Q&A with Dennis Shirk
- Thread starter Petiscator
- Start date
ferretbacon
Obsessor
I don't understand the hostility, hate, and resistance the Zulu get from some players.
With the exception of Portugal, I'd rather have the Zulu over any currently excluded European civilization.
They can be fun to play and Shaka makes for an entertaining personality. What's not to like?
With the exception of Portugal, I'd rather have the Zulu over any currently excluded European civilization.
They can be fun to play and Shaka makes for an entertaining personality. What's not to like?
TheMarshmallowBear
Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
I've done my share of complainining with The XCOM Squad, it's another civ to blast and nuke the others with, In Civ 5 Shaka can be given a brand new ability unlike the previous games? So why not?
Besides people have complained of lack of respresntation in Africa, and now that we're given, we're still complaining.. Ahh, don't you just love us Fanatics?
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,938
I'm not fond of the Zulu, but I don't stand against the inclusion of any civ. The argument that some group is "undeserving" or "unqualified" reeks of snobbery and ignorance of the highest degree. Has Firaxis ever stated their qualifications? No. Do they even have any qualifications? Judging by the existing examples of the products of their selection process, the only things that qualify are a fun, unique playstyle and appeal to the fanbase. Basically, the rule of cool. They don't care about how advanced a culture is or whether it represents some geographical area or if its conquests spanned a continent. Just because you feel that they should observe whatever rules of selection you prefer, doesn't mean that they made the wrong choice when you don't like it.
Hannibal XIII
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 120
I'd rather have Shaka (who I fondly remember from 4) than, for example, more Native Americans and especially more Europeans. I want more Asia and more Africa, and the Zulu, like it or not, are an exemplar of South Africa. It's not like the Huns, who I think were truly undeserving (its telling that they had to steal city names in order to make that Civ work).
Now, for dark horse, if they really wanted to mess with people, they'd put in the Boer with De La Rey. Technically African, but also European...
Now, for dark horse, if they really wanted to mess with people, they'd put in the Boer with De La Rey. Technically African, but also European...
Snoopaloop
King
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2007
- Messages
- 607
A war verse Shaka and a force of Impi in Civ III was the single moment I became addicted to the series. I somehow still remember the map layout after ten years of playing the rest of the series.
Villager720
Warlord
so, did anyone end up watching?
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,938
It's tomorrow.
ferretbacon
Obsessor
It's tomorrow.
Villager720
Warlord
Its amazing how 1 number can make you feel such a fool.
awesome
Meme Lord
Oh, I agree with you that that shouldn't be why. I was more making a point that just because you may not have heard of something doesn't make it unimportant. That post should be read in the context of the post I made just before it.
And I'm pretty sure that Shaka is better known than Leopold II, though that's probably the least important of all of the points I made.
Kimuyama
Prince
What some people here need to understand is that just because a civilization didn't have any direct impact on your society, it doesn't make them unimportant or, a word that has been thrown around here time and time again, "unworthy". That's just plain ignorance on your part.
As long as the Zulu has their own unique flavour, just like every other civ in the game they qualify for an inclusion in my opinion.
As long as the Zulu has their own unique flavour, just like every other civ in the game they qualify for an inclusion in my opinion.
TheMarshmallowBear
Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
I'm scared, tomorrow I think they'll gonna give us so much information that we'll drown in it.
I think we'll get a puddle and some folks will try to dive in headfirst anyways.
daveydave8
Chieftain
hahaha hey...hey guys...remember when we all fought over the african civ with a rich cultural history, a renown empire, with one notable victory to its name (zulu)...and that civ was put in along with the Polish who have how many fair, major victories? how many victories against major powers such as Sweden? or Germany later on? How different from eastern european culture? how divided of a kingdom both in government (poland vs. Lithuania) and ethnicity (Nordic features near baltic, slavic/eastern inland)??????
I'm Polish, is it Bigotry to point these things out?
I'm Polish, is it Bigotry to point these things out?
Inhalaattori
Emperor
At least my point has been all the time that they should have more civs from Africa, but more deserving, more historically important and more interesting than Zulus. Civs like Ashanti, Benin and Kongo would be better choices.
And also they have a true influence and legacy in southern Africa even nowadays.
I'm glad they're back. I can't wait to be rushes by a spear welding lunatic.
Since they're already doing ethnicities (Polynesia) I think the Bantu would be a much better choice than the Zulu...
But I won't complain so long as Vietnam gets in.
I still hope at least one more African civ gets in... But I suppose that's quite unlikely... Still, hope's the last thing to die, right?
Similar threads
