Civ3 site just updated.

[Nemo]

Originally posted by d_dudy
gee, then why not call them "native americans"?

given the way they are going to be played...i fully agree that they should be called "native american" instead of a specific tribe. i mean, SOME of the tribes formed alliances against the Europeans during their arrival and during the developement, too.

[splangy]

Originally posted by Nemo


given the way they are going to be played...i fully agree that they should be called "native american" instead of a specific tribe. i mean, SOME of the tribes formed alliances against the Europeans during their arrival and during the developement, too.

Its probably becouse it would be ahistorical and people would be critisizing it much like they are now critisizing the horse thing. Sure YOU may not but ALOT of people would, it would be like calling Zulus "South African unorganized tribes" or the Aztecs "central to south American tribes".

Also, they most likely made there UU a horse becouse so many people use warrior-uniques and they needed some early unit good at attack. This worries me becouse I like the world map and I dont want all my games to start with "Iroquoise destroy Americans!"...

[Nemo]

Originally posted by splangy

Its probably becouse it would be ahistorical and people would be critisizing it much like they are now critisizing the horse thing. Sure YOU may not but ALOT of people would, it would be like calling Zulus "South African unorganized tribes" or the Aztecs "central to south American tribes".

True...we complain about everything...no matter what decision they make. but, hey, what are fans for

i just like playing devils advocate.

[KrazyHorse]

Everybody watch Dan squirm...

[Wernazuma III]

Although I strictly oppose the inclusion of the Iroquois or any other native american tribe, in this point I have to "break a lance" for the general idea. In those centuries since the import of horses, they had become an extremely powerful factor in the indian warfare and life in general, so it's OK that they have a mounted UU.
But why in 3 devils names did FIRAXIS choose the Iroquois if they wanted to have a typical plains tribe?????????

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by splangy


Its probably becouse it would be ahistorical and people would be critisizing it much like they are now critisizing the horse thing. Sure YOU may not but ALOT of people would, it would be like calling Zulus "South African unorganized tribes" or the Aztecs "central to south American tribes".

And to begin with critizising: There is a fundamental difference between Zulus and Iroquois on one side and Aztecs on the other: Aztecs were a real urban society with a centralized state, infrastructure and administration. They knew codified writing etc.: So don't call them tribe

[Sarxis]

Dan, don't let anyone give you a hard time about the game. The true CIV fan knows where to draw the line between 'REALITY' and 'PC GAME'.

[java4me]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
Dan, don't let anyone give you a hard time about the game. The true CIV fan knows where to draw the line between 'REALITY' and 'PC GAME'.

He is right, if it was all real life, then the game wouldn't be as fun!!!

[Wexu]

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS
..there would still be a few angry people who feel that "their Civ" had been slighted.

Dan

Where are the FINNS? This game suuuuuucks!

But hey, really, it's stupid enough to have Americans as a civilization anyway, so stop whining about some damn Iroquis (I think I mispelled it..). If you care so much about how historically accurate this game is, why are you not whining/laughing 'cause Americans are in? At least I have laughed since the Civilization I, because it is and it always have been the most ridicilous thing in any Civilization. It's sad to see Firaxis still hasn't got the balls to leave Americans out. Thank God there are those good editors so we can make/remove any civilization(s) we want to? Right?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS

I really couldn't tell you, to be honest, because I don't know. I would suspect that it comes down to trying to select Civs that have good "name recognition" and that balance out others in geocultural terms (i.e., what part of the world the Civ is from, what time period the Civ was dominant in, etc.)

The one thing I have learned is that you can't please everyone, and no matter which civs had made it into the game, there would still be a few angry people who feel that "their Civ" had been slighted.

Dan

Thanks, Dan, your response is appreciated.

If that's the case (name recognition), I am a little disappointed in those who made the choice, but can say I understand. I can only feel that it is somehow feeding into a stereotypical dismissal of Islamic culture as a significant force out of prejudice and ignorance.

I for one would most likely not PLAY the Turks, but would like to match wits against them. I'm a predominantly German civer!

Cheers.

[MarkG]

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28439