Beyond the Sword Fact Sheet

[monkspider]

"Native Americans" is horrible on several levels. The fact that it combines several highly diverse cultures has already been commented on by quite a few here. But it is also a name that is derived from a European Explorer, Amerigo Vespucci. It is just a totally inappropriate name and I am shocked that it is being seriously considered.

[Kuciwalker]

[AEdwild]

Real history?

Originally posted by Locutus
All the more reason not to make sh*t up and use civs that existed in real history and had at least some kind of significance. Not local tribes that don't meet even the most liberal definition of the term 'civilization', just to be PC.

This kind of reasoning can be misleading (and I don't see any PC liberal bias here either). If we are going to use "real history" as a guide to judge the game or an expansion, then the game is flawed in all areas. The biggest one being that almost none of the civs in the game existed thousands of years ago, and yet I can start a game playing alongside the American civ and the French and etc. --- who as we all know did not exist in real history back then.

At its core, the Civ game is a "what if" game (less a loose simulation of real history or of the world's greatest civs) . The game seems to be designed for all flavor of civs (whether they were tribes that never hit the big time) to have the potential to be a great civ.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Native Americans
Sioux
Huron
Iroquois
Pueblo

Don't insult our intelligence, Firaxis

[proviisori]

It might be that 2K wanted the civ to be called as Native Americans

[joncha]

Then they're the ones who suck.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by monkspider
"Native Americans" is horrible on several levels. The fact that it combines several highly diverse cultures has already been commented on by quite a few here. But it is also a name that is derived from a European Explorer, Amerigo Vespucci. It is just a totally inappropriate name and I am shocked that it is being seriously considered.

They all look the same to me

[Provost Harrison]

I am looking forward to the return of the Mayans...and their great UU, the skirmisher...oh wait...

[Brutus66]

Looks like it's unanimous- the idea of naming a civ "Native Americans" is a non-starter. Hope it's not to late to switch to "Sioux", Sid .
Honestly, I'll never understand the need for all the secrecy involved when developing an expansion. Why doesn't Firaxis occasionally ask the fan base what they want? What's wrong with a poll here and there, maybe on the Firaxis website? "What civ/unit/building would you most like to see included?"
The hubristic attitude of "this is how we're putting it together and if you don't like it, too bad" doesn't make sense. Give the consumer what they want and they will be more likely to buy your product.

[Solver]

There was a poll after Civ4 got released about what leaders and civs people wanted.

And Firaxis does have a group of hardcore fans that has considerable input on the game

[Brutus66]

Really? One poll? Conducted by Firaxis or Apolyton?

Yes, there is that hardcore group of fans that have their influence, but what about the other 99% of us that don't play day and night and develop our skill into deity level?
I do give Firaxis a lot of credit for listening, but it's usually in a reactive rather than proactive manner (x feature is broken- fix it!!).
I am simply suggesting a little more openness and occasionally soliciting opinions, ideas or suggestions.

[Solver]

A Firaxis poll. We're not official on Apolyton .

You'd be surprised at the wide range of skills among those hardcore fans. The ones that work directly with the developers aren't all picked because they're the best skilled players - there's a wide range of people and skills there, really.

Firaxis developers regularly read the forums here and at CFC, and there's the occasional question for the public. Most of the time, though, it really isn't too feasible. Some decisions may not be up to the game designers. In some situations, people will give many ideas that seem fun but aren't at all viable due to design or programming reasons.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Native Americans
Sioux
Huron
Iroquois
Pueblo

Don't insult our intelligence, Firaxis

I was a Federal Police Officer (White) on a Federal Indian Reservation (Peter Dana Pointe) Princeton-Indian Township Maine.

The Indians were Native American by birth right from ancestrial times.

http://www.passamaquoddy.com/history.htm

As one can read, many tribes were in part of the history that made up what is now known as the Passamaquoddy Indian Reservation.

Then you have the Pleasant Point Indian Reservation, same tribal history, outside of Eastport Maine.

The Penobscot Indian Reservation at Indian Island near Orono make up the other group of Native Americans living on tribal grounds in Maine.


I say this because I dont think it is a slight to say "Native Americans" no more than it is a slight to say someone is an American when some Americans take pride in say their Southern Heritage or Yankee's from the North.

Some black people call them themselves American

Some call themselves African American

Some call themselves second class citizens, unfortunately.

Just sharing is all.

By the way, my people are Irish-French-Indian-German and French Canadian. Not a people group for that now is there?

Just sharing good folks

Gramps

[joncnunn]

Actually, it could be worse. In Civ III, the Irq civ had a UU that this civ historically never used and that the Sioux were much more famous for using. (But even then the stats and timeframe are all wrong, the Sioux combined horses with muskets after the wave of horse expansion brought over to the Americans by the Spandards intercepted the wave of musket expansion bought over by the French & English.)

[_BuRjaCi_]

No, the real problem is that “Native Americans” were very similar to each other in civ terms, but so are all the European civ’s, that’s why this is unfair. The argument is; you aren’t well enough know or “civilized” enough to get your own civ so we will just bunch you up in a generic term.
The Netherlands or even frikkin Austria (almost got in in Civ I and was an easter egg in Civ3) get their name recognition.
And the Aztecs and Incas are Native Americans as well. So its even more silly, its like having Britain and France in but bunching up Poland, Bulgaria and all the other little countries into “the Europeans” and being a member of such a small country I know that I rather not be in civ than to just be bunched up with other nations.

There is nothing wrong with generic terms per se, but only if all civs are generic.

Like “the Europeans”, “the Africans”, “the former European Colonies” (US ,Canada , Brazil ,Australia,… How would you like that or to even reduce the US to just a another leader for the Anglo-americains )



P.S. To be fair “the Scandinavians” of C3C were also a simplification but a little less so.