Korea....

[Elponitnatsnoc]

Ugh. Korea made it into the expansion pack.

I don't mind any of the other choices (Zulu, Carthage, Ottomans, Vikings, Celts), but Korea just isn't worthy. I'm not saying Korea has no importance but other civilizations are just so much more important like:

-Babylon/Sumeria
-Byzantium (I understand this because Ottomans made it in)
-Maya
-Hebrews/Israel
-Austria
-Portugal
-Holland

What's with the Firaxis obession with Korea?

 

[Lithgon]

They're just appealing to their Korean fanbase.

 

[Armorydave]

They're just appealing to their Korean fanbase.

That is the winning answer. There are several Civs. I would have chosen ahead of Korea but none of them have a particularly strong modern fan base.

 

[Xanikk999]

That is the winning answer. There are several Civs. I would have chosen ahead of Korea but none of them have a particularly strong modern fan base.

I beg to differ. Babylonia was extremely popular in civ3 and before so i dont see why they didnt include it in the expansion or vanilla version.

 

[Armorydave]

I beg to differ. Babylonia was extremely popular in civ3 and before so i dont see why they didnt include it in the expansion or vanilla version.

Actually, I think you just proved our point.

 

[Vietcong]

korea is on leavel with all those civs.
infact. those civs are much more worthy then the vikings or celts

 

[Ogedei_the_Mad]

Ugh. Korea made it into the expansion pack.

I don't mind any of the other choices (Zulu, Carthage, Ottomans, Vikings, Celts), but Korea just isn't worthy. I'm not saying Korea has no importance but other civilizations are just so much more important

Personally, I like their civ choices (although I would have much preferred the Nubians than the Zulu).

I must disagree with your point on Korea not being "worthy." Chinese and Japanese civilization is what it is today because of interactions with "lesser powers" including Korea. Regional politics today is still shaped by Korea's interactions with both countries.

The same can be said with Rome and its "barbarian" neighbors. If Rome had no neighbors to subjugate or contend with, what would Rome be?

 

[Zhahz]

Where's the

- Who cares, some people get too uptight about which civs are and aren't represented in a game

option?

 

[Gherald]

Where's the

- Who cares, some people get too uptight about which civs are and aren't represented in a game

option?

++

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.

 

[HourlyDaily]

On a World Map scenario, I like having the resolute Koreans providing a counter balance to Chinese domination of the island locked Japan. The history of Korea and its defence against itself and its northern neighbour is quite fascinating and old.

 

[Kushluk]

Korea definately deserves entrance because of it's long national history, it's advanced technology, unique written language, unique spoken language, large repetoir of national literature etc. . .

Now the Zulus, the Zulus . . lived in grass huts without literature, a real army or even a city. The very definition of barbs. Someone elese said it but I'll echo it, the only reason they are there is becuase they got pwned by England.

It gives you a hint when you have to use the plural, you know. "Zulus" becuase there's no "Zulu" no national territory to speak of, just a transient tribe. China? An empire. Rome? Another empire... just an obersvation. The weaker "Civs" tend to be just ethnic groups pluralized "Aztecs" vs "Maya"". Celts I don't think deserve it ether, more savages waiting to be civilized by a nation with cities, literature, agriculture and learning - that is - a country like Korea.

 

[salty]

Because The Flaming Hot Dog Cart Rules All

 

[Lithgon]

Now the Zulus, the Zulus . . lived in grass huts without literature, a real army or even a city. The very definition of barbs.

And who did the Romans evolve from?

 

[Yarmoss]

And who did the Romans evolve from?

Not Zulus, if thats what your implying...

In 6000 years of world history the Zulus never left their grass huts, unlike the Roman Tribes. It would be like putting the Aborigine of Australia in as a Civilization. An ethnic group? Yes. Did they build cities, roads, raise armies? No.

 

[Sabretou]

Actually, Firaxis was concentrating on theme-based expansion packs. The theme for now is medieval battles and hence we have medieval-based scenarios. The Koreans, therefore, were a very advanced civilization back then, which is why they were included.

As for the Zulus, well, they weren't so fortunate. But that's the point of Civ IV, get a civilization, no matter how strong or weak, they're all equal in Civ. And then you advance them, and make them great.

 

[Thehistoryman]

I must agree with previous posters. Korea is much more worthy than the Zulu and probably even the celts. We already have civilizations that cover the gauls part of europe and the Zulu did very little except lose the the british. Carthage i can see, but dont care for. I also like the Ottomans(though they should be called the turks) and who doesnt love the vikings?

 

[anonyguru]

well, i also think that it's somewhat surprising Korea has made it into the Expansion...
cuz all the far east countries are all in already. Chinese, Japanese and Mongols.

but plz know that Korea is quite an under-estimated country thanks to the big neighbors..
China and Japan for a long time, Mongols once in a while, Russia and America recently..
and furthurmore, Korea has been divided under their influence.
the history of Korea is filled with many many invasions from them, and survived anyways to have their own language and culture today.

by the way, i don't think Korea is not that appealing market for Firaxis.
actually off-line games market has been virtually "extincted" due to the widespread broadband and piracy in Korea today, and few foreign publishers are releasing Korean versions.
just a negligible number of real Civ Fans are buying Civ4 from abroad and still no announcement of Korean release of Civ4.

I think probably they will release Civ4 & Expansion together as they included Koreans in the Expansion, but doubtful about whether they will spend money translating into Korean.. or it won't be successful anyway.

 

[Sabretou]

I also like the Ottomans(though they should be called the turks)

No, actually they are two important types of Turks - the Seljuk and the Ottomans. It would lead to confusion if the Ottomans were to be called the Turks.

 

[Veteranewbie]

I don't think the Zulus or Celts should be included for that matter
Hell I don't even think they should include Mongol in the first place
Something such as Babylon/Sumeria, Byzantine, Maya etc. are more deserving

Another reason to introduce idea of Non-playable minor civ into the game

 

[marioflag]

The fact that Babylonians haven't been introduced in the game is the most important sign that there will be a second exp. in my opinion, from a marketing point of view it would be a great mistake adding all most important civs in one xp and leave the less known for the second xp.
One thing that seems really strange to me is the fact that only a few complain because Netherlands and Portugal weren't introduced.
Netherlands was the world trade leader before the rise of the British Empire, while Portugal was the second largest empire after Spain in 1500-1600, so they should deserve more attention.