1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Why does Firaxis still use BC and AD?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Vandlys, Dec 25, 2017.

?

What should Firaxis do?

  1. Keep BC and AD

    74.1%
  2. Change it to BCE and CE

    13.0%
  3. Start the counter at 0 for each civilization.

    6.5%
  4. Use a calender similar to the real-world counterpart of used Civ

    6.5%
  1. zhivik

    zhivik Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sofia, Bulgaria
    As a non-native English speaker, I get the impression that using the BC/AD label gives some sense of history, given that AD is not in common use anymore. I do understand the religious meaning behind it, but as a non-religious person I don't really mind it. It may have originated as a religious notation, but it has turned into a largely cultural one. Please mind that the AD label wasn't uniformly introduced for quite a long period of time, even in Western Europe, even though it was created in the 6th century.

    Regarding the BCE/CE thing - I am afraid I have to agree that it is kind of unnecessary and things like these give political correctness a bad name. I am very much in favour of phasing out terms that are insulting (like "cripple" for "disabled", for instance), but I don't see the point of doing so for everything that has even the slightest chance of offending someone. Here is an actual example. I am from Bulgaria and during the first 12 years of my life, I lived under a communist system. What they tried to do is to replace the religious dating label (we use "before/after Christ", like in France) with BNE/ANE, where NE stood for New Era. Well, after communism was over in 1990, these labels didn't stick and people very quickly reverted to "before/after Christ". It shows how meaningless the new labels were, and how people didn't care for them. After all, the Gregorian calendar is based on the year Jesus Christ was born, and trying to pretend it is something else sounds ... fake.

    I do understand that some people might have a problem with that. However, since Christians themselves don't attribute any religious meaning to the Gregorian calendar anymore, I don't see why people from other religions should do so. For better or worse, the Gregorian calendar is the most widely used in the world at the moment, so it is the easiest to understand. I wouldn't mind an option to use civilization-specific calendars (someone may even do a mod out of this), but I do believe that the Gregorian calendar gives the best indication how much you diverge from real-life events. If the AD label is indeed very insulting to someone (I do not pretend I understand completely other cultures or religious beliefs), then take it away and keep the system in line with what is commonly used at the moment.
     
  2. jddods

    jddods Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Messages:
    264
    Location:
    New Zealand
    I voted for the status quo but I don't really care. When I started with Civ II, I used to look at the date. Now I focus on the turn number.
     
  3. nukehumvee

    nukehumvee Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    120
    Location:
    Earth
    I have no problem of either "BC/AD" or "BCE/CE". But I think, alongside the common calendar, the game can introduce individual calendars for civilisations based on whether they have researched Calendar, kinda like the Mayan Long Count ability in G+K.
    For example, when whatever civilisation I'm playing has not researched Calendar, then the individual calendar doesn't show anything.
    - The turn I complete Calendar would be year 0.
    - The individiual calendar should display the year relative to the "year zero" or the origin of my calendar alongside its relative Domini/Common Era year.
    - If I researched Calendar in 500 BCE, then the "year zero" would be 500 BCE, and 2018 CE would then be the 2518th year of my calendar.
    - If I established a religion 300 years earlier, then the system should retroactively refer to that religion as being established 300 years before "year zero".

    Just an idea.
     
  4. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Minor issue for doing this in Civ VI is that there's no calendar tech. :p

    Others have suggested seeing year zero for the year you found your religion and something different if you don't found a religion.
     
  5. nukehumvee

    nukehumvee Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    120
    Location:
    Earth
    Just work the tech back in. I see no problem.
     
  6. tat501

    tat501 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    243
    Because its so well known. We all have a mental picture of how long ago 2000 BC was, and how long ago 1999 AD was, because we are living in a world that uses the birth of Christ to mark time. If you're not Christian I guess it's annoying, but one third of the planet is Christian, and the most influential part of the world historically (Europe and North America) are Christian (Europe at least culturally speaking, if not actively religious). Changing it would be unnecessarily confusing for many, and an immersion breaker to boot.
     
    Thormodr likes this.
  7. Vandlys

    Vandlys Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    175
    Location:
    New Atlantis
    Even though I might not agree entirely, your arguments are sound, aside from it being 'an immersion breaker'. Immersion is not to have Scythia/Aztec/Egypt/Arabia/China/Rome/Greece/Japan/etc. use BC and AD, from the moment they developed agriculture.
     
  8. Perseus Gold

    Perseus Gold Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    27
    Gender:
    Male
    Most of the people on this site would defend whatever the status quo is. Why would this topic be any different.
     
  9. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,797
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    If it ain't broke...

    Add more features to it?
     
  10. tharg

    tharg Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    BC/AD is the only calendar I am familiar with and don't see any reason to change it. Don't you also get the turn number displayed as well as the year?

    I am not a Christan and don't really see what that has to do with anything.

    Maybe someone has done a mod to configure your own calendar. Using the calendar for the Civ your playing might be amusing and educational, but also really confusing.
     
  11. Slip de Garcon

    Slip de Garcon Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2005
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    SW England
    CE/BCE only seem to be used by slightly PC historians.

    As the Civ VI community is somewhat broader I don't see the issue.

    The whole BCE/CE vs BC/AD thing is a great example of the modern trend for trying to make things less offensive just by renaming them. If it just means the same thing who cares?
     
  12. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,496
    I don't think it's a matter of offensiveness at all, but an attempt to "modernize" and distance themselves from the original meaning.
     
    evanaurora and Vandlys like this.

Share This Page

Ebates: Get Paid to Shop