What is a "civilization" anyway?

[ranskaldan]

After a weekend of lurking, I've seen a lot of debate on what civs should be or should not be in civ. Debates on whether the Mongols are a civ or not, whether the Byzantines are just a type of Greeks, whether the Iroquois should be in at all, whether the Malians are more/less important than the Dutch, etc.

Anyway... I've realized that there are dozens of definitions of a 'civilization' out there, and everyone seems to go by a different definition of 'civilization'. That's what caused these arguments IMO.

So, my question is, what is a civilization, in the context of civ3?

P.S. Please do not to use dictionary definitions, most of those don't apply to the context of civ3 the game.

[DarkCloud]

According to Civ, The Civ msut have been a civilization which is:

-Interesting to Play
-Has exerted power over a large amount of the landmass of the earth for a significant (IE 100 years) amount of time
-Has some special allure that makes it noticeably different from any other civilization.
-Was a nation at one time

----
This definition disqualifies many barbarian tribes and lesser nations...

[XarXo]

The true reason to be included in Civ III is to have a bloody past. If the germany history didn't had a "Hitler" surely that now they are considered as a "minor nationality" like Ukrania, Turkey or Korea.

Probably in Civilization IV we'll see Afghanistan or the Arabians by default in the fisrt 16 "more important civilizations".

The people wants BLOOD, WARS, DEADS, VIOLENCE. A pacifical game with bloody leaders only is a kind of the "morbus" tath the people want.

Is the same reson to play a game like Quake III Arena or another stupid 3D action. The same to see the News at TV, or read a historical text. Welcome to the "anglo-balized" culture!!

Only a people that cross a water pass and invades the celts, dividing them with wars, stealing spanish money with pirates, had a bastard queen can make a great emapire, beacuse they are the biggest S.O.B. amount of people in the world.

Of course, a lot of cultures have similar status, english aren't the "bad ones"! Of course, the second in "bad" (Spain) isn't included, they don't want to be compared.

[ranskaldan]

Interesting to Play

Ok, that includes basically any culture that existed.

Has exerted power over a large amount of the landmass of the earth for a significant (IE 100 years) amount of time

Would it then be right to include, say, Ethiopians? Or Aztecs?How 'large' is large?

Has some special allure that makes it noticeably different from any other civilization.

Do the Byzantines have a special allure that makes it noticeably different from the Romans or Greeks?

Was a nation at one time

Were the Mongols a nation? Were the Iroquois a nation? Does a nation have a government? Can it just be tribes? Or clans? Or kingdoms? Or a confederation?

You see... by varying the meaning of such fuzzy words like 'significant', 'interesting', 'noticeably different', and 'nation', we can include every civilization in the world, or just a few.

So how should we define:
significant
interesting
noticeably different
and nation?

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by XarXo
The true reason to be included in Civ III is to have a bloody past. If the germany history didn't had a "Hitler" surely that now they are considered as a "minor nationality" like Ukrania, Turkey or Korea.

Ukraine had COSSACKS, and many wars between Poland and Rus... Turkey had the turks, very bloody...
Korea had many wars... Thus that idea is out-

---
Yes, Aztec. It was a large empire; it bordered the Maya.
In Civ the Inca are out because they didn't exist as a large civ for but 25-50 years.

The largeempireconsideration arbitrarily keeps other empiresout of consideration...

ran- i did not say ANYTHING about the byzantines.

Was a nation- all "civs" inthegame are nations.

[XarXo]

Originally posted by DarkCloud


Ukraine had COSSACKS, and many wars between Poland and Rus... Turkey had the turks, very bloody...
Korea had many wars... Thus that idea is out-

Yes, but they killed 10 million of people in 3 years?

France is exterminating Occitania, England extermintaed Cornwall, Spain tow amerindian empires, well... Blood, blood, blood...

[August Borms]

Originally posted by XarXo
The true reason to be included in Civ III is to have a bloody past. If the germany history didn't had a "Hitler" surely that now they are considered as a "minor nationality" like Ukrania, Turkey or Korea.

Well, that and the fact that Germany is the second biggest market for PC games in the world

[mactbone]

This is an absolutely stupid assumption. First you ignore the fact that EVERY nation/civilization has killed, be it in an actual war or otherwise. Then you accuse Firaxis of only picking Civs whaich are "Bloody, bloody, bloody". Have you seen the list of sixteen civs? Did you know every single one? If you did then it looks like they got it half right already. Name recognition is a big factor when looking for civs. Were you able to rationalize why they were in the game, i.e. "world influence"? I've been able to. The only civ that doesn't jive with this is the Zulus, but that civ is in more for geographical and cultural purposes than any other reason IMHO.

BTW, the Iroquis was a confederacy, effectively making it a nation (borders + culture + government = nation).

[ranskaldan]

dark: the byzantines question wasn't directed at you, it's just a general question to everyone.

xarxo: every, and any culture, in the world, has killed off other cultures. There is not a single race, culture, civilization, or nation, that hasn't massively killed other groups.
Also, France is not 'exterminating' Occitania. Assimilating its culture, yes. 'Exterminating', no. Exterminating means 'killing off anything that moves'.
And Turkey is a 'minor' nation? What about the Ottomans Turks, who ruled the Middle East for 4 centuries??

[Leppersson]

Indeed!!!
Arabs, Mongols and Turks should be among core 16 civs.
And Spain - they've conquested half of the world!!!

[Sarxis]

What is a civ? Pedantics

Main Entry: civ·i·li·za·tion
Pronunciation: "si-v&-l&-'zA-sh&n
Function: noun
Date: 1772
1 a : a relatively high level of cultural and technological development; specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained b : the culture characteristic of a particular time or place
2 : the process of becoming civilized
3 a : refinement of thought, manners, or taste b : a situation of urban comfort

[Rosacrux]

Originally posted by ranskaldan

Do the Byzantines have a special allure that makes it noticeably different from the Romans or Greeks?

YES, very much so. You can read the (quite accurate, but with some things left out I am afraid) description posted in the thread about Mongols and Spanish. If this is not enough, let me know, and I shall provide you with a dozen links on byzantine history and what distinguishes them from Romans and Greeks.

[Rosacrux]

Originally posted by Assur


Well, that and the fact that Germany is the second biggest market for PC games in the world

Hmm... I thought that was Japan...

[Kc7mxo]

Its probably quite the tossup, their populations are very close. however, japan is currently in a bit of an economic reccession.

[Sarxis]

OT

Originally posted by Rosacrux


Hmm... I thought that was Japan...

Do the Japanese play a lot of PC games? Or do they play more console type games? I would think the Japanese are more into the consoles.