Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by GhostWriter16, May 22, 2010.
Too American. Not many other developed countries have a merely two-party state.
I think its funny how republicans think they are conservative when Bush and all the other republicans spent Clinton's surplus and much more, putting the US into the highest debt it has ever seen. Consequently delivering the next president a country in the midst of the worst financial crisis we have seen since the great depression.
Amen to that. For me as player, the loss of control would be most annoying. In Civ2 I wasn't too happy about the auto-peace either. Sometimes there's just a good reason for war, in life, but especially in Civ. With war weariness and running out of luxuries in big cities, it's challenging enough without having to deal with an abstraction level of nay-saying opposition.
I fully agree with Hypernova's description of how Civ represents the leadership part. Even when you've selected a democracy trait, you're not el presidente, the queen or the prime minister. You're all of those people and you're all of their advisors (except for the Civ advisors where they exist) and you're the city council and parliament too. All those functions are implied through your choices as human player.
It's like SimCity suddenly got an independent zoning commission that would prevent you from putting a mall where you want it. It's your game and you're the boss.
Furthermore, the proposal is very much geared towards one political system and while I recognise that the americans are an important demographics for the publisher, there are billions on this planet living in democracies that aren't run in the same way.
Separate names with a comma.