Historians discuss: Civ 7 Abbasids: a 52% positive review!

[The_J]

History PhD student and Civ6 streamer @Paisley_Trees has made another video with her colleague Dr. Crow, this time focusing on the Abbasids.
They discuss how some of the used names, like for the unique ability, are rather generic, but many are grounded deeply in the Abbasid culture, like the "round city". The art for the mosque is apparently also non-contemporary, but other parts of the Civ are, such as the Mamluks.
If you are curious about more historical background, and how it is integrated into this civ, then have a look at the video.

For reference: Our Abbasid thread https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/new-civ-game-guide-abbasid.692732/

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I am really enjoying this video; how Paisley and Dr. Crow pick apart the civ and show examples of not only the unique items in the civ, but where they didn't get it quite right or what might have been better. Absolutely terrific!

 

[tedhebert]

Really nice video @Paisley_Trees ! This is coming from a totally NON historical buff person, and on top of that a totally western one, I really enjoyed the video and the information it contained... It is very detailed, but not so much so that a neophyte can't enjoy it. Great job.

 

[Paisley_Trees]

Thanks for sharing and glad you all are enjoying it! It was a lot of fun making this one, hopefully it shows!

 

[FishFishFish]

I think the core problem is that the Abbasid's Civ uses a lot of generic terms that could be applied to any medieval Muslim empire.

Even a small change, such as renaming their unique units to something more specific like Shakiriyya rather than being generic Mamluks, would go a long way for me.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think the core problem is that the Abbasid's Civ uses a lot of generic terms that could be applied to any medieval Muslim empire.

Even a small change, such as renaming their unique units to something more specific like Shakiriyya rather than being generic Mamluks, would go a long way for me.

Yeah, but they are chosen to represent all medieval Muslim states.

 

[The_J]

In my research area, there is well known saying which goes "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
It means that whenever we make any type of abstraction, we lose precision. It matters if it makes to some extent sense.
The Abbasid civ is covering 500 years of history. Obviously things at the beginning were different than at the end. Some decision must be made what to depict.
Then another level is added, that the viewer must connect all of this to the actual civ, and it must make sense to them (us).
Having a different building for the mosque, in how far would that be more accurate versus a trade-off of perceived immersion?
That applies to every item, and to every civ.
In some cases it works better, in some cases it works worse.

 

[Paisley_Trees]

In my research area, there is well known saying which goes "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
It means that whenever we make any type of abstraction, we lose precision. It matters if it makes to some extent sense.
The Abbasid civ is covering 500 years of history. Obviously things at the beginning were different than at the end. Some decision must be made what to depict.
Then another level is added, that the viewer must connect all of this to the actual civ, and it must make sense to them (us).
Having a different building for the mosque, in how far would that be more accurate versus a trade-off of perceived immersion?
That applies to every item, and to every civ.
In some cases it works better, in some cases it works worse.

Yes! One thing I wish we discussed more was trying to guess some reasons why they made the choices they did, since I do think these discussions did happen in development. For example, would having the Samarra minarets as the unique building clash with the aesthetics of the civ in general and especially the madrasa/quarter? Would the rectangular plan mosque not be distinct enough from the courtyard madrasa? Is there some value in the popular recognition of a dome with Islamic architecture to help with player immersion? But of course my investment in this is much different than the developers! As someone who teaches Islamic architecture, the difference between the artistic styles of certain regions and caliphates or empires is really important to teach students to recognize, or another example, it’s important to make clear that the dome of the rock is not a mosque but this very unique structure and pilgrimage site, and its Byzantine stylistic influence is actually an ideological choice. The developers are probably much less invested in providing players with the tools I try to give students and I definitely need to remind myself that theirs is a different goal (hopefully for the next vid)!

 

[notNamed]

Is there some value in the popular recognition of a dome with Islamic architecture to help with player immersion?

Civ 7 leans heavily, and I do mean heavily in that direction as far as buildings are concerned.
Building models are treated in some ways similar to how Age of Empires 1 did it. Bright, historically inspired, strongly themed but not one-note. For example the Babylonians take a lot of cues from the Ishtar Gate but their buildings aren't just Ishtar Gate Barracks, Ishtar Gate House,...
The Asian buildings need to have slanted roofs with upturned eaves, even if they didn't exist back then. The Roman buildings are all marble white even if the real ones were painted. Etc. You do get these exact same thematic choices in Civ 7 if you look at Han (slanted roofs everywhere centuries before their development) and Rome (official buildings follow the AoE1 grey and white palette to a T).