Hermes said:
I think generic religions is just as fun as generic civilizations.
*foreign advisor looking shocked: Generic civ 2 has declared war on generic civ 7*
My point is that part of what makes civ fun is that you recognize things and then change history with known elements.....
The problem is one of actors. By controlling the actions of civilizations, you are only controlling the earthly, the human. When you start to "control" religions, you start to move into the realm of the supernatural or the divine. I buy these games to step into a world leader's shoes, not God's.
Most religious folks that I know do not attribute the success or spread of their religions to earthly leaders, but rather to their conception of God and spiritual ones. What earthly leader caused Martin Luther to write his 96 thesis? None, yet it was a pivotal moment in the history of Christianity (both Catholic and Protestant). I'm sure other religions have similar moments. I would imagine to suggest that Mohammed did not receive divine revelation from Allah, but rather was just the first person to discover Monotheism, would be offensive to muslims.
That said, generic religions don't have to be boring ones, nor one's that are completely dissassociated with today's religions. Civ is about gameplay, not historical accuracy. You can replace Christianity, Islam, etc. with the "generic" religions of Monotheism, Polytheism, Hedonism, Sciencism, etc. Add cultural modifers in front of them, and you can definitely associate them with the religious movements you want to or keep distance from them if you want to. European Monotheism could represent Catholicism or Protestantism in your mind, without offending any Catholics or Protestants. Asian Polytheism could be Hinduism, and so forth. You get as much mental recognition as you want, without upsetting anyone by saying that their relgion is represented by traits/actions they don't like. After all, the Hinduism of Gandi doesn't necessarily represent all Hindus.
For added complexity, under certain conditions, you could even have multiples of these groups. Under normal conditions, being of the same religion would help diplomatic relations with another civ. But let's say you and this other civ have been pissing each off for a long time. Their religion could split off from your, creating even more tension, mimicking, say, the Protestant/Catholic split (I realize my example have been very Europe/Christianity heavy... this is simply a result of my familiarity with them, making me feel more qualified not to screw up when discussing them). The result would be even worse diplomatic relations, and each religion named for the civ that it's associated with.
Even better is generic religions could add to gameplay. Right now, all religions are the same, because Firaxis doesn't want to offend anyone. Make the religions generic, and you no longer have to worry about that. Give the Sciencism folks higher scientific output, but temples and cathedrals give no benefit. Monotheism could get more content citizens per city or improvement, while Polytheism would be allowed to build multiple religious buildings per city, with additional benefits per improvement and Hedonism more likely to convert other religions than any other. There'd have to be some balancing to make sure no religion was flat out "better", but you can see how this would add another level of gameplay and intracy, improving the game, while not offending anyone, allowing folks to make what historical connections they want without forcing any on anyone.
