Should Hitler have been the German Leaderhead in Civ3?
- Thread starter Artifex
- Start date
- Status
silver 2039
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,208
Leaderheads arent based on the person who conquered the most territory. Otherwise Napolean would be the French leaderhead Stalin the Russian one and Asoka the Indian one. If you want a Hitler leaderhead you can get it at the creation and customization fourm. Personally I like Biscmarck just fine.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
What would be your next idea? To put the Swastika on the box, in Germany?
While there are nineteenth century leaderheads included in the game, I think that the inclusion of twentieth century individuals would detract from the historical feel of the game.
Aside from that there are still people living who remember Hitler from their own lifetimes. Other leaders in the game were certainly just as evil and caused just as much death, if not more so, but since they're further back in the past, it's not such a big deal.
Aside from that there are still people living who remember Hitler from their own lifetimes. Other leaders in the game were certainly just as evil and caused just as much death, if not more so, but since they're further back in the past, it's not such a big deal.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
It's not who conquered the most terrority, it is who was the best the best leader, and helped the country to it's current day standing. Hitler did nothing to help german, but kill millions of it's people and other countries with a useless war he started.
While I agree they tried to pick the "best" leader for each civ, I also want to point out that in some circumstances, they chose women for the sheer sake of having a few female leaders in the game (eg Joan of Arc).
The leader selection process is always subjective and open to scrutiny, I also tend to think it irrelevant. It's really nothing more than a name and a picture, either of which can be changed without altering the AI nation itself.
The leader selection process is always subjective and open to scrutiny, I also tend to think it irrelevant. It's really nothing more than a name and a picture, either of which can be changed without altering the AI nation itself.
dojoboy
Tsalagi
No, Bismarck is by far the best selection for Germany (based on my knowledge, German history is not my forte). Hitler did nothing but hypnotize millions of Germans, taking advantage of their vulnerable pysche following WWI.
I remember Stalin was the leaderhead in Civ 1, he killed more peeps than Hitler..and many he abused are still around. Anyway just a question wondering how many would have liked him, I'm kind of neutral on the subject. Wouldn't mind it if Civ 4 had multiple possible leaders for each Civ with different personalities.
I remember Napolean was the Civ 1 leaderhead as well for France.
I remember Napolean was the Civ 1 leaderhead as well for France.
ironduck
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2002
- Messages
- 6,561
It sickens me that people even suggest Hitler as a leaderhead. I also find it disgusting that Mao is the leaderhead for China. Plenty of people remember very well the immense cruelty and oppression these despots have brought down upon humanity.
As mentioned, falling back to older historical leaders circumvents the problem of survivors and the immediate generations after them. Regardless, someone like Hitler should never be seen as a leader. The same goes for Stalin. What next? Do you want Ceacescu for Romania? Pol Pot for Cambodia? These people tore their countries apart, they did not lead them into any kind of greatness.
As mentioned, falling back to older historical leaders circumvents the problem of survivors and the immediate generations after them. Regardless, someone like Hitler should never be seen as a leader. The same goes for Stalin. What next? Do you want Ceacescu for Romania? Pol Pot for Cambodia? These people tore their countries apart, they did not lead them into any kind of greatness.
Without Bismarck, Germany wouldn't be a nation but a bunch of small independent states. He basically single-handedly united Germany into the single nation-state that we know it as today. Without a doubt he was the greatest leader in Germany's history and mor than deserved to be the nation's leader in Civ3.
I imagine "leaders" are chosen who best represent the strongest civilizing forces a country has to offer. Or alternatively, a leader who helped their country make crucial choices at a time when it could have made a wrong turn into the toilet of history.
Jefferson and Washington were strong leaders, but Lincoln is the best choice.
Maybe Churchill or Victoria, but Elizabeth kept the crown together.
Hitler (not actually born in Germany) falls far short of this measure. One would easily place several Germans like Bismark, Konrad Adenauer or even Martin Luther well ahead of what he had to offer. Before and after the Nazis, German civilization has advanced itself and helped the world forwards in contrast to the destruction and perversions Adolf achieved.
Joan of Arc, on the other hand, is one of the most remarkable and important women in history, and was crucial in unifying the French nation.
Jefferson and Washington were strong leaders, but Lincoln is the best choice.
Maybe Churchill or Victoria, but Elizabeth kept the crown together.
Hitler (not actually born in Germany) falls far short of this measure. One would easily place several Germans like Bismark, Konrad Adenauer or even Martin Luther well ahead of what he had to offer. Before and after the Nazis, German civilization has advanced itself and helped the world forwards in contrast to the destruction and perversions Adolf achieved.
Joan of Arc, on the other hand, is one of the most remarkable and important women in history, and was crucial in unifying the French nation.
lbhhh
King
Right on !
It doesn't really matter who the leader of the civ is, simply because it doesn't affect gameplay. As for the female leaders included I agree Joan is kinda a strech. I liked the Civ2 way, where each civ had one female and one male leader.
DBear
unbeliever
The trouble with the Civ2 approach is that for the ancient civs, females had no role in government. Can you name a female leader for Sumeria? The Incas?
While Hitler would be an egregious choice for Germany, I find it just as egregious that Mao is the leader for China. Get ol' Sun Tzu or Sun Yat Sen. Just about anyone else would be a better choice. And don't get me started on Stalin as the Russian leader in Civ1.
While Hitler would be an egregious choice for Germany, I find it just as egregious that Mao is the leader for China. Get ol' Sun Tzu or Sun Yat Sen. Just about anyone else would be a better choice. And don't get me started on Stalin as the Russian leader in Civ1.
Salamandre
King
I dont see why anyone would have the dumb idea to flame this thread. Since in Civ game we are suposed to kill millions of people, nuke them, sink them, burn them to death, yes, Hitler could be a leaderhead, as well as Stalin. After all, once you win, I hope you still remember it is a game
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
Hmm... so it would be ok for you to have Marshall Petain as French leader? Or Robespierre, or Danton?
Salamandre
King
Would be ok for me, I can not imagine bringing political discutions about the use of a leaderhead in a videogame. The truth is outside this.I remember hitler was used in a Heroes 3 scenario, he was ugly and strong and gave a big chalenge defeating him. And a big reward also. Hitler, Stalin could be a good setup for some interesting scenarios.
Dogzilla
Chieftain
I think Firaxis was trying to be respectful by not choosing leaders that have been repudiated by their own people. Thus, Stalin and Hitler would not be used, but Mao could, despite having a human rights record IMO in the same league.
I think it is just a matter of time.
Hitler did not become well known for being kind and gentle. But Attila was a really bad guy, too. But after hundreds of years, we no longer associate fear and killing with him too much to make him unsympathic.
Perhaps will Hitler be the German leaderhead in 400 years? Right now it is too early to see his unhuman politics without emotion.
George Bush might become the American leader, the one who conquered Mars and Iraq - time washes away most negative aspects and he will probably be remembered of that, who knows???
BTW: Each Civ should have a female and a male leaderhead to chose from. Or perhaps even more, e.g. Charlemagne, Napoleon, Joan, Lous XIV... - the French had lots of great leaders.
I would not mind to have a German Hitler-leaderhead, but think of all the trolls that would abuse this, usually the same who mask themselves as Darth Vader or Darth Maul... cool dudes with little respect or brain.
Hitler did not become well known for being kind and gentle. But Attila was a really bad guy, too. But after hundreds of years, we no longer associate fear and killing with him too much to make him unsympathic.
Perhaps will Hitler be the German leaderhead in 400 years? Right now it is too early to see his unhuman politics without emotion.
George Bush might become the American leader, the one who conquered Mars and Iraq - time washes away most negative aspects and he will probably be remembered of that, who knows???
BTW: Each Civ should have a female and a male leaderhead to chose from. Or perhaps even more, e.g. Charlemagne, Napoleon, Joan, Lous XIV... - the French had lots of great leaders.
I would not mind to have a German Hitler-leaderhead, but think of all the trolls that would abuse this, usually the same who mask themselves as Darth Vader or Darth Maul... cool dudes with little respect or brain.
- Status
Similar threads
