Leaders Firaxis considered but didn't include (from art files)

[duodecimal]

Top thing on my list of things to do is to add civs that use the 'rare' or 'non-existent' trait/tech combinations.

Such as, for example, could you imagine an Egyptian leader starting with Mysticism? I kept getting drawn to Egypt for an all-religions play but wound up going with Asoka or Saladin simply because Egypt doesn't start with Mysticism.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by LordShiva
How do you know he's been calling his Greek leader Pericles since Civ 1?

I was talking about the first part of the statement

[MasterDave]

I don't know if you guys remember this, but there was a massive riot by outraged Muslims in Nigeria a couple of years ago. The cause was a beauty pagent, where the host said that one of the contestants was so beautiful that she was worthy to be a bride of Mohammed. At least dozens of people were killed, it may have been hundreds, I do not recall the number exactly.

This was a few a years ago, and I may be remembering some of the details wrong, but the point is that ANY depiction of Mohammed is playing with fire and literally taking your life in your hands. If Firaxis put him in saying some of the funny things their other leaders say in diplomacy, the BEST case scenario for them would be getting sued by an advocacy group and getting a lot of really bad press. In fact I am worried that if news got out about him even being in an unused file, then Hillary and company in the US government could go on another holy crusade like they did when they caught wind of the "Hot Coffee" mod for GTA 3 (another feature not in the game out of the box).

I do look forward to more leader choices in general in patches or expansions. Ideally every CIV could have two or three to add variety to the game.

[Nikolai]

Whoa! I'm so glad Firaxis didn't risk making Mohammad the Arab leader, that would be to beg for some diehard islamist to declare some kind of Jihad.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I was talking about the first part of the statement

[jkp1187]

Originally posted by Nikolai
Whoa! I'm so glad Firaxis didn't risk making Mohammad the Arab leader, that would be to beg for some diehard islamist to declare some kind of Jihad.

Sigh. So now we let the fanatics dictate to us? That's a bit like saying that we'd better not include Hitler, because the Nazis would get angry at us....

Muhammad was both a religious and a military/political leader. It would be quite appropriate to include him.

Again, where are these pictures/files located? Are they complete leaderheads?

[Nikolai]

We better not include Hitler because he has nothing to do in a Civ game and it would piss off all except the Nazis.

Muhammad was both a military and political leader, like all the early leaders of Islam. That does not make it any better to include him. The problems it would make is not worth it. And while I as a Christian can't say I agree with Islam on some points, I know one thing: to Muslims, Muhammad and Islam is holy and extremely important. There's no need to anger them. Show respect. I know you and me would have wanted it if it was our views and values that was in question.

[WHLNH]

Pericles is in the game. If you play one of the canned scenarios (Greece) you will find him there.


Bill

[dearmad]

Letting fanatacism rule us is sick.

Killing people over religion is sick.

Offending people who are religious is NOT in the same strata as the above two concerns. Offending people is a component of liberty.

Being able to be offended and deal with it with civility is a part of being civilized and an adult.

I'm all for Mohammad being put into the game. The fanatics can deal and suck it up.

[spy14]

Originally posted by jkp1187


Yes, well, I'm not Muslim. It's a shame that they felt the needs to trim their sails to avoid offending knownothing supersitious religionists, still smarting over the Crusades, and Salman Rushdie.

Do yourself a favour, and don't ever go to Iran.

Wasn't Salman Rushdies work actually offensive to muslims though, hence the ayatollah issuing a fatwa?

[Dis]

I'd really be impressed if one of these days a computer game company had the balls to put Hitler in. But it doesn't bother me too much he's out. He wasn't leader for that long

[kseecs16]

Hitler is in both Paradox Hearts of Iron games, as are all other WWII era world leaders. All the evil nazis are in HOI.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by dearmad
Letting fanatacism rule us is sick.

Killing people over religion is sick.

Offending people who are religious is NOT in the same strata as the above two concerns. Offending people is a component of liberty.

Being able to be offended and deal with it with civility is a part of being civilized and an adult.

I'm all for Mohammad being put into the game. The fanatics can deal and suck it up.

It's not about fanatics ruling us. It's not about free speech either. It's about being considerate to other people. Something like this would be incredibly offensive to literally billions of people around the world. There are plenty of highly qualified Arab leaders to choose from, why choose someone offensive when you don't have to?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by jkp1187
Sigh. So now we let the fanatics dictate to us? That's a bit like saying that we'd better not include Hitler, because the Nazis would get angry at us....

Sigh. So now all muslims are fanatics?

[duodecimal]

The absence of Hitler in these games probably has more to do with being banned from the market in parts of Europe than with sensibilities being offended.

It would probably breach paraphernalia laws in France and Germany.