Civilization 4 hates Native Americans

[Stilgar08]

Once Again: Why isn't MY civ, my favorite region, my idea included in the game: Because it's simply impossible. There are 18 civs, not 180, that's the problem. I liked to play as the Iroquois in civ3 and when they get included in the Expansion I will definitely play as them again and love it.

Other threads similar had been: no turks, no dutch, no vikings, no Israel, no Zulu's, not more than one african civ, no Australians, no canada, no Scots,Welsh,Irish....

I could go on like this forever!!!

You could attack me by stating: "You have a completely biast point of view because you're German and therefore don't have a problem, because YOUR civ is in the game!"
But that's not the point!! I'm playig COTM's taking the civ the great "makers" give me!

And when I'm playing a "regular" civ-game I'm playing as another civ as the German's quite often, because it's fun to change your point of view, your traits, your UU...

The point is, you have to make a choice... And isn't with Incans and Aztecs two native American civ's included? Ok, not NORTH! You got me!

Last point I want to make here: This almost became a "killer-phrase" in this forum and I understand your complaint (I really do!!), but anyways: There will be a mod. And you don't even need to make a mod to include Iroquois in YOUR civ, I think you would "only" have to rename leaders and cities in a textfile like it has been in civ3. So please, do me a favor and stop whining!

Cheer up, that we will get a better civ!!! I'm sure of that and if they wouldn't include Germany I would buy it anyways!!! And if it would really bug me I'd put them in. Period.

Cheers! Stilgar

 

[Dell19]

Yeah, the game'd either cost over a hundred dollars on release and take two more years or it'd be released "on time" 40% complete and completely, utterly unplayable.

I like the reason that it makes the expansion pack more appealing as well.

 

[Chieftess]

I think I'll just give the usual answers on this one.

1 - Mod it in! They give you XML and Python.
2 - It's potential expansion pack material. They have to save SOMETHING so you buy the next expansion. Just about all games do that.
3 - The artists and researchers can only do so much. (Suppose you're working for 18 months, that's a month per artwork -- granted, it's a bit quicker than that) Not to mention the gameplay tweaking that goes along with it.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I don't know any living people who identify themselves as Babylonians.

There are however Assyrians (the Christians in Iraq typically refer to themselves as that)

Also in Civ3 you could change the name of the Civ and Leader at the start of the game, and unless you're starting on an Earth map with Historical locations that should work, for enough immersiveness.

 

[trotskylite]

also, considering the aztec empire was based in mexico (which is undeniably part of north america), claiming that there isn't any representation of native north american civilizations is at least as ethnocentric if not more than not including the iroquois. north america doesn't end at the rio grande, and it doesn't end with the english language.

 

[LAnkou]

as they change the african civilisation, i would be glad if the US native american civ in the expansion pack would be the Navajos
Culturally speaking, they are much more attractive to me than the others....

just my 2 cents

 

[North King]

You know what'd be awesome? If the game developers included an unlockable civ, but didn't tell anyone...

 

[CivFan91]

You never know. They did that with Grand Theft Auto but never told anyone. Once it did, they were sued. Expansion packs are better than secrets because after ONE person discovers the secret he will post it here, everybody who can read will know it, and the secret will be lost. Expansion packs are enough for me.

Not blasting you, just saying your idea can backfire. Don't take it personally, please. Or I will nuke you for being thin-skinned. MWA HA HA HA HA!

 

[Aks K]

I don't know any living people who identify themselves as Babylonians.

Because it is "the birth of civilization"! (if I may be so bold). Babylonia combined the territories of Sumer and Akkad which comtained some of the most cultured cities at that age. I miss the Babylyonians - but hey they can be modded. Same goes for the native americans.

Aks K

 

[mossmonster]

I actually have a Native American friend who was dissapointed he couldn't rewrite history and stick it to the white people.

How can this statement be received as being anything but racist? The sooner we stop obsessing on what our great-great-great-great, etc. ancestors did or didn't do and instead focus on cooperation and working together to improve our current lives, without the pre-conceived notions of bias and hatred, the better off EVERYONE will be.

That said, it is just a game. I'm sure there will be native american cultures created and available for your friend to play once the game is released.

 

[thehouse]

The mound builders were the only possible civilization in what is now the USA that should make it in. At one time their greatest city had a population in the 30,000-60,000 with huge temple mounds and a very substantial defensive wall. They also existed over a huge area and had trade networks thousands of miles long. The Iroquois had no major cities or works and the "six nations" at their heights could only muster an army of about 3,000 men. One could make the argument for the pueblo tribe or Cherokee but both make more sense as minor civs.

 

[I am the Future]

They were TRIBES not civilizations. I know people that complained about them being in other Civs

 

[Urederra]

also, considering the aztec empire was based in mexico (which is undeniably part of north america), claiming that there isn't any representation of native north american civilizations is at least as ethnocentric if not more than not including the iroquois. north america doesn't end at the rio grande, and it doesn't end with the english language.

I was going to tell the same, but you did it better.

Just a question. What do the Native americans from USA think about the native americans from Mexico? There are more than 20 million of them in the USA. Is there any blood tie of any kind?

 

[Crayton]

The Aztecs did come from north of the Rio Grande. And conquered the... Olmecs?... Toltecs in modern-day Mexico. I know I'll mod America to represent North American tribes (no matter how diverse). I think Zoroastrians in Iraq call themselves Babylonians.

 

[Cassius Maius]

It's only a game people

 

[Louis XXIV]

I don't know any living people who identify themselves as Babylonians.

I believe there are some. There definately are those who identify themselves as Assyrian. I'll have to check on that.

Personally, I would love the Iroquois as a civ, but I understand the list they chose. Carthage, Babylon, and the Iroquois Confederacy would be my next choices if there was an expansion pack.

 

[Hyena]

Let's just be thankful that everyone seems to be sick of fighting over which civs should and shouldn't be in the game and why. That got a little ugly for a bit. My own opinion here...is that it's just a game, and with limited space for civs in the game, not everyone is represented. I actually think that the designers just pick civs that they personally feel like playing, and then make them. That seems pretty fair to me, since that means NONE of us have a say in it hehehe. Anyway, im Sicilian, and every non-sicilian seems to have this notion that we're Italian, (which we aren't). This means that my people will never be included in this game. What do I do about it? I MOD the city and leader names. I've got enough of an imagination to look at my Roman Legions conquering the world and founding cities named Palermo and Messina and Trapani, and imagine them to be Sicilians. So don't worry about your civ not being in the game. Not everyone's is, and they can't please us all. Ciao e buonna fortuna.

 

[ported]

I know this thread is just trolling, but give it a rest people. There are hundreds and hundreds of cultures, and they can't all be in Civ4. Some people will always be offended because civs were left out. No one is forcing you to buy this game. Most others won't have any problem falling in love with it, despite it exclusions, and plenty of extra civs will be added (one way or another) after the retail release.

Crap, could you imagine if they tried to get more technical with religion? What if Christianity had a +bonus to conversion rate (increasing in effectiveness after the "mass media" tech was discovered)? There will be enough people complaining about religion as it is, let alone all of these arguments over excluded civs, double leaders, resources, etc.

I'm only bothered by the reduction in overall world sizes (and therefore, a lower potential city count). But if the game's still fun, I'll overlook that.

 

[BearMan]

According to the preview information the Iroquois are no longer an available tribe. None of the the North American Native American civilizations can now be played in the stock game? I actually have a Native American friend who was dissapointed he couldn't rewrite history and stick it to the white people.

The only Native American tribe I saw on the preview page was the Cherokee, listed as barbarians.

What happened?

Actually, Not any of the North american continental countries or tribes deserves to be in a "civilization" game with so few civs. The Americans are only there for commercial purpose. None of them was around for any longer period of time and did notthing noticeable. Or, like america, basicly just is an branch of the europe civs.

 

[Nyvin]

Honestly I find both of you very uneducated. I have the greatest respect for the Native Americans and I admire their culture. But the reality is that even before the Europeans arrived they were limited due to their tribal system and traditions. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, just that it prevented them from evolving into bigger and stronger factions.

"Since in Civ all civilizations start out equal, the actual world events are not a factor."

Then we should include every nation/civ/people who's ever walked the face of the earth.

It wasn't their systems of government or traditons or even society. It was the geography of the americas. There wasn't any long continuous stretch of land like in the eurasian-north african landmass (where you'll find about 90% of the civs)

Since they didn't have such a long east to west common ground for trading of lifestyles and farming techinques and such, they didn't develop nearly as quickly as the Eurasians did. If you were to tilt the world to a 90 degree angle, you'd see the america's become the 'old world' and asia and europe the 'new' (going back in time anyway)

It's really wrong to blame the slow development of cultures on their traditions. That's very biased and cruel.

As for Native Americans worth of being included...it should be noted that the Native americans were the most successful plant breeders in the world and their diet was more fullfilling then any where else in the world. The also had one of most efficient trading systems between different groups of people, meaning things were gotten from one area to another quicker then you see elsewhere.