Is Civ 6 PC: A continuation.

Birdjaguar said:
Then don't single out Firaxis and keep things at the general level.
Click to expand...

Again, I wasn't bashing Firaxis at all... and I already moved the point to the general sense.

Whatever, done with this thread.
 
Birdjaguar said:
Then don't single out Firaxis and keep things at the general level. We don't want OT to become a place to bash Civ or Firaxis because we are a bit more lenient here. Civ specific conversations are best left in the appropriate civ forum rather than here. OT is not the place to discuss Firaxis game development decisions
Click to expand...

To be fair, this thread started in the Civ boards and is about whether Civ VI specifically is PC and if that is a good/bad thing. It's kind of hard to separate Firaxis completely from a topic that is, to some extent, critically analyzing a specific Civ game. Unless we want to completely retitle this thread?

(should there be an "Off-Topic Civ Trash" subforum for ambiguous threads like this?)
 
An Off-Topic Trash form sounds like fun.
 
PhoenicianGold said:
To be fair, this thread started in the Civ boards and is about whether Civ VI specifically is PC and if that is a good/bad thing. It's kind of hard to separate Firaxis completely from a topic that is, to some extent, critically analyzing a specific Civ game. Unless we want to completely retitle this thread?

(should there be an "Off-Topic Civ Trash" subforum for ambiguous threads like this?)
Click to expand...
OT is not a place to avoid moderating that can happen in the Civ forums. You can certainly talk about how pc Civ VI is, but that discussion should just be a place to rant against Firaxis.
 
Last edited:
Birdjaguar said:
OT is not a place to avoid moderating that can happen in the Civ forums. You can certainly talk about how pc Civ VI is, but that discussion should just be a [lace to rant against Firaxis.
Click to expand...

Ah I understand the distinction now. Thank you for the clarification. :)
 
Arwon said:
Also with regards to representation, India being a single civ is a hangover from Civ 1, and that part of the world is screaming for split and expanded representation by multiple civs from its history. That would be top of my to do list if I were working on Civ 7. Mughals, Maurya, Tamil, Harappan... lots of options across timeframes and geography.
Click to expand...

Then Modi would probably ban the game in India. It's a big market you know...
 
Alexander's Hetaroi said:
Isn't racism bad and on the same level no matter what group of people is doing it?


There are plenty of minorities that want wokeness and PC culture to go away. A majority of the Hispanic community thinks that the term Latinx, for example, is silly.


Not sure what that has to do with the topic but I agree with you that the background isn't good. Probably not the Hagia Sophia because they already put it in the background for Suleiman but they could have least gave Basil II the Hippodrome.
Click to expand...

No its not on the same level. Again start reading more and babbling on forums where the avg education level is higher. There are plethora of reasons why this is the case.

I'm aware that the hispanic population in the US is generally nonplussed by the term LatinX, I'm not sure what that has to do with this though except. . .Squirrel! Squirrel!
 
Alexander's Hetaroi said:
That's a very easy thing to say in America, but that's not a justifiable answer to say what is currently happening in China right now with the government and the Uyghur people.
Click to expand...

We should be shifting away from China as quickly as possible and imo tightening screws on Xi regime. This would require a far better State Dept then what we've been running for the past 20 years.
 
DogeEnricoDandolo said:
This feels like one of the cases where people are ok with a celebrity to voice political opinions only when they resonate with them. This is why America feels like two giant echo chambers without any form of communication going through from one to the other.

As someone in science, I wish this were true. People are in fact motivated by other non-scientific agendas, but because of Andrew Wakefield's huge scandal, people are getting better at dodging possible consequences. Even established branches of science like Forensic DNA aren't as definitive as you may believe, as pointed out in the NAS 2009 Report, the most referenced report in Forensic sciences. I don't want to brush your evidence aside completely, like you did to me, although I could easily have said "this science is from twitter so it isn't legit", so I searched Rebecca R Helm on pubmed, and she did have credible publications, so I trust her and your sources. However, if you look, also on Pubmed, peer-review studies and replication studies of her publications, you can see academia isn't totally agreeing upon this. While things like "Smoking causes lung cancer," "climate change is man made" or "vaccines don't cause autism" are generally agreed upon by the vast majority, this just isn't one. Picking out just one study (although what you showed me was just a twitter feed) that echoed your already founded belief doesn't cut it, even though to your credits, this is from a credible source (a person with a doctorate degree in microbiology).

Just because I don't like PC culture, I must be white? You are funny. Just for your record, I'm not.
(1) Curb your White privilege assumption - YouTube

Probably my last comment here, because just like every other politically charged threads, this isn't going anywhere. For the record, in the original thread, I said I didn't find Civ6 PC at all, and suggested people who advocated for PC culture to have more compassion for folks who don't share your point. A good starting point? Stop saying someone isn't as "qualified" as you because they hold a different opinion.
Click to expand...

white in this case can be a state of mind my friend. like said elsewhere jsut change it to privilege. Even that tho is problematic. There are good reasons why the white guy drives into town instead of his black friend most of the time. . . Its not because of of his enthusiasm of urban driving.

Also I like how you state there is no good communication going on yet page after page here shows it actually is going on. It was not too terrible long ago that I was where you are at in a lot of ways, more reading and dialogue change my mind on a great many things.

PC culture can be poisonous, its not an either/or proposition. Frankly most PC backlash I see is this. . .


So yea.
 
Estebonrober said:
I'm aware that the hispanic population in the US is generally nonplussed by the term LatinX, I'm not sure what that has to do with this though except. . .Squirrel! Squirrel!
Click to expand...

I think the point is he is trying to explain that not everyone who you would believe would be for PC culture is actually for it.

IMHO I believe you simply can't make a game PC without it being boring, stale, and dry. It wouldn't be a game if it didn't allow you to have a little fun and discriminate against certain civs. That's the whole point of Civilization!

Do I think Civilization is a PC game? No! And it shouldn't, because PCness requires one to be so careful you can't have any fun. Do I think Civ 6 is more PC than previous installments? Yes, and I believe this is the maximum PCness it can have before it becomes some lame, woke, SJW's gender studies homework simulation or something. Not a very fun game to play, or game if you can even call it that.
 
Obligatory
tenor.gif
 
João III said:
No, that's you inserting your own interpretation to meet a preconceived opinion. I'm saying it's unreasonable to base what's considered normal human biology on fringe cases, but to equate that with denying the existence of people is absurd.


Well, I'll be waiting for statistical evidence to the contrary :coffee:
Click to expand...
Disorders of Sex Development Loci

Disorders of sex development (DSDs) are defined as congenital conditions in which chromosomal, gonadal, or anatomic sex is atypical. They occur at a frequency of 1–3%.
​
Note that this is a bit non-PC now, the current term is differences of sex development ('cos that keeps the abbreviation, and doctors never write anything out in full anyway).
 
Joij21 said:
It wouldn't be a game if it didn't allow you to have a little fun and discriminate against certain civs. That's the whole point of Civilization!
Click to expand...

I've never played a Civ game like this, and the only Civ games I never played are Civ5 and CivRev. Are those like that, or is there some alt-right version of Civ somewhere?
 
aelf said:
I've never played a Civ game like this, and the only Civ games I never played are Civ5 and CivRev. Are those like that, or is there some alt-right version of Civ somewhere?
Click to expand...

In my last Civ 4 game I murdered several tens of millions of people by razing cities during a modern-era war so I wouldn't have to deal with different cultures in my cities. Moreover this war was carried out by choice, for no other purpose than conquest.
 
Joij21 said:
You've never gone to war with another civ? War is a form of discrimination.
Click to expand...

Lexicus said:
In my last Civ 4 game I murdered several tens of millions of people by razing cities during a modern-era war so I wouldn't have to deal with different cultures in my cities. Moreover this war was carried out by choice, for no other purpose than conquest.
Click to expand...

Um, this isn't "discriminating" in any way that's meant in this context. Just making use of game mechanics to play a simulation of the 'slaughter bench' of history. This can happen to any Civ in the game, with any Civ in the game. And no particular Civ is singled out for such treatment by the game or even necessarily by the player, really.
 
Last edited:
aelf said:
Um, this isn't "discriminating" in any way. Just making use of game mechanics to play a simulation of the 'slaughter bench' of history. This can happen to any Civ in the game, with any Civ in the game. And no particular Civ is singled out for such treatment by the game or even necessarily by the player, really.
Click to expand...

Well one could make the argument that because the game allows such actions to be taken through it's mechanics than by default it enables discrimination.

Also while one particular nation might not be singled out by another AI led one for such treatment, that doesn't stop the player from only choosing to slaughter all the African nations or one's led by black leaders.

So at the end of the day it really depends on what type of human player is playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom