Civilization 7 Announcement and Teaser Trailer

[Leyrann]

It is worth noting, that everybody has always been fine with including comparably very tiny and humble native nations of North America (total population of Iroquis was no higher than fifty thousand people), whereas the requirements for Africa seem to be some super special turbo important states.

I'd say it's probably mostly because Americans (obviously) make up a large percentage of people online, and they're more likely to be familiar with local civilizations of the past than those of another continent.

Another thing that might also contribute is that Africa at least has some major states in the past, whereas I'm not sure whether north America (as in, north of Mexico) ever did. Admittedly, I barely know more about pre-colonial north America than aforementioned people do about pre-colonial Africa...

 

[BackseatTyrant]

If Zulu/Shaka were removed, what would be the best way to represent Southern Africa?

would the Xhosa led by Nelson Mandela be too controversial?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

would the Xhosa led by Nelson Mandela be too controversial?

Firaxis seems to have solidified into the policy of avoiding leaders more recent than the 1940s. While Mandela qualifies in many regards, he is too recent.

 

[BackseatTyrant]

I wouldn't be surprised if Civ 7 moves away from having India and Greece altogether, would actually be for it if it meant representing them as non-blobs variants. WE've seen this begin with Macedon being announced with Alexander making a comeback.

Plot twist: A Greek Alexander is returning to the franchise, but it's Alexander Ypsilantis, one of the most important figures behind modern Greece's independence

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

It is worth noting, that everybody has always been fine with including comparably very tiny and humble native nations of North America (total population of Iroquis was no higher than fifty thousand people), whereas the requirements for Africa seem to be some super special turbo important states.

The thing is the Iroquois Confederation would still be considered a "super state" in pre-Columbian North America.

Firaxis seems to have solidified into the policy of avoiding leaders more recent than the 1940s. While Mandela qualifies in many regards, he is too recent.

Did they publicly announce this? Because they did use Halie Selassie in Civ 5.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

The thing is the Iroquois Confederation would still be considered a "super state" in pre-Columbian North America.

Did they publicly announce this? Because they did use Halie Selassie in Civ 5.

There have been fewer and fewer post-WW2 leaders each iteration. Wilhelmina lasted to 1948. She was the only one in Civ VI.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

If Zulu/Shaka were removed, what would be the best way to represent Southern Africa?

As one of the heads of the Mutapa agenda the Mutapa led by Nyatsimba Mutota. It also makes sure Rhodesia doesn't make it's way into Civ 7

 

[Caesar of Bread]

There have been fewer and fewer post-WW2 leaders each iteration. Wilhelmina lasted to 1948. She was the only one in Civ VI.

Curtin led Australia during WWII

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

There have been fewer and fewer post-WW2 leaders each iteration. Wilhelmina lasted to 1948. She was the only one in Civ VI.

Gandhi also died in 1948. But I guess he doesn't count because he's a given anyways.

Curtin led Australia during WWII

Well, he did die in office while the war was still going on, so he wouldn't be a post-World War II leader.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

View attachment 694144
Curtin led Australia during WWII

He lost his post (or died?) in July of 1945, just a month before the war ended. He is not a post-war leader.

 

[AriochIV]

Firaxis seems to have solidified into the policy of avoiding leaders more recent than the 1940s. While Mandela qualifies in many regards, he is too recent.

I'll predict it now... Barack Obama leads America

 

[Acepox]

View attachment 694144
Curtin led Australia during WWII

Australia was so freakin cool

So glad they had it in Civ 6. Wish the UU had been an aborigine unit tho, so we could use it in an earlier era

 

[Leyrann]

Australia was so freakin cool

So glad they had it in Civ 6. Wish the UU had been an aborigine unit tho, so we could use it in an earlier era

I'm not normally one to complain about colonialism too much (let's live in the present, not the past), but giving a colonial civ an indigenous UU is a step too far imo.

 

[Arcaian]

would the Xhosa led by Nelson Mandela be too controversial?

In addition to the issue with post-WW2 leaders, I'm not sure how Mandela leading the Xhosa would be received. I'm more separate from my South African past than I would like to be and so may be missing something, but despite Mandela definitely being Xhosa, he put in a lot of effort to lead a racially and tribally unified South Africa. With recent events in the country intentionally inflaming Xhosa-Zulu tensions, putting a figure like Mandela as the leader of only the Xhosa might not go down well.

 

[Solver]

I don't think any dev policy would be based on a strict year cutoff, like 1945 being okay but 1948 not being okay. Rather it's about not upsetting people, so a good rule for that is, don't include leaders if there are people still alive with strong negative feelings about the leader. That's why John Curtin, who died in 1945, is acceptable - as I understand it, he's viewed as a positive figure in Australia and is certainly obscure elsewhere - while for instance Vladimir Lenin (died in 1924) is impossible. There's nobody alive who remembers him but he's the founder and main symbol of a country that many people have strong feelings about so putting Lenin in wouldn't be acceptable.

This is not to say that one can't imagine a Civ-like game with controversial and outright hated 20th century leaders in it, but that's not going to happen in an official Civ game now. 2K of course has veto powers over any externally visible part of the game, and 2K has, beyond any doubt, shown itself to be a very cautious company in terms of communication, marketing and appearances. It's clear that 2K would not sign off on anything that could be anticipated to create controversy.

 

[MarcosQuadros]

I don't think any dev policy would be based on a strict year cutoff, like 1945 being okay but 1948 not being okay. Rather it's about not upsetting people, so a good rule for that is, don't include leaders if there are people still alive with strong negative feelings about the leader. That's why John Curtin, who died in 1945, is acceptable - as I understand it, he's viewed as a positive figure in Australia and is certainly obscure elsewhere - while for instance Vladimir Lenin (died in 1924) is impossible. There's nobody alive who remembers him but he's the founder and main symbol of a country that many people have strong feelings about so putting Lenin in wouldn't be acceptable.

This is not to say that one can't imagine a Civ-like game with controversial and outright hated 20th century leaders in it, but that's not going to happen in an official Civ game now. 2K of course has veto powers over any externally visible part of the game, and 2K has, beyond any doubt, shown itself to be a very cautious company in terms of communication, marketing and appearances. It's clear that 2K would not sign off on anything that could be anticipated to create controversy.

He wanted to build a country for the White english men only, so not controversial for the right people on the marketing perspective at least.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

Gandhi also died in 1948. But I guess he doesn't count because he's a given anyways.

Well, he did die in office while the war was still going on, so he wouldn't be a post-World War II leader.

He lost his post (or died?) in July of 1945, just a month before the war ended. He is not a post-war leader.

Ah ok, thanks for correcting me.

 

[Acepox]

He wanted to build a country for the White english men only, so not controversial for the right people on the marketing perspective at least.

Damn, hierarchical and racially-exclusive, just like 90% of the other leaders in Civ, what a bastard!

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Damn, hierarchical and racially-exclusive, just like 90% of the other leaders in Civ, what a bastard!

Which ones?

 

[Nikolai II]

I wonder what is the 33% new this time and makes our speculation moot on that area due to drastic changes...