What constitutes a civilization?

[JFD]

To you, perhaps; for most of the world it's all just Scandinavia. I'd honestly view Brazil as far more different from Portugal than Denmark and Sweden from each other.

I don't know how accurately either of us could argue that. As far as I see it, Denmark represents not Scandanavia but a Viking peoples. But then again, perhaps there's little more to Scandanavia as far as the gaming public goes than that. Point is though that Sweden is different enough from Denmark that it was viable enough to make it into the game. Personally, I hope they feel the same way about Brazil, but I wouldn't hold out hope, considering it is a post-colonial power.

 

[GenjiKhan]

I don't know how accurately either of us could argue that. As far as I see it, Denmark represents not Scandanavia but a Viking peoples. But then again, perhaps there's little more to Scandanavia as far as the gaming public goes than that. Point is though that Sweden is different enough from Denmark that it was viable enough to make it into the game. Personally, I hope they feel the same way about Brazil, but I wouldn't hold out hope, considering it is a post-colonial power.

Right now,I see that there are three reasons against including the Brazilian civilization:

- They simply can't go through dlc way,like plenty of civilizations,because there aren't any worthy scenario to include them;
- It wouldn't make much difference to include them or not for many brazilians,specially because there aren't even an official translation of Civ5 for Portuguese-Brazilian;

But the most strong reason for not including them is the fact that they are seen as a "modern-civilization" and there are many players of civilization(specially the older ones) who strongly reject the idea of including a second "modern civilization",just because it was never done it before .

 

[ehecatzin]

TBH the more I keep seeing the arguments against and pro, post colonial civs, the more I wish they make another expansion that includes a fleshed out colonial and revolution system. Something along the way of colonies getting too big to manage properly and having to choose to organize them into some sort of commonwealth, viceroyalties or keeping them under an iron fist. And of course risking revolution if badly managed or under foreign influences.
Post colonial entities could be like a middle step between a civ and a city state, escentialy a CS that can have multiple cities and have limited expansion capabilities, but only within its own continent.

Taking time to keep your transatlantic empire intact while forcing your opponents colonies into revolution (and alligned with you) could be real fun.

It could go nicely with Autocracy-Freedom-Order powerblock system, and would allow for the inclusion of a lot of post colonial nations that wouldnt be in the game otherwise.

 

[aluelkdf]

I think America fully meets the defenition of a "civilization". I agree that in colonial times America was not a civilization and could be lumped in with England. And even today America is in a way a branch of the British Empire. But it is the dominant, largest and most powerful branch of the empire (even though the brain of the Anglo-American Empire may be in London, Washington DC is like a regional headquarters.)

But at least at a superficial level Ameriac has broken away from England. And in the past 100 years America has dominated the world culturally, diplomatically, economically, militaraly, basically everything. America is a global empire and has concentrated power and influence unlike any other empire since Rome. This maks America worthy of being a true "civilization" for the purpose of the game.

The only thing is America seems a little out of place when it's warriors are marching around in 4000 BC, but the same is true for many civs in the game.

 

[Ahhuatl]

so, americans must be in game? they aren't an empire, and their race and part of their culture are british

The United States is an empire. Not only was the bulk of its territory conquered but so has it maintained its status through careful military exploits and the occupation of foreign nations.

Well not Incans, but earlier Andean Civilizations yes.

This may not be true. Topa Inca Yupanqui supposedly lead an expedition which may have landed on Easter Island.

 

[Zipa_DH]

An exception to the rule that colonial civs won't/shouldn't be in the game must be made for the United States. The reason is obvious.



I have to admit I've never heard that Polynesians made contact with the Incans. Atlantis is supposed to be near the Andes, but Polynesians contacting them? Fascinating if true.

Also, to be fair, you cannot damn those who think European culture is preeminent when it is their culture, and categorise them along with those who think this and are racist in their manner. Eurocentrism is not an inherently racist stance. Eurocentrism may work both internally and externally.

have you heard about Kon-Tiki? Tupac Inca Yupanqui traveled to Rapanui, and trade with the polynesians, but you're wrong with atlantis, atlantis was near to Mesoamerica, not andes, but you're right, eurocentrism isn't racist, but racist people uses eurocentrism to justify their actions

 

[Zipa_DH]

The United States is an empire. Not only was the bulk of its territory conquered but so has it maintained its status through careful military exploits and the occupation of foreign nations.

well.... I mean, "oficially" they aren't an empire, their economy, and military works like an empire, but, oficially, they sitll are a republic

 

[Zipa_DH]

I think America fully meets the defenition of a "civilization". I agree that in colonial times America was not a civilization and could be lumped in with England. And even today America is in a way a branch of the British Empire. But it is the dominant, largest and most powerful branch of the empire (even though the brain of the Anglo-American Empire may be in London, Washington DC is like a regional headquarters.)

But at least at a superficial level Ameriac has broken away from England. And in the past 100 years America has dominated the world culturally, diplomatically, economically, militaraly, basically everything. America is a global empire and has concentrated power and influence unlike any other empire since Rome. This maks America worthy of being a true "civilization" for the purpose of the game.

The only thing is America seems a little out of place when it's warriors are marching around in 4000 BC, but the same is true for many civs in the game.

americans isn't like the other modern nations of the continent, colonization in America was completely different from the rest of the continent, miscegenation never happened in colonial America, this is why americans still have european factions, same language, same music and another cultural expressions, things that could define them as a civilization, Latin America is different, our culture is product of the native american and european people, we aren't native americans or europeans, we are a different people, a different civilization, maybe they have great power, but culturally they don't represent any different from european civilizations

 

[JFD]

have you heard about Kon-Tiki? Tupac Inca Yupanqui traveled to Rapanui, and trade with the polynesians, but you're wrong with atlantis, atlantis was near to Mesoamerica, not andes, but you're right, eurocentrism isn't racist, but racist people uses eurocentrism to justify their actions

Okay. Knew it was somewhere in the Americas. Had never heard about Kon-Tiki before, but very interesting stuff. I also never realised the Easter Islands were territories of Chile.

 

[Zipa_DH]

Okay. Knew it was somewhere in the Americas. Had never heard about Kon-Tiki before, but very interesting stuff. I also never realised the Easter Islands were territories of Chile.

actually Isla de Pascua (Rapanui) are chilean territory, supposedly, polynesians learned to build in stone (the moais) from incas

 

[asmartlittleman]

Going back to the Brazil topic. If we don't have Portugal as a civ then Brazil is out of the question since Portugal colonized that area. In a way it's the same as having America as a civ and not England.

 

[Gucumatz]

actually Isla de Pascua (Rapanui) are chilean territory, supposedly, polynesians learned to build in stone (the moais) from incas

Any evidence? I will look this up but sounds intriguing. If you can pm me I would greatly appreciate it.

Yea I remember a few years ago in an issue of the Smithsonian (can't remember when) that there were plants found at some Chachapoyan Mummy only found in the Pacific islands.

If there is archaeology being done trying to prove a better connection I would love to read/hear about it.

 

[Zipa_DH]

Any evidence? I will look this up but sounds intriguing. If you can pm me I would greatly appreciate it.

Yea I remember a few years ago in an issue of the Smithsonian (can't remember when) that there were plants found at some Chachapoyan Mummy only found in the Pacific islands.

If there is archaeology being done trying to prove a better connection I would love to read/hear about it.

actually have a few, like the temple of Vinapú, in Rapanui, supposedly it architecture is the same that the incas used to build, it design is the same of the ancient graveyards in Perú, south american potatoes finded in pacific islands, and bones finded in Araucania from pacific ocean species of chickens, that would probe trade relationship between incas and polynesians, honestly, I just go for the temple, it's really similar to other incan temples

 

[Liex]

Going back to the Brazil topic. If we don't have Portugal as a civ then Brazil is out of the question since Portugal colonized that area. In a way it's the same as having America as a civ and not England.

Fear not, for the Portuguese are probably coming as a DLC sooner rather than later.

Brazil is uncertain. I don't think it'd work as a DLC, but it has potential to be included among other civs in a future expansion pack, unless they decide to add the remaining European countries.

But the European options are exhausting: If Norway and Finland are ruled out by Denmark and Sweden, and Hungary by Austria and the Huns, then, besides Portugal, I can only conceive they adding Poland/Lithuania. But they can always surprise us, as they did with the notorious 9th civ...

 

[Louis XXIV]

Going back to the Brazil topic. If we don't have Portugal as a civ then Brazil is out of the question since Portugal colonized that area. In a way it's the same as having America as a civ and not England.

Everyone moved from somewhere. It would be like saying none of the civs can be in the game before Ethiopia, since Homo Sapiens came from there. If Brazil deserves to be, it needs to deserve it on its own merit regardless of origin. If it does not deserve to be in, having Portugal in doesn't increase its odds.

 

[JTWuest]

Right now,I see that there are three reasons against including the Brazilian civilization:

- They simply can't go through dlc way,like plenty of civilizations,because there aren't any worthy scenario to include them;
.

While your other two reasons valid this is absolutely false. In fact, there are worthy scenarios for any possible civilization. To say otherwise shows a lack of historical knowledge about the area. Brazil, like everywhere else in the world, has a rich history that would make for compelling scenarios.

 

[GenjiKhan]

- They simply can't go through dlc way,like plenty of civilizations,because there aren't any worthy scenario to include them;

While your other two reasons valid this is absolutely false. In fact, there are worthy scenarios for any possible civilization. To say otherwise shows a lack of historical knowledge about the area. Brazil, like everywhere else in the world, has a rich history that would make for compelling scenarios.

It could be possible to set a scenario during the Imperial era(1822-1889),but there should be a unique rebel mechanic and a customized victory set,which would be related to the end of slavery there(it would be similar to Viking Scenario) . The only problem would be about recreating the external influence on the end of slavery,because England had speed up the end of slavery in Brazil when they start to intercept any embarcation with Slaves .

 

[Louis XXIV]

It's also worth noting that Rio de Janeiro was added as a city-state before Lisbon.

 

[aluelkdf]

I would like to see Brazil added as a civ. Every continent is represented in the game by a modern civ that currently exists. Europe has France, Germany and many other civs that currently exist. Asia has China, Japan and others. North America has America. Africa has Egypt (which I think represents both ancient and modern egypt, depending what era of the game you are in, same goes for china and others.)

All South America has is Inca, an impotant civ historically, but its a civ that no longer exists. Modern day South America is completely ignored and deserves to be represented in the game, and Brazil would be the best fit. Brazil may not have a history that makes it worthy of being a civ the way America does (not much of a history, but still has at least 100 years of major global influence). Brazil historicly does not have that, not even 100 years, but its current position in the 21st centry world does make Brazil worthy of being a civ. Brazil is the superpower of South America. And Brazil has potential to become a global superpower in the 21st centruy. They have the largest most powerful economy, and are one of the only countries in the world that is 100% energy independent. If Brazil and Spain were next door neighbors and they got in a war, Brazil would probably win the war in a month. So why does Spain get represented but not Brazil? Spain may have 1000 years of history while Brazil has none (at leat in regards to history that qualifies a civ in the game). But if you look at the world today, Spain is irrelevant compared to Brazil. So we should look at history when qualifying a civ, but we should also look at the modern world too.

 

[Louis XXIV]

And Brazil has potential to become a global superpower in the 21st centruy.

The key word there is "potential." I'll explain why this is problematic below.

But if you look at the world today, Spain is irrelevant compared to Brazil.

Spain isn't in for their modern times, they're in for historic achievement. But they're a good example why you have to be cautious. I'll use a better example.

In 1900, Argentina was richer than the United States. They had a first class navy. If you were to look at them, you would say "they have the potential to become a global superpower." If a Civilization game were to come out in 1900, Argentina would be in. However, people would look back at that game and say "what were they thinking at including Argentina." People's thoughts turned out to not be true. Argentina never became the global superpower they seemed to have potential to achieve. Brazil is in the same way. If they keep going where they are, I think they can be included in 15 or 20 years (in Civ9 or Civ10), but I don't think they're at the point where they can be included in Civ5.

The difference between Spain and Brazil is that Spain was a superpower. Ancient Rome isn't a superpower any more but we're not relying on modern history. With Brazil, you have to rely on modern history, so you want to make sure it's actually come true (the United States is a superpower, not "has potential to be" a superpower).