Looking Back: Comparative Civ

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Xuenay


A whole three hours?-)

I meant I couldn't post it right then.

[CarnalCanaan]

I think there is one factor missing from Alexander01's predictions: novelty.

Every Civ iteration has so far added a new member to the Family of Civilizations, and I certainly see no reason that such a prestigious addition as Civ 4 wouldn't do the same.

Thus, I predict that one of the three following civilizations will make their illustrious debut:

Ethiopia/Abyssinia
Navajo/Dinetah
Thailand/Siam

Afterall, a very important component of the business model built around the Civ franchise is community buzz. Adding new civilizations is a good way to generate a lasting bit of it.

It should be noted, however, that none of those three civilizations necessarily exude "warlord-quality" (and that Mali may have already hoarded the coveted Novelty Slot). I believe, however, that the absence of a Native American civilization, a shortage of East Asian civilizations and the notoriety of the infamous Token Sub-Saharan Civ all override the expansion pack theme.

Or the next expansion pack will be titled "Civilization 4: Also-Rans!"

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by CarnalCanaan
I think there is one factor missing from Alexander01's predictions: novelty.

Every Civ iteration has so far added a new member to the Family of Civilizations, and I certainly see no reason that such a prestigious addition as Civ 4 wouldn't do the same.

Yes, I ignored the possibilty of newer civs in this study because there are only 6 civs in the expansion. Were there more, I felt that perhaps Firaxis would be a little bit more creative, but I felt the paucity of new civs leads to more conservative selections.

[CarnalCanaan]

Originally posted by Alexander01


... there are only 6 civs in the expansion. Were there more, I felt that perhaps Firaxis would be a little bit more creative...

That seems reasonable. Does it seem to anyone else that this is more a packaging of game elements that missed the deadline? Military GPs, Babylonian civilization, unique buildings: these all seem like things that SHOULD have been in Vanila.

I will, nonetheless, purchase "Warlords" to fund the next expansion pack.

[Badtz Maru]

Originally posted by CarnalCanaan
I believe, however, that the absence of a Native American civilization...

Are Aztecs and Incans not Native American???

[Son of David]

Originally posted by Badtz Maru


Are Aztecs and Incans not Native American???

Not when you consider that their ancestors were Mongoloid immigrants who crossed into the Americas via the Behring Straits. Apparently immigration violates one's right to claim indigenousness.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Son of David
Not when you consider that their ancestors were Mongoloid immigrants who crossed into the Americas via the Behring Straits.

So were the ancestors of the other Native American tribes, I believe.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by LordShiva


So were the ancestors of the other Native American tribes, I believe.

Among others.

[Senethro]

I thought the cool new theory regarding colonisation of the Americas was that an earlier settling wave took place via the Polynesians?

[Alexander I]

They've found ancient skeletons of all racial types. Apparently in the distant past people were getting to the Americas from all over the world.

I even read in the newspaper that there "must have been an ice bridge from France that allowed early Caucusoids to cross over." Somehow I really think a theory involving boats is much easier to swallow.

French ice bridge, bah!

[Alexander I]

So what's the general consensus on the next 3 civs?

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by CarnalCanaan
I think there is one factor missing from Alexander01's predictions: novelty.

Every Civ iteration has so far added a new member to the Family of Civilizations, and I certainly see no reason that such a prestigious addition as Civ 4 wouldn't do the same.

Thus, I predict that one of the three following civilizations will make their illustrious debut:

Ethiopia/Abyssinia
Navajo/Dinetah
Thailand/Siam

Afterall, a very important component of the business model built around the Civ franchise is community buzz. Adding new civilizations is a good way to generate a lasting bit of it.

It should be noted, however, that none of those three civilizations necessarily exude "warlord-quality" (and that Mali may have already hoarded the coveted Novelty Slot). I believe, however, that the absence of a Native American civilization, a shortage of East Asian civilizations and the notoriety of the infamous Token Sub-Saharan Civ all override the expansion pack theme.

Or the next expansion pack will be titled "Civilization 4: Also-Rans!"

I agree.


Ethiopia/Abyssinia
Navajo/Dinetah
Thailand/Siam/Khmer

[CarnalCanaan]

Interestingly, the terms "Native American" and "Indian" vary according to whether they are spoken in the New World or the Old World.

"Indian" is most often an all encompassing word for indigenous New World peoples. This meaning is more prevailant in Europe. In the New World, especially North America, reference is often made to the given subject's tribal identification or simply "indigenous person(s)."

Indians of what became the United States are called "Native Americans" as polite form. In Canada they are called "First Nations" (though I'm not sure how they refer to individuals).

Thus, a Native American civ might also be a First Nation civ (e.g. the Souix, who are both). The Aztecs, Maya and Inca are usually refered to as Mesoamericans, in part because of the perception that their civilizations were more advanced than those of the Native Americans or First Nations, but also because they were multi-national empires.

According to this the Iroquois might be seen as a modern Mesoamerican civ (oxymoron notwithstanding), rather than a Native American/First Nation civ.

[CarnalCanaan]

Consider this next to the dilemma it raises in the German language:


Sub-continental Indian - Inder, Inderin

New World Indian - Indianer, Indianerin

Person from the U.S. State of Indiana - Indianaer, Indianaerin
[Any Germans care to explain how they pronounce the word for a female person from Iowa: "Iowaerin"?]

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by CarnalCanaan
[Any Germans care to explain how they pronounce the word for a female person from Iowa: "Iowaerin"?]

I would assume it would be "Aye-oh-vehr-een."