Take a shot every time I say the word deserve.
@Olleus
I see people arguing that XYZ doesn't deserve to be in the game all the time. It's my impression that a lot of people think Russia or Germany DESERVE to be in the modern era over Mexico, for example. Check post comments under the Mississippi or Majapahit reveals in social media. A non-negligible amount of commenters deplore that we're getting them over more well-known polities. Hell, someone on this very forum was comparing Majapahit to some Tolkien fantasy race because the name sounded funny (!?!) Hence my comment. It's not a competition about who gets there first.
Of course this is a game. I'm not sure why you're bringing UNESCO to the conversation.
I did not use the word "DESERVE" to imply any moral value judgment. I specified in my next comment how all nations "DESERVE" to be in civ. It's not about who "DESERVES" , as they all do, because I agree, a video game is not an authority on what defines a DESERVING nation. Nevertheless, it still offers some commentary on how it chooses to present the world and world history, hence why I appreciate when they pick civs from across the world.
Making this about what nation DESERVES to be in the game highlights the ridiculous commentary some provide. The other commenter accused pastoral civs of being redundant, but they would never argue the same for the likes of European colonial powers. Why? Because in their eyes, Portugal, Spain, the UK, France, all DESERVE to be in the game, and of course I agree, why wouldn't I? All are important and have fascinating histories easily translated to gameplay elements. But pastoral civs also DESERVE to be in the game, which I'm not sure they would agree.
"Who do want to play as?", "who do want to play against?" , "which will have a fun play style?" , "which will widen the most the feeling of playing over the whole world for all of history?" are all valid topics. Having personal preferences is fine and expected. But these are not the prevailing discussion points I see.
"I want Germany in the modern era at launch because I like Germany, I want to play against Germany, I think I'll have fun as Germany" are reasons, good reasons, I can understand.
"Germany should be in the base game over Mexico or Buganda because Germany deserves to be in civ because I read about Germany in my school history books and that makes them more important than Buganda or Mexico" is not a point I can take, but it's one I read about often.
In essence, we seem to agree that the whole "DESERVE" discussion is not at all relevant, and I don't believe I'm the one who brought it up, I'm merely pointing it out.
@Evie
I'm not arguing that the Medes should be in Civ right away, I'm saying they should not be barred from the series for being similar, especially when a crowded region of the world with similar civs has usually been the case in previous civ titles.
People are iffy that the Normans will probably lead to America, which I understand, but come on, the Normans are "similar" to France and England, yet we all want want exploration France and England too. Thankfully, "thanks" to the DLC model, we probably will have them eventually.