monster, but he did manage to achieve something for his nation. It's hard to say that Hitler achieved anything positive at all for Germany.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by sophist


At least with Stalin, Russians can look back and see something positive in the victory over Germany. He was a monster, but he did manage to achieve something for his nation. It's hard to say that Hitler achieved anything positive at all for Germany.

Hitler restored Germany's economy after the dreadful depression caused by the outrageous Treaty of Versailles. Most Germans viewed him as a hero, that's why so many people couldn't believe the Holocaust. He was a very successful demagogue, one of the most nefarious too, not to mention completely out of his mind.

[sophist]

Originally posted by Alexander01
Hitler restored Germany's economy after the dreadful depression caused by the outrageous Treaty of Versailles. Most Germans viewed him as a hero, that's why so many people couldn't believe the Holocaust. He was a very successful demagogue, one of the most nefarious too, not to mention completely out of his mind.

I'm not saying how they viewed him at the time, but how people view him now. I don't think you can say that Germany's economy would not have recovered without Hitler by, say, 1950. I mean, Hitler may have rebuilt Germany's economy in the 1930s, but then he started a war that led basically to the complete destruction of the country and the deaths of millions of Germans. I think the economic cost of that vastly exceeds whatever economic damage would have still remained in 1950 from the Treaty of Versailles in 1919.

[Solver]

At least with Stalin, Russians can look back and see something positive in the victory over Germany. He was a monster, but he did manage to achieve something for his nation. It's hard to say that Hitler achieved anything positive at all for Germany.

The victory over Germany was in Stalin's time, not thanks to him, not thanks to any skills he had. Besides, I assure you that normal Russians don't view him as a positive person in the least - the ones who do view him as positive are the same nutters that are now urging to kill/get rid of all non-ethnically-Russian people in Russia.

Leaders in Civ should be someone who wouldn't offend people, and of whom people of that nation could be proud. There's a big thread about Hitler at CFC. Germans there said that they want another leader because there are leaders that Germans are proud of.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Solver

At least with Stalin, Russians can look back and see something positive in the victory over Germany. He was a monster, but he did manage to achieve something for his nation. It's hard to say that Hitler achieved anything positive at all for Germany.

The victory over Germany was in Stalin's time, not thanks to him, not thanks to any skills he had. Besides, I assure you that normal Russians don't view him as a positive person in the least - the ones who do view him as positive are the same nutters that are now urging to kill/get rid of all non-ethnically-Russian people in Russia.

Leaders in Civ should be someone who wouldn't offend people, and of whom people of that nation could be proud. There's a big thread about Hitler at CFC. Germans there said that they want another leader because there are leaders that Germans are proud of.

Besides, Stalin and Hitler agreed back in the 30s to partition Poland between the two of them. Personally, I think that Stalin would have propagated a World War if Hitler hadn't. The only reason he fought on the side of the Allies was because Hitler attacked him. I would not say that Stalinwas better than Hitler in any respect whatsoever.

After Germany was defeated, Patton wanted to move on to Moscow.

[Xorbon]

Solver: Thanks for your detailed explanation. I never thought of that. I could see how people from the former Soviet Republics would be offended by his inclusion in the game.

Now that brings up a another question: shouldn't Chinese players be offended by having Mao as a leader of the Chinese?

[GeoModder]

He's still 'worshipped' in China.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Xorbon
Solver: Thanks for your detailed explanation. I never thought of that. I could see how people from the former Soviet Republics would be offended by his inclusion in the game.

Now that brings up a another question: shouldn't Chinese players be offended by having Mao as a leader of the Chinese?

Well, he undoubtedly killed more people than Hitler and Stalin combined.

[PJayTycy]

What's wrong with a few "evil" leaders ??

At one point people here complain about PCPOS (no terrorism) and here you want more PCPOS (no leaders you can't be proud of).



PCPOS : Politically Correct Piece Of S...

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by PJayTycy
What's wrong with a few "evil" leaders ??

At one point people here complain about PCPOS (no terrorism) and here you want more PCPOS (no leaders you can't be proud of).



PCPOS : Politically Correct Piece Of S...

Want? No, it's not so much that. I think it's just a statement that some people would be offended, thus barring the inclusion of certain leaders (ie. Stalin, Hitler, etc.).

[Solver]

Originally posted by Xorbon
Solver: Thanks for your detailed explanation. I never thought of that. I could see how people from the former Soviet Republics would be offended by his inclusion in the game.

Now that brings up a another question: shouldn't Chinese players be offended by having Mao as a leader of the Chinese?

Ah yes, Mao is an interesting issue. Surely Civ1 and Civ2 were as unavailable in China as they were in the USSR, but frankly, I'm quite surprised Mao is still in. I suppose that the developers have the same logic as with Stalin 15 years ago - they think that not many Chinese people will get to play the game. In a way, that's true, after all, China has internet censorship, disallowing access to foreign sites, plus most games are banned too, and Civ definitely isn't "politically correct" in the eyes of Chinese censors. That's my best guess.

[GeoModder]

It won't stop Chinese to 'purchase' the game en masse.

[Solver]

Maybe not as en masse as, say, Russians, but yes. Then again, 'purchasers' are never taken into account when developing .

[Xorbon]

Originally posted by PJayTycy
What's wrong with a few "evil" leaders ??

At one point people here complain about PCPOS (no terrorism) and here you want more PCPOS (no leaders you can't be proud of).

I have no problem with leaders like Stalin or even Hitler being in the game, but I understand that people are very sensitive about these relatively recent evil leaders, so that's enough of a reason if Firaxis decides not to put them in the game. If they think they'll lose sales because of bad press, that is... I can even understand not putting in terrorism, though I don't agree with it. You can have ethnic cleansing, city bombarding, and forced starvation, but no terrorism. Oh, but I'm getting off topic.

Anyway, I don't think it's because they're "evil" leaders, but because they're recent evil leaders who killed lots of people. You don't hear people objecting to Genghis Khan do you?

[Solver]

Yes of course, the reason is that these leaders are recent. There are many people now who not only hate those leaders, but who have actually suffered from them. For instance, there are many in Russia and Eastern Europe who lost close relatives on the front lines of WW2, and there are also many people who lost family members in Siberia camps, etc.