America isn't old enough to be in Civ3

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Fresno
But I wonder wether it's only the fault of the press. Generally, newspapers tend to tell the people what they want to hear.

To a degree, in order to sell papers, but there is a lot of the owners/editors views in newspapers. Considering the calibre of the owners of most of the British press it is not hard to see why the papers are anti-euro.

[Fresno]

Sun Zi 36: The problem is a bit the same as the one we are dealing with on the other thread; I mean, when should a (there: non-western) civ be included and when not. We should think of some criteria to determine what we exactly mean with 'culture.' Should it only be like the concept it is in civ (temples and libraries) or also things like language? Although I personally feel the last meaning is the better one, I don't see a way to introduce the concept in a game like civ.

Sagacious Dolphin: Well, at least Blair supports the euro, doesn't he? I guess that if he and his cabinet have enough time, they should be able to introduce it.

BTW, what was wrong with your deep blue sea? Has Shell been busy there?

[Ironikinit]

Originally posted by Fresno
But I have to say many of the posts posted by the English here were very good; till now, nationalist posts were strictly American.

Edit: Just to make sure this post won't be misunderstood: it's true England was a great nation, and it should definately be a civ.

Make a thread called "England isn't good enough to be in Civ3" and you might get a few more nationalist posts from the English.

[Immortal Khan]

Originally posted by Sun Zi 36

This then comes down to personal opinion and the ultimate purpose for defining the civ. As this is a game/simulation with a maximum of only 16 civs, we should easily deduce that def 2 should be used in a very broad sense which means only great differences should be viewed as a different or indepent "type".

in my opinion, the differences mentioned are just not enough to make it a different "type of culture and society" (def 2). so I do no agree that the USA is "culturally separate" at the time of its national independence. I will not go into the details of why i think it's not enough bcos the whole subject has been going on for too long, so much has been repeated and it's just getting too boring.

If this be the case then why is England , Germany, France an "independent" civ? Shouldn't they be a European Civ? and Persia and Babylon should be integrated into a single Civ.
This is why Firaxis came up with the great idea of making these civs "independent" but yet they are part of their greater culture group: European, Middle Eastern, Asian, and American. Although the only thing i disagree with is that America should be part of the European culture, not the American culture along with the Aztecs and Iroqouis. I think it would be better if you take out Americans, put in the Incas as the 3rd American civ and introduce the revolting cities concept. The revolting, newly independent civ would be of the same culture group as the civ it revolted against.

Originally posted by Sun Zi 36

A personal response: i made the statement in my previous post only to emphasise my point about real-time vs turn-based civilisation gaming which was unrelated to what u were saying. i never even intended to "correct" you.

If it was unrelated to what I was saying then why did you put my quote in that specific post?! DUH! I thought that was the point of replying with quotes!

[Dauphin]

Sagacious Dolphin: Well, at least Blair supports the euro, doesn't he? I guess that if he and his cabinet have enough time, they should be able to introduce it.

Blair does, but his cabinet can only make it happen via referendum else be faced with a popular electoral revolt.

Gordon Brown is also a sticking point because as CotE he has the say on when and if we are ready for Euro membership ("The economic tests" as he puts it) and hence a referendum on the issue. And I have serious doubts over his desire for the Euro.

[Sun Zi 36]

Immortal Khan:

If this be the case then why is England , Germany, France an "independent" civ? Shouldn't they be a European Civ? and Persia and Babylon should be integrated into a single Civ.

This is already partly answered:

As this is a game/simulation with a maximum of only 16 civs, we should easily deduce that def 2 should be used in a very broad sense which means only great differences should be viewed as a different or indepent "type".

applying to your question, this means i think that England, Germany, France satisfies the "broad" sense of cultural difference while USA does not. on the other hand, if u only make them a European civ (too broad) then there is not enough civs to make it 16.

As I said, i don't want to go further into answering WHY i think there are enough differences with other civilisations (eg France England Germany) while there are not enough with the USA because it would mean firstly to assess all the details of their aspects of "intellectual, cultural, and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record-keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions" (def 1) and then compare whether they are a different "type" (in "the broad sense") as others (def 2). this is just to tedious and complex to go into.

If it was unrelated to what I was saying then why did you put my quote in that specific post?! DUH! I thought that was the point of replying with quotes!

i dont want to say further on this point. it is useless to argue further.

Fresno:
Trying to think up some criteria to determine what we mean by culture would be too controversal. i have come to learn that the best and easiest way to eliminate any doubts about it is to refer to some convincing authority like the defintion in the dictionary. I am sure u will find things like language in the definition of "culture" or "civilisation" in a dictionary. i guess using many concepts of culture to SELECT civs does not necessarily mean all those aspects have to be reflected in the actual gameplay (it's only a game/simulation afterall), although it'd be much more fun. maybe some tendency of your citizens to react differently to different governments?
but as i said in the other thread culture cant be the ONLY criteria to select a civ into a game like this. i think importance in history is the only other good sub-criteria.

[Fresno]

Originally posted by Sun Zi 36
Trying to think up some criteria to determine what we mean by culture would be too controversal. i have come to learn that the best and easiest way to eliminate any doubts about it is to refer to some convincing authority like the defintion in the dictionary. I am sure u will find things like language in the definition of "culture" or "civilisation" in a dictionary.

Here you'll find some definitions given by dictionary.com. I think definition 1b would be the most accurate.

i guess using many concepts of culture to SELECT civs does not necessarily mean all those aspects have to be reflected in the actual gameplay (it's only a game/simulation afterall), although it'd be much more fun. maybe some tendency of your citizens to react differently to different governments?

Maybe, it's a nice idea. Perhaps the citizens also should develop different religions, like they do in EU.

but as i said in the other thread culture cant be the ONLY criteria to select a civ into a game like this. i think importance in history is the only other good sub-criteria.

As I said in the other thread, I agree with that.

[gopher]

Jesus, this thread is STILL alive?

Just one more sign of the comming apocalypse, right along with the new Britney movie.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Oligarf
'Americans discover Navigation'

Explain this, Americans.

"Babylonians discover Robotics"

Explain this, Babylonians.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by FireDragon

"Babylonians discover Robotics"

Explain this, Babylonians.

I don't think there would be any Babylonians complaining if there was a request to remove them from the game on those (or indeed any) grounds.

Besides, the Babylonian market isn't big for Civ series games.

[KrazyHorse]

As this is the 550th post in this thread, it's time for it to die.

[Dauphin]

Is that actually an official forum rule, or just general practice?

[KrazyHorse]

Official. Running scripts on the longer threads is apparently a problem. Plus, I want to get rid of this topic.

[Dauphin]

I declare this thread closed.

Oh wait, I'm not a moderator...

[Mars]

I must say i'm rather surprised that this thread is still in existence. It was started like 4 months ago. Or was it 5.