I’ve spoke about how I’m not a huge fan of the infantilization of other cultures in being unable to handle the inclusion of one specific leader on behalf of a civ that they don’t like in general to begin with at length in these forums.
Genuinely, civ is not a very culturally significant game. It’s not a massive cultural phenomenon which is going to stir up a major controversy. Despite the game’s popularity in Korea, it’s not like previous inclusions of Nobunaga, Ieyasu or Tokimune have actually been problems in Korea either.
it’s bizarre to me that there’s a genuine belief in these forums that if any semi-recent Japanese ruler was included, it would be such a huge deal that none of them could be included. I understand a concern to include any of the emperors responsible for the colonization of Korea, and that would make sense, but if Chinese folk aren’t rebelling against the inclusion of Genghis Khan, and Indians aren’t protesting the inclusion of Victoria, I think that tells you that it’s ridiculous that people in this forum seem to think that every civ’s leader inclusion is a diplomatic powder-keg waiting to explode. I guarantee you that the average Korean, let alone the average Korean *gamer* does not think about the Imjin war enough to be scandalized by the inclusion of Toyotomi Hideyoshi.
And that’s not to even say Hideyoshi *should* be included. But I think it’s undoubtedly true that Himiko is a bad choice. Yayoi-era Japan doesn’t represent modern Japanese culture in any way beyond the continuity of the Yamato people (and there’s even anthropological debates about whether the Yamato culture had even developed at the point of Himiko’s rule of Yamatai) and the emperor’s lineage (which it’s unclear to the extent that she was even related to that, since the lineage of the emperors that far back is all nearly impossible to attest to, and she ruled from what *should* be the capital of the emperors that point, and yet the legends would claim that there was an emperor at that time)
in any case, japanese nationalism has pretty much always been attached to the notion of a rightful claim to korea, like there are legendary empresses of japan who are referred to as the precedent for meiji to invade. you aren’t going to escape that reality just by picking Himiko when legendary figures that are supposedly her contemporaries were trying to invade Korea too
You know what? Zero fighter in Civ 5 and "Dvine Wind" in Civ 6 were quite a big issue in Korean Civ gamers. Those were barely eased by the neutral leader choice.
And the funny point is that we can find Himiko only in the non-Japanese records. We can find the other woman instead of her in Japanese version, and this Empress Jingu is regarded as who invaded ancient Korea. Picking Himiko instead of Jingu has quite enough meaning in this case.
I’ve spoke about how I’m not a huge fan of the infantilization of other cultures in being unable to handle the inclusion of one specific leader on behalf of a civ that they don’t like in general to begin with at length in these forums.
Genuinely, civ is not a very culturally significant game. It’s not a massive cultural phenomenon which is going to stir up a major controversy. Despite the game’s popularity in Korea, it’s not like previous inclusions of Nobunaga, Ieyasu or Tokimune have actually been problems in Korea either.
it’s bizarre to me that there’s a genuine belief in these forums that if any semi-recent Japanese ruler was included, it would be such a huge deal that none of them could be included. I understand a concern to include any of the emperors responsible for the colonization of Korea, and that would make sense, but if Chinese folk aren’t rebelling against the inclusion of Genghis Khan, and Indians aren’t protesting the inclusion of Victoria, I think that tells you that it’s ridiculous that people in this forum seem to think that every civ’s leader inclusion is a diplomatic powder-keg waiting to explode. I guarantee you that the average Korean, let alone the average Korean *gamer* does not think about the Imjin war enough to be scandalized by the inclusion of Toyotomi Hideyoshi.
And that’s not to even say Hideyoshi *should* be included. But I think it’s undoubtedly true that Himiko is a bad choice. Yayoi-era Japan doesn’t represent modern Japanese culture in any way beyond the continuity of the Yamato people (and there’s even anthropological debates about whether the Yamato culture had even developed at the point of Himiko’s rule of Yamatai) and the emperor’s lineage (which it’s unclear to the extent that she was even related to that, since the lineage of the emperors that far back is all nearly impossible to attest to, and she ruled from what *should* be the capital of the emperors that point, and yet the legends would claim that there was an emperor at that time)
in any case, japanese nationalism has pretty much always been attached to the notion of a rightful claim to korea, like there are legendary empresses of japan who are referred to as the precedent for meiji to invade. you aren’t going to escape that reality just by picking Himiko when legendary figures that are supposedly her contemporaries were trying to invade Korea too
It's not necessarily that the forum is sensitive to offensive representation, but we have observed that Firaxis/2K tends to shy away from controversy and we factor that into our expectations.
So this... Normans here represents Medieval French (and even Germans) rather than English.
He always come with two FREE cavalry units. A nod to Paladins?
But keep in mind there always TWELVE Paladins at any given time, no more, no less. (And this made them equivalent to The Nine Pillars of Demon Slayer corps in Kimetsu no Yaiba. The Mightiest Nine Champions.
with this. I also see pathways clearer. Charlemagne can begin leading Roma. then Normandia, forming Holy Roman Empire. and later found The Deutschreich as Kaiser.
It's not necessarily that the forum is sensitive to offensive representation, but we have observed that Firaxis/2K tends to shy away from controversy and we factor that into our expectations.
sure, but my point is more that if firaxis was so sensitive to the potential of a small controversy happening being disqualifying for a leader, there’s a lot of leaders and civs that prob wouldn’t be in the game. It’s just selective treatment of (particularly asian cultures, in my observation) certain players to be perceived as too sensitive to handle the geopolitics of a video game
And the funny point is that we can find Himiko only in the non-Japanese records. We can find the other woman instead of her in Japanese version, and this Empress Jingu is regarded as who invaded ancient Korea. Picking Himiko instead of Jingu has quite enough meaning in this case.
Besides the fact that Jingu is attributed to a later date and doesn’t seem like the same person, I do think that it would be inappropriate to be picking someone who isn’t even attested to in Japanese records (and attested to poorly at that) as (probably) the only leader representing Japan.
Respectfully, (and I’m quite sympathetic to why Koreans feel so strongly about Japanese imperialism, as it was so horrible) if Divine Wind being a ability name (ironically named as such because it protected Japan from invasion in its own right) just because Japanese colonists appropriated the term 700 years after Hojo lived and died, was a serious problem, I do think that’s turning up so much of a fuss about anything Japanese that the very presence of Japan in civ will probably cause a commotion in Korea.
And clearly, since the ability didn’t need to have its name changed or anything, it wasn’t a big enough deal that it would be unfair to expect Firaxis to pick a more appropriate leader for Japan
In England I would say that the word Cavalier brings to mind a flowing-haired Royalist cavalryman from the 1640s rather than a oddly-shorn Norman knight of the 1060s.
sure, but my point is more that if firaxis was so sensitive to the potential of a small controversy happening being disqualifying for a leader, there’s a lot of leaders and civs that prob wouldn’t be in the game. It’s just selective treatment of (particularly asian cultures, in my observation) certain players to be perceived as too sensitive to handle the geopolitics of a video game
Besides the fact that Jingu is attributed to a later date and doesn’t seem like the same person, I do think that it would be inappropriate to be picking someone who isn’t even attested to in Japanese records (and attested to poorly at that) as (probably) the only leader representing Japan.
Respectfully, (and I’m quite sympathetic to the Korean perception of Japanese imperialism) if Divine Wind being a ability name (ironically named as such because it protected Japan from invasion in its own right) just because Japanese colonists appropriated the term 700 years after Hojo lived and died, was a serious problem, I do think that’s turning up so much of a fuss about anything Japanese that the very presence of Japan in civ will probably cause a commotion in Korea.
And clearly, since the ability didn’t need to have its name changed or anything, it wasn’t a big enough deal that it would be unfair to expect Firaxis to pick a more appropriate leader for Japan
Considering the most Korean gamers I know are completely okay with Kublai or Qing in the game (and of coursely Japan itself without context), we have to focus on more specific point. And this lead us to the undone problem of the modern history between Asian nations. And I strongly deem it is not the particular problem only for Asia. If you think it is, it just because Asian countries which experienced colonial era become rich and have enough say supported by the purchasing power while the other victims sadly didn't.
I originally started from why Hideyoshi is unlikely expected, but you drove it to condemnation of the sensitive Asian now... I'm done with this. I want to just give a room for upcoming conversations about Charlemagne.
And I strongly deem it is not the particular problem only for Asia. If you think it is, it just because Asian countries which experienced colonial era become rich and have enough say supported by the purchasing power while the other victims sadly didn't.
I originally started from why Hideyoshi is unlikely expected, but you drove it to condemnation of the sensitive Asian now... I'm done with this. I want to just give a room for upcoming conversations about Charlemagne.
i think you misread what i said, i literally argued the opposite of this.
my point was that people in this forum talk like asian cultures *are* so sensitive that they would oppose the simple depictions of medieval historical figures so heavily that it’s untenable for firaxis, and that’s an infantilization of these communities
The Normans already fill the role of what I would have wanted from the Exploration Carolingians, which is the Crusading Knights theme. I bet they'd probably just have Antiquity Franks, which could have a little bonus from the Carolingian Empire, that could then lead to Ancién Regime France, and Holy Roman Empire Germany.
Because for once, Civ is being Precise. Chevaler was the Norman (French) word for a mounted, armored warrior.
Chevalier is a more general word, used in several Romance languages and in English to refer to either a mounted warrior, an aristocrat or a political faction. It is, therefore, not as easy to directly associate with a Norman Unique Unit.
And cavalier raises the English Civil War associations, even more confusing since you're in a arguably related civilization (England, though past the Norman/Saxon days) in the same age. We knew this was going to be a challenge for French localization, and for players who were familiar enough in French to recognize "chevalier" as "knight", but went with the precision foremost.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
![Andrew Johnson [FXS]](https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/326/326908.jpg?1589646534){kind=avatar}
