 |
|
Taylost
|
|
San Pedro, CA.
Oct 2001
time: 23:15
|
|
The Samurai is a very good unit ... almost too good. After all, why would you play the Chinese when theit UU has the same stats but needs horses? I suppose you might want the Chinese for their civ specific abilities, but I don't think that creates that big of an advantage.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ruckus9
|
|
Chicago, IL
Aug 2001
time: 23:15
|
|
Um I thought samurais used horses. Guess I've been playing too much Total War. Ah it's not that big of a deal; the samurai as it stands (notice the stupid pun) is pretty good.
As for the history, I didn't really read it but I didn't really expect them to bring up the whole atrocities thing. It's a pretty short summary of a history so I find it somewhat understandable.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
23 Skidoo
|
|
Santa Clara, CA, USA
Apr 1999
time: 21:15
|
|
I just don't get the wheel as an early tech for the Japanese. Yeah, they had it, but the only people legally allowed to use it were the Imperial Nobility! Pretty much only the Emperor and his immediate family. The first public use of wheeled vehicles didn't show up in Japan until after 1854 (Admiral Perry brought a miniature locomotive)!
As for horses, only samurai were allowed to ride them. Everyone else walked. A commoner could be arbitrarily beheaded for riding a horse (why it's a big deal in Kurosawa's Seven Samurai).They should have roads early on; it's what made the Tokaido Highway so famous.
Samurai as special units is not very insightful. It should really be Ashigaru Arquebusiers. Japanese were the first in history (that we presently know of) to use the battlefield tactic of coordinated, massed, ranked gunfire; they did this in the 16th century (Oda Nobunaga). Europe first did it in the 17th century: Gustavus Adolphus in the Thirty Years War.
Oh well. Game play, that's the thing.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ruckus9
|
|
Chicago, IL
Aug 2001
time: 23:15
|
|
jdd2007: I was thinking along the same lines as you. Admittedly it's terrible what the Japanese did but then I wasn't so sure if an article about the game should bring it up.
But then again it's still history they're writing even though it is condensed and you should bring up some of the major bad points as well. I mean these things did happen and if we don't remember past crimes, they're bound to happen again.
I actually learned alot of Japanese history (at least the Sengoku period) from a game, but I doubt if a significant amount of people do. It's a tough call for me about the civ3 article, but I do agree history textbooks should present everyone in the same light regardless of the current circumstances.
Anyway I've blabbed long enough. I would say this is off topic but then again the topic is about the cotw update and this does concern it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
jsw363
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I hate white-washed history. If students were given the facts so they could make a critical evaluation, it would be a much more valuable and interesting learning experience. Instead we dieify or villify historical figures, gloss over the "bad parts" and turn history into national propaganda. At least, that's how U.S. high school history courses are. It's the only subject where the more classes you take, the stupider you get.
|
They want the game to do well in Japan. If they make the Japanese everyone's immediate enemy by portraying them that way, then they'd lose a lot of business. Besides, Firaxis isn't known for its historical accuracy is it. I personally think it was a smart business move.
Does anyone remember the controversy regarding the different version of "Pearl Harbor" that was released in Japan. Similarly, no one wants to go to a movie to see their country commit atrocities.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Leonidas
|
|
Game companies are in business to make money - hey, they play games in Japan too. They don't want to offend, even if it is a "distortion" of the facts.
I don't consider this "Japan bashing" - it is a historical fact - Japan bombed Pearl Harbour and caused absolute havoc in the Pacific. Even after 56 years, it is something for which Japan has yet to apologize.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord_Davinator
|
|
Kathmandu
Nov 2000
time: 10:45
|
|
I agree if you wanna list atrocities then... well every civ would need two pages.... no one is free from guilt.... not the americans not the russians not the chineses and not the japenese.
For the question of samurai's not having horses let me tell you they did use horses but only upper class samurai's used horses to fight most of the other by which I mean the BULK of the samurai fought on foot. So that makes it justifiable to see them on foot...besides they look cooler.
hmmm.... as for a fight between a knight on a horse between a samurai... well it could go either way... samurai's are supposed to be the best swordsmen and those smaurai swords are long...
all of you know about knights... if it was sword to sword I doubt the knight would win... esp. with that bulk of metal on him...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
So, you'd like them to detail in excrusiating detail every atrocity by every civ? What happened to the Ukrainian massacres under the Russians (Soviets then)? You want them to focus on the Holocaust in the German description, and killing of Natives under American description?
Are you upset that the Aztec description didn't go nuts on their human sacrifices and what they did to rival tribes?
This Japan bashing is a bit much. |
If cannibalism was fair game in describing the Iroquois, why gloss over--or outright ignore--the genocides of other civs? Just because there aren't many Iroquois left around to play the game?
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-10-2001 21:45
|