Why is Korea not in Civ 5?

[tifa9292]

well, wikipedia says orient is east asia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orient

 

[Maidel]

Ah I think you have that wrong. America has the best soldiers not the most.

Sorry to go back a bit - but this was asking for it.

That statement is not only wrong, its laughable.

The american Military rush trains most of its soliders - for example - basic training for standard soliders in the UK is as long as basic training for american marines. Its almost 1/3 again as long as basic training for the standard american army.

What is true is that the american military is FAR the best equiped soliders, 'best' soliders, is definately not true.

 

[Thormodr]

only for a short time in history is korea not independent in its history. and korea has 5000 years of history according to science ad recent reserch. i know about the bear myth but it is a myth.

http://www.seoulselection.com/index...ategory_id=12&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=53

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Korea - "Korea, one of the oldest continuous civilizations in the world[1], has over 5,000 years of history.[2] "

5000 years. longer than japan and i think china

5000 years is totally incorrect. Korean nationalists are just trying to make themselves look better than China or Japan. Call it a national insecurity.
There's a reason why the Korea refers to China as "Older brother".

Besides, you shouldn't use Wikipedia when a subject is controversial. It's not credible in this case.

Koreans have a 3000 year history max. Only the last 2100 or so fall into the realm of historical written history, and that through Chinese accounts.

Some Korean "historians" have claimed that Koreans invented the Chinese script and that Confucius was actually Chinese. Also, Sumerians were actually Koreans as well.
To their credit, most Koreans think these guys are crackpots.

Here's a you tube link about Korea's 10000 years of history. I mean, why stop at a mere 5000?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIhoBy6a0BY

 

[bonafide11]

Oriental means eastern, but it also refers to South and South-East Asia, so it's a bit more specific then Asian. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/oriental

Historically "Orient" has meant different things to different cultures. In American culture, people think of Orient as far-east or south-east Asia, but not in Europe, at least not historically. In Europe for the seventeenth up until this past century, Orient referred to what we now consider the Middle East, which is hardly South-East Asia or Far-East Asia, as another posted mentioned. Read Edward Said's Orientalism, which is mentioned on the Wikipedia site that someone else linked to. It's a very influential literary history of how Europeans have looked at and defined the "Orient." It's one of the canonical books of Asian studies and Postcolonial studies. Europeans considered the Ottoman Empire to be Oriental, and Americans don't consider that region as Oriental. So the term is not only vague, it's outdated and imprecise.

 

[Varelse]

Sorry to go back a bit - but this was asking for it.

That statement is not only wrong, its laughable.

The american Military rush trains most of its soliders - for example - basic training for standard soliders in the UK is as long as basic training for american marines. Its almost 1/3 again as long as basic training for the standard american army.

What is true is that the american military is FAR the best equiped soliders, 'best' soliders, is definately not true.

We may rush train them, but we rush train the hell out of them!

 

[Maidel]

We may rush train them, but we rush train the hell out of them!

Im going to take that as a humourous statement

 

[Maidel]

Historically "Orient" has meant different things to different cultures. In American culture, people think of Orient as far-east or south-east Asia, but not in Europe, at least not historically. In Europe for the seventeenth up until this past century, Orient referred to what we now consider the Middle East, which is hardly South-East Asia or Far-East Asia, as another posted mentioned. Read Edward Said's Orientalism, which is mentioned on the Wikipedia site that someone else linked to. It's a very influential literary history of how Europeans have looked at and defined the "Orient." It's one of the canonical books of Asian studies and Postcolonial studies. Europeans considered the Ottoman Empire to be Oriental, and Americans don't consider that region as Oriental. So the term is not only vague, it's outdated and imprecise.

Yes - but europeans dont NOW think of that region as oriental. For a couple of reasons, one of which is that the ottoman empire doesnt exist anymore...

Currently the orient is east asia (japan/ china/ thailand etc) in almost all western cultures.

 

[snapple232]

You want to take out China for Korea? Really?

 

[tifa9292]

5000 years is totally incorrect. Korean nationalists are just trying to make themselves look better than China or Japan. Call it a national insecurity.
There's a reason why the Korea refers to China as "Older brother".

Besides, you shouldn't use Wikipedia when a subject is controversial. It's not credible in this case.

Koreans have a 3000 year history max. Only the last 2100 or so fall into the realm of historical written history, and that through Chinese accounts.

Some Korean "historians" have claimed that Koreans invented the Chinese script and that Confucius was actually Chinese. Also, Sumerians were actually Koreans as well.
To their credit, most Koreans think these guys are crackpots.

Here's a you tube link about Korea's 10000 years of history. I mean, why stop at a mere 5000?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIhoBy6a0BY

ok so korea and china have similar years old history but still longer than japan and most other civilizations right.
i dont think confucius is korean by the way. is there any evidence?

 

[tifa9292]

You want to take out China for Korea? Really?

no. its there just as a poll option if others share that opinion

 

[bonafide11]

Yes - but europeans dont NOW think of that region as oriental. For a couple of reasons, one of which is that the ottoman empire doesnt exist anymore...

Currently the orient is east asia (japan/ china/ thailand etc) in almost all western cultures.

The Ottoman Empire doesn't exist, but that region still exists. The Ottoman Empire wasn't the only ones considered Oriental, it was the entire region and culture. As diverse as the region and culture were, Europeans looked at as "East" and "Other" to Western culture.

Your second point is simply not true. Orient just means east of Europe, but its specific location depends on where you're from. An "Oriental rug" now refers to a rug from anywhere from Persia to China, but traditionally it meant more specifically a rug from the Middle East region. So Orient has changed, but it's still no more specific than Asian.

 

[Thormodr]

I wish there was an option to vote Korean out of the game because they are over represented. After all, according to the Korean History Channel, Koreans founded the Chinese, Indian, Sumerian and Egyptian civilizations. They also founded a civilization in Essex (Southern England), conquered Arabia, discovered America, colonized Alaska and became Native Americans. They even conquered the Incas!

Even Chinggis Khan was descended from Koreans according to some Korean historians. Japan as well.

Right there they are represented by at least 6 civilizations! Frankly, I want less Korea in ciV.

For your viewing pleasure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjIfWtCp29M&feature=related

Finally, Jesus was Korean as well!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARntHwTONN0&feature=video_response

 

[cybrxkhan]

I'm not sure whether to take that as a joke or not.

 

[Maidel]

The Ottoman Empire doesn't exist, but that region still exists. The Ottoman Empire wasn't the only ones considered Oriental, it was the entire region and culture. As diverse as the region and culture were, Europeans looked at as "East" and "Other" to Western culture.

Your second point is simply not true. Orient just means east of Europe, but its specific location depends on where you're from. An "Oriental rug" now refers to a rug from anywhere from Persia to China, but traditionally it meant more specifically a rug from the Middle East region. So Orient has changed, but it's still no more specific than Asian.

A quick google search brought up only the germans still use the word orient to describe the middle east. Every other western culture use the word to describe east asia (some with and some without india).

I never said it was 'specific' - however it is definately more precise than asian - that term has WILDLY different meanings depending on its context. Asian in the UK means almost exclusively pakistani/indian/bangladeshi, conversely asian in the US means chinese/japanese/korean.

 

[Thormodr]

I'm not sure whether to take that as a joke or not.

This was played on Korean television and they are perfectly serious. I believe some Koreans even claim to have invented Chinese traditional medicine too.

I lived in South Korea for 6 years and I saw these programs with my own eyes. It's also in their newspapers from time to time.

 

[lishiping84]

only for a short time in history is korea not independent in its history. and korea has 5000 years of history according to science ad recent reserch. i know about the bear myth but it is a myth.

http://www.seoulselection.com/index...ategory_id=12&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=53

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Korea - "Korea, one of the oldest continuous civilizations in the world[1], has over 5,000 years of history.[2] "

5000 years. longer than japan and i think china

i can change this right now if i wish

wikipedia is just a simple tool but it always goes wrong.

korea culture is longer than china. is that a joke?

actually the uu and ub of korea in CIV4 are both from china.

Ok, chinese and japnese should take responsibility for the Hysteria of modern korean people. you know, the trauma in childhood

well the only thing which i admire and you korean should be proud of is the toughness.so many powerful nations around it, it is still there. sometimes even tougher than china. if you are not tough enough, you guys now will be proud as a chinese or japanese, and needn't anything to prove how great you are.

 

[Liquidated]

There's always gonna be endless "why isn't" in any civ. I mean take for example civ4 (BTS's) 42 leaders and there are still missingle nationalities and why-not's.

Considering how there's only what 18ish leaders for the initial civ5, of course there is going to be a massive amount of leaders and nationalities missing.

Regardless, since the trait pool of civ4 was limited in terms of trait permutations; leaders had to be shoehorned into expansive, aggressive for example. At least with what I understand from civ5 is that each leader is their own unique set of advantages such that it will be much easier perhaps to add more than a mere 42 leaders.. really depends how complex sets of leader 'traits' are built up.

Well if there's one thing, lets at least hope when they do add Korea, the leader isn't an effing spineless pos like Wang in civ 4 is

Cheers!
-Liq

 

[cybrxkhan]

This was played on Korean television and they are perfectly serious. I believe some Koreans even claim to have invented Chinese traditional medicine too.

I lived in South Korea for 6 years and I saw these programs with my own eyes. It's also in their newspapers from time to time.

That's quite a pity, since Korea has it's own admirable history and achievements, even without the being-the-father-and-mother-of-all-civilizations-on-earth thing.

Also, the Korean claim to having more history than China is simply chauvinistic pseudo-history. In Vietnam, we also claim that we are 3000+ years old (i.e. at least as old as China) - but we only did it so that we could say that we were as old and prestigious as the Chinese; and, even though I can be a proud Viet sometimes, I have to say that those claims are ridiculous.

 

[lishiping84]

5000 years is totally incorrect. Korean nationalists are just trying to make themselves look better than China or Japan. Call it a national insecurity.
There's a reason why the Korea refers to China as "Older brother".

Besides, you shouldn't use Wikipedia when a subject is controversial. It's not credible in this case.

Koreans have a 3000 year history max. Only the last 2100 or so fall into the realm of historical written history, and that through Chinese accounts.

Some Korean "historians" have claimed that Koreans invented the Chinese script and that Confucius was actually Chinese. Also, Sumerians were actually Koreans as well.
To their credit, most Koreans think these guys are crackpots.

Here's a you tube link about Korea's 10000 years of history. I mean, why stop at a mere 5000?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIhoBy6a0BY

well, this is funny, even the 10000 year's history is recorded in chinese.

 

[Thormodr]

That's quite a pity, since Korea has it's own admirable history and achievements, even without the being-the-father-and-mother-of-all-civilizations-on-earth thing.

Also, the Korean claim to having more history than China is simply chauvinistic pseudo-history. In Vietnam, we also claim that we are 3000+ years old (i.e. at least as old as China) - but we only did it so that we could say that we were as old and prestigious as the Chinese; and, even though I can be a proud Viet sometimes, I have to say that those claims are ridiculous.

I totally agree. Korea has a lot to be proud of and they do have a long history of over 2000 years. Under Kong Sejong they had an enlightened kingdom with a number of scientific achievements. Also, managing to stay intact as a culture for all those years is quite remarkable. They don't have 5000 years of history though. That's pure fantasy. A form of history envy I guess as they aren't as long as others.

Korean "historians" making up crap makes them look foolish. It's a shame really.