18-05-2003 21:53									#1
	Is there not political correctness in Civ 3? Full PM-box? Change here!

Now I know this will go against the times we live in but dont you admit that some of the civs that were included were done purely for PC reasons instead of what civs were actually more deserving than the other?

I'm thinking the Iroquios and Zulu in particular.

Can anyone sane argue that the Iroquois are MORE deserving than the Dutch or Portugese?

Of course I see the necessity for non Euro civs like Hebrews, Indians, Chinese, Arabs, and so on. If you're worthy you should be in. Period. Doesn't matter if youre Euro or not.

However that being said, if this game was solely going after which civilizations were most worthy, surely the Iroquois, Zula and some of the others would be out and the Dutch and Portugese in.

So here's the question: In all honesty, don't you guys feel that SOME of the civs that were put in the game were done purely for PC reasons rather than historical importance??

Look foward to intelligent responses. Thanks.

	18-05-2003 22:03									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I played the first two civs and it makes sense on the world map to have Zulu and what not because if you had the Dutch instead then europe would be ridiculously crowded and Africa will be completely left open for the Egyptians and/or Carthaginians.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the game starts in 4000 BC so the potential for just about any group to rise to greatness is quite significant.


thanks

	18-05-2003 22:07									#3
	Get a bigger avatar today!

lets take out the greeks and replace them with the macedonians.

	18-05-2003 22:10									#4
	Put an end to popups!

Dear captain DL!

I like the Zulus. They're cool, and they are a great placeholder on the earthmap. I don't think that Hebrews should be one of the 16 civs, but if the amount of civs is increased to, say, 32-40, I think we should be in.


Thanks in advance.

( If you're not a DL I am sorry, you'll find out what a DL is if your search the forum for 'DL'. also, read the FAQ. but Heck, what am I saying? You are a DL! )

	18-05-2003 22:12									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Not only were civs put in for political corectnes, a form of government - fanatism - was also removed for PC reasons, as admited by Firaxis.

The game is as politicaly correct as they get, but still, some guy wrote a couple megabytes of an essay complaining that nomad/barbarian tribes are wrongly presented. Someone posted a link on Poly once.

You can never please everyone.

	18-05-2003 22:12									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Im sorry Azazel......I cant get over that clever avatar of yours!

So wise...... So wise!

It makes anything you write look intelligent!

	18-05-2003 22:13									#7
	Remove this text

Fanatism? whats that?

	18-05-2003 22:14									#8
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Not only were civs put in for political corectnes, a form of government - fanatism - was also removed for PC reasons, as admited by Firaxis.

So true.

Political correctness =

	18-05-2003 22:17									#9
	Get a bigger avatar today!

sorry, fundamentalism. fanatic is the unit

	18-05-2003 22:18									#10
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Captain Obvious Im sorry Azazel......I cant get over that clever avatar of yours! So wise...... So wise! It makes anything you write look intelligent!

Looks can often be decieving.

	18-05-2003 22:18									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

nah Zulus should be in there for gameplay reasons (filling up the otherwise empty Africa) as well as because of the fact that in 4000 BC, there was potential that they would have established a civilization...

i do find it messed up when political correctness destroys historical correctness... i played colonization or whatever it was called that was similiar to civ and there was no slaves... ridiculously unhistorical but they still had free convicts and indian converts though that made up for this that would potentially be harmful for gameplay.

	18-05-2003 22:20									#12
	Tired of ads?

they got rid of fundamentalism in civ 3? why?

So people can only be Democratic or Communist in the later part of the game? What is supposed to represent Fascism?

	18-05-2003 22:20									#13
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

There are much better ideas for African civs. like the Ethiopians, and the Mali ( don't know jack about the latter, I must admit. )

	18-05-2003 22:22									#14
	Remove this text

In all fairness, I think there should also have been a Women civ. It would fit right in

	18-05-2003 22:22									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Azazel If you're not a DL I am sorry

No need to be sorry... this is the same mr usa guy from yesterday.

	18-05-2003 22:23									#16
	Support Apolyton

quote: hey got rid of fundamentalism in civ 3? why?

There is a chat log somwhere on the site.. someone from firaxis explained it was because of terrorism etc.

	18-05-2003 22:24									#17
	Got spare money?

IP! IP! IP!

	18-05-2003 22:26									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Let's not forget the 'other' political correctness in Civ3, namely last few techs on the tech tree are based on American weapons systems, and that whilst the phalanx and trireme were renamed to make them less Greek, we still have the AEGIS cruiser and an insane TWO stealth aircraft.

	18-05-2003 22:26									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

WAAAAAY too easy, Ming.

	18-05-2003 22:29									#20
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Azazel WAAAAAY too easy, Ming.

No kidding...

	18-05-2003 22:32									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Er, on the contrary. Specific inclusion of Zulus is rather a symptom of Eurocentrism. There would have been many more worthwhile African and Native American civilizations - yes, more worthwhile than Portuguese and Dutch, too - to include, but Civ series chose Zulus. In Civ2 they added Sioux, who were scrapped in Civ3 for the Iroquis.

Why? These civilizations are pretty much defined by their contact with Europe. Zulus were pretty much a jumped-up little warrior kingdom. Mali and Ethiopia would have been much worthier inclusions. However, unlike Mali and Ethiopia, Zulus played by the rules of the historical narrative. They achieved one rather high-profile victory against Europeans - Isandhlwana. Same with Sioux, at Little Big Horn. Unlike Mali and Ethiopians, the Sioux and Zulus are part of the European mythology, playing the role of the Technologically Inferior But Still Noble Opponent Achieving One Victory Before Utter Vanquishment. That's the stuff blockbuster movies are made of. And in case of Sioux, it's even better - they're specifically part of the American mythology. Iroquois, too, are part of the American mythology, by the supposed connections between their style of government and American democracy.

	18-05-2003 22:32									#22
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: and that whilst the phalanx and trireme were renamed to make them less Greek

Phalanx was Macedonian, not Greek

	18-05-2003 22:34									#23
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Albert Speer i do find it messed up when political correctness destroys historical correctness...

...and I finds it annoying when both political Correctness and historical correctness pushes the gameplay away... I'd say adding the Zulu's and Iroquis, and leaves out the dutch, makes the gameplay better...

Sure, there might have been a better South African tribe, than the Zulu, but to leave South Africa without any civs, would make it more boring...



... and as a side-note: I don't think the Dutch deserves to be in the game... (unless there's more Civs)... The Iroquis is more important, I'd say

	18-05-2003 22:34									#24
	Increase Your PM Length

Stefu well in that case Ethiopia would just beg to be in after what they did to Italians

	18-05-2003 22:34									#25
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Communism is too weak in Civ3. They should've allowed it to compete in trade, like in civ2.

	18-05-2003 22:39									#26
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Phalanx was Macedonian, not Greek

Sorry.

	18-05-2003 22:40									#27
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Oh, who cares, the DL is gone, now let's dance on his tomb.

	18-05-2003 22:47									#28
	Full PM-box? Change here!

we've had this debate soooooo many times before...and my team always wins

	18-05-2003 22:49									#29
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Thanks Sandman, I have done a weeks worth of defending macedonia in "what will you do this summer" thread, I can do without a phalanx discussion right now

	19-05-2003 02:32									#30
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Does any of this actually matter?

Yes- we could have had the Dutch. Yes- we could have had the Belgians, or the Hungarians. We could have had hordes of Europeans civilisations distinguishable only by the forms of cruelty to animals perpetrated in their village festivals, but what would have been the point? It would have been dull.

Instead we get bare-chested Zulus in fur skirts. Their civilisation is more deserving that the Portuguese because they had big spears and fur nappies, and that rocks. And Iroquois because they had fab examples of cruelty to enemies and their women all had their tits out.