Civilization IV an Education tool?

Here's a link to an Article in a Melbourne Metropolitan Newspaper.

Civ 4 used to educate Primary school children

When a game becomes mainstream, and ends up being used in schools as an educational tool, does it stop being fun to Play?.

Or has Firaxis, discovered a way to indoctrinate the young into the Civ Community, and being the dealers of intoxicating dreams, they seek to hook the young on their produce.

This deserves a Poll, hey its Election time in Australia today Saturday the 21/Augustus/2010 more Education from Civ 4

I played civ 3 when I was alot younger and it really got my interested in history. I still found it fun though. But hat does sound like a great idea to let kids play civ in class. The more time in history clas sthe better!

If this is for real then it is ******ed.

No. Play Europa Universalis to learn history. Civilization is more about strategy.

Higher Game said:

No. Play Europa Universalis to learn history. Civilization is more about strategy.

Click to expand...

Can younger people learn that game/find it not boring?

Akar said:

Can younger people learn that game/find it not boring?

Click to expand...

It's probably perfect for kids as it's very simplistic and the combat system is almost entirely random. On the other side, being able to play 300+ different nations from 1419-1820 is insane. EU2 with the AGCEEP mod is the best way to do it.

Uh. The way this thread started, it's almost destined to go down.

Bringing more games into schools is long overdue. In a world where recreational media are thrown at our kids from every corner, teaching has to be interesting, it needs to compete against all the other things that the kids can watch or do. Integrating games into teaching is a great way to do that.

Of course, with regards to Civ, it's necessary to make the kids aware that the game only represents an abstracted and heavily modified view of history. But usually kids can grasp the difference between a game and reality, so that shouldn't be a problem. The game could be used to raise interest, and lead to talking about the "real facts" later. Just like Civ players do when they see a cool new unit that they never knew about, and then google a bit to find out what these "Redcoats" really were.

The notion that a game is less enjoyable when more people play it, as stated by the OP, is rubbish though. It's the same game. This can only happen if you play the game not for the joy of playing it, but for the feeling of belonging to a select group people. And if that's your motivation, then you've got far worse problems than worrying about games in schools.

Civ, the original, actually played a really large part in me learning English and building an interest in history, both of which carried through to my adult life so while it obviously was not an educational tool per say, it did really influence me.

same boat as JFleme ... started playing Civ I back when i was ... 5 years old i think, not having the faintest clue about reading english (well ... half a lie ... i knew what stuff like 'look' or 'take' ment from playing Space/Police Quest etc) ... i sucked hard at it (believing buildings by default sucked for one), but it sparked my interest in learning English and history

Going all its Popular, hence it Sucks is hardly unbiased, or clever

civ 3 got me into history

I wouldnt be suprised if most of the dictators 20 or so years from now played civ as a kid

bitplayer said:

If this is for real then it is ******ed.

Click to expand...

Itotaly agree with him, that would be ******ed

CELTICEMPIRE said:

civ 3 got me into history

I wouldnt be suprised if most of the dictators 20 or so years from now played civ as a kid

Click to expand...

Same here. It also leads you to appreciate some of the decision-making processes by leaders. Although I think some of the Mods, such as RFC, are even better at this than regular CivIV.

Ataxerxes said:

Same here. It also leads you to appreciate some of the decision-making processes by leaders. Although I think some of the Mods, such as RFC, are even better at this than regular CivIV.

Click to expand...

Try neoteric world mod, it's the best mod on bts

Ataxerxes said:

Same here. It also leads you to appreciate some of the decision-making processes by leaders. Although I think some of the Mods, such as RFC, are even better at this than regular CivIV.

Click to expand...

Oh, please.
Leaders, deal with dilpomacy alot more than they will warfare. Most just get informed of the plans and give the ok. Not on the ground conducting each battle, like we do in this game.
The Generals and Admirals organize much of the military, and even then, the warfare is modern-future age only, with bombers taking out radar instillations, and longer ranged Tanks taking out shorter ranged Tanks. Very missle heavy, and no one wants to use nukes. The loss of life would be too great. The first to use one again, would likely have their country destroyed.
Unmanned Drones and Transport helos are not even in Civ1-4 (I don't know about 5 yet). Irradiated cities wouldn't be easily repopulated as any other city would be after it gets nuked.

2 examples, here in the U.S.
Under President Bill Clinton, the U.S. didn't move to assist in the Bosnia-Hertzagavainia civil war. It was deemed internal, and thousands died. He got bad press over it.
Under President George Bush Jr., the U.S. moved, with UN support, into Iraq to unseat a dictator who had already invaded his neighbor. Thousands died and he got bad press over it.

I didn't mention this to start a political debate, so, please don't continue a "who was right/who was wrong" thread. Just pointing out that in real life, leaders have many factors to weigh in their decisions, and whether or not to use miliary force, will usually result in some people booing you choice, regardless of a positive outcome for others.

"It also leads you to appreciate some of the decision-making processes by leaders."
There is so much left out of Civ for this.

Those who could benefit from the small impact it would have, are probably, the ones who can't name the capitol of the state they live in, or are too busy buying clothes for their pet.

I hope that didn't come across as too mean. That last part was just too funny to not point out.

Why not. We used to play oregon trail in my days. It never stopped being fun just because it was played at school.

Just like how when historical movies get released on dvd/vhs, you watch it at school, I don't think it has to be perfectly historically accurate to generate interest. Also you can probably learn more about discussing the inaccuracies in the movie/games anyway.

Civ was what got me into history too!

Not to mention that there was Oregon Trail.

"You have died of Dysentery."

"FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!"

The Civilization games are about as historically accurate as Roland Emmerich's 10,000 BC.

Voted for all because I could.

G-Max said:

The Civilization games are about as historically accurate as Roland Emmerich's 10,000 BC.

Click to expand...

It's not just to learn history. It's to learn about many things like diplomacy.

On History and such, you really should read all the article.

The Teacher mentions about teaching history to students and how he'd just drone on and on about it, but as its so dry and dusty, fugitively and literally, that nothing would get through.

This puts it in a fun and interactive way.

On the Poll, I allowed multiple selections, as some would agree on multiple points, End date is arbitrary 3 months, but it was election day, and we've got a hung Parliament.

Best thing they've ever done, string up all the politicians. Errr no....I mean, no clear majority in government.