Is great influence on human history required...

[aaglo]

... from a civilization to be presented in the game? Those who think so, give me a show of hands, and those who don't: likewise

IMO: Not in any way. If a civ is interesting, it can be taken to a game. And thus every civ in the world (past or present) qualify...

[Stuie]

Only thing required for admission in my opinion is that the Civ makes the game interesting. I'm happy with the mix selected by Firaxis - they will make for interesting gaming.

[Ribannah]

I'd say so, otherwise they are just stuffing.
I would go even further and say that a great influence on the progress of human civilization is required. If it's just plundering and killing that they did, no matter on what scale, I would consider them Barbarians.

By the way: excellent idea for a poll!

[jdd2007]

wheres the -other- option and the in between option?

[shade]

I would say NO,just because I don't know how you define great influence.
Hitler had a great influence on history,but when asked most ppl want him out of the list of the 100 most important ppl of the century.(And what about the history you don't know.)

Shade

[orange]

Shade - those people are ignorant. History is written by the victors, sure, but even the losers have changed history in substantial ways. Hitler was an undeniably huge influence on history. Just because he was pure evil doesn't mean he didn't influence history.

I put yet because I lean more towards yes than no. There also has to be a balance on the world map, IMO, even if not all games are world map games.

[shade]

Shade - those people are ignorant.

they make out the major part of humanity,stupidity and ignorance is an easy way of life,you don't have to think for yourself.(look at what happened the hours after WTC)

Shade

[orange]

I hear ya man

[Blaupanzer]

"Significant influence" can mean, 'They did stuff I care about.' From the point of view of their citizens or their descendants, they are all significant. I think it is interesting that no one ever advocates adding Hatta (the Hittites), or the Georgians (of the Caucacus), or Mali, all of which were quite influential in their turn, but don't seem to have much in the way of modern, game-playing people who think of these civs as theirs.

[Sarxis]

NO

Because as was mentioned before: How do you define a 'great' civ? And even then, the victors are the ones doing the defining.

[knott]

Originally posted by orange
Just because he was pure evil doesn't mean he didn't influence history.

Leave the word evil for the curch.

[Ironwood]

Knott: No. It is leaving the word "evil" to the church that is the greatest error of philosophy. It is by that means that we surrender morality to superstitious and dishonest men.

As to the topic of the thread, I voted no, mainly because it is clear that "influence" isn't the primary criterion of the devs. I would think that there is one major criterion:

Can the avarage fourth grader recognize their name?

Like Hollywood, game makers primary goal, besides making a product they can enjoy themselves, is to make a profit. Who cares what the Ottoman Turks accomplished? Who ever heard of them?

Yes, the answer to both questions is me. But I'm majoring in history!

[shade]

Who cares what the Ottoman Turks accomplished? Who ever heard of them?

1)Not really,but it's just interesting to know such stuff.

2)I did.btw are there ppl who don't??? Q:are there still countries where history isn't a course you have to do at school??

Shade

[DarkCloud]

shade- because he's from California

hey, I advocated Mali,Ghana and the Turks!

I voted yes because, why should we be forced to play with useless civilizations? (Yes, all civs did something, but in ranking the most important, there are clearly 30 civilizations that consistently emerge... one of the reasons many people list European civs as the most important is that they conquered most of the world and influenced through their colonizing- and brought many civilizations onto the world scene.)

(in ancient history however... )

[JellyDonut]

Right now split 50%-50%, 12-12

I voted "yes." I heard a common complaint about CTP was that you would often have a game filled with non-important civs like the Canadians, Jamaicans, etc. who never really had a great influence on human history. It doesn't matter whether the civ "accomplished" much or not, i.e. even if you didn't do much to advance human progress but you made a great influence on human history (i.e. Mongols), you still deserve to be in the game.

Of course, I have to mark this post with a big IMHO, although I sincerely doubt anyone cares about some Civ-addicted teenager's HO.