1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

No Gandhi in Civilization 6?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Alex Khan, Jul 9, 2016.

  1. TheMarshmallowBear

    TheMarshmallowBear Benelovent Chieftain of the BearKingdom

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,491
    Location:
    Inside an Ikanda.
    But she "is" in the game... as a Great Work, further confirmed by their run-through of the annoucement trailer.
     
  2. ashvin.l

    ashvin.l ITendToLoseALot

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    54
    History of India is over 8000 years old. Agreed much of it is lost since we didn't invent paper in time, but representing such a long period with the myopic view of last 50 years seems hardly right. Look at it this way, 400 years down the line, how many lines would Indira Gandhi command in the history books? Not much...

    There are far more important rulers of India in the last 2500 years (Pururava Or Porus, who defeated Alexander, Chandragupta-II (Vikramaditya) whose reign is called Golden Age of India, Chandragupta Maurya who unified India 2000 years back, Rajendra Chola who commanded a Naval force large enough to conquer Indonesia, Sri Lanka, etc, Shivaji/Sambaji/etc of Marathas who bankrupted the large Moghul empire in a span of 27 years). There are enough interesting leader bonuses that you can think of for each of those leaders.

    On the other hand, what leader bonus can you associate with Indira Gandhi?
     
  3. Svip

    Svip Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    126
    By that logic, why can't Hitler be the leader for Germany then?

    I found it quite offensive that Stalin used to be the leader for Russia in previous Civilization games, when Hitler could not. They amount to the same thing in my book.
     
  4. TheMarshmallowBear

    TheMarshmallowBear Benelovent Chieftain of the BearKingdom

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,491
    Location:
    Inside an Ikanda.
    Does Russia censorship games with Stalin in them?

    Because Germany does (with Hitler). There's your reason.

    I'm sorry but I have to say that's not exactly a correct statement. Sure, India's history is vast but Civ 5 didn't represent just the modern-era India, they also had the Mughal Fort and them Elephants.

    People need to realise that Civilization has never aimed for historical accuracy and trying to force it to do so is quite silly. It's a game that has always been streamlined. It's NOT a Historical Simulator, it's never been one to begin with.

    They're going to go the casual route, rather than the exact-to-detail 100% historical representation. They've done this since the beginning.

    We will most likely see Gandhi (as well as likely Isabella and Montezuma) and his Nuke-Happy-Trigger-Finger.
     
  5. Svip

    Svip Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    126
    Actually they don't. Hitler is in Hearts of Iron and that game is not censored in Germany. It's only Nazi symbolism, which is different (Hitler is not considered a symbol in that regard). They would just have avoid putting Swastikas everywhere on a depiction of Hitler in Civilization.

    My point is this; any argument you are going to make in the defence of Stalin being in a game but Hitler not is going to be ridiculous. Because it is only going to be based on a modern day public perception of Hitler. Any credible historian would definitely find a decent list of leaders worse than Hitler that have made it into Civilization. Beyond Stalin, Genghis Kahn and Attila the Hun seem like obvious candidates.
     
  6. leif erikson

    leif erikson Game of the Month Fanatic Administrator Supporter GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,747
    Location:
    Plymouth, MA
  7. Nekator

    Nekator Master of Desaster

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    86
    Location:
    Old Europe
    :goodjob:
     
  8. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,708
    Given India's consistently woeful representation in every Civ title so far, I find it hard to believe many people will particularly care if he's axed.

    And as a non-leader who shouldn't be cracking top 5 or even top 10 notable figures in Indian history, he should not be representing India in Civ. India shouldn't even be constrained to one civ, that by itself is ridiculous. It's not as ridiculous as Ghandi leading it though.

    Civ could have Michael Jackson as a leader of the USA for all the sense it makes. Ghandi could make some sense as a great person given his presence in history. But as a *leader* of a nation? No. There are too many great historical figures in India for him to have ever been considered. Euro bias should not dominate to the extent that it actively misrepresents the region yet again. At least Civ 4 had Ashoka also. Throw in 2-3 more civs in India and give them appropriate leaders and scratch crap like Venice and civ would be a better game for it.
     
  9. Mustakrakish

    Mustakrakish In 'Node' We Trust

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    2,520
    Location:
    Grainvillage, Finland
    Amen.

    Seriously though, someone make that poll, I'm too lazy :p
     
  10. Denkt

    Denkt Left permamently

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    3,654
    India could definitely be split into several civilizations as India is not exactly culturally homogen.

    Ghandi could as other have pointed out be a great person in Civilization VI.
     
  11. Scaramanga

    Scaramanga Brickhead

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,171
    Location:
    Canada
    I'm not sure if it's fair to new gamers or casual gamers if a handful don't want to see his spectacled face any more. The fact that he harnessed Indian nationalism indicates that there is some kind of unified Indian consciousness or civilization as opposed to the mutually-suspicious Europeans. So really, this is supposed to be a compliment to the diverse yet singular nature of India. Europeans are the brutes. :D
     
  12. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,708
    Under-representing and misrepresenting Indian history is not something that will do new/casual gamers any favors. You might as well argue to avoid including nations like Mali, Ethiopia, and Shoshone from previous titles because casual players wouldn't recognize them. Does that sound like giving casual gamers enough credit? If not, then why are we still okay with how India is treated?

    My Michael Jackson comparison was hyperbole, but not by that much. India has had actual rulers with darned significant impacts reaching past the subcontinent, ruling a large percentage of the world's population and empires larger/longer-lived than many civs we've seen in multiple civ iterations. Not only that, India has multiple such potential civs that could be used.

    Butnopeghandi. At least, that's what we're fed so far.
     
  13. Zaarin

    Zaarin Chief Medical Officer, DS9

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    7,528
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    New gamers won't be familiar with the hackneyed Nuclear Gandhi joke from 25 years ago; casual gamers are probably no more likely to buy the game with Gandhi than without it.
     
  14. tamyrlin

    tamyrlin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2016
    Messages:
    86
    Ashoka would be good. Maybe he can have 2 phase agenda , for some 150 turns , he is a bloody warmonger and then he turns into a total peacenik.
     
  15. m15a

    m15a Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,471
    I'm in favor of other leaders for the India civ as well as multiple Indian civs (not to say I'm against Gandhi being the leader). But the Michael Jackson comparison *is* major hyperbole. Yes, they were both not rulers of nations just as 99.999999% of people aren't. But Gandhi was a political leader that directly caused major political change that definitely impacted the world as a whole. Of course he didn't do it alone (although no ruler does either) and things didn't end up the way he planned (same as many rulers including many of the Civ V leaders), but he still had a major political agenda that was in part realized.

    I agree that a lot of Civ's decisions are Euro- or US-centric, but claiming that Gandhi was just a celebrity is an extremely myopic fan- / history-buff-centric view (and considering most people in this fandom are North American or European, it just might also be a Eurocentric view).
     
  16. Scaramanga

    Scaramanga Brickhead

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,171
    Location:
    Canada
    Really? Pacificist Gandhi going ballistic with nuclear weapons... yeah I guess that is a bit over people's heads.

    I have not watched the announcement trailer more than a couple times, but sure his face is in there and I don't think it's for the hardcore players.
     
  17. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,708
    I don't know, a nuke happy leader that wasn't a leader is a pretty contrived/ridiculous scenario. Major hyperbole? His representation, action, and behavior don't mirror history in Civ 5. How major my hyperbole was isn't the point anyway. It makes no sense to see Gandhi yet again over numerous legit great leaders in India. The new/casual gamer line doesn't hold up either.
     
  18. AriochIV

    AriochIV Colonial Ninja

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,949
    Location:
    Nehwon
    Also, I've been playing Civilization since 1991, and I have almost 2000 hours in Civ V, and I can't recall ever seeing Gandhi nuke anyone. I know the attribute is still there, but I think people overestimate how often it actually comes into play.
     
  19. m15a

    m15a Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,471
    How major of a hyperbole it was is exactly my point. I'm sure there are arguments that can be made for other leaders being good choices for India, and from what I've seen, I think you specifically could make such arguments. But that's not what you're doing. You're trying to bolster your assertion by framing the opposing assertion as ridiculous.

    Same. I haven't noticed it particularly much either and I wouldn't even know about it if it weren't for the fandom.
     
  20. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,439
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    I posted a poll here in the Ideas and Suggestions Forum on who you think should be the leader of India. It doesn't focus on Gandhi per se (although he's the first option).
     

Share This Page