King William I
King
According to the Civilopedia, Babylon was a "reinvention of the old Sumerian Empire." Therefore the leader could just speak Akkadian.
I don't see the point of adding in civs like Assyria....
- Thread starter pokeravi
- Start date
- Status
According to the Civilopedia, Babylon was a "reinvention of the old Sumerian Empire." Therefore the leader could just speak Akkadian.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Reinvention in the sense that they emulated it. Not a reinvention in the sense that they spoke the same language. Russia consider themselves the third Rome, but they don't speak Latin. The Sumerians spoke Sumerian, not Akkadian.
ETA: That's not to say that it's impossible to find a Sumerian speaker, it's just difficult.
ETA: That's not to say that it's impossible to find a Sumerian speaker, it's just difficult.
nunor
King
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2010
- Messages
- 786
Oh, don't tell me the developers went 'Damn, we really wanted Sumeria in, but where are we going to find a Sumerian speaker??'
Did they leave Egypt out for not having an Ancient Egyptian speaker? They didn't. It's not a sine qua non condition.
turingmachine
Emperor
- Joined
- May 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,438
Which is rather significant as Sumerian was not a Semitic language so it's not even from the same language family.
However, as seen by the inclusion of the Huns, the inability to find a speaker of a civs language doesn't immediately prevent a civs inclusion.
This. I mean, Sumeria was the first civilization ever (and a proper civilization too) and it doesn't make it?
But doesn't it being the first civilization actually explain why it's not included? After all, the ancient ruins we keep discovering must have come from somewhere...
As cool as the talking leaderheads are, they've hindered the developers more than entertained us I would suspect. I wouldn't be sad to see the feature gone in Civ VI.
Sumer shouldn't be understood as an empire; it was a collection of city-states much like the poleis of Ancient Greece (although there were certainly exceptions to the norm where one city's king would annex other cities during his lifetime). Later Sumer was variously controlled by the Akkadians, Amorites, and others. The reason Sumer as a civilization largely "disappeared" is because Semitic-speakers effectively assimilated the native Sumerian-speaking population.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
The Akkadian lasted only with Sargon and then disappeared. After him, the Sumerian City-State of Ur had an empire that was fairly impressive for the time (The Third Dynasty of Ur). To the extent that an Empire is necessary to be a civilization (although the Mayans had none), that Empire does the trick.
I wasn't suggesting that Sumer was not a civilization. I was merely pointing out that examples of Sumerian empires were not indicative of the character of the civilization itself (primarily that of autonomous city-states).
Guandao
Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka
They did have Sumerian speaking units in Civ4. The words were different from Babylon's units.
Maybe longer sentences are harder for them. The Hittites haven't been in civ since civ3 probably because of the language issue. We have many examples of Hittite writing, but maybe they have trouble finding a Hittitologist to translate?
Maybe longer sentences are harder for them. The Hittites haven't been in civ since civ3 probably because of the language issue. We have many examples of Hittite writing, but maybe they have trouble finding a Hittitologist to translate?
Stonecutter9
Rex Michiganensis
Geographical completeness, while a helpful yardstick for the addition of new civs, is no substitute for historical accuracy. While both civs shared a common cultural heritage, the Assyrians actually conquered the Old Babylonians, and in turn the Chaldeans (Neo-Babylonians) conquered the Assyrians. In that same vein, the Hittites and the Ottomans barely share a common heritage. The Hittites arose in Asia Minor, while the Ottoman Turks migrated there. Not to mention the Byzantines who also inhabited the area; their culture was a mix of Roman and Greek influences which blended little with the native Turkish peoples.
squadbroken
King
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2009
- Messages
- 716
But doesn't it being the first civilization actually explain why it's not included? After all, the ancient ruins we keep discovering must have come from somewhere...
Spoiler :
DWilson
Where am I? What turn is it?
Brilliant, squadbroken! I kinda walked into that. But by 4000BC standards, both Rome and America are pretty much modern civs. And I also think its strange to see a civ like Babylon in 2000AD.
But we shouldn't over analyze too much. This is a game that spans human history from far ancient times all the way to the space age. The game has civs from every era, and every era has civs that don't really "belong".
Dark_Jedi06
"Deus ex Machina."
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,399
Spoiler :
I don't want to say it was aliens...but it was aliens.
Edit: And Sumer would be awesome just for the simple fact that we could play as the semi-Divine Gilgamesh a la Civ IV.
Eru Ilúvatar
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2006
- Messages
- 99
Civilization is not an only ancient game. Of course the default game starts at 4.000 BC, etc. But demands realism in this case will force us to consider only 1/5 of the civilizations presented. France is not ancient. The francese and the franks are not the same. The germans and english are not exactly the same thing as the saxons, jutes, and angles. Russia didn`t during the ancient ages, neither the native americans. These were just 'ancient' during the discovery age.
I loved Assyria in the game, I love the ancient civs. I`d love to see the hittites, Israel (the old one), Miccenas, Sumeria, etc. But civ is a game throw the ages, and we have to admit that few of these civs remained, even changed, at the point to survival the test of time.
I loved Assyria in the game, I love the ancient civs. I`d love to see the hittites, Israel (the old one), Miccenas, Sumeria, etc. But civ is a game throw the ages, and we have to admit that few of these civs remained, even changed, at the point to survival the test of time.
The pyramids may very well be ancient ruins that the Egyptians stumbled upon and said, "wow look at that! I wonder who built it."
The idea that something like the pyramids can be bulit by a people that haven't even discovered iron working or horseback riding yet, it's laughable.
nunor
King
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2010
- Messages
- 786
- Status
Similar threads
