 |
| |
|
|
nationalist
|
 |
None of your Goddamned business
Nov 2001
time: 00:27
|
|
Does anyone think that Civ 3 is a little too Politically Correct? I know that we've had many discussions about the fact that there are better French leaders than Joan of Arc (a decision that still baffles me), better Russian leaders than Catherine ( Peter the Great, anyone?), better Egyptian leaders than Cleopatra, etc. Many people think that those particular characters were selected due to the fact that they are women, and a sign of Firaxian P.C. ness. However, something that really bothers me are the choices for German great leaders.
I play as Germany all of the time. As a militaristic civ, I generate many GLs. Germany's selection of GLs is terrible. First of all, Germany only has 4: Barbarossa, Richtoffen, Hengest, ad Horsa.
Barbarossa is a good choice. The others are very crappy indeed. German history is full of military and political legends, and these are the leaders that are given? Lets examine them.
Richtoffen, the Red Baron, isn't all that bad, he just isn't as good as many others that could have been selected. Hengest and Horsa are terrible selections. Though both were Saxons, they figure far more in English history than German history, and may not have even existed. Why include them when there is such a rich history of German leaders to choose from?
I can understand if Firaxis was squemish about using Hitler as a Great leader. However, they saw no qualms about using Lenin and Stalin as Russian great leaders. What, weren't their bloodbaths as evil as Hitler's? Why not use Rommel as a leader? He wasn't nearly as atrocious of a figure as Stalin.
If Firaxis wants to avoid using Nazis (but still uses Totalitarian Communists? Seems hypocritical to me), then why not use some early, 2nd Reich German figures. Besides Bismarck, who I think was the PERFECT choice as the main leader of Germany, Firaxis seems to ignore these figures all together. Why not Hindenburg and Ludendorff? Wasn't the 1914 Battle of Tannenburg remarkable enough to earn them a spot on the Great Leader roster? How about the elder von Moltke? Wasn't his brilliant leadership during the Franco-Prussian, especially the crushing defeat of France at the 1870 Battle of Sedan greater than anything that Richtoffen, (let alone Hengest and Horsa) ever did? Even more inexcusable is ignoring Frederick the Great, one of history's all-time greatest generals. What about Napoleonic War generals von Clausewitz or von Blücher? All of these men were great leaders, and all deserved to be included over Richtoffen, Hengest, and Horsa.
Does the fact that Inforgrames is French have anything to do with the choices that Firaxis made on which leaders Germany should have? Is the fact that most of these great German leaders fought against the French the reason that they were ignored? If so, then that seems to me to be an insultingly stupid piece of P.C.ness. I know that this is a minor detail, and that it can be fixed through the editor, but it is something that annoys me and I wanted to see if anyone else was annoyed by a particularly P.C. move on the part of Firaxis. Am I the only person who notices/ gives a **** about these kinds of things?
Last edited by nationalist on 01-04-2003 at 11:53
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
Nah, I don't think so. If you can raze enemy cities(killing millions) without repercussions in year 2003, there is no PC involved.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nationalist
Am I the only person who notices/ gives a **** about these kinds of things? |
Hmm......Yeah, you are.
CASE CLOSED!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
Some of their leader selections go beyong being too PC, they are just silly.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Reinhard-Baer
|
|
!!PARTY!!
Mar 2003
time: 00:27
|
|
Well Hitler wasn't really a great leader. Ok he was an administrative genius and a wiz in running his country but far, far away in being a leader. We all know what happened when he personally takes over the command whooom good by Germany. But Rommel would be a good choice-the desert fox-I would also vote for Model and Jodel, two very good Generals in the German army. Hmm perhaps the same code of "political correctness" that prevented Paradox from showing the Nazi-flag in HoI hit Firaxis and they left out any German leader in this time period but we all know that the German Wehrmacht Generals had nothing to do with this madness in fact Rommel took part in an attempt to kill the Fuehrer but it really looks like companies are quite sensitive when they tackle this period of time and tend to ignore it completely I call this ignorance of reality
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fatalis2
|
|
I agree with you, Nationalism... Clausewitz and F II should be german GL's. And even Rommel : why is Hiro Hito a japanese GL and not Rommel a german one ?
About the leaders... of course Jeanne d'Arc is a very bad choice ! Louis XIV (as in civ2... and is reign is the real french GA !) or Napoleon (as in civ1) would be much better choices. And Jeanne is a perfect example of GL !!
Victoria, IMO, should be the leader of the english (the legendary "British empire" !), as Ramsès should be (and was...) for Egypt (Cleopatra's reign was the burial of the independant Egypt !).
I think the other leaders are acceptable...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fatalis2
|
|
If Churchill had been thir leader, I'd love to play the english, even if they're one of the worst civs in civ3... and even if I'm french ! I love Churchill !!
Yes, Elizabth I had more power than Victoria, but Victoria's empire was much more powerfull, isn't it ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MrDictator
|
|
maybe they picked Catherine for the Russians because she brought a lot of culture to Russia, and didnt kill that many people unlike Peter,Stalin etc- most of the other leaders in civ 3 were complete gits
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jarvin
|
 |
America!
Jun 2002
time: 05:27
|
|
I think a great choice for a Russian main leader would be Peter the Great, he's the one who gave Russia most of its power. He's the reason why Russia became a powerul nation, before him Russia was dependent of German mercenaries for defence.
One leader that really smacks of PCness is Lincoln, aside from freeing the slaves, he wasn't a very good president, the American Civil War started largely because of him, and not just because of abolition, many economic matters pissed of the South to the extent of causing a war. Washington, Jefferson, or one of the Roosevelts would have been much better IMO.
Mao pisses me off because he crippled China with his Great Leap Forward. I can undertsand how his notoriety put him above the other options, but Sun Yat Sen and that "First Emperor" (whos name i cant recall) seem much better choices.
I'll lay off Joan of Arc because everyone else has said everything there is to say about her, and I'll lay of Cleopatra because i dont know jack about Egyptian history (other than the fact that she didnt really do much).
I WILL say that Napoleon being a corsican shouldnt bar him from being the main leader of france. After all, Alexander the Great wasnt Greek, he was from Macedon.
On a more positive note: most of the other civs have very good choices of main leaders.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-04-2003 10:39
|