 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Alex
|
 |
Brasil
Mar 1999 time: 02:15
|
|
I think Firaxis has chosen the most famous leaders that are easily related to the civs or nations they represent. To us, modern westerners, Mao is easily related to China, but of course he is probably not the best choice, from a politically correct point of view.
Take the greeks, for instance. Most people identify them with Alexander the Great, but he was Macedonian. Despite Demosthenes´ warnings, Philip from Macedonia conquered what we think today as being Greece (at that time, there were just a bunch of city-states that would unite in times of dangerous crisis; take the Persian wars, for instance).
In terms of political leaders, maybe Pericles would be the most accurate choice, but how many people really know him? For me, I would think of Socrates, Plato or Aristotle, but that´s because of my philosophical background, so I don´t think it counts (I know they were not political leaders, but, hey, Plato always wanted to make his "republic" dream real - and failed -, while Aristotle was Alexander´s teacher)... 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mactbone
|
 |
Lift Your Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
Sep 2001 time: 23:15
|
|
AAAARGH! Anyone feel like they're arguing with Bob Dornan here?
OK, you have a game. You want to sell it. You have animated leaders in the game that can look happy or sad. Which do you pick for advertisements. The happy "I'm playing Civ3" look, or the "Oh crap, I just got blown up" look?
Now, they pick Lincoln and Mao because, I'm assuming here. They were the first ones done. Say it again, they were the first leaders they got animated. So, do you wait a month or two to get the word out about Civ3? Or do you use the first two available rulers?
BTW, Machiavelli was probably as bad as Mao if you want to look at it that way.
Why aren't you arguing against the Iroquis leader, or the Japanese leader? It's because you have a bone to pick and aren't intelligent to realize none of these leaders are perfect. Sid is not AFAIK a communist, and I'm sure from an emotional perspective he dislikes Mao. But from an historical perspective he makes a lot of sense.
BTW, who's Lady Jane? Do you mean from G.I. Joe?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jason Beaudoin
|
|
Canada
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
You must feel it convenient to peg me as Anti-American. I can assure you that I am not. That, my friend, is pathetic to even suggest. I never said anything against the Americans.
I'll tell you what we should do tatterdemalion, you make a list of leaders for each CIV, making sure that none of them have been ruthless or none have been murdurers (directly or indirectly), and we'll send the list to Firaxis. Is that better?
This way, we can all feel better about having a politically correct game, which is devoid of any negative historical event.
Maybe, tatterdemalion, we should take slavery out as well, because slavery is politically incorrect.
Wait... but that's not all, we can't have war in our game either because that would only foster more animated and simulated killing. That wouldn't be nice. We would be adopting a Mao way of doing things, and that would be politically incorrect.

|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jason Beaudoin
|
|
Canada
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
quote: Why aren't you arguing against the Iroquis leader, or the Japanese leader? It's because you have a bone to pick and aren't intelligent to realize none of these leaders are perfect. Sid is not AFAIK a communist, and I'm sure from an emotional perspective he dislikes Mao. But from an historical perspective he makes a lot of sense. |
Well said MacTBone. That's exactly my point.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
zoom200
|
|
FYI, 30 million dead in the civil war was mainly due to the Nationalist ( KuoMingTang --- the govt in taiwan now )( also US backed ) neglect of the peasant population and infact their own soldiers. Due to the incompetence of the KMT, millions of chinese died of hunger ,and their own soldiers defected over to the Commies.
When Mao took over leadership in 1949, he lead to the industrialization of China ( despite the Soviets pretending to help then screwed China over when their relationship soured by withdrawing all Soviet engineers, scientist , etc and taking with them the blueprints of many projects ) China was left with half built bridges, factories ,etc which they had to tear down and start over. Without Mao, China would have been able to recover from such a shock . It took a charismatic leader to continue on , despite having to start from scratch again. ( they made incredible advances...and even built the A-bomb ).
However, when Mao got older, he became a little senile and decided to launch the cultural revolution.
So...
Mao won popular support and kicked the KMT's asses out of china, thus bringing china out of its worst ever time ... good!
Mao industrialized China...Good!
Mao was an idealist...not a psycho path.
W/o Mao, Deng Xiao ping would have never been able to "open-up" china to capitalism so successfully.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
zoom200
|
|
Off Topic: will there be preset rivalries btwn civ
like Russian vs American
Germans vs French
Chinese Vs Japanese??
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Blaupanzer
|
 |
Fairfax, VA
Oct 2000 time: 00:15
|
|
Mao was not the leader of China during her most influential period. Kublai Khan was. (I know he's the grandson of the Mongol leader, so what?) KrazyHorse, the cultural revolution under Mao resulted in millions of deaths during a planned refresher revolution designed for Mao and carried out under his orders. Similarly Russia's greatest period is under Peter the Great, not Stalin. Napoleon is the first leader most of us think of for France, and he was a Corsican, started out speaking Italian.
With that vented, I have a question. In Civs I and II, all civs had two leaders, one female, the other male. Will this be true of Civ III? In the earlier Civs, the only thing that changed when you changed leaders was the name itself. Will this be true of Civ III? Does anyone know?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jason Beaudoin
|
|
Canada
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
You're right about Napoleon. I think Firaxis put Joan of Arc in there because they wanted to include female leaders, and Joan of Arc is an excellent choice.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
TVA22
|
|
First of all, Napoleon would not have been the best choice for France, Louis XIV would have been. Under Louis XIV, France was at the pinnacle of her power, and After Louis XIV (and yes, indeed, perhaps partially because of him) France began her eventual decline.
China did not achieve it's most influential period under K. Khan, nor was it Mao, the pinnacle of Chinese civilization is generally recognized as the high Ming Dynasty. Once the Europeans arrived, and began carving China up into spheres of influence, China's decline had begun. China was exploited, and humiliated as a nation for a century and a half, culminating with the Japanese aggression in Chinese land, and the Chinese civil war. Mao Zedong was not an evil man who purposefully meant to kill millions of his own people (by starvation, yes, not "premeditated murder"). That role can be reserved for Hitler, who hated people of Jewish ancestry, Pol Pot (anybody ever heard of him? Probably not, but he was an atrocious leader of Cambodia) and Stalin, who did kill his people because of his own fear that there were traitors in his midst.
No one think I'm an anti-American or anything, because I'm not, just an objective historian--but if you want to talk about premeditated murder look at the atomic bombings, and no one make the argument that it was to "shorten the war," thats just what history teachers tell you. Also look at the war for Philippine independence, following the Spanish American War. History teachers don't tell you about that one.
Its easy to place the blame on someone like Mao, who sought to empower China to be free from foreign control (a theme common in Chinese history), when you see none of the horrible things the pinnacle of freedom and tolerance (America) has done for what they really are. You all blame Mao for being a horrible mass-killer, but you won't stop to look at what he was trying to do from a historical, Chinese point of view, instead, you call him an evil communist, subhuman even, because he personifies a different economic theory from capitalism, and he's associated with the death of 30 million Chinese citizens (yes, a disaster, not murder) ---Because that's what you learned in 7th grade history class.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|