Its call Eurocentric vision of the world. It happens in history and even in PC games as we know it!
Sweden inclusion its not the problem, the problem is another Europe civilization in the game.
Why upset for European Civs?
- Thread starter Haig
- Start date
- Status
Its call Eurocentric vision of the world. It happens in history and even in PC games as we know it!
Sweden inclusion its not the problem, the problem is another Europe civilization in the game.
AbsintheRed
Deity
Cía;11446908 said:
I guess it was only because Civ IV had the Vikings. Having both them and Sweden wouldn't be too wise, I agree with those who were against it
On the other hand, with Vikings changed to Denmark(-Norway) in Civ V, there was a clean road to Sweden
I was sure they will be inlcuded sooner or later, as soon as I saw the Denmark DLC
Absolutely agreed
Sweden is historically important enough to be included, it was a good choice
Civs like Gran Columbia or Australia has nothing to do in a game like this IMO
Although many people, many different opinions
Everyone is biased in a way of course - I for example can't really stand "modern" civs in Civ V, I guess I'm mostly biased against them.
They just don't suit the concept well enough for me. If it were up to me, there is a chance I would have left out the USA too
AbsintheRed
Deity
Absolutely agreed. Perfectly reflects my thought on this
Gilgamesch
Ancient Alien
Dont forget the great empire of Switzerland, and while we still have not enough European Civs, please ad Belgium, and Ireland. And maybe the holy Roman empire. Or lets make a total european conversion of Civ.
Eurolisation
I notice you spelt it with an S. The small things really do matter...
Isn't there already Europa Universalis for that though?
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
Cía said:
This is a straw man. Doubtlessly most who complain about Sweden would also complain about silly additions like "Gran Colombia" or Australia.
People complain about Sweden not simply because it is "unworthy", but because there are too many Europeans "civilizations" already or because having two "civilizations" (i.e states) from a relatively unimportant culture like Scandinavia is not exactly a priority when the bulk of the globe's many diverse and important cultures are already under-represented. Even the Scandinavians here, pleased as they they may be, don't really think their region should have two civs.
Brazil has been the major power in Southern Hemisphere for at least 100 years,specially when Argentina's importance start to decline and their global importance is rising in the last 10 years . Their history is very unique,compared with other American countries and it's easy to see that on the 19th century(While Most of the American countries were Republics,Brazil had a Monarchy governed by the same house of their former controllers) .
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
While I agree, the problem is the modern world requires a broader picture. The relevant benchmark now is status as a world power, not a regional power. The ease of communication and transportation plus the more integrated geopolitical concerns show that just being top dog in one continent doesn't go as far as it used to.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Capable of competing militarily, economically, and politically with every other power in the world. Generally, the top five or so most important states.
Do I think this is the only way to be included? Certainly not, but achievements in history and culture would have to be exceptionally interesting otherwise.
Do I think this is the only way to be included? Certainly not, but achievements in history and culture would have to be exceptionally interesting otherwise.
Zhahz
PC Gamer
OP must be new here. Somebody is always upset over which civs are/are not in/out.
I don't think Sweeden measures up with most civs in the game or typically included in the game, but at the same time, I also don't think there's a "rule" for qualifying civs to be in the game.
I'm pretty sure I said "WTH" out loud when I saw Sweeden was the 9th civ and I generally don't care about these things. I was expecting something a little more exotic and outside the box. It was about the same reaction I'd have if they added Canada as a civ. /ducks A big "eh?" I guess Sweeden is "outside the box" as it relates to other civs but it still seems kind of meh.
I don't think Sweeden measures up with most civs in the game or typically included in the game, but at the same time, I also don't think there's a "rule" for qualifying civs to be in the game.
I'm pretty sure I said "WTH" out loud when I saw Sweeden was the 9th civ and I generally don't care about these things. I was expecting something a little more exotic and outside the box. It was about the same reaction I'd have if they added Canada as a civ. /ducks A big "eh?" I guess Sweeden is "outside the box" as it relates to other civs but it still seems kind of meh.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 18,949
I would also qualify a nation as a world power if they manage to monopolize a specific high-demand field, such that it becomes a bargaining chip in foreign relations.
Examples: shale oil exploitation, low-cost manufacturing, atomic weapons, alternative energy, or space exploration. and certainly not limited to these things.
Examples: shale oil exploitation, low-cost manufacturing, atomic weapons, alternative energy, or space exploration. and certainly not limited to these things.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Diamonds for many African countries could fall under this category. Every member of OPEC would qualify as well. I think this is way too broad of a definition.
The only Civilizations which fulfill these standards are already in the game or URSS,USA and UK should be included again? Of course that if you remove "militarily",Brazil can fulfill all these standards better than any other modern civ not included yet.
Their culture fulfill these standards,I guess .
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
USSR is not in the game.
Russia is in the game, but given they added HRE in Civ 4 despite already having Germany, you can't rule out the developers adding it. Russia as is seems to represent the Russian Federation but with an 18th century leader; Kiev for instance, centre of Kievan Russia, important in the Russian Empire and in the USSR, is not part of it
Russia is in the game, but given they added HRE in Civ 4 despite already having Germany, you can't rule out the developers adding it. Russia as is seems to represent the Russian Federation but with an 18th century leader; Kiev for instance, centre of Kievan Russia, important in the Russian Empire and in the USSR, is not part of it
PhilBowles
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2011
- Messages
- 5,333
Most likely because we're more interested, as people generally interested in history, in civs we perceive we know less about. In truth, I know less about Swedish history than I do about Majahapit history, but I can't deny a feeling that the Swedes are somewhat boring based on no evidence whatsoever.
Why? And where does 'pity' come in? The Songhai weren't a long-lived civ, but they are among the best-known in Africa due to their architecture (and the Great Mosque of Djenne, one of the most recognised monuments in Africa, is popularly perceived to be of traditional Malian - i.e. Songhai-period - architecture even though it was designed by the French as a colonial interpretation of Sahelian styles). Timbuktu doesn't warrant city-state status as it was only briefly independent; it was incorporated into the Mali Empire less than a century after it was founded, and from then was inherited directly by the Songhai and the successive colonial and Malian nations.
Cía;11446908 said:
I think there's simply less point in complaining about a done deal - and moreover a lot of the commentary flying around before was aimed at providing reasons why X should be included, not because of a serious expectation that it was a likely candidate for inclusion (Gran Colombia, for instance, never was). I'm not very interested in Sweden, and I think an ability based on the Nobel Prize is simply bizarre, but now it's here discussion's moved on to wondering how it will play.
They wanted something new, Sweden is new. I think that's the only qualifying criterion; that and a belief among the developers that they can do something interesting with that civilization's theme. There's been a suggestion that it's linked to the Renaissance scenario, however not only does the new achievement list indicate that that scenario includes factions not in the main game, there are no achievements for Sweden relating to that scenario and it seems as though it may be set somewhat earlier than the 30 Years War, so I doubt this is it - Sweden may not even feature in the scenario. At the very least, it's a refreshing change from the tendency to associate Scandinavia exclusively with Vikings to have a Renaissance-themed Scandinavian civ.
The difficulty with this being that it presumes people want "modern civs", when there are so many historical ones to choose from. Or, as mentioned previously in the thread, that if a modern civ were to be chosen it would be based on regional power. Canada is a member of the G8; even if we assume that Italy or the UK won't make it in as civs because they're represented by existing civilizations, surely the one missing major industrialised nation is the most likely first choice for a modern civ if one was chosen? Gameplay-wise there's a fundamental difficulty with a civ that can't really have pre-Modern era uinits/buildings, and I already find it possibly too much of a stretch that Sweden will be awarding Nobel Prizes from its earliest history.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 18,949
For Civ IV, if a civ didn't make it into the vanilla or an expansion, you had to get it from a mod. Therefore there is a lot of pressure from fans to see their favorites in the expansions.
Now, in Civ V, there are DLCs where errant civs can be introduced outside of vanilla and expansions. So the pressure to have fan favorites in G&K is lower (although not gone, obviously).
Now, in Civ V, there are DLCs where errant civs can be introduced outside of vanilla and expansions. So the pressure to have fan favorites in G&K is lower (although not gone, obviously).
Even on this day and time I think that people in Finland are quite different than the ones living in Italy, don't you think? It's like lumping Chinese, Japanese and Thai people in the same category, those eastern devils..
Not really. There's more diversity in China than Europe.
If you ignore some stupid stereotypes about Brazil,they could actually have an UU and even a 2nd UU or UB from Renaissance era instead being avaliable from Industrial/Modern era . Some of the suggestions that made for them are:
and
If Bandeirante is a bad choice,then it's possible to replace them for "Sambadrome",which would replaces "Opera house" and gives some bonus related to luxury resources worked by the citizens .
Cía;11446908 said:
I think everyone who knows history well knows that Sweden were very important (and are now as cultural and political model pieces of democracy). If someone knows Sweden only from today, as a peaceful country of Abba, they don't understand that it could have been anything powerful.
For some adding Sweden sounds like adding Iceland, the home of Björk.
Kind of same how I thought of Brazil, an ex-colony of Portugal with strong economic momentum at the monet. Then thru civfanatics and 2k boards I became actually interested in them and now have read stuff like the Paraguay war, dreadnought race etc. (They were 3rd nation to purchase dreadnoughts and fired a test shot that was biggest broadside fire shot in that time)
- Status
Similar threads
