Does firaxis know what they're doing?

[johncmcleod]

Hello
Civ3 is a great game, but I think FIRAXIS should do some more research on the leaders. This is probably the thousandth time someone has said this, but THE LEADER CHOICE IS RIDICULOUS!!

Americans- It should be FDR, maybe G. Washington, but Abe Lincoln isn't too bad of a choice.
Aztecs-That's an easy one. They didn't screw it up.
Babylonians-They got that one right. It's obviously him.
Chinese-This is RIDICULOUS! Mao is one of the worst world leaders ever. He stomped on Chinese culture and killed millions of people. If Mao's China is the one FIRAXIS wanted in Civ 3, then they're stupid. It should be on of China's leaders during one of there golden ages when they were an actually brilliant civilization.
Egyptians-How stupid are they? Oh yeah, I forgot. They want girl leaders so they don't look sexist. For those of you who don't know the story of Cleo I'll tell it to you. She fell in love with caesar, and then he got killed. So then Marc Antony and two others lead Rome. He wanted her help so he could take over Rome, and then they fell in love. To make a long story short, the Romans came when they saw he was enslaved by love and they crushed Egypt and that was the edn of their civilization. So why Cleo?
English-Liz is the best choice for a female leader, but still not a good idea. It should be Churchill.
French-This is also ridiculous. WTF did they have her be a leader when she never lead the country. It should DEFINITELY be Napoleon. If not him, maybe Charles de Gaulle
Germans-I would have to say Hitler. A terrible man, but when you come to think of it, he went from being a bum to leading Germany out of a terrible depression into one of the most powerful nations ever. But it would make nobody want to be Germany. Bismarck did lead the second reich, and he's not too bad a choice.
Greeks-I don't know who else could possibly be the leader besides Alexander.
Indians-Ghandi never lead the country, so he shouldn't be leader. He's a terrible choice. I don't know who should be, though.
Iroquois-They were right on that one, though it would be hard to mess up. It could be Sageyowatha (Chief Red Coat), though.
Japanese-I know nothing about Japan's history, don't ask me who the leader should be. It would be kind of cool though to play against Tojo.
Persians-Good choice. The only other option would be Cyrus, but it defintely should be Xerxes.
Romans-They got that one right, no one should come close to Caesar.
Russians-What a stupid decision. It's because they want girl leaders in the game. It should be Peter the Great or Stalin.
Zulus-They were right, it definetly should be Shaka.

How about in Civ4 you get a bunch of choices of leaders and you could choose one?

[Jon Shafer]

Re: Does firaxis know what they're doing?

For the most part, I agree with your conclusions, but I highly disagree with you here...

Originally posted by johncmcleod
Germans-I would have to say Hitler. A terrible man, but when you come to think of it, he went from being a bum to leading Germany out of a terrible depression into one of the most powerful nations ever. But it would make nobody want to be Germany. Bismarck did lead the second reich, and he's not too bad a choice.

Hitler made Germany powerful (but maybe not the strongest) country in the world for, oh, 5 or 6 years. After (during) that, the country was utterly destroyed.

Bismarck, on the other hand designed the formation of the German Empire, the complete defeat of Napoleon III and total humiliation of France (most likely the strongest country in Europe at the time. They were at least considered to have the finest army in Europe), then went on to unite the fragmented German states into the strongest country in the world. Not for 5 years. Not for 10 or 15, but for over fourty. Germany could have handily defeated any country in Europe 1 on 1. Instead, during WWI they fought 3 or 4, crushed one, came 10 miles from crushing the other, and held off the combined largest industrial might in the world for 3 more years.

No offense, but comparing Hitler to Bismarck is a joke.

[hzm]

I agree with most everything except churchhill. WWII wasn't exactly englands golden age, losing the empire and all.

[vondrack]

Hitler does NOT belong to Civ3

Oh, my... Hitler again. I am not going to repeat what I already said in this thread:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55962

Hitler is an outrageous idea.

[The Pioneer]

Stalin was a leader for Russia sure but I think he falls in the Hitler category of history and should not appear in a game like Civ! He has more blood on his hands that most people think.

So long....

[YC4B4U]

I think you will find Firaxis did more research than you think. You will find it goes under the name "Market Research".

Result - no Hitler or Stalin, and the rest are basically the most well known. Basically if you got 10 regular Joes in a room to name leaders for the civs, the names chosen will come up the most.

And I definately don't won't Churchill!

[Darkworld Ark]

As I've said, Ramses II should be Egypt's leader, Napoleon France's, Some old Chinese Emporor China's, Ivan the Terrible Russia's, & the Superhero "Theodore Roosevelt" Americas.

[FlyDude]

Well, if they do market research and they come up with Mao, there must be something wrong there. I can see why they do not choose for 20th century dictators, so why Mao?

On the Greeks: Alex wasn't exactly Greek, he was Macedonian. He didn't rule the Greek empire (for there never was one), he ruled the Macodonian.
Maybe they should have taken Pericles as one of the great Athenean rulers.

[Harovan]

Re: Does firaxis know what they're doing?

Originally posted by johncmcleod
Chinese-This is RIDICULOUS! Mao is one of the worst world leaders ever. He stomped on Chinese culture and killed millions of people. If Mao's China is the one FIRAXIS wanted in Civ 3, then they're stupid. It should be on of China's leaders during one of there golden ages when they were an actually brilliant civilization.
...
Russians-What a stupid decision. It's because they want girl leaders in the game. It should be Peter the Great or Stalin.

Rejecting Mao and proposing Stalin, that's what is ridiculous.

[notyoueither]

It seems to be a balance of fame and other factors, like having a few of the more famous women represented.

Yes, Mao was a terrible choice, but no other would have nearly the recognition factor he has.

Joan was a bit of a reach, but it did allow another female leader. Louis (at least 2 of them) might have been more appropriate as builders of the nation.

Neither Liz not Cathy can be called bad choices in any way what so ever.

Liz did more to preserve and promote the Empire of the English than any other I can think of. A truely remarkable leader, especially given the circumstances she ruled in. A weak man on the throne in her stead and we may well all be speaking Spanish.

Katherine... You can slag her all you want, but if you have a clue you will know that she did a great deal for the Rus, both in power and the importation of European ideas. Yes, Peter would be good as well. However, I can find no quibble with Katherine being included other than the wish that she could look like something other than the proverbial Baba.

[notyoueither]

Hitler?

[Deathwalker]

English-Liz is the best choice for a female leader, but still not a good idea. It should be Churchill.

Please God it should not be Churchill. He was a prat and not a good leader. Liz is fine as the leader of the English and if you want a man it should be Cromwell

[Yit]

Bah, this gets on my nerves...

The whole Hitler/Bismarck thing can go on forever, with each side promoting theirs and downplaying the others until the end of time.

I'll try to be as unbiased as I can, but all I have to go off of is what I myself know. Take it or leave it. (Note: The public education system in Alabama is 49th in the country, IIRC)

I don't agree they did that much market research. Why?

-Mao
I have *never* even heard of this guy. Heck, the leaderhead doesn't even look Chinese. Granted, I haven't been through college yet, but I don't think many other people in their target audience has heard of Mao either. When I play a game, I like to choose a character I have at least heard of. I'll probably never play as China on Civ3 because I don't know who I'll be playing as.

-Zulus
I recall hearing something about an African tribe fending off some other guys with a bunch of guns, impaling them with spears and such, but thats about it. I hadn't heard of the Zulus until this game. After reading about the Zulus, I think Shaka is a cool guy, but, IMHO, they're an... obscure civilization? They're not in the mainstream. I should note again, Alabama is 49th in the country...

-Bismarck
My only formal introduction to Germany's history was World War I&II. When I think of Germany, I think of Hitler, not Bismarck. I am not saying Hitler was a good person, I am not saying Bismarck didn't do anything good. I am merely basing this off of reputation, and Hitlers rep is much more well-known than Bismarcks, IMHO. What hitler did was BAD. However, this is a GAME.

I'm gonna stop here so I don't ramble anymore...

[notyoueither]

Yit.

Are you serious? Are you in high school? Never heard of Mao? Which Chinese leaders have you heard of? Chun King?

Bismarck never did anything good? How about he assembled the modern German nation and fended off the antagonists to that idea?

49th? I think that is high.

[redstar1]

This my freind is half the problem. The US education system doesn't really focus on world history/events, moreover when they don't concern the US itself. This is fair enough but it does lead to the sort of situation where you don't know who Mao Tse Tung is, have never heard of the Zulus and as far as you were concerned all Germany have ever done is lose 2 world wars, and only cos you turned up late for both of em

But I'm not getting at you mate. What I am saying is that we might think Cromwell would be a good leader for the English, or that Rameses would be a good Egyptian figurehead but at the end of the day, the only market that matters to US developers is the American one and you just don't know who the hell we are on about.......