The KOREAN Civilization: Things Every Civ Player Should Know

[YefeiPi]

And if Thailand was able to conquer even HALF of what Japan conquered, then yes, they should be included.

So if you are saying if another country start attacking U.S, which I suppose is where you live, and the soldiers start to rape American women, slice their stomachs open and kill the infants then take men for chemical experiments, and performing a bunch of other inhuman acts. Then this country should definitely be included?

If that is your mentality then by all means, let us kick out all deserving civillizations of the game, and include the most cruel and barbaric countries.

[yin26]

WHO CARES if it was positive or negative? Was it or was it NOT an impact?

Firaxis would NEVER think of having a NAZI regime in Civ 3, right? They would never use Hitler as a leader in Civ 3, right? Tell us why, Imran.

Now, when most Civ 3 players play as Japan, they think of samurai and Nintendo. They think of the "good" things about Japan. What you have to realize is that when an Asian person (more clearly: Somebody living in China, Korea or this region), then they can't help but think of Japan in terms of the pictures I have given.

To those people, Japan was an Asian Hitler. The body count might have been less, but the methods were equally if not more horrid. You have seen the links, so this is undisputable. My parents-in-law, for example, still vividly remember being beaten by the Japanese if they spoke Korean.

They wear they fact that they can understand Japanese language as a badge of the most vile DIS-honor.

Surely Imran can understand such things...

But since Civ 3 is made for a Western audience, we must forgive the insensitivity...But then let us not raise a fuss when and if Korea makes and RTS featuring Hitler.

In fact, a number of Nazi flags are indeed showing up in Korean pubs and so forth because they don't quite make the connection between what Hitler did and what Japan did. This is sad. This is a mark against people who have a casual drink next to a Nazi flag.

So why should I expect more from a Western gaming company to understand the sensibilities of the Far East? I don't expect it, actually. But I DO want the record to be clear for people NOT to play this game ignorant of such issues.

[yin26]

I will predict the next question:

"So, Yin. Why is it seemingly O.K. to have Germany in the game?"

Like I said, it's a matter of regional perception. To China and Korea, Japan was nothing special for an AWFUL long time. And when Japan finally did exert its influence, you can see how they chose to do so. Thus, the image of Japan in that case is nearly totally a horrid one. Forget the samurai and Nintendo: Irrelevant to many.

Where do you draw the line? If we disqualified civs based on horrid acts, who would be left? And is that the point of a game anyway?

At the very least, an historical game such as Civ allows people to come in contact with information they might never have encountered otherwise. Though it may look like I have tried to lionize Korea and vilify Japan...that is only secondary to my primary purpose: To present information that some may never have seen before.

If the atrocities committed by Japan in the 20th century (some of the worst in human history) combined with the fact that Japan's leadership hides or lies about the past while continuing to visit the graves of CONVICTED war criminals DOESN'T send a 'caution' signal to you about the Japanese nation, that is fine. Not very logical or perceptive, but fine by me.

Just be aware of the issues. That is the first, important step.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So if you are saying if another country start attacking U.S, which I suppose is where you live, and the soldiers start to rape American women, slice their stomachs open and kill the infants then take men for chemical experiments, and performing a bunch of other inhuman acts. Then this country should definitely be included?

If that nation conquers most of the US and North and South America, making a large empire, then YES, they should be included because they have made amazing conquests.

Firaxis would NEVER think of having a NAZI regime in Civ 3, right? They would never use Hitler as a leader in Civ 3, right? Tell us why, Imran.

China's leader is Mao, and Russia's leader in Civ1 was Stalin (who was equal to Hitler is atrocities). Also the special unit for Germany in Civ3, as you are aware is the Panzer tank, a Nazi tank.

But then let us not raise a fuss when and if Korea makes and RTS featuring Hitler.

I hope not either. I have no problems with Adolf Hitler being the leader of Germany. Although I consider Bismarck and Fredrick II to be more worthy.

If the atrocities committed by Japan in the 20th century (some of the worst in human history) combined with the fact that Japan's leadership hides or lies about the past while continuing to visit the graves of CONVICTED war criminals DOESN'T send a 'caution' signal to you about the Japanese nation, that is fine.

And what does any of this have to do with Civ? Firaxis should make a political statement on the Rape of Nanking? or the Holocaust? or anything for that matter? Why should they?

Actually I'd prefer Firaxis get a little more un-PC. I was dissapointed that they didn't include any slavery in the game (though it is hard to model in such a game, CtP sucked at it), and they should have put genocide, in some form, in the game, as they somewhat did in SMAC with the nerve stapling of the drones.

You can say all you want about the atrocities of the Japanese, but you can't wipe away the fact that they had an incredibly large and powerful Asian Empire in the 1930s-40s. If Japan had merely been an economic marvel, I would not have favored its inclusion (just like I don't really care for the Dutch to be included). It is their Empire which makes them Civ3 worthy.

[yin26]

As I have said, they have their audience and should deliver accordingly. I would support your call for slavery and genocide, etc., if it were historically accurate, otherwise it's blood and gore with little other purpose...but that's not the open-endedness of Civ, so you can't. I would be fascinated, however, to see what some of the mod people could do.

It is clear to me that you and others don't care HOW a civ became powerful. In fact, you seem to put conquest above most else. To me, this is sad. It is a sad commentary on human nature. I urge you again to look at those images and say: "Japan is an honorable nation." I don't dispute the influence. But I despise the KIND of influence.

No nation is spotless...but few are as stained or deserving of scorn...yes, of being ripped even from a computer game.

On the other hand, the difficulty in leaving out such a nation when designing a game ABOUT world conquest is clear. Perhaps the day will come, however, when Sid's complaint that he didn't want so much focus on war in Civ will actually be backed up by the civs he puts in. Brilliant thought, eh?

Of course, it wouldn't sell as many copies. Again...human nature at its best.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It is clear to me that you and others don't care HOW a civ became powerful. In fact, you seem to put conquest above most else. To me, this is sad. It is a sad commentary on human nature. I urge you again to look at those images and say: "Japan is an honorable nation." I don't dispute the influence. But I despise the KIND of influence.

You are really ****ing amazing aren't you?

A person's opinion on what type of civs to include in Civ3 means they think that civ is 'honorable' and that what they've done is good.

I'm sorry your ulterior motive of trying to include the Koreans in the game over the Japanese has failed (actually I'm not sorry), but you just have to accept it. The Koreans just aren't WORTH being in Civ3!!!

If calling those that support civs that are justified being in Civ3 as 'barbarians' (basically) that support the horrible actions of those civs and hold them up as honorable is your way of coping then get a God damned life!

I, for one, am deciding not to take this abuse anymore and will be leaving this thread.

If I sound angry in this post, it's because I really really am !

[yin26]

LOL! Ahhhh. Irman suddenly realizes on some lower-level that some of the nations he prizes show much got there in large part through horrid atrocities. Must be tough on the guy...but it will help him in the long run.

By the way, I've said about 1,000,000 times Firaxis has to sell games, right? What I have ALSO said is that:

Yes, Imran, if you praise Japan for its empire in the early 20th century, you are also praising HOW they got it. Sorry buddy. You can't separate the two thoughts. If this has caused you some pain and anger to realize, I am quite happy actually because it might mean you are finally understanding something here.

AGAIN: As for Civ3, I understand the choices. We like civs that kill. Understandable.

[yin26]

And, yes, when you post here about Japan being 'worthy' of being in Civ 3 because of its empire, you are also implicitly saying that their means of getting there were worthy, too.

Sorry. But true.

[yin26]

Just in case anybody wonders, I was actually prepared to go to Japan first instead of Korea. There are a great many wonderful things about its culture, people and history.

Unfortunately, the 20th century wasn't part of that...curiously, it's the 20th century Japan Imran seems to love so much.

[Saint Marcus]

Yin, you find Japanese acts of genocide and other crimes against humanity terrible, and make it an argument for not including the Japanese in the game. You do say that no nation is spotless, but what the Japanese did is no worse than what the other nations did. The English invented the concentration camps, used in the Boer War. And they, along with the Dutch, were the biggest slave traders in human history. The Germans murdered millions in camps in WW2, as did the Japanese. The Russians, Chinese and Koreans ended up directly or indirectly killing millions during the years of Communism. The Americans and Spanish wiped out most of the Native American population. The "noble" Romans basically invented genocide, Caesar boasted about killing 2 million Gauls in his conquests. So what nation does deserve to be in Civ2? The Japanese certainly are no worse than the Germans, Russians or Americans.

Though it may look like I have tried to lionize Korea and vilify Japan...that is only secondary to my primary purpose

Both secondary and primary motives are awfully colored, IMHO.

If Japan had merely been an economic marvel, I would not have favored its inclusion (just like I don't really care for the Dutch to be included).

Being Dutch, I agree with Imran (which is rare ). The Dutch have a magnificent and rich culture, and have and had a great influence on the world. But they don't qualify to be part of the first 16 civs, that's for sure. Though they certainly are more worthy than the Koreans.

BTW, the only influence Korea had on the world was helping the "invention" printing press by Gutenberg, and influencing the Japanese language. All in all, pretty marginal. Certainly not any better than the Dutch/Spanish/Byzantines/Arabs, who are all also not included in civ3.

Yes, Imran, if you praise Japan for its empire in the early 20th century, you are also praising HOW they got it.

Let me see. How did the Spanish get their empire? By peaceful diplomacy? No, by military conquest and genocide. Same goes for the Romans and Persians. Not to mention Alexander the great. And then you have the Americans of course. Did they peacefully "conquer" the west? No, they wiped the natives out. Did the French and English act in the best interested of the people they dominated? Doubt it, they opressed them and killed them by the thousands. We praise the Americans and Romans for their "empires", but they also got it by shedding blood. That simply goes for almost all of the civs.

[yin26]

...but what the Japanese did is no worse than what the other nations did.

First, you are wrong. There is a difference between Mongols running around in the 13th century and Japanese hacking off heads and piling up babies in the 20th.

Unless you face that fact, you'll continue to demonstrate the unfortunately implicit argument that we are no more 'civil' than we were centuries ago, thus the "Kill first" philosophy will continue with us to an uncertain end.

Do I think Civ3 is the place to teach people the truth about history and our sad repetition, indeed PRAISE, of vile acts? No, I don't.

Work a bit harder on your research. Not all nations shed blood in the same way and for the same reasons. To argue such is to display a dangerous ignorance.

[Saint Marcus]

First, you are wrong. There is a difference between Mongols running around in the 13th century and Japanese hacking off heads and piling up babies in the 20th.

Work a bit harder on your research. Not all nations shed blood in the same way and for the same reasons. To argue such is to display a dangerous ignorance.

England in the Boer War
Germany in World War 2
Russia under Stalin
Americans in Vietnam
Dutch in Indonesia

[yin26]

That doesn't address what I said.

[Saint Marcus]

That list describes some horrible acts those civs have commited in the not so distant past. In what way is that different from Japan?

Also, Japan isn't included just because of WW2, but also because of their economy, their rapid catch-up with the west in the late 19th/early 20th century, their sumurai with their code of honor.

[yin26]

In what way is that different from Japan?

I'll let you do the research since I already have. Please report back what you find. I am not being confrontational. I think it would be an amazing study. Certainly in the case of the Nazi's, it's quite similar.

Code of Honor

You are now touching on my point. There was a TIME in Japan's history when this was so, but the 20th century continuing with these visits to graves of convicted war criminals tells another story.

I am fully aware that the image of any country will vary widely depending on exactly what moment in history you are looking at, but since Japan's atrocities are still SO recent and still SO ignored and even glorified by Japan (and others here at Apolyton), I would say that there is a 'ugency of the moment' related to discussions of Japan.

I look forward to what you find. If, for example, you can show me 300,000 killed and 20,000 raped by Americans in the Vietnam war...with photos or accounts of dead babies stacked high and severed heads arranged in 'glory,' I will personally thank you for opening my eyes. Yes, I know villages were napalmed, and there is no glorifying that.

Unfortunately I am talking about atrocities of scale and displays of inhumane behavior of the most depraved order. Please show that in the cases you list on the magnitude and depravity of Japan.

Oh, and please also include the "reasons" behind each incident. It seems evident that Japan's "reasons" and the U.S. "reasons" for being in Vietnam were quite a bit different in a way that condemns Japan to a far greater degree. Prove me wrong.