Depends on how you want to contribute to the debate..Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
Printable View
Depends on how you want to contribute to the debate..Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
There was an interesting similar point raised in one of the more recent PCGamer issues. Basically, is it right to reduce religions which are important to many to a mere set of numbers, a mere "Christianity: +10 economy -10 Happiness" or equivalent?Quote:
Originally Posted by King Henry V
There are plenty of people not born in a particular location, from a particular family or from a particular ethnic group that end up contributing to a larger civilisation.
There are over 180 countries in the world with many different versions of them over 6000 years. So if you choose 18 you can expect at best only covering 10% of the worlds current nations... so Turkey is out there with the other 90%.
You can also rename your civilisation... I always used to play the romans or mongols and rename them... I am not so centric that I only play british nor do I play them in the majority.
BTW do you know which general I am referring to?
Why the bible has a book of numbers. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
Good point, i think when they added Abu Bakr in Civ 3, no one complained, so i guess 3d images are alright or even 2d as long as its cartoony or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDC
Napoleon Bonaparte..Quote:
BTW do you know which general I am referring to?
What are you trying to do? Moderatorship can give you incentives to look down on me and my knowledge ? Is it a teacher-pupil relationship that you can test me ?
So a grouping is missed out in the original. If the previous Civ series is anything to go by, you can mod the game and include any faction you like. Even MTW/RTW have been modded.
Game designers, will not want to hurt the modding community. There focus is on a balanced game and race is secondary to their considerations. And besides, the game is often played on a abstract world with no relation to the real world.
I doubt it. Then the game most likely wouldn’t be available in Saudi Arabia… or Iran for that matter. Some people would be very upset if the Prophet was depicted in any way, even if it is only a game.Quote:
Originally Posted by faisal
Though, I think they did change the leader of the Chinese in the Chinese Civ3 version.
I don't mean to be insulting, but seriously, who cares about selling games in Iran or Saudi Arabia ? Chinese might be a huge market, but it wouldn't be the first time a game is not sold in some arabian country for political or religious reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dâriûsh
Granted. But I was merely joking. No, the issue is that the Prophet must not be depicted, and that many people would find it offensive if he was. And by ‘many people’ I mean people from the sizeable Muslim community in the west.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
This is out of topic, but I'm fairly sure I already saw ancient paintings of the Prophet in some History books. How is it possible ?
I think the Iranian Safavids made some illustrations of the Prophet, but not with his face shown. There are also some famous Turkish illustrations, but again his face is disguised, I don’t remember what they are called, though. Depicting the Prophet is strongly discouraged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
Indeed, I must apologize for this off-topic debate.
I don't mean the prophet, maybe his companions are ok, since in the UAE they also check games before releasing them. And Abu Bakr passed without a hitch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dâriûsh
Oh and the middle east has a big gaming community, or i'm made to think like that(EA for example has a branch in dubai, we have lots of lan cafes and such). I play online with saudis and iranians i'm sure its big there aswell.
Sorry for derailing the thread in advance ~;p
Twooooot !
*puts the train into the the rail and pulls down the horn*
~:)
And Napolean was he born in France and does he represent France in Civ...Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine
Less then 10% of the worlds countries are represented in Civ, I hardly see not including one of the worlds nations as racist. If they included 95% of the world then the last 5% might have a case.
I look down on those who argue racism when it clearly is not... unless the makers of Civ have came out and stated they actively hate Turkey?
I have play Civ since the first version, the third had some good points but really didn't cut it for some reason.
I have never thought that Civ is racist because Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, Sweden or Wales are not represented.
Comparing Pacific and Australian nations or the Welsh (considering the length, vigour, durability and test of time) with the one Turks have, you do not have my point.
Sorry, my mistake about ideas or not, this does not give you the right to test me..
You already have stated your ideas rationally, however you do not have the right attitude. I'm not concerned with your posts anymore, Pape.
Thanks..
Oh well at least we have revealed who the true racist is that somehow Turks are above anyone else.
Turkey is younger (1923) then all those other countries. It was the center of the Ottoman empire but not The Ottoman empire.
Australia has been a democracy longer then Turkey has existed as a separate state entity.
No offnse to anyone but its a game for christs sake something fun not something to debate over Im sorry but there has to be something more important:dizzy2:
Turks not Turkey, Turks not Turkey, Turks not Turkey, Turks not Turkey..Turks not Tu..Oh, my wrist hurts..
Let's be frank, here. Have you played any of the Civilization series before?Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine
It's pointless to debate this topic with rational ideas. The game is well... a game. IMO it's pretty good too but it's a game. It's not even on the same world as MTW, which is much more accurate. So really it's futile to discuss whether TURKEY !!! (just kidding)... the Turks should be included or not becasue they were a civ in history from this year and the Malians were not. Turks were much more significant etc.. all this makes no sense because they don't care who made bigger impact. They want to include what they feel most appropriate to the game. But again if Persians and Arabs are included then Turkey should be also. And if Arabs and Persians are included then there is no issue of racism because they already included other "browns" and "blacks". Maybe they don't like Turks in particular or something. It's unlikely though. IMO MTW is much more supremacist in that way with it's hilarious Islamic army line ups of cotton clad screaming schoolgirls complete with girl scout caps.
Except "Test Of Time" series, I played all.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonGod
Okay, good. So, then, you should understand that there is no defined criterion for entry, and that the factions available are a mix of ethnic, cultural and political groups. Correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine