Some thoughts about leaders depiction and choices

[ehecatzin]

Both of the mesoamerican depictions are rather weird TBH, I've mentioned this before, Monty looks like a down town folkloric dancer rather than the Huey Tlatoani, and before somebody bring this up, "he is in a ceremony" doesnt hold up either as he's not wearing anything resembling Aztec ceremonial garbs. They keep on giving him skull crowns, etc, I just wish they added a more dignified Monty (he can still be a prick) or even go with a diferent leader, Ahuizotl or Cuauhtemoc could work as well.

Pacal has a very odd depiction, and way too Apocalypto inspired, and its rather odd because we actually have very lifelike sculptures of the guy they could have used for reference, but instead went the Mel Gibson way.

Spoiler :

 

[Kurtbob]

I would love for the game to not rely on the 3D depictions of the leaders, something that becomes rather old and tedious a few games in. IT also sucks valuable money from...let's say... improving the AI.

I think each CIV should have a number of leaders (let's say 20). Then, when you start up a game, a CIV like America could have Washington, Lincoln, Bush, Obama, Jefferson, or even Taft as its leader. I'm all for some random action in the game.

I agree with you. The 3d leaders were neat at first, but now I just don't care. It's odd that the devs removed victory and wonder movies yet put so much work into the leader screens.

Having numerous 2D leaders (with no bonuses attached to them) would be a great way to make each playthrough different. Right now, each leader doesn't add anything to a civ except a face, so why should it be limited?

 

[GhostSalsa]

I would love for the game to not rely on the 3D depictions of the leaders, something that becomes rather old and tedious a few games in. IT also sucks valuable money from...let's say... improving the AI.

I think each CIV should have a number of leaders (let's say 20). Then, when you start up a game, a CIV like America could have Washington, Lincoln, Bush, Obama, Jefferson, or even Taft as its leader. I'm all for some random action in the game.

I'm indifferent to the 3D screens but I think just having an available advanced setting for "AI personalities match civ abilities" with each AI civ then reverting to a different flavor spread (ie cultural Napoleon, peaceful Gustav) would give the player optimal gameplay variety. Having more than one non-ability-appopriate personality - or 20 - for each civ would do what? There's already a random personalities option.

 

[Halcyan2]

Theodora and Dido are some of my favorite leaders from Civ V!

While Haile Selassie might have been a terrible leader, he makes a lot of sense since Ethiopia was included in the Gods & Kings expansion. Since Selassie is viewed as the next messiah by the Rastafarians, his religious significance is notable.

As for other suggested leaders: Cyrus, Frederick, de Gaulle, Roosevelt, Lincoln, Hannibal, Victoria, Asoka, and Hammurabi were already in Civ IV. I don't mind if they change things up now and then to give us something fresh. Also, presumably Firaxis can probably do some number crunching based on Civ IV data to see how popular (or not) those leaders were in their previous appearance.

One thing I love about the Civilization series is that it can be extremely educational, by shining light on civilizations and leaders that are not as well known. Hatshepsut, Wu Zetian, Songhai, and countless others are names that most people would be completely clueless about, so I like the educational component.

My main issue with leader selection is that the lineup of male leaders is rather bland. Yes, I know we are largely constrained by history.

At least with the female leaders, you have good variety. Some are beautiful (Theodora, Dido). Some are older or more matronly/dignified (Maria and Maria Theresa). Some are serious (Elizabeth, Boudicca and Isabella). The main fail to me is uncanny valley Catherine, which is a shame since she was one of my favs in Civ IV. One good thing about Civ V female leaders is that a lot of them are *not* overly sexualized, which is common in games (exceptions to Theodora and Catherine but in those cases, such depictions could be historically justified).

As for the men, there is more diversity in terms of ethnicity/religion. But the vast, vast majority of male leaders are unattractive older guys, usually with beards. It really feels kind of bland and monotonous. But in this case, it's often more to do with the depiction (as opposed to the specific leader choice).

 

[Liufeng]

At least with the female leaders, you have good variety. Some are beautiful (Theodora, Dido). Some are older or more matronly/dignified (Maria and Maria Theresa). Some are serious (Elizabeth, Boudicca and Isabella). The main fail to me is uncanny valley Catherine, which is a shame since she was one of my favs in Civ IV. One good thing about Civ V female leaders is that a lot of them are *not* overly sexualized, which is common in games (exceptions to Theodora and Catherine but in those cases, such depictions could be historically justified).

As for the men, there is more diversity in terms of ethnicity/religion. But the vast, vast majority of male leaders are unattractive older guys, usually with beards. It really feels kind of bland and monotonous. But in this case, it's often more to do with the depiction (as opposed to the specific leader choice).

Well, thank goodness they didn't make boobs on legs for female leaders. I sure hope they'll never make manga-esque female characters because man, having a 65 year old Maria-Theresa who looks like 20, or a provocative Isabella, no thanks.

And about the unnatractive men, it makes me remember that my girlfriend, who loves to use my games, said once : "Why is the only attractive man in this game a prick ? (Alexander)". But sure, I guess another attractive man could make it, but who ? After all, history leaders were not known for their beauty, or at least in our standards. The only one I can see right now is the virgin king of Portugal, Sebastian, but I would be kinda pissed if that stupid fanatic spoiled boy made it into the rooster.

 

[Abraxis]

I don't think the time of the art directors has much to do with the programming aspects of the game

They could be inspiring the AI coders with great works of art to keep them motivated

 

[El Caballerion]

I don't think the time of the art directors has much to do with the programming aspects of the game

Not so much time, but valuable dollars that could be spent for the programmers.

Or

Maybe the art directors can do more to customize each civ! Though I love the R.E.D. Modpack, as a person of color it's aggravating that the vanilla game has neglected ethnic diversity by depicting Aztecs, Zulus, Polynesians, Indians etc. as white-skinned pikemen. That's where the graphic money should go first!

 

[LoneRebel]

Maybe the art directors can do more to customize each civ! Though I love the R.E.D. Modpack, as a person of color it's aggravating that the vanilla game has neglected ethnic diversity by depicting Aztecs, Zulus, Polynesians, Indians etc. as white-skinned pikemen. That's where the graphic money should go first!

Normally I'd agree, but as a person of color myself, I think that attempting to depict even the "generic" Civ units accurately for their culture and ethnicity might start trouble of its own. Some people are always going to think that the clothing, weapons, or even the skin color are inaccurate or even offensive. Maybe such a thing is best-saved for a modpack.

I don't mind too much if all the non-unique units are white guys. That means they're the ones killing each other.

 

[Abraxis]

And about the unnatractive men, it makes me remember that my girlfriend, who loves to use my games, said once : "Why is the only attractive man in this game a prick ? (Alexander)". But sure, I guess another attractive man could make it, but who ? After all, history leaders were not known for their beauty, or at least in our standards. The only one I can see right now is the virgin king of Portugal, Sebastian, but I would be kinda pissed if that stupid fanatic spoiled boy made it into the rooster.

It sounds like your girlfriend is very young, Alexander is the only one that looks like a little boy. Askia, Darius, Harold, kamehameha, Attila, Pacal, Hiawatha, William (if he wasn't dressed like a clown), Ahmad al-Mansur, and Pocatello are all quite attractive.

 

[Halcyan2]

Well, thank goodness they didn't make boobs on legs for female leaders. I sure hope they'll never make manga-esque female characters because man, having a 65 year old Maria-Theresa who looks like 20, or a provocative Isabella, no thanks.

Well, Civ V is definitely a step forward in progress (for female representation).

And about the unnatractive men, it makes me remember that my girlfriend, who loves to use my games, said once : "Why is the only attractive man in this game a prick ? (Alexander)". But sure, I guess another attractive man could make it, but who ? After all, history leaders were not known for their beauty, or at least in our standards. The only one I can see right now is the virgin king of Portugal, Sebastian, but I would be kinda pissed if that stupid fanatic spoiled boy made it into the rooster.

I agree with your girlfriend. IMHO, Alexander is the only remotely aesthetically-pleasing male leader in Civ V (and even then, I prefer his stylized icon more than his actual leader screen).

Awhile back there was a thread discussing male leaders, "Civ 5 Beauty Contest: The men this time!":

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=505058

If you're only interested in pure physique and showing maximum skin, I suppose some people might favor Shaka, Kamehameha, or Hiawatha.

As for other possible options, the first one that comes to mind is if they had gone with a younger Augustus Caesar. I know there are a few people who like his current portrayal (being bored and dismissive of the player) and I understand that it made sense for diversity within the context of the base vanilla game. But it's a lost opportunity within the scope of the larger Civ V. For example, in Civ IV they went with a younger Augustus, probably to contrast with the ancient-looking Julius. (Boudicca, Isabella, and Catherine were prettier too, though Alexander, Washington, Montezuma, William, Napoleon, Shaka, and Darius were all much uglier).

Another option is maybe if they had gone with a younger Frederick the Great for Germany, but I understand the reasoning for the more obvious choice of Bismarck.

 

[El Caballerion]

I don't mind too much if all the non-unique units are white guys. That means they're the ones killing each other.

 

[Krajzen]

It sounds like your girlfriend is very young, Alexander is the only one that looks like a little boy. Askia, Darius, Harold, kamehameha, Attila, Pacal, Hiawatha, William (if he wasn't dressed like a clown), Ahmad al-Mansur, and Pocatello are all quite attractive.

If I would be homosexual, I would find Hiawatha the hottest guy in Civilization V

For some reason, I find Kamehameha very annoying. I mean, his apparition, not his personality - I am definitely not the biggest fan of Pacific people ;/ (though astronavigation and all that stuff is awesome)

 

[LoneRebel]

For some reason, I find Kamehameha very annoying. I mean, his apparition, not his personality - I am definitely not the biggest fan of Pacific people ;/ (though astronavigation and all that stuff is awesome)

Ouch, that hurts.

 

[ehecatzin]

Not so much time, but valuable dollars that could be spent for the programmers.

Or

Maybe the art directors can do more to customize each civ! Though I love the R.E.D. Modpack, as a person of color it's aggravating that the vanilla game has neglected ethnic diversity by depicting Aztecs, Zulus, Polynesians, Indians etc. as white-skinned pikemen. That's where the graphic money should go first!

Yup, I agree

They need to rethink the importance of leaderscreens, I get that they are there to give each civ personality and make it feel more unique, but IMHO, what makes a civ more unique its the way it looks and plays on the map (after all thats what you will be looking at most of the time). CiV already took important steps in this direction compared to CivIV, giving each civ real a UA, as well as UI on the map, those are the things that make civs feel diferent, not the leaderscreen.

If anything they should go deeper on that direction for CiVI, making each civ even more unique on every level UA, UI, UU,etc (ethnic units too ) and why not maybe even its own SP tree. Playing a nomad Mongol horde at its core, should be radicaly diferent from Mayan Pyramid builders.

The depiction of the civ as a whole should be the real focus, not the animated leader.

 

[Justice1337]

This seems to be the order of priorities in designing leaders and civs:

1) It has to NOT upset a certain politically influential group's sense of social progress

2) It has to be easily recognized, flavorful and immersive


To my eye, most of the failures with this game's flavor come from #1. Not really the fault of design, but more the fault of this political faction upholding hype and fashionable ideas as historical facts. Most face-palming to me personally is when they don't give certain civs the accuracy they deserve as a result of them failing to meet a certain threshold of political sensitivity. The hierarchy of most respected to least probably goes as follows: Modern Native American > African > Ancient Native American > Ancient Asian > Modern Western > Modern Asian > Pre-Classical.

Take Greece, for example, a Pre-Classical, Western civ. They take a leader who was not even Greek, but rather Macedonian, and from an era where the label "Greece" didn't refer to a single established polity. No one seems to care. All throughout Civ on a lot of levels is a failure to categorize names, places and structures appropriately, because the game flavor consistently fails to distinguish one civilization from another who occupied the same land or went by a similar name. Previous Civ's like Civ IV bunched together Mao's China with Ancient China, which are altogether different despite having the same name.

But taking from one of the higher tiers on that hierarchy, there is no way the slightest bit of inaccuracy will seep into the game regarding a modern native american civ. Countless hours were spent mulling over the details of the Shoshone civ, on top of them being recalcitrant in the first place at all. All the 1/32 Native Americans in the US were feared to show up on their doorstep with a defamation suit.

 

[bcaiko]

It sounds like your girlfriend is very young, Alexander is the only one that looks like a little boy. Askia, Darius, Harold, kamehameha, Attila, Pacal, Hiawatha, William (if he wasn't dressed like a clown), Ahmad al-Mansur, and Pocatello are all quite attractive.

Or his girlfriend doesn't like facial hair. (There is a LOT of facial hair in Civ!)

If I would be homosexual, I would find Hiawatha the hottest guy in Civilization V

Yeah, I am gay, and I can confirm that Hiawatha is extraordinarily hot. I'm also a big fan of Pacal.

I think part of the reason the women seem to be more attractive than the men is because the women are often portrayed as their younger selves and the men as older.

 

[Abraxis]

I'm surprised you guys don't prefer Attila, I always thought he was, by a pretty wide margin, the hottest.

But maybe it's the God's and Kings promotional piece that's influenced my view here, as I also have a pretty bit of a soft spot for Boudicca.

Spoiler :

 

[Arachnofiend]

I always thought Askia was a fine example of a man but I might be too gay for my opinion to be valid on that

I, for one, certainly appreciate Theodora's inclusion in the game. :v

 

[reddishrecue]

Both of the mesoamerican depictions are rather weird TBH, I've mentioned this before, Monty looks like a down town folkloric dancer rather than the Huey Tlatoani, and before somebody bring this up, "he is in a ceremony" doesnt hold up either as he's not wearing anything resembling Aztec ceremonial garbs. They keep on giving him skull crowns, etc, I just wish they added a more dignified Monty (he can still be a prick) or even go with a diferent leader, Ahuizotl or Cuauhtemoc could work as well.

Pacal has a very odd depiction, and way too Apocalypto inspired, and its rather odd because we actually have very lifelike sculptures of the guy they could have used for reference, but instead went the Mel Gibson way.

Spoiler :

The large feline that mauled in apocalyptic doesn't even look like a jaguar. The feline looks more like a panther from the jungle book. Pacal doesn't even look like a 12 year old.

 

[j51]

Take Greece, for example, a Pre-Classical, Western civ. They take a leader who was not even Greek, but rather Macedonian

Oh boy, here we go...