Would you be offended

[GoodGame]

Surely there'd be a mod to make religions before 'historic' or 'specific', but realistically it probably be taken as prejudiced to say give certain religions 'suicide bombers' or others 'inquisitors'.

The aim is mass appeal to get mass sales.

 

[Carver]

I wouldn't be offended, but I think it's a bad idea for the game. The religions just produce similar cultures, it adds to diplomacy by creating groups of countries that may be more likely to get along with each other. Adding traits to religions would add little to gameplay - what would you do with suicide bombers anyway in a game as large as civ? And of course some ppl would be offended by the traits so why create all the hassle when you get so little in return?

In fact, I wish they had just used generic religions.

 

[Afgnwrlrd]

Giving religions specific traits is not only offensive, but stupid.

All religions are functionally the same in real life, so why make it more complicated in CivIV? All of your examples can easily be applied to ANY religion. What's the real difference between jihad and crusade? or the IRA and Bin Laden?

 

[Danger Bird]

Not offended, but disappointed in the ignorance that such stereotypes would reveal.

I agree that the examples given in the first post could have been better chosen, although suicidebombers have a pretty strong link to Islam in people's minds, and that's what matters.

most suicide bombers/terrorsit are associated with Islam

Actually, the suicide bomb technique has its roots in the Tamil Tigers, a secular, marxist movement. They invented the famous suicide vest for their suicide assassination of Rajiv Gandhi in May 1991. The Palestinians got the idea of the suicide vest from them.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

Not offended, but disappointed in the ignorance that such stereotypes would reveal.


Actually, the suicide bomb technique has its roots in the Tamil Tigers, a secular, marxist movement. They invented the famous suicide vest for their suicide assassination of Rajiv Gandhi in May 1991. The Palestinians got the idea of the suicide vest from them.

I see no ignorance in stating the obvious. I wrote that the examples could have been better, but after recent years suicidebombings many associate them with muslim fundamentalists. Ask a guy on the street about suicidebombings and see if he associates them with "the Tamil Tigers, a secular, marxist movement".

And note that I'm not saying I want suicidebombers in or that I relate them to Islam. I wouldn't be offended either by them or if religions had special abilities, which is what the question was about.

 

[Danger Bird]

Sorry. I wasn't saying that your post was in any way ignorant. I just quoted it to point out your statement "suicidebombers have a pretty strong link to Islam in people's minds, and that's what matters."

With the guy on the street, the "suicide bomber - islam" association is strong, I agree. But I don't think that a game (or a book, or a movie) should reinforce this association. Because it is not accurate. Giving suicide bombers to any weak civ would be more accurate.

I think I've gone a bit off topic - back to the point of this poll: I think that religion-specific traits or units should be avoided, because (as many here have pointed out) most religions have developed in many ways. Most religions have been peaceful, violent, fundamentalist, moderate, etc. at some point, or in one of their sects.

 

[Afgnwrlrd]

He [the guy on the street] would more likely associate it with terrorism which belongs to no ideology.

 

[Panda]

No I wouldn't. It's a game, for crying out loud.

 

[bjblue]

Suicide bombers do not represent Islam. They represent terrorism and USE Islam as an excuse for their murderous traits. To associate the one exclusively with the other is too ignorant for words. Suicide bombers do not grow out of the teachings of Islam but out of a feeling of desperation and hopelessness.

No where in the Koran does it say "though shall strap explosives to your chest and go forth to kill the inocent"

Put a christian community in the same situation for a few hundred years and I have no doubt that we would have a small minority who would behave the same way!

Whilst I'm not sure if I have just taken you're bait and you deliberately used very distasteful ideas I've got to say that if those ideas were implemented I (and many many others) would be highly offended.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

This has got to be one of the worst constructed polls I have ever seen, with an incredibly loaded question followed by two incredibly blanket choices-none of which fit my views. Why couldn't you have put a third and/or fourth option like: Yes, but only if they are aquired via the Founders Gameplay; or Yes, but only if they are acquired by the choice of the Founding player. Seriously, how difficult with that be. However, to answer your question. YES I would be offended if Islam were automatically represented as a religion full of Jihadist fanatics, just as I would be offended if you depicted followers of Judaism as Usurers, or all Christians as Ultra-Conservative hypocrites. Yes there are some people within these religious groups who resemble thatstereotype, but I have found they are the exception-not the rule-and often tend to be people who merely cynically exploit religious belief for their own nefarious ends. There, are you satisfied?

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Goblin Fanatic]

I would only agree if those 'specialities' would be sensible, having suicide bombers for Islam is like having a 'anti-condom' unit for Catholicism that has the special ability to infect your cities with AIDS... or 'dishonest merchants' for Judaism...
Let's make those bonuses reasonable, it's a worthy discussion as modding would make that possible despite Firaxis decision.
Each religion should have a 'combat' unit because each religion had some fighting in it's time. Each religion should also get a peaceful bonus because no religion is only devoted to war.
The controversial religions:
Christianity:
Unique unit:crusader/templar. Does not only symbolise those who attacked middle east but cloistered knights in general, Christianity supported knight orders very much.
Bonus:better missionaries, Christianity was most active in converting others.
Islam:
Unique unit:certainly not a bomber, rather than that, a 'fanatic' from the medieval period. Hashishin would fit in nicely, a Dervish, a 'Ghazi' soldier or something like that.
During the crusades there were religous warriors on both sides.
Bonus:religous buildings require no upkeep or even give you extra income. That's because Islam requires it's followers to give tithes.
Alternatively they could have a bonus to assimilation as Islam says it's enough to
say aloud that your Muslim to join the religion, in many wars peple saved their lives that way.
Buddhism:
Unit:warrior monk, most Buddhists are pacifists but in turbulent times in Asia bands of warrior monks were a force to be reckoned with, and as far as i know they weren't much better than other religions 'fanatics'.
Bonus:better culture production. Buddhism is popular across the world despite not being a state religion nowhere.
Hinduism:
units:a warrior from an elite caste, don't know what they are called. They would be strong but come in very limited numbers, one per each big city maybe.
bonus:not sure, growth rate? better temples?
Polytheism of European variety, Greeks, Vikings, Gauls, Romans...
units:no special units but a bigger chance to get a great leader trough fighting as heroic values are treasured.
bonus:normal temples are cheaper because people don't need much to start worshipping. 'Pagans' are easier to conver because the idea of a new god is ok for them.
Confucianism
units:no idea
bonus:AFK a science bonus would be appropriate as Confucianists value wisdom.
Tribal religions, Animism
unit:tribal warriors, an upgrade to the basic warrior that has upgraded defense, later would be fodder.
bonusne happy face in each city, people worship without a need of temples.
Judaism
unit:Macabee or Zealot, possibly Judaism would allow you to draft Zealots in time of dire need.
bonus:the 'chosen people':lesser corruption, much worse at converting others, harder to convert themselves.
Daoism:
Don't know much about it.
Shinto:
Not an expert.
If Protesthantism would be available it should give you less corruption or a productivity bonus but you could not build temples for happines.

 

[Danger Bird]

Good list, Goblin Fanatic.

I'm sure some may have objections to parts of it, but I would enjoy playing religions with well thought-out traits like those.

 

[Legionary37]

I don't think we really need to have special units for the religions. that ends up limiting the religions to one dimension or another. Christianity HAS to have good missionaries, Buddhaism HAS to have good culture etc. See my previous post.

 

[troytheface]

Religions should give a specific unit- maybe muslim would give a janissary and chritianity gives a Crusader and Budahism gives a Shaolin Monk...ect. One could side step sterotypes (well...kinda...) if one had a physical manifestation of that religion as oppossed to a "trait". Speaking of which is there any Indian (asian indian) martial art? never hear about one. A Hindu martial art?

 

[rhialto]

For commercial reasons, I don't think they can give religions any unique traits in the production/release game. However, that doesn't mean they can't write the code to support that for the benefit of modders. Firaxis won't suffer any flak if a modder then makes the religions have the full range of interesting specialisations.

Someone might even mod religions in a way that makes them unique and not offensive.

 

[HourlyDaily]

Well yes, I agree with the use of units as well, but not necessarily for battles between faiths - because that is very crass. I think that if you drew a link between regions that shared the same religion (more so during the early and middle ages) and looked at traits - you could come up with something.

However, if it is easier to put in a 'Crusader,' then maybe it should be a Hospitaller Knight or something from back when these Christians were also doctors (such as they were) and not the Templar fanatics.

 

[Legionary37]

The problem is that these religions have changed over time. At some times, they have been more war-like, and later, they are more peaceful.

 

[oagersnap]

Having a suicide bomber as a moslem UU is probably the worst idea I've ever heard. This would make even more people think that all moslems are terrorists, or that moslems support terrorism (some moslems do, of course, but it's a very small minority.) I am sure Sid Meyer/Firaxis would never do that. (They even removed the fundamentalism government in civ 3 for the same reason.) So yes, I would be offended, and I'm also offended by your examples, Ghafhi.

 

[Himalia]

The truth is no true follower of Islam can support terrorisem. Its ones who hide behind the name and do it in the name of Islam that are the problem. I say the religions are a good idea but at the moment look like they may need alittle work. We will be able to judge this better once the game is out and if the game can be modded in the ways they are claiming it can be then it would seem that everyone can have religion in the exact way they want. Firaxis are probably going to play it safe.

 

[Invisible Rhino]

The fundamentalism govt was just a generic religous extremist govt. IT wasn't specifically muslim. For example when the English had it their title was "Lord Protector" and when the Spanish had it they were the "Archbishops" I believe. I actually miss the fudny govt, but theocracy may replace it just fine.