Which Civ Do You Wish Was in Civ Rev?

I'm a Civ-hugger. I like WAY too many civs. If Sid Meier made an expansion pack with all of the civs I want in, your computer/X360/PS3/Wii/DS/PS2/XBox would explode.

Persia - I would have placed them in over Africa. Maybe Firaxis thought that kids would think African tribes are cooler than Persians?:confused:

Babylon - Age of Empires players know them too well, but most other kids would have seldom heard of them.

Sumeria - Same as above.

Assyria - Same as above.

Byzantines, Turks, Celts, Vikings, Mayans - Age of Empires II players would know who they were, but I guess Firaxis didn't have that in mind.:sad:

Netherlands, Portugal, Inca - Age of Empires III players (like one of my best friends) would love playing as them.

Korea - Quite a few of my friends are of Korean descent.

That's just some that I voted for.;)

I think the Vikings

The Hungarians.

Persia - the biggest one they missed

Babylon - its a tradition, no?

Inca - Now S. America is empty except for that Norte Chico dude.

Maya - They're much more civilized then the Aztecs!

Vietnam - (its a nationalistic vote!) and, anyhow, who doesn't like Pho?

Vikings - easily stereotyped civ, which would be good for pop culture acknowledgement and sales

Ottomans/Turks - Important civ. And easily fits into pop culture too.

Iroqouis - There must be a NA civ!!!

Sioux - same as above

Persia: A must! Civ isn't civ without Persia!

Inca: They were cool, and rich, and powerful, and gullible, and ETC ETC ETC :gripe:

Other: I'd like to see the Inuits, or maybe some other Arctic tribe.....

PORTUGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!
NATURALMENTE!!!

plus:
Babylon, Persia, Maya and Inca.

Israel, would be nice!

Persia - I would have placed them in over Africa. Maybe Firaxis thought that kids would think African tribes are cooler than Persians?:confused:

Babylon - Age of Empires players know them too well, but most other kids would have seldom heard of them.

Sumeria - Same as above.

Assyria - Same as above.

Byzantines, Turks, Celts, Vikings, Mayans - Age of Empires II players would know who they were, but I guess Firaxis didn't have that in mind.:sad:

Netherlands, Portugal, Inca - Age of Empires III players (like one of my best friends) would love playing as them.

Korea - Quite a few of my friends are of Korean descent.

That's just some that I voted for.;)


I completely agree with you. They should have put more Civs in.;)

Great Britain, led by our Winnie.

There are some peculiar omissions, true. But I don't really understand why we are playing with real historical civs on randomly generated maps anyway... surely in these days of bountiful processing power and procedural content generation, it is not too much to ask for the game to invent new civs, based around various cultural templates.

There are some peculiar omissions, true. But I don't really understand why we are playing with real historical civs on randomly generated maps anyway... surely in these days of bountiful processing power and procedural content generation, it is not too much to ask for the game to invent new civs, based around various cultural templates.

thats what i thought civ was when i first heard of it... :D

But, well, some people just love making the Aztecs righteously take their revenge on the Spaniards or a Muslim-state-religion America beat the crap out of the world superpower Hindu Arabia or something.

Yep, I'm one of those people.;) :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Sweden and Poland. Sweden for the awesomeness and Poland for the... really big country missing-ness.

Yep, Sweden should DEFINITELY be in CivRev;)

All should be in, but since I don't want to spam civs I limit myself to:

Persians - ...please? :please:
Babylonia - again... :please:
Inca - the Americans are underrepresented
Korea - Asia is underrepresented
Khmers - see above
Mali - Africa is VERY underrepresented
Ethiopia - see above
Turks - very large impact on history, should be in.
Vikings - raid and pillage! :D
Celts - maybe not, but they're quite important in early European history.

Maya - They're much more civilized then the Aztecs!

But the truth is that most people know the Aztecs better.

^i know. this is just a "wish". :)

In addition, how many console players would have heard of a single Persian or Babylonian leader?:nuke:

^Persian, yes. Ever heard of 300? :D

Yeah, well in 300, they treat the Persians like Orcs (for Lord of the Rings fans). They make them look like total barbarians. The Spartans were far more barbaric (they through "weak" babies off of cliffs) and much less progressive (the Persians had free religion, tolernat government, and an organized economy). So, even if the Persians were in Civ Rev, all the console owners would remember about them is when the Greek person says "They came from the blackness." Then they will say (or think) "Ewww....I don't want to be the Persians. They tried to conquer Sparta, and the Spartans were played by cool actors:) "

Yeah, well in 300, they treat the Persians like Orcs (for Lord of the Rings fans). They make them look like total barbarians. The Spartans were far more barbaric (they through "weak" babies off of cliffs) and much less progressive (the Persians had free religion, tolernat government, and an organized economy). So, even if the Persians were in Civ Rev, all the console owners would remember about them is when the Greek person says "They came from the blackness." Then they will say (or think) "Ewww....I don't want to be the Persians. They tried to conquer Sparta, and the Spartans were played by cool actors:) "

But, who tried to conquer who? Killing the weak might be more related to population control rather than the popular rationale. Many tribal groups still employ the practice. And, ancient Greek society, which the Spartans were a part of, provided the philosophical education/government theory of which the Western world is based. Now, as to your suggestion of how influential media is, I agree.

Ok.... Seriously, WHY Finns!? :confused:

Otherwise all in :) Other for Polynesia or other Oceanic civ :)

In addition, how many console players would have heard of a single Persian or Babylonian leader?:nuke:

Don't underestimate console players. Some I know are smarter than me.

i would like all of these, but we can't always have what we want.

... we can't always have what we want.
QFT -- more does not always mean better besides.

The only reason why I want CivRev is because a game there will progress faster than in Civ4.

Of course, now that I own a Wii, there is one game that I'm waiting for sooooooo much. And it's called...





























...SUPER SMASH BROS. BRAWL!!!!

Why can't we generate our own Civ in the startup screen. Make each leader trait and special unit/building worth a certain number of points based on its relative value and start the game with a set number of points. Buy the traits/special units/special buildings that you want to start the game. Maybe you choose 3 traits and no units/buildings or no traits and lots of buildings. Make it customizable. A recommendation for CIV5??????? What do you think?

Why can't we generate our own Civ in the startup screen. Make each leader trait and special unit/building worth a certain number of points based in its relative value and start the game with a set point value. Buy the traits/special units/special buildings that you want to start the game. Maybe you chosse 3 traits and no units/buildings or no traits and lots of buildings. Make it customizable. A recommendation for CIV5??????? What do you think?

YES! YES!!!!!!!!!:) :) We need custom leaders!

The only reason why I want CivRev is because a game there will progress faster than in Civ4.

Of course, now that I own a Wii, there is one game that I'm waiting for sooooooo much. And it's called...

...SUPER SMASH BROS. BRAWL!!!!



YAY!!! I want Super smash bros. Brawl too!!!:D :D

I hope CivRev doesn't get all those delays like SSBB did.:mischief: :rolleyes: :eek: :p

Yeah, all the way till march 10........ T_T


When it comes out I'm going to my friends house EVERY DAY so I can play it.:lol: :lol: No really, I'm serious.:D

When it comes out I'm going to my friends house EVERY DAY so I can play it.:lol: :lol: No really, I'm serious.:D

My bro has a DS, but I still have an SP, but maybe they'll magically and suddenly switch themselves :mischief:

Anybody has a game to recommend to me? Right now it's between The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess and Mario Kart DS.

I've played both but I personally like Twilight Princess better. I mean, who doesn't want to turn into a wolf!?!?!?:D :D

And if this thread doesn't get back on track, it'll be closed....

I voted for Persia to be in, but now I think the Ottoman's are the best choice, I think they achieved more than the Persians. But I wouldn't mind All of them being in it.:p

Is Carthage in Rev? If not, I want them in there.

I'm not sure of they're in there......

Again, why did he use Finns as a Civ suggestion?:confused:

Curse the OP for calling the Scandinavian civilization Vikings!

Finns as a civ to Civ Rev!!!!!!! I just need to see that civ!!!
Again, why did he use Finns as a Civ suggestion?

And you would leave a country that standed alone against Russia in WW2? Or actually... Don't answer.

Definitely Persia, but as a twist have the leader be Sassinid or maybe Savafid or another Islamic Dynasty.

Firaxis should put Persia in !!!!

They should have all the middle east nations in it as well

Civ rev looks awesome but should have Persia in it!!!

Persia IS BEST

iS PERSIA IN CIV REV???

As of now...... Almost positively no........

As of now...... Almost positively no........

that is poo!!!!

wait.... what's poo?:confused:

I think he's referring to Persia not being in CivRev.






















































Ah well, the Persians weren't in the first Civilization game, anyways, so you can't expect them to make the leap to consoles from the get-go.

maybe in CivRev II

Will there be Civ Rev 2?

well.........if the first one sells well......most likely

I know I don't get why ALL the civilizations and leaders have to be pop-identifiable. Most of them, yes, but how baleful can it be to have a few arcanes?

Sixteen civilizations...probably the most wieldy power of two available (eight would have been far too few, thirty-two overdoing it, especially with the way era bonuses are set up). Still, my hope list from the BtS civilizations differed in three places, even accounting for popular taste...

On the offical list, not on my list: Germany, Zululand, Mongolia
On my list, not on the official list: Iroquois (or, even better, Cahokia), Inca, Babylon (just how unknown is Hammurabi?! The code of laws he developed, in and of itself...)

(I'll probably play Japan, myself...)

I would have liked more......but then it's already too late since it releases on June 2.....

I chose Persia because everyone knows of Alexander the Great, and he conquered Persia, making them well-known.

Btw, where could I find a list of Civ in CivRev?

I agree that Persia should be there
:gripe:

you can see the list of civs on wikipedia

Alright, thanks.

I looked at the list, all of the civs that are on the list deserve to be there, but some of them don't deserve to be there more than the Persians.

Where is Poland? And HRE?

Poland because most people of the world think they don't deserve it (not me) and HRE isn't known by more than 50% of people

The main thing is that in this game, the target audience is pre-teens and even kids (in my view). Empires, then, have to be easily associable with those today.

A shortlist?

America
England
France
Germany
Spain
Russia
India
China
Japan
Persia (Hello? 300 anyone?)
Greece
Rome
Aztec (most well-known Mesoamerican Civ, probably)
Inca?
Arabia

believe it or not, a lot of young people who watched 300 don't realize it was the persians that the spartans were fighting.(oh god, save me from the stupidity of public schools!)

That is pretty pathetic and is sadly true (based on kids at my school)

Germany anyone?

According to http://www.civilizationrevolution.com/ Germany is in the game.

yeah, they were confirmed from the start

Why can't we generate our own Civ in the startup screen. Make each leader trait and special unit/building worth a certain number of points based on its relative value and start the game with a set number of points. Buy the traits/special units/special buildings that you want to start the game. Maybe you choose 3 traits and no units/buildings or no traits and lots of buildings. Make it customizable. A recommendation for CIV5??????? What do you think?
this is something 2k/Firaxis could put in a later add-on to the game but not as from the launch of the game. Civilization is about recreating history, it would not fit in the starting concept.

I think it's a shame they didn't put Persia in the console game.

Anyone know about majapahit??
Maybe this isn't quite popular, but they had a big territory.
Almost all of southeast asia
Including indonesia, malaysia, timor leste, south thailand and philippines, brunei darussalam.
It's very big.
Almost as big as europe

yes, I've heard of them..........But I thought they only ruled some of Indonesia.....

No.
Majapahit had rule all of indonesia.Indonesia alone is very big.
But they also rule malaysia, and little of thailand and philippines.
It's bigger than what civ like japan or india control.

Until i just read your message i had never heard of that Civilization, nor a couple of those countries.

Where is Poland? And HRE?
HRE??? Wth?

the one thing is that the majapahit are now not ruling, Japan and India still exist, and most people have never heard of them so they don't want to overwhelm console players by putting in lesser-known civs.......

the one thing is that the majapahit are now not ruling, Japan and India still exist, and most people have never heard of them so they don't want to overwhelm console players by putting in lesser-known civs.......
I guest you're right.
Otherwise it's just an idea

the one thing is that the majapahit are now not ruling, Japan and India still exist, and most people have never heard of them so they don't want to overwhelm console players by putting in lesser-known civs.......

yeh i mean give them a break there all dumb thickos of course. :king::sad:

i defineitly think finland should be in this game

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh................why?

Why finland??
What's special from them??

some people are really bad at decting sarcasm :mischief:

Persia, Babaylon, and Sumer are the 3 big Civs they missed.

Civ Revolutions bias against ancient Civs is sickening.

I chose Persia because everyone knows of Alexander the Great, and he conquered Persia, making them well-known.

Btw, where could I find a list of Civ in CivRev?

Are you insane. Alexander the Great didn't make Persia well known. It was Persia that made Alexander the Great well known.

Persia was the first great world empire, and Cyrus the Great was the first great world conquer. Cyrus the Great made Persia well known, and the conquest of Persia made Alexander the Great well known not the other way around.

Alexander's conquest of Persia makes him legendary. He did not make Persia legendary; Cyrus the Great is main one responsible for that.

In addition, how many console players would have heard of a single Persian or Babylonian leader?:nuke:


Most of then that would be interested in this type of game would have heard of both Cyrus the Great, and Hammurabi.

Heck I guanratee you most have not of leaders like Shaka or even heard of the Zulu at all.

As far as famous historical leaders both Cyrus the Great, and Hammurabi are pretty high on the list.

The Xbox 360 version should have Master Chief, Joanna Dark, the Gears of War guy, and Han Solo while the PS3 version should have Solid Snake, Amaterasu, the SotC guy, and Kratos while the DS version should have Mario, Link, Samus, and Soma Cruz.

wow..........ok...........it's a bit too late now........

I have to question a lot of those Civs you've put in the poll. A LOT.

I vote Vikings anyway.

South America is.. empty - we need the Inca back

I have to question a lot of those Civs you've put in the poll. A LOT.

fx? 10bloodychars

Reasoning behind my votes (Persia, Babylon, Inca, Byzantines, Netherlands, Ottomans, Celts, Vikings, Iroquois):

Well how can they not be in???

Well, I agree on most of them.
I think that the game has decreased the number of civs to get a more simple variety to choose from. The middle east is empty - which is an error - as well as SA and Oceania, but otherwise a good deal of representative civs are present.

The smaller number of civ, imo, is also a result of all civs being much more unique due to different civ bonuses, compared to Civ4.

@lord joakim: Arabia's in the game. ;)

I will not buy this game but I will play it (when my fav civilization will gonna be present),this is getting bored,every game releases the almost same civilizations,then will releases after a expasion with other civilzations,only to earn money.

Why US and not also Brasil??

Why Spain/France/England and not also Portugal/Netherlands/Vikings??

Why Aztec and not also Incas/Mayas/Amazonians??

Why Egypt/Greece/Arabia and not also Summerians/Babylonians/Persia??

Why Rome and not also Celts/Byzantines ??

I'm getting tired of this political way of chosen civilizations.
Its a stupid and all the same way.

I will not buy this game but I will play it (when my fav civilization will gonna be present),this is getting bored,every game releases the almost same civilizations,then will releases after a expasion with other civilzations,only to earn money.

Why US and not also Brasil??

Why Spain/France/England and not also Portugal/Netherlands/Vikings??

Why Aztec and not also Incas/Mayas/Amazonians??

Why Egypt/Greece/Arabia and not also Summerians/Babylonians/Persia??

Why Rome and not also Celts/Byzantines ??

I'm getting tired of this political way of chosen civilizations.
Its a stupid and all the same way.

Because Brazil isn't and never has been a world power

Because Portugal/Netherlands aren't as important historically as Spain/France. Not sure why the Vikings aren't in it, but perhaps because their bonuses would have been too close to a different civs?

Egypt and Greece are far and away more important than Sumeria, Babylon, or Persia, the only reason I can think for Arabia to be in the game rather tha Babylon or Persia is because Arabia had more technological impact on history than they did.

Amazonians were barbarians, not a civilization, and the only reason I can think of to only have the Aztecs and not the Incans and Mayans is because they could only include 16 civs in the retail version and couldn't very well devote 2 out of 16 to American civs.

Because Rome is one of the greatest and most powerful empires ever, and the Byzantines are Roman in origin, while the Celts were not really an empire until after Roman rule.

Its not political, its a lot more accurate than you wish for it to be....Brazil...why would Brazil be in the game? what have they accomplished aside from winning freedom from Portugal?

some people are really bad at decting sarcasm :mischief:

Well, maybe he should have used [/SARCASM] tags!

Why the US? Maybe because Sid lives there?

Because Brazil isn't and never has been a world power

Agreed

Because Portugal/Netherlands aren't as important historically as Spain/France. Not sure why the Vikings aren't in it, but perhaps because their bonuses would have been too close to a different civs?

Portugal and Netherlands were kind of important, but less so than most of the other civs in the game.

Egypt and Greece are far and away more important than Sumeria, Babylon, or Persia, the only reason I can think for Arabia to be in the game rather tha Babylon or Persia is because Arabia had more technological impact on history than they did.

There's no reason to include all 3 of those civs, but at least Persia should be included, they were very important in history. As for Babylon and Sumeria, they were kind of important, but not important enough to get in the game.

Amazonians were barbarians, not a civilization, and the only reason I can think of to only have the Aztecs and not the Incans and Mayans is because they could only include 16 civs in the retail version and couldn't very well devote 2 out of 16 to American civs.

Agreed on the Amazonians. Also, the Mayans didn't do much of historical impact. The Inca, on the other hand, had an empire spanning most of South America's west coast, which contained about 10,000,000 people. And they managed that empire without a written language.

Because Rome is one of the greatest and most powerful empires ever, and the Byzantines are Roman in origin, while the Celts were not really an empire until after Roman rule.

I agree that the Byzantines and Romans don't both need to be in, even if the Byzantines were important in the middle ages, but the Celts were reasonably important, even before being conquered by Rome.


Also, if you see my post a few posts ago, I thought that many of the civs he mentioned, as well as the Ottomans and Iroquois. The Iroquois are kinda iffy, they did play a big part in Colonial American history and shortly afterwards. But the Ottomans not being in? Come on, they conquered the Middle East, North Africa, Southeastern Europe, and the area around the Crimean penninsula. They were a major PITA for a while to the Austrians, Hungarians, Russians, Slavs, and Greeks. They're historically important enough to get in.

Why the US? Maybe because Sid lives there?

The US is in because the US is the only world superpower at the moment, and we've done a LOT of crap in the 20th century.

I agree that I wish the Incans were in rather than the Aztecs...it is my opinion that the Incans are a much more worthy empire(the Aztecs would have fallen soon whether the Spanish came or not...but the Incans had a very stable and large empire)

I agree, the incas should be there...

The Mayans had a massive historical imapct! Their science, writing, literature, religion, calendar, and math influenced all later Meso-American civs. Their people still lives in the Yucatan, and their mysterious buildings and cities have been a wonder to the world since we rediscovered them!

Celts. I never play as them but they are just cool to have.
I was actually pretty happy with the ones they picked for Rev. I only ever play with America, Rome, Greece, Egypt, or the Mongols.

Why the US? Maybe because Sid lives there?

I will tell you right now that the Americans weren't in Rise of Nations.















Until Thrones and Patriots came along anyway. Then they were a force to be reckoned with. But that's our America!

I will tell you right now that the Americans weren't in Rise of Nations.


So, Brian isn't as patriotic as Sid. :)