1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

I found a pattern that indicates that the Sioux will be added to Civ VI eventually

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by leandrombraz, Oct 12, 2017.

  1. leandrombraz

    leandrombraz Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    124


    Ed is talking about the process to choose BNW's 9 Civs. The part I highlighted he already showed four Civs that was more obvious to them, now they will pick one of each group as he explain, which will be Brazil, Assyria, Indonesia and Shoshone (Venice was a special case, as he explain later). Do you see a pattern there? Sumeria, Australia and Khmer, all from different groups, all released later for Civ VI, two as DLC. They are picking Civs that they left behind while choosing civs for BNW. Only one group still didn't get one: Native Americans. The three Civs in the group is Inuit, Pueblo and Sioux.

    They considered the Inuit strongly for BNW, Ed explain why they didn't go for it, I guess their reasoning still valid and the chance for us to see the Inuit in Civ VI is low, it's just a tough Civ to portray. Pueblo is a no go. Basically the Pueblo don't want to be portrayed in a video game and Firaxis respect that. After that they looked for more option and came up with the Shoshone, he didn't explain why the Sioux wasn't their pick but what I got from it is that they had a cool idea for the Shoshone and decided to go for it. So if they are in fact looking back to their BNW rejected Civs to choose new Civs for VI, I guess the Sioux will at least be strongly considered in the future and we might see them in a DLC or in the first expansion. If they release another DLC with a Civ in it before the expansion, there's a good chance it will be the Sioux.

    I recommend to watch the whole thing, btw, it's an amazing insight to how they make this choices.
     
  2. Arianrhod

    Arianrhod Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    47
    I know it's a shallow desire, but I've always kinda wanted the Sioux and the Hittites to return to have every civ from the series playable between 4, 5, and 6. If it were something like Native America or the Vikings, that would be one thing, but both of the former two are still reasonably justifiable choices. So this would certainly suit my interests.

    Who knows, though. Considering the weird circumstances with what happened with the Native American civ last time, it's hard to be sure of anything.
     
    Morningcalm likes this.
  3. Returning Lurker

    Returning Lurker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2016
    Messages:
    343
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Somewhere but not here
    Meh. I'd be fine with that. Sioux are a bit bland but you can't make a sandwhich without bread, and Sioux are very much the "bread" of Native American portrayals. The staple, the go to, the first thing 95% of people think of when they hear the words "Native American" (with 4% thinking Iroquois and 1% being hipsters... I mean Zaarin... wait, no got it right the first time :mischief:) so I don't see any problem with them being the first choice. You'd think the map were a bit hinky if Europe didn't have France, right? Sioux had a large and diverse population, far reaching cultural influence on neighboring and sister tribes, and plenty of traits to base unique gameplay mechanics around. If your theory is correct, I'm down with it.
     
  4. Cerilis

    Cerilis Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,713
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Germany
    I dont have time to watch the full video now, but is there a more thorough analysis of it on the forum? :p Or does he explain how they took the choice for SEA (and why not vietnam)?
     
  5. Katakanja

    Katakanja Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2016
    Messages:
    957
    Seems like a fairly logical bet. At the very least, when they get around to adding a Native American civ to the game I don't think it will be one we have seen before - there's so many different NA societies that it's probably more interesting from a development standpoint to come up with a design for a new, unseen one than just do an update of the Iroquois or whatever for Civ VI, at least at first.

    Wait... what is @Zaarin 's hipster choice for an ideal NA civ? :p

    The video is from 2014, so it predates all the current talk about how good Vietnam would be as a civ. They probably just didn't have it on their radar at the time as a popular choice.
     
  6. Cerilis

    Cerilis Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,713
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Germany
    Well the SEA group has Majapahit, Khmer and Vietnam... :p
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
  7. Katakanja

    Katakanja Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2016
    Messages:
    957
    Does it? :o

    Urgh, I must have missed a bit - I have it playing in the background while I'm making lunch so I might not be paying enough attention :lol:
     
  8. bbbt

    bbbt Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    886
    Yeah he talks about the civfanatic elimination threads (literally), and they basically did one among the Firaxis civ staff to get their choice.
     
    Cerilis likes this.
  9. nzcamel

    nzcamel Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,340
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    The Iroquois fit the bill best in terms of the label "Civilization" to me.
     
    altayrneto and SammyKhalifa like this.
  10. Returning Lurker

    Returning Lurker Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2016
    Messages:
    343
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Somewhere but not here
    I'm not arguing for or against that. Just saying that they'd be most people's third thought if you ran up to them on the street, whipped out a taser, and demanded that they name a Native American tribe in 5 seconds or you taze them right in the face, with the second thought being "Sioux" and the first being "HUH?! WHAT?! WHY?!"
     
    altayrneto, Leyrann, Siptah and 4 others like this.
  11. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,349
    I'd probably say Iroquois or Shawnee but that's probably bias from where I grew up..
     
  12. Eagle Pursuit

    Eagle Pursuit Scir-Gerefa

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    9,523
    The Sioux are fine, but plains nomads are so stereotypical. If there must only be one or two NA civs per iteration, I would prefer they not repeat the same choices. We have not even ever seen a PNW culture. There is such variety, it wouldn't be fun for the token NA civs to have the same flavors iteration after iteration.

    And even though the Pueblo asked not to be represented as a civ, maybe Mesa Verde or Chaco Canyon can be a city-state.
     
    Siptah and Zaarin like this.
  13. bbbt

    bbbt Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    886
    I think my first associations were the Cherokee or Seminole based on streets names I grew up on, which is a little sad in many respects.
     
  14. IdiotStyle

    IdiotStyle Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    168
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    France
    Cherokee is one that stays in my mind because of the sound it makes. And maybe also because of the keely smith album.
     
  15. Guandao

    Guandao Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    2,893
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City
    Not too big on Sioux becoming an official Civ. They may have well-documented leaders, but were nomadic buffalo hunters without fixed settlements (their ancestors were part of the Mississippian moundbuilding culture, but their nomadic lifestyle is the most famous). The stereotypical image of the North American Indian promoted by pop culture (Westerns especially), and contributes to views of them as primitive, environmentalist people. I doubt Firaxis will make their Cities movable. It doesn't seem like a possible game mechanic. Maybe the Sioux themselves would object to the portrayal of their leaders in a game (considering their activism against the pipeline....). I just like North Amerindians with fixed settlements being Civs (like the Southeastern, Northeastern, Pacific Northwest, even Californian).
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  16. leandrombraz

    leandrombraz Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Messages:
    124
    They didn't want to go with Khmer because it was in Civ before. One of the criteria to choose was Civs that was never in the series before. Popular with fans was another Criteria, reason why the Zulu made the cut. Then he explain why they decided to use Indonesia as the name of the Civ instead of Majapahit (people couldn't pronounce Majapahit), he doesn't talk about Vietnam.
     
  17. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    212
    Having very little actual knowledge on the various different tribes/civilizations, Cherokee and Apache would come to my mind first. Yeah, cars and helicopters...
     
    HEF likes this.
  18. Zaarin

    Zaarin My Dearest Doctor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    2,273
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    I hope you're wrong. The Sioux are so overrepresented in the media that most of the world and a significant part of America already thinks all Native Americans are Sioux, and in the scheme of things they weren't horribly significant beyond fighting some wars with the US--the same accusation made far less fairly against many a civ that was an enemy of Rome.

    I'm a big fan of including the Powhatan, who have an ideal leader choice, fill a similar gameplay niche as the Iroquois (which they accomplished without gunpowder or European backing), and were far more significant than the Sioux. I'd also love to see a PNW civ like the Haida and Tlingit, though I acknowledge their lack of centralization or prominent leaders presents a challenge. Third choice would be the Choctaw, who were not quite as significant as the Creek but have the advantage of not being torn apart by a civil war or being sold out by their leadership (as the Cherokee and Creek were) and have a better leader choice (Pushmataha) than the Chickasaw. Fourth choice would be the Cree. Fifth choice would be the Iroquois, but only after several other Native American civs have appeared. If we must have a horse-raider civ (because between Scythia and the inevitable return of the Mongols, we don't have enough of those :rolleyes:), I propose the Nez Perce led by Chief Joseph--romanticized, yes, but no more than the Sioux.

    Let's face it: the most Native American civs we've gotten in a game so far is two; on a continent with hundreds of civilizations, recycling the Sioux and Iroquois over and over is unacceptable. The Iroquois are at least understandable as the unquestionably preeminent Native American civilization, though; the Sioux are only significant for their ability to be neatly packaged as the romantic "noble savage." They weren't even the preeminent power on the Plains, where they were driven out of the Great Lakes by the Iroquois.
     
    earlc and Katakanja like this.
  19. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,349
    I think an ancient mound builder civ would be cool, but there just isn't enough information about them.
     
  20. UWHabs

    UWHabs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,526
    Location:
    Toronto
    It's a flaw in numbers. There's too many different unique civs that it's hard to pick any out specifically to use, unlike Central America (Aztec) and South America (Inca) (although the old colonization player in me always wishes that the Tupi would make an appearance, since I always liked having them around).

    You also have the "flaw" in that the largest one, the Iroquois, essentially should start at the same place as America. I'm sure if the Iroquois were found more on the West, they'd be as common in Civ games as the Aztecs, or at least the Inca.

    But yeah, count me as someone else who would love to see a PNW native civ. They could add them in at the same time as they add a new sea resource, salmon. Although again, it's not like there was just one PNW native tribe, so they would likely have to pick one to go with as a representative of the region.
     

Share This Page