Talk:Civilization IV
Archive 1 - Archive of pre-launch discussion
Archive 2 - August 2005 - February 2006
The Expansion Pack
Since Civ IV is the most moddable in the Civ series, probably the idea that Firaxis will crate an exapnsion is a bit slim. But I myself (and many others) hope that there will be an expansion. Why ? Here are some of my reasons:
- Some bulidings should change their apperance when entering a certain age (e.g. a theatre with an ancient look in the Modern Age should look like a modern day theatre in the modern age).
- More leaders and more civilizations.
- Despite the fact that the Civ series is said to be the best history simulation game ever made, there are some inaccuacies:
- Arabs are the only people in the game that get to use camels (how about other Middle Eastern nations which used them?)
- Religions can't be removed in cities once they spread to them.
- Some techs are misplaced, such as democracy (since democracy existed in Greece during the Classical age).
- Nearly all units all have a Western look and this might be a very annoying thing, considering the fact that the Civ series is said to be the best history simulation game ever made.
- There are many missing units or buildings (solar power plants, tactical bombers, etc).
- Scouts and Explorers can't attack.
- Citizens can't become militia.
- You can't choose what units you want to create when using the draft option.
- Spies can only be built in a city with Scotland Yard.
- More civics options and civic effects.
- Some buildings should be improved.
- Some cut scenes and movies should be improved.
- Many Civilopedia errors (such as the use of wrong grammar in some articles).
- More victory options.
- More soundtracks or music.
- How about those fans who don't know how to mod? Do they have to wait for the next mods in the download pages in Civ IV related sites?
- InGenX
- Um, just because it's heavily modable doesn't mean that they won't make an expansion pack. I don't think that would make their fans very happy. Not everyone can mod; in fact, most people can't, and I'm sure that the average fan (myself included) would want an officially released expansion pack. And many fans, myself included, I'm sure would prefer any expansion pack over just about any mod. And, to be perfectly honest here, some of your proposed changes are ridiculous. War elephants weren't used by all of these civilizations. Well, neither were tanks, chariots, marines, planes, longbowmen, carriers, or any other modern unit. bob rulz 19:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
safedisc
Should this article really mention that work-arounds exist? Isn't that helping people learn how to pirate software? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Framed0000 (talk • contribs)
- I don't think so. There are a number of legitimate uses that Safedisc prevents, and it's not like the article tells how to get around it. —LrdChaos 05:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- I second LrdChaos for the same reasons. Nothing illegal or immoral about noting a problem that some users have had with an aspect of the game. -- gtdp (T)/(C) 19:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Archived
In accordance with WP:SIZE, I've archived old discussions to Talk:Civilization IV/Archive 2. I've left discussions that were less than a week old on this page. -- gtdp (T)/(C) 18:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Civilization IV, stereotypical haven
The game's own Civopedia calls Indian workers as having "compact, wiry frames". What's next, an expansion that adds Chinese sweatshops as a city addition? Scott 110 03:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
It is idiotic to remove a reference to this issue when it is from the game's own documentation. If you want to change the language of the criticism, do so. But do not give a lack of sources as an excuse to delete it, there is a source and it's in the game itself. Just because this issue has not been published in the NY Times does not mean it doesn't exist. Scott 110 20:20, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
- I did not remove the reference to the issue -- I kept the quotation from the Civilopedia, and even checked it against the version in the game's XML file. I removed the reference to it being criticism. Please read WP:CITE and Wikipedia:No original research. Just because something is 100% true doesn't mean that it should be included in the encyclopedia.--M@rēino 21:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
- The question here is not whether it's true or not, the point is that it's OFFENSIVE. Further you're very happy to talk about citing sources, yet on the references section of this article, "In game experience" is cited....hardly an academic source. You have not changed that, yet you edit this.... Scott 110 00:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- Whoopdie doo. I suspect I have it on better authority than you (unless you are also Indian, yourself) that this is not something that Indians are offended about. Are you one of these people that feels the need to be offended "for" people? Get over yourself, take a chill pill, and allow this to be subjected to the NPOV process. The fact of the matter is, who is doing the accusing? You say "accused by people," but if "people" amounts to yourself, then it's not encyclopedic. Also, your personal insult that you leveled towards Mareino is unprofessional and undermines your case. I have placed {{POV-section}} on the relevant section until this can be resolved. And let's leave the kindergarten namecalling at home. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 03:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- To Joseph, three things: #1 Don't lecture me. #2 Don't make assumptions. Unless you have the ability to extrapolate a person's appearance based on their Wikipedia contributions, do not assume I am not Indian. #3 Just because YOU are not offended by this does not mean others aren't, so do not presume to speak for everyone. Agreed this issue has not been publicized in any major newspaper or other academic source, but that's due to a lack of awareness. Civilization IV, while a great game, still has a limited market as it is a turn-based strategy game and thus, appeals to a far smaller crowd than a game like Halo, for example. Also, Civilization IV is still a faily new release. A case in point, when Hitman 2 (a first person shooter) came out, it featured a level that was similar in appearance to a Gurudwara (if you know what that is, then I will honestly be surprised). That game caused an outcry among the Sikh community. Besides, I am not the first person to criticise the Civilization series as a whole. You want more info, see the Wiki article on the Civilization series. Scott 110 08:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with Joseph on this one. You are guilty of what you accuse him of. Just because you ARE offended by this doesn't mean others are. To quote you, "Do not presume to speak for everyone." Furthermore, this is nonverifiable information. You should read Wikipedia:Verifiability sometime. Nimlot 09:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- I have never before seen this particular aspect of Civ 4 declared controversial - contrary to the claim in the precise wording proposed - and it's awfully petty. If Scott 110 is offended by it, he would be best off trying to raise consciousness elsewhere (along with informing the benighted Wikipedia community of what a gurdwara is) and sticking to the genuine points of controversy the game has raised, namely those pertaining to the religious aspects, which have upset people of all kinds, from hardline Christians unwilling to rule over a nonchristian empire, to radical atheists who think religion has been nothing but a force for unmitigated evil.
The unique unit aspect has raised very few - if any at all - eyebrows. I have always believed that the fast worker unit seemed kind of out of place with the Indian civilisation and the designers assigned it to them merely because they wanted to put them somewhere. The manual, therefore, is mere fluff to post-facto rationalise the choice.
As for the injunction given for reading the more general article on the series, the criticisms seem to be flaws in the game mechanics or, more apropos to this discussion, the unique civilisation traits. They are there to give the game some flavour, making the civilisations different. The games have all had an option to randomise these personalities so far as I know, rendering the situation moot. You can even disable the unique units if you have no sense of fun whatsoever. Pthag 14:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Comment To me, the Civilization series has had a strong joke element to it (which extreme political correctness would not fit into, in my opinion). Is it fair to call the game controversial because it is offensive to some people, especially since the game was not made to be offensive (no malicious intent)?--SirNuke 01:41, 15 March 2006 (UTC)