Greece confirmed - one spot left for a civ

It's simple: Latin America (plus Spain) Market have more buyers then the Scandinavia one.
But the medle east region is still poor. so Babylon or Persia. One of the two.
 
Well lets not forget that since they are implementing a 1 leader per civ rule again that in the expansions (I assume we will get at least 2 again) will probably be adding more nations assuming they stick to their guns on this.
 
They need a pc a money to buy the game too... Also Latin America... they got the Aztecs, or else we could include those in America of Scandinavian descent. Anyway, I don't think they're trying to squeeze the most out of the markets. They don't have to, they can always include those missing in the expansions.
 
They need a pc a money to buy the game too... Also Latin America... they got the Aztecs, or else we could include those in America of Scandinavian descent. Anyway, I don't think they're trying to squeeze the most out of the markets. They don't have to, they can always include those missing in the expansions.

Aztecs don't cover everything. Spain at its height was massive.
 
qui sera, sera

but i don't believe that in the expansion there will be a second leader. it's to high tech the leader's interaction (hope for an option to reduse it or frooze it), you couldn't not have a second leader. It's most like to return to the 1st and 3rd Civ's. One Leader one civ.

On the other hand, where is Shaka?
 
He was probably replaced with Askia of Songhai. They're the new crazy homocidal african civ. Shaka will be missed.
 
Possibly. It would be a shame to never beat down on Shaka again... or take control and roleplay as his AI. :mwaha:
 
I wonder if the consumer-market isn't larger in Scandinavia than Spain, but they need something to sell the expansions too I guess...

I'm guessing Persia.

I think you are right about that consumer market.

On a sidenote there are city states, maybe the vikings are one of these. Maybe those "vikings" in the trailer is just barbarians :) It could be anything.

I am a dane myself, yet I would rather have spain than "the vikings". I dont even think the vikings were a civilization - they were more like pirates, with farming skills. Hardly qualifies as a civilization.
 
I've heard an Icelander (or maybe he was a Swede) say a long time ago on CFC that using "Viking" for a "Scandinavian" civ was like having a "Cowboy Civ" instead of an "American Civ".
 
How come vikings are used in Scandanavian music and alot of the myths aren't just about trolls.I'm confused why some scandanavians embrace the vikings and others hate them.I mean I'm not a huge fan of cowboys,but one must respect the fact that without cowboys much of the US west would still be lawless and also without cowboys the east coast would be dependant on seafood.

Anyway if its based on money then its probably going to be Persia or Spain since both have alot of people and had a huge historical influence.If its based on playing style then vikings or maybe a tribe like Khmer or early Vietnam.

I'd personally would love to see a Eastern European civ,but that'll never happen.
 
How come vikings are used in Scandanavian music and alot of the myths aren't just about trolls.I'm confused why some scandanavians embrace the vikings and others hate them.I mean I'm not a huge fan of cowboys,but one must respect the fact that without cowboys much of the US west would still be lawless and also without cowboys the east coast would be dependant on seafood.

Anyway if its based on money then its probably going to be Persia or Spain since both have alot of people and had a huge historical influence.If its based on playing style then vikings or maybe a tribe like Khmer or early Vietnam.

I'd personally would love to see a Eastern European civ,but that'll never happen.

I think people see cowboys as gunmen because of movies, but they were just herders that lived in lawless territory hence they were often armed. I dont hate vikings, and I dont hate cowboys, neither of them are just suited to be defined as a civilization.
 
everybody forgot about celts!
IMO, for vanilla persia will be IN and with the EP some new civs may come, together with new game features: spain, dutch, portugal,vikings, celts, maya and maybe zulu, ethiopia, khmer

mali won't come back as there is already songhai
i think holy roman, byzantine and native americans won't be back neither.

i think babylon, carthage, sumer etc. will be city-states.
 
Vikings might fit for scandinavia, but they are only about 25 millions (S,N,Dk,Fin) and don't identify themselves with vikings that much any more (I lived half a year in Nidaros - old name for Trondheim! - and there's not so much to be seen from viking history, really nice place by the way :D )
Coming from Denmark then I can say that Norse is a very great part of our culture, only standing down for the constitutional monarchy and Christianity.
 
As long as I know Finnish guys are different than nordic cultures (S/N/Dk/Iceland/Faroe/Greenland etc)
Fin language is also in Ural/Altai language family, in Ural branch.

Fins, Ugors etc. I even heard some articles point a relation between Turks/Fins but I don't know how much it can be true :)

By the way, Copenhagen is a very nice city! I stayed there 2 weeks.

Trondheim was the Viking capitol in civ2 (i think it was civ2)
 
You guys do realize that if every civ that “deserves” to be in vanilla would also have “deserved” to have been in vanilla in all of the previous versions of Civ – right? If every deserving civ (assuming you can limit that to 18 anyway) made it in, then there wouldn’t be very much change in the games from version to version.

I for one am quite happy with a little mix-up of the starting civs. I would love it if a dark horse candidate “won” inclusion – like the Native Americans or Polynesians. If it was always the same list of “deserving” civs it would be boring.
 
Coming from Denmark then I can say that Norse is a very great part of our culture, only standing down for the constitutional monarchy and Christianity.

I had the impression that the Danish are more into that part of their history than the Norwegians. Norwegian tourism featured nature more prominent than medieval history, and troll mythology is more prominent than viking legends. Catholic heritage was especially big in Trondheim, the 1000 year-old Nidaros Cathedral being the biggest church in Scandinavia. But that was just an exchange students impression.

Back to topic, when I compare my impression from spanish and nordic mentality, I have a feeling spanish customers would be more interested in playing their own country, but I might be wrong (I guess the regions with separation tendencies are not very fond of Isabella and catholicism, so I'm not sure).

Then again, the Norwegians were very fond of "nerdy" stuff like comics, board games and so on, so they might be a comparably big market for civ.


Just a few assumptions about two of my favourite regions (I've been to both with greet enthusiasm, and could imagine to live in either), not meant to insult anybody!

PS: I gave up on Austria beeing ever acknowledged as the global player it was for centuries, Empire: Total War being the single exception. :king:
 
As long as I know Finnish guys are different than nordic cultures (S/N/Dk/Iceland/Faroe/Greenland etc)
Fin language is also in Ural/Altai language family, in Ural branch.

Fins, Ugors etc. I even heard some articles point a relation between Turks/Fins but I don't know how much it can be true :)

By the way, Copenhagen is a very nice city! I stayed there 2 weeks.

Trondheim was the Viking capitol in civ2 (i think it was civ2)

Its actaully Hungary and Finland that have alot in common when it comes to langauge
 
Back
Top Bottom