 |
|
TVA22
|
|
To those who have been defending Korean legitimacy, and the fact that they are a distinct civilization, cheers! and thank-you!
This is the first time I've been back to Apolyton in 8 months, I left because this place is so filled up with people who just bash oriental civilizations over and over and over again- people whose narrow view of the world is completely centered around europe, and their own backyards.
Thank-you, for showing me that I'm not the only one out there who isn't totally ignorant of non-western humanity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Veracitas
|
 |
Berkeley, California (or) Fairfax, Virginia
Jul 1999
time: 05:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Oerdin
This is completely meaningless. If California were an independent country it would be #9 on the list. Does that mean we need a Californian civ?
It's interesting to note that just 40 years ago Korea was considered poor even by Asian standards |
That kind of argument is completely meaningless. The fact is, California is NOT it's own independent country (even though it vaguely feels like it at times!). If, say, it and Texas were to found their own respective republics (Bear and Lone Star, for instance), then yes, they would have powerful economies, but the US would consequently be weakened a great deal, as well. You can't go around combining and taking apart nations saying "well, look at this combo.." For instance, what if you took all the EU nations together and made it a United States of Europe? That would change up rankings quite a bit, too, right? Most likely in the Koreans favor, since a lot of those top countries are in the EU, pushing up everyone's rankings. You also must know, of course, that Korea isn't even whole as a country. North Korea is actually MUCH richer in natural resources and economic potential than South Korea, and also has the 6th largest army in the world. Many Koreans are bitter towards the US, Russia (well, the USSR), and especially Japan (a large part of their early recovery after WWII was due to the fact that they sold large amounts of weapons to BOTH sides during the Korean War).
Your last sentence is very interesting. True, about 40 or 50 years ago, Korea was on an economic level with some of the poorest African nations. Which merely makes it more amazing how quickly they've turned things around.
But, by bringing up that example, you're trying to argue that Korea was insignifcant in the past, aren't you? Ok, well, let's see...even only a 100 years ago, the US wasn't a major geo-political power. A few hundred years ago and the US didn't even exist. Also, a few hundred years ago, Korea (well, one of the three Korean kingdoms, Koguryo) was the mightiest power in Asia, rivalling the current Tang Dynasty in China and controlling all of current day North Korea and a huge chunk of Manchuria. In fact, constant warfare with the Chinese actually caused the COLLAPSE of the Chinese Tang dynasty. ON TOP OF THAT, there were TWO MORE Korean kingdoms that all fought amongst themselves. The reason that Koguryo fell from power was that an embittered Sui dynasty (the dynasty that emerged in China after Tang fell) allied itself with another Korean kingdom (Silla) to overthrow Koguryo and Paekche (the third kingdom). BIG MISTAKE, because after the Chinese pulverized the once mighty Koguryo (the Chinese hated them so much that they burned EVERYTHING to the extent that modern scholars can only speculate on the everyday aspects of the kingdom) and Paekche, they came after Silla. If Silla hadn't fought back so valiantly, Korea might today just be another Chinese province. Instead, they accepted nominal Chinese suzerainty.
But, if Koguryo had not lost the war and absorbed the Sui instead, who knows what sort of world power the Koreans might be today instead of economic lackeys of the US?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
thinkingamer
|
|
quote:
But, by bringing up that example, you're trying to argue that Korea was insignifcant in the past, aren't you? Ok, well, let's see...even only a 100 years ago, the US wasn't a major geo-political power. A few hundred years ago and the US didn't even exist. Also, a few hundred years ago, Korea (well, one of the three Korean kingdoms, Koguryo) was the mightiest power in Asia, rivalling the current Tang Dynasty in China and controlling all of current day North Korea and a huge chunk of Manchuria. In fact, constant warfare with the Chinese actually caused the COLLAPSE of the Chinese Tang dynasty. ON TOP OF THAT, there were TWO MORE Korean kingdoms that all fought amongst themselves. The reason that Koguryo fell from power was that an embittered Sui dynasty (the dynasty that emerged in China after Tang fell) allied itself with another Korean kingdom (Silla) to overthrow Koguryo and Paekche (the third kingdom). BIG MISTAKE, because after the Chinese pulverized the once mighty Koguryo (the Chinese hated them so much that they burned EVERYTHING to the extent that modern scholars can only speculate on the everyday aspects of the kingdom) and Paekche, they came after Silla. If Silla hadn't fought back so valiantly, Korea might today just be another Chinese province. Instead, they accepted nominal Chinese suzerainty. |
Verancitas....... Where did u learn this? Sui destroyed itself mainly because they attacked Koguryo with more than 1,100,000 men and lost.
The combined forces of Tang and Silla destroyed Koguryo, but really Koguryo destroyed themselves (the main reason that they lost was because two princes divided the nation by 2 to obtain the throne in the middle of the war against Tang and Silla).
quote:
Personally I think countries which have had a greater world impact (such as Holland or Portugal) or who come from areas which are poorly represented in Civ3 (such as the Inca or the Ethiopians) should get the green light before Korea. Yes, Korea is a unique country. Yes, it has an interesting history. No, it doesn't merit inclusion. |
That is ur opinion and i respect it. But it is arguable that Korea has equal impact in the world as Japan (specially because Koreans taught Japanese people most of aspects of civilization such as writting, bronce and iron working, etc.). And before 16th century, Korea had much more impact in East Asian history than Japan. I guess ur "world impact" is more of a "western world impact"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bisonbison
|
 |
my bathtub, CA
Aug 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
I think Korea is tops. It's a great peninsula, even better than florida!
But there are already 4 central or east asian civs, and only three in all of the Americas. I'm all for clutching at the faded remnants of a once proud nation, but in many ways Korea = Poland. And Poland doesn't deserve a spot.
And don't try to argue with me on that last point. I anticipate all your responses ahead of time:
You will claim:
1. Poland is in Europe and Korea is in Asia.
You're wrong. Europe and Asia are clearly one continent arbitrarily divided in two to perpetuate a false distinction between its peoples. Therefore? Poland is in Asia too.
2. Korea did really cool things and fought wars and was real important way back when.
You're wrong. The things Korea did were lame or at best just average, and the wars they fought and the importance they enjoyed were dumb. Just like Poland. I mean Poland was huge in the thirteenth century, but a good mongol invasion was all Poland or Korea needed to revert to their third-teir ways for the rest of history.
3. Even now, Korea does important stuff.
You're wrong. South Koreans do mediocre stuff, like play counter-strike and win soccer matches. North Koreans are busy trying not to starve to death in the grip of an absolutist regime. Korea itself does very little. It is an arbitrarily defined geographical region. It just kind of sits there while Koreans do things on top of it. Poland, as I need not remind you, is not divided, and so achieves its mediocrity all at once
4. Asia w/Korea is still way less crowded than Europe w/o Poland.
You're wrong. Europe and Asia are the same landmass, so any additional civ increases the crowding for all of it. If you're so concerned about crowding why don't you look at South America?
5. People who don't want a Korean civ hate Koreans.
You're wrong. People who do want a Korean civ hate Koreans, because including a Korean civ will likely increase sales of Civ3 in South Korea, thereby keeping more South Koreans inactive in front of their computers instead of outside beating Italy in the world cup. Now who hates Koreans? You do!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sm24
|
|
Seoul
Dec 2001
time: 05:20
|
|
I've been a lurker on these boards for a long time, so please accept my apologies in advance if I trip over myself in my first post.
With respect to Korea - maybe it's an oversimplification to say simply "games are games" and civ3 is not intended to resemble life nor is it a simulation of life; ("life" meaning the grand sweep of history and cultures).
Putting aside this simple dimestore philosophy, if you want to evaluate whether Korea (or any other civ should be in a "game"), consider the span of time in the game. Ask yourself, what civilizations (cultures) have been around in a coherent fashion and for how long? The Babylonians? A brief stint of only a couple of hundreds years (preceded and followed by Sumer, Assyria, Hittites and Medes). (Apologies to any die-hard Babylonians out there.) The point is the same could be done with many of the civs in the game. Most of them have brief moments of identity in a sweep of time.
In terms of Korea, if you wanted to measure continuity in terms of an identified people, a language, a place, a culture, Korea has many of these factors for a far longer time than most of the civs in the game. Many folks here seem to have some idea of this. For those that don't, take time to find out. It's pretty damn interesting (and maybe it will lead you to find out why Andy Grove gave a speech a few years ago entitled "I fear Korea.")
Now the same argument can be made to include "Eskimos" as a civ in the game. And quite possibly, if Eskimos has the resources to develop further in organization they would have had acendencies and declines in the scope of history.
O.K., so someone should say "what's the point?" Simply this, reach beyond what you know and, in a game playing mode, simply ask "would it be fun to play as X in achieving a continuity in the scope of time."
(As background, I've lived in Japan for about five years and have lived in Korea for the past 4 years. If anyone wanted to know whether the Korean psyche is unique, they should have been with me in the Daejon Stadium last Tuesday. I have never experience such a large collective set of emotions galvanized into a collective pride of culture and being.)
Anyway, my two cents...or more like half a buck at this point.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
thinkingamer
|
|
Bison, ur unsupported statements only reveals ur loving affection towards the Koreans people.
Last edited by thinkingamer on 21-06-2002 at 07:26
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kring
|
 |
Wichita,KS,USA
Dec 2001
time: 23:20
|
|
sm24, good first post. Looking forward to hearing more from you on all subjects.
Time will tell whether or not the Koreans are in. I have no personal preference. They are either in or they aren't. We can't change it either way. I will play all 8 civs, whatever they may be.
Last edited by kring on 22-06-2002 at 09:29
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mikhail
|
|
flesh.and.binary
Mar 2002
time: 23:20
|
|
*sigh*
Two things:
1. Korea deserves be in Civ 3
2. As do 30 other civilizations
|
|
| |
|
|
|
thinkingamer
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Oerdin
No, when I say world impact I mean being an active military/economic/political force in many different parts of the world. To continue the previous example countries that have had large overseas positions (such as Holland, Portugal, or even Turkey) would qualify while regional powers such as Korea, Afganistan, and others would not. |
Oerdin.... imperializim is a western world value, not a Eastern one. But yes, in ur point of view, Korea doesnt deserve to be in the expansion. But for Koreans surviveving for more than 3000 years is a value.
Besides, while someone can consider an overseapower influence a possitive influence, it can also be a negative influence to others. I mean, all South American nations that were influenced by the Spanish thinks that what Spanish did to them was not right, and they have their own identity (which in overall its not necessary a good influence).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CivGeneral
|
 |
Mara Jade of the Jade Commandos
Dec 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
I dont mind Korea being in the expantion pack. The Koreans would be a perfict civilization for a Korean War Scenario. ( I just hope Firaxis include the MiG-15 and the F-86 Saber  ). The Americans can represent the UN forces while the Koreans represents there northern counterpart, China would be in the scenario too. I dont remember what role China played in the Korean war but I do remember MacArthur wanted to go pass the river bordering the two countries. Thankfuly Truman held him back (and removed him from his possition.) If MacArthur did went pased "The river bordering China and North Korea" the result would be a nuclear war.
Korea defenatly has a lot of culture and history. They defenatly do not want China and Japan on there land (Correct me if I am wrong), the same thing with Vieatnam. The Vietnamies did not what Chiniese troops on there turf.
quote:
You're wrong. Europe and Asia are clearly one continent arbitrarily divided in two to perpetuate a false distinction between its peoples. Therefore? Poland is in Asia too. - Bisonbison |
I guess thats why modern geography books in school calls Europe and Asia Euroasia
quote:
I think Korea is tops. It's a great peninsula, even better than florida! - Bisonbison |
Only one problem. The winters are harsh. (See any History book, They usualy show some of the Korean War pictures in the winter season. Quite plesent in the summer and harsh in the winter. With the exception of the peninsula whitch is larger than Florada, Korea does not resemble Florada, It resembles more like the Albany area of New York state.
quote:
5. People who don't want a Korean civ hate Koreans.
You're wrong. People who do want a Korean civ hate Koreans, because including a Korean civ will likely increase sales of Civ3 in South Korea, thereby keeping more South Koreans inactive in front of their computers instead of outside beating Italy in the world cup. Now who hates Koreans? You do! |
As I said before, I dont mind Korea  . For any people who do not like the Koreans, There is always the editor that comes with the game to rename them (The Civ's name.
quote:
I dont think that will change but what will there UU be?
Cathrage cant have elephants since India has them already? And what about Vikings, will they copy off AoE, Bersekers?
-TrueLight |
The Viking can have two UU. The Bersekers (Or Huskarl), and the Longboat (More supperior version of the Galley that has the abbility to stop on ocean tiles with out sinking)
The Cathrage can have a diffrent version of the elephants than the Indians and would be advalible earlyer than the Indian's Elephant unit
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tridotan1
|
|
By reading most of this thread it seems blindingly obvious that only one of the Ottomans and the Arabs exist. They are both Arabs, they both have bits of evidence here and there and, afterall it would be quite clever, from a marketing point of view, to keep the final civ under wraps until relaease date.
I think we can keep guessing about one more civ, maybe since so many people think they should exist it will be the Hebrews, or perhaps the Polish, Canadians, Australians, Incas or Austrians. Who knows?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GeneralTacticus
|
 |
of Melbourne, Australia
Dec 2001
time: 15:20
|
|
quote:
No, when I say world impact I mean being an active military/economic/political force in many different parts of the world. To continue the previous example countries that have had large overseas positions (such as Holland, Portugal, or even Turkey) would qualify while regional powers such as Korea, Afganistan, and others would not. |
That would also disqualify Persia, Babylon, Egypt, Rome, Greece, Zululand, Aztecs and Iroqouis at least.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Q Cubed
|
 |
t3h y3ll0w p3ril
Apr 1999
time: 23:20
|
|
so true. i have to say, korea hasn't had the benefit of persian, babylonaian, egyptian, roman, greek, zulu, aztec, iroquois, portuguese, spanish, italian, polish...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
siredgar
|
 |
New York, NY
Nov 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
It is apparent that many of you have not even studied Korean history prior to the 17th Century. If you had, you would recognize that the Koreans established one of the greatest civilizations in history.
It is quite interesting to note that there are posters here citing Japanese occupation (1910-1945), the Korean War (1950-1953), and the rags-to-riches story of Korean economic recovery (1960-1990) as factors to determining Korea as a "worthy" civilization. People, these are ALL events from the 20th Century!
Indeed, it is unfair to judge a civilization with over 5,000 years of history based on a single century. For those of you that do, why don't you apply the same logic to Greece or Egypt?
Korea has one of the longest-lasting and yet most advanced civilizations of the world:
Did you know that the Koreans defeated the Chinese many, many times, even leading to the collapse of the Sui Dynasty?
Did you know that at one point Koreans controlled most of Manchuria and parts of Siberia-- territory nearly the size of all of Western Europe?
Did you know that the Koreans provided the roots of Japanese civilization and that just last year the Emperor of Japan acknowledged Korean ancestry?
Did you know that the Koreans invented the world's first...
1. ironclad warship
2. printing press
3. meterological measuring device
among other things?
Did you know that during a time when nearly everyone in Europe and Asia relied on either the Greek (Phoenician) or Chinese (Han) writing systems, the Koreans invented a unique one that is now considered one of the world's most phonetically accurate?
The list goes on...
It is also interesting to note that Korea is one of the few civilizations to make a "comeback". While civilizations like Greece and Egypt have yet to emulate their former glory, it looks like Korea is well on its way.
Today, many of the advances in telecommunications, semiconductors, and biotechnology are emerging in Korea. It's society is making innovations in not only science, but the arts and culture. Korean pop culture (music, film, and TV) is sweeping Asia and Korean modern art and poetry is receiving wide recognition in Europe and the U.S.
But I still see Korea's most glorious period as primarily the 15th-16th Centuries and these most recent accomplishments during the late 1990's pale in comparison to anything acheived during this time.
So, please take everything into perspective before you judge an entire civilization.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-06-2002 23:48
The Vikings are still building there berserkers in thw modern era.
|