Why Korea as a Civ?

[Ozymandius]

How does this site number posts. I had a feeling my posts were disapearing... The number of posts is the same above #215 & 215 and also a 215 on the site about culture flips...

And the number just changed to 216 including this one????

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I have no problem with Korea being in, or for that matter anyone being in or out. A certain amount of the choices are simply, "we need a Civ from this area with roughly these characteristics--ah this one will work"

That said, it would have probably been market pandering to have included Korea in the first 16 Civs of the original game. Civ is a popular enough title, everyone knew it was gonna be successful. But the expansion pack isn't a guaranteed success--or at least wasn't when they got the go-ahead to do it. Putting Korea in pretty much says it will be successful financially. Koreans buy and play so many computer games, that there are titles that are total disasters in the rest of the world, but Korea makes them into a robust seller.

So bottom line, putting Korea in means that the second expansion pack is not likely to get cancelled because of problems with the first. It means, when all is said and done, that there will be more Civs, more improvements, more everything for everyone. Some of you with a favorite that got left out this time will get your wish later.

I say, three cheers for Korea!

Oh, and I'm American with no Korean connections at all. So don't accuse me of pandering.

 

[TETurkhan]

The Persians came from a similar area in central asia as did the Ottomans/Turks. The Slavs were so incompetent as fighters they gave the world the name SLAVE.


Firstly, the Persians along with some Afghans were not originally Central Asian, they are Indo-Aryan. The Turks and practically all Central Asians are from the Altaic Family. Your statement makes it sound as if they were the same people which is anything but true.

I do agree with you in that not enough attention has been given to Central Asian Civilizations but the same could also said about African, South East Asian and more. The most obvious ones to me are the Abyssinians and the Jews, both have rich and long histories. The part about Slavs doesn’t seem right, the Ottoman Turks fought against the Serbs who are Slavs and the battles were terribly fierce. Later when the Serbs became part of the Ottoman Empire, they fought along side with the Ottomans. Once such battle was against Timur-Lenk in 1402, “Yildirim” (Thunderbolt) Sultan Bayezid army was all but broken and fleeing except the Janissaries and Serbs, they fought heroically side by side until the end when they finally succumbed to the assaults of Timur-Lenk’s army.

Finally, Turks and Arabs. They do share the same religion, many of their cultural aspects are the same, however they speak different language, originate from different place, and both have a unique and different history from one another. If you classify them as the same, then apply this to others and you would be left with on Civilization in Europe (EC Civ )

oh yeah, the Koreans (that was what this thread was about )
sure they should belong on the game, why not? I don't mind more options for people, heck if you had 30 more Civilizations in the game why not? Yes you would get some Civs almost identical to others, but you can select who you want to play against and who you dont... if it makes people happy I am all for it!

 

[sebanaj]

most of the ancient had the concept of slavery, but calling it different according to their language, so i don't think the slavs are related to slavery.

 

[sebanaj]

then the hebrews must be there with no doubt.

 

[narmox]

sebanaj: the word SLAVE was born because of the SLAVS.

No one said they invented slavery and all

 

[narmox]

ok, if the koreans are in, everyone else should be in.

Whatever. Firaxis can put any civ they like in the game, and I'm glad the Koreans are in. I'd be glad if the Incas or the Mayans were in too, but whatever. No big deal.

I think this is getting pointless....

 

[Ozymandius]

Teturkhan:
I did not say the Arabs are the same as Turks.
If a people did not originate in Southern-Eastern-Northern-Western-Asia then they came from the arid-mountainous area sometimes called central asia. That covers a large enough area where so many of the world's cultures originated. How is that false information. I was trying to make a point that so many of the cultures that affected us originated in an area that excludes the China/Japan/India part of Asia. IMHO Koreans are in for non-cultural reasons. If their purchases help the game, all the power to Firaxis. Not too many Assyrians, Celts, Huns, Babylonians, Hittites, Phoenicians etc are going to be buying this game.

 

[Exsanguination]

aye, thanks for the input. But I'd like to re-clarify my stance: I never said Korea didn't deserve to be civ, but I wanted to know WHY they SHOULD be a civ, because I didn't know. I just found it curious that they came before the Mayans/Incans/Hebrews (especially the latter).

Anyways, I still really haven't seen a definitive answer other than "who cares" and "marketing". I'm asking whether there is a historical reason they are in. Anyone?

 

[Ozymandius]

Exsanguination:

I'm with you on this one, I'm just as perplexed

 

[Evie]

Errr. Have you checked earlier posts?

-Great advances in the field of early rocketry, and in various other advances later attributed to China which made their way from there to the west.
-Created the first true "armored" warships (Those turtle boats from AoK *were* built and used in warfare) with more than respectable success.
-Managed to retain their cultural identity and for long stretches their national independance despite being trapped between aggressive great powers (Japan and China).
-Later rose to become one of the asian tigers of economy.
-Civilization that has remained there with its own cultural identity (though like all other nations influenced by its neighboors) for well over two milleniums already.

Compare, again with the hebrews.

-First civilization with a set system of monotheistic believes. Birth civilization of two out of the three great monotheist religions. (But had nothing to do with the spread of monotheism ; Christianty was born with the hebrews but would have remained a minor sect if not for the romans and greeks)
-Survived despite constant occupations and scattering as a culture.
-Outside from that? Not much for them. The first temple? Prove that it's more than a biblical myth. The only one we have ruins of around was built by Herod who was more greco-roman than hebrew while Judea was a roman "protectorate" of sort.

The Hebrews would deserve in, but the Koreans are the wrong civs to pick on as historically undeserving to make room for them. Frankly, I'd say that if one look at the overall contribution to how the world turned out, lookign at the MONGOLS for elimination may be a better choice.

What did the Mongols do? Conquer, burn, pillage and destroy a lot. Did they set up anything that lasted (outside China where they took over and actually simply became a new Chinesse dynasty (IE part of the China civ), or was even impressive beyond the size of their empire-of-a-generation?

Frankly, I'd look at them first and foremost for elimination, but what can I say? The image of the rampaging barbarian horde is way too popular.

The Vikings actually have the claim of having built up some of Russia, partly Normandy, etc - and having found their way to America first among europeans (that we can prove at present). They did built up somethign that lasted. Not to mention that they have the claim of being responsible for modern english having so much in common with french in terms of vocabulary (not grammar).

The Mongols, though...They were a great force for a short while, but worth inclusion more than the Inca, Maya or Hebrew? First two, perhaps, but...

 

[Capt Ajax]

I'm Not buying it.

I say the Jews have endured much more over time and it's a wonder that they have managed to retain their cultre distinctevness with all the many civilizations they have impacted.

Let's face it:
1. In essence the strength of the Hebrew Culture started WWII. Hitler used the general dislike of the Jews in Germany to unite the German people and further his political goals.
Negetive Result - WWII - Death of Millions
Positive Result - We were able to save the Koreans from the Japanese.

2. One may use terms like "biblical myth" and try to discount the effect that one single Jew has had on the history of the world, but it is a "fact" that hundreds of millions of people all over the globe do not go to church on Sunday to worship a Korean.

3. Even after all that has transpired with the Jews they have enough enfluence worldwide, as a people, to keep themselves from being totally annihilated in the middle east.

4. Judaism has impacted the Koreans through the cultural / religious influence that they have had on other civilizations who deal with the Koreans. (WWII - Christianity) On the other hand, the Koreans have not impacted the Hebrew Culture in such a way.

I am not Jewish but think that they have impacted history enough to be placed on the VIP-CIV list before the Koreans. No offence to the koreans but I just believe that historically speaking a better choice could have been made.

However,
I guess Infogames believes that more Koreans will buy the game than Jews? In any case the Jews are not the weakest CIV, but it's the votes that count................goodby.

 

[Hamlet]

Originally posted by Capt Ajax
Hitler used the general dislike of the Jews in Germany to unite the German people and further his political goals.

Actually, Hitler drew on many more important sources of discontentment in The German people to bring him to power.

Whilst Jews became more important after Hitler had came to power as scapegoats for reprisals, such as The Krystalnacht, The whole Jewish issue in relation to Hitler's rise to power is pretty much an irrelevance - Hitler drew upon many more important sources of discontetment, such as economic problems and the weakness of The Weimar Government, which were probably the most important factors in his rise to power.

If Judaism had never even existed, Hitler would still have been able to unite Germany against a single 'evil' foe - Communism.

 

[sebanaj]

started when they fought against the city states of Canaan, in the ancient age, Abraham came from Ur (Sumer), they formed some little states around the south region of Canaan (near Jordan actually), and the dead sea.
Then they fought against the city states and conquered them.
But they weren't Israel at that time! they were divided in tribes.
They conquered the land Moises said God told him to conquer because it was their land... well at least in the tale of the Byble.
Before that the Egyptians and the Mitanni were fighting to control the region. But they were city states like Jerico, etc. And were very advanced, the tribes of Canaan reached the Neolitic Revolution much earlier than the rest.

 

[sebanaj]

To put an end to religions.
Now that everything can be explained and that everything has a reason.
I've read a lot about religions, so I doubt about all the religions, I can't pick one as the right religion.

I don't really understand why many modern men still need to believe in something higher, or have faith in something other than themselves.

 

[Ozymandius]

Jewish religion/ civ.

Their strength is not in a homeland but in their ability to survive for 2000 years without one. As a culture they can survive as the ultimate merchant/scientific/religious civ without having to have a continuous border.

(almost)Every other historic civ had to expel them because they got so powerful and were owed too much money.

Contributions: Einstein maybe?? My knowledge is too limited to list all their achievements in their adopted countries but it would surpass the Koreans hands down except for purchasing power for Firaxis games...

 

[SLIMSHADY339802]

Originally posted by newfangle
Here's an interesting tidbit on Korea. Virtually all Chinese, Japanese, Cambodian, etc.... all originated from Korea. I guess it could be considered the "mother" of a multitude of civs.

are u kidding???
Chinese were one of the earliest civilization even born
if u say Koreans are originated from the Chinese that could be right (After all China got 2 huge rivers, giving all reasons for humans to first settle there)

 

[Richard III]

Originally posted by sebanaj
I think the official History focused on those lands because of Jesus.

Or more bluntly, perhaps the "official history" focused on those lands because of bigotry and eurocentricism...

I think Korea is a great civ, and a simple way for the skeptics to convert would be to read a little Korean history instead of just waving their hands wildly in the air.

And this "cynical marketing" argument is very telling. Korea has a huge market for computer gamers. Go figure!! Could it be because it is a large country, quick to develop economically when it wants to (e.g. 1300-1500 golden age, 1960-2002?). If economics was the only factor, Holland, Australia and Canada would be civs (especially the last two, given the english-speaking market which supports higher game prices). Bablyon wouldn't be.

And for those arguing about redundant civs, I've always seen Babylon as the Arabs, helped along by their Egyptian brethren. Under those circumstances, an Arab civ is redundant.

R.III

 

[sebanaj]

the babilonyans came from the Arabian Peninsula, but they were called Amorreos (Spanish) who were semitics.
The Hebrews were also semitics.

 

[sebanaj]

about the western fertile crescent which is: Lebanon, Israel, Jordan and Syria.

the books it's called "The Land of Canaan" and its written by Isaac Asimov. It's quite a good book, it says the zone already had city walls by 7000 bC, and was more developed than the majority of civilizations. But their inhabitants weren't hebrews yet.
The Hebrews conquered it in around 1300.