Why no hitler, stalin, churchill, or mouslini?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Danielos said:
It´s a little strange that Civ-games can include butchers like Mao and Stalin and not Hitler. But I guess nobody would like to play the German civ if he was in charge...
Click to expand...


Oh C'mon...

You know everybody and there uncle would be Hiter just so they could be Hitler in a game.
 
Well, they've at least thought about Stalin and Churchill, because they were both suggested civ leaders that were in that one poll which was posted here a couple days ago.

The Hitler exclusion is probably because of what he did and how wrong it was, like a few of you said. But I will admit, having Hitler and his "take over the world" desires would make one heck of a great experience in future Civ games. Trying to stop him on your own would be so much fun... or even trying to gain allies who are willing to risk their Civ's just to stop him would be great.
 
CVDon said:
We should have all the above mentioned leaders, but include an additional factor.

Hitler: +1 happy face in all cities if Government is Fascism (ditto Mousilini). Or +10% hammers and +1 experience for military units. Something like that.

Bismark: +1 happy face in all cities if Legal is Nationalism, or something like that.

Stalin: +10% hammers, -1 happy face if economy is Communism.

(Edit to add PS: If Scottland invades Canada the US will have to attack Scottland. It's the Munroe Doctrine. Nothing personal.)
Click to expand...


Jeez, this forum should be renamed "lets no jack crap about history"

The Munroe Doctrine isnt binding and most recently was reversed during the Falklands War with Argentine and Britain... the US supported Britian.
 
Stinson said:
Well, they've at least thought about Stalin and Churchill, because they were both suggested civ leaders that were in that one poll which was posted here a couple days ago.

The Hitler exclusion is probably because of what he did and how wrong it was, like a few of you said. But I will admit, having Hiter and his "take over the world" desires would make one heck of a great experience in future Civ games. Trying to stop him on your own would be so much fun... or even trying to gain allies who are willing to risk their Civ's just to stop him would be great.
Click to expand...



No, the only reason Hitler isnt in the game is because half the world would cry and whine if he made his way in.

Stalin destroyed at least 20% more human life than Hitler and arguably some say that he killed double that what Hitler did.

The problem is we live in an ignorant world of people who can barely read.
 
Need I point out that in the real world leaders die every few years meaning there are tons and tons of leaders left out of the game? Why can't I play Ramses? Akhenaten? Papa Doc Duvalie (sp?)? Howard Taft?

Besides I played as hitler last night. It was real tough, I chose frederick on the world map (excellent map now that I can run it) and named myself Hitler. Did it make my panzers any less effective that I did not have an animated picture of the jerk to show the ai? Hell no.

-drjones
 
So is it 'best' leader or 'most influential'?

It is kind of odd the way it is now. I mean, the one guy says he is going to slaughter 50,000 slaves in honor of friendship or something (I forget who). Some guy from a thousand years ago can say it, but Hitler couldn't.

...then you have, um, the possibility of a Hitler-led Germany with the state religion of Judaism... and that just opens up a whole 'nother can of worms...
 
Roxinante said:
But 'terrorist' is about as vague as what it replaced; 'anarchist'. There are politics behind terrorism, but its not defined, its not a single, overridding philosophy, like the Nazis.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are trolling so I must disagree. The core values of the philosophies are very similar. They are both based on hate and the complete intolerance of people who are not of your cultural origin and who don't share your values, dehumanizing them to the extreme extent that killing them is not only acceptable and desirable, but actually rewarded. Think about it, is it really that different?

Roxinante said:
I think if you're going to have Nazis in a game, you should have some history behind them.
Click to expand...

So the memory of millions of people murdured by Stalin during his post war paranoia and Mao during the cultural revolution and the philosophies that facilitated this are not as worthy of a history lecture? Nazi germany has been gone for over 50 years. Communist China and North Korea still exist today - still oppressing billions.

My point is not that you should not, you absolutely should. But I think you can't just single out one totalitarian and genocidal philosophy as more important to vaccine our free societies from rather than the other.

Isn't the real reason that Hitler and nazism is so tabu in a game today that what you are asking for is actually working very effectively? Most people today understand how unacceptable nazism is and how terrible Hitler was just because the memory IS being kept alive effectively, and rightfully so.

The real important question should be why more is not being done to teach about the genocides of other leaders of history? Probably because those events did not take place at the heart of the biggest war the world has ever seen. Nazism hit the fan so to speak and the majority of the world had to deal with it, in large parts by litterally spilling their guts. About Stalin and Mao, well that was after the war and most people (who live in countries where they sell computer games) just don't care or even know about how many people they murdured. They were home watching TV, dealing with it by watching a news flash about it at best.

About fundamentalist, islamistic terror - well, maybe they will qualify too given enough time. That history is being written now.

My whole point in this is that the reason that Firaxis CAN consider putting Stalin and Mao in is because people in general are ignorant about them. People are not as ignorant about Hitler. In the case of Mao, over a billion chinese still live in the dictatorship he created and they sure aren't getting taught the truth about Mao. Still today, they grow up believing he was a great guy and are very willing to buy a game where they can play as "the great leader" Mao and take over the world. Including Mao in the game makes a lot of business sense (and we should probably not put too much of a moral aspect on that).

I don't expect Firaxis to change all this or put Hitler in. It is not their fault. In fact, they can do whatever they like with their game and I wouldn't blame them either way. It's just a game in a historical setting and history just is what it is. I do however think people seriously lack perspective when they react on using Hitler in a computer game but don't react similar when it comes to Mao, Stalin and others like them.

Moderators: If this is too OT or you think the thread is getting too political for this board, please take the appropriate action.
 
Don't know if it has been mentioned yet or not, maybe Firaxis is planning a WWII Scenario on an expansion pack that would include these leaders.

Maybe it was intentional, so they could sell them to you at a later date.
 
This is just silly. Silly!

Civ4 is NOT a history game. If you want to play as Hitler or Mussilini, go ahead and buy Hearts of Iron 2. Play as nazis all you want. It's way more realistic than Civ4 as it is a WWII simulation.

Every other day we get one of these "why isn't so-and-so" in the game. Whether it's the Koreans, the Madagascarians, Hitler, or whoever. People want to take Caesar out of the game. Some people don't like FDR.

Hitler isn't in the game because he was a horrible person, and his horror happened way to close in recent history to include him. Even without the law it would be in bad taste to include him.

"But Roosevelt is in the game. He ruled at the same time, you schmuck!" Yes, he did. However, Roosevelt, despite his indiscretions, is historically known as a great leader of free people. Plus, to the victors go the spoils.

The fact is, Hitler hits a little bit too close to home for a lot of people. He represents a portion of society that wanted to do away with another sect of people. Yes, there are other leaders in the game who did the same thing, but they happened centuries ago. Not sixty-five years ago. This is a light-hearted game as far as the leaders go.
 
zeeter said:
The fact is, Hitler hits a little bit too close to home for a lot of people. He represents a portion of society that wanted to do away with another sect of people. Yes, there are other leaders in the game who did the same thing, but they happened centuries ago. Not sixty-five years ago. This is a light-hearted game as far as the leaders go.
Click to expand...
Mao Zedong was less then sixty five years ago (1959 - 1976) yet caused half of his Country to die of starvation die to his horrid farming and steel working ideas, then attempted to destroy all Chinnese traditions in the "Cultural Revolution" causing the deaths of many. He may be noticeable as a public icon, but he was a horrid leader. (Compared to the hundreds of rulers of China throughout history)

Hitler atleast helped his Country in the beginning, Mao didn't seen to do that.
 
Mrdie said:
Mao Zedong was less then sixty five years ago (1959 - 1976) yet caused half of his Country to die of starvation die to his horrid farming and steel working ideas, then attempted to destroy all Chinnese traditions in the "Cultural Revolution" causing the deaths of many. He may be noticeable as a public icon, but he was a horrid leader. (Compared to the hundreds of rulers of China throughout history)

Hitler atleast helped his Country in the beginning, Mao didn't seen to do that.
Click to expand...


Who would be more offensive to the people who are purchasing this game? Hitler or Mao Zedong? That said, if Mao had actual malice against his people for putting forth these policies then he probably should be excluded. Still, though, I find Hitler far, far more offensive than Mao.
 
Hitler would be philosophical and industrious. =P

Philosophical for the Hitler Youth, all the young people he inspired, the average fighting German who were very philsophical. Industrious because he established war factories in all of conquered Europe. =P

Actually maybe aggressive would fit better, since he did have an obssession with attacking all the time...
 
lysander said:
Churchill . . . I don't understand why you grouped him with the fascists. I've got no arguement against why he shouldn't be in the game, other than the fact that there are a large number of great English leaders who he had to compete with.
Click to expand...
Sorry if this has already been mentioned but it's a long thread.

Churchill was the prime minister not the king. He wasn't the leader of the country.
 
StarWorms said:
Sorry if this has already been mentioned but it's a long thread.

Churchill was the prime minister not the king. He wasn't the leader of the country.
Click to expand...

The king in Britain is simply a figurehead; it is the prime minister who runs the government and thus makes most of the important decisions.
 
Guys, it's all arbitrarily assigned, and just a few "traits" slapped on top of cute animated images of political/religious leaders. That's all. Civ4 Saladin isn't anything within .0001% of the real thing; nor is Caesar, or Alexander, or Catherine, etc.

So as far as I'm concerned, they can call new leaders Mussolini, Stalin, Wile E. Coyote, or Roadrunner. It doesn't matter, and all discussion of who is "great" and who deserves what abilities is pretty laughable. This isn't history, or anywhere near is. This is a highly entertaining game, with a few tangential nods at reality. :)

If you want to argue history, go read source materials on the time and places involved. But it's pretty useless squabbling over something like this, in my opinion.
 
i like canada. why not. oh if my side thing doesnt say so im from chicago, so yeah, im still waiting to meet some inbred miidwesterns.... why would you insult us... im hurt. anyways. yea bain is the reason the us has a horrible public image among some, people think were all like him, :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mastrude
Civ IV Excel Calculator Nerds
Replies
7
Views
706
Quintillus
Quintillus
M
UU/UB's and Wonders for map type, map speed and tech trading type
Replies
5
Views
2K
sampsa
sampsa
F
What are the different "types" of games for you, that feel very different and scratch a different itch?
Replies
8
Views
1K
Gumbolt
Gumbolt
PPQ_Purple
A bunch of disconnected questions
Replies
12
Views
1K
PPQ_Purple
PPQ_Purple
AcaMetis
Nobles' Club 342: Stalin of Russia
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Snowbird
Snowbird
Top Bottom