Here was a clear example of how history provides only a context for the game. It then said, it’s 4000 BC, can you build a civilization to stand the test of time? The window that popped up to tell me this spoke of how the United States arose in the 18 th century, etc, etc. I ended up with Washington, Leader of the Americans. Would Civilization still be great gameplay without the history?įirst of all, where is this history? I loaded up the game the other day and chose a random civilization instead of hand-picking my leader. Now, he said this in a kind of defense for why Civ isn’t historically realistic, but I want to unpack his statement a bit and challenge the underlying assumptions. The lead designer for Civ 5, John Shafer, once said that if you took the history out of Civilization, you’d still have great gameplay – it just wouldln’t feel as familiar. The latest iteration in the series came out a few months ago and adjusted many aspects of play for better or worse depending on whom you ask. Sid Meier’s Civilization is one of the most-loved franchises in gaming, particularly among those with a historical bent, even though it doesn’t provide a realistic narrative of history.
0 kommentar(er)
