Countries represented -Canada - or Kanata (original name used)
Looking over the list of available country nations...I see many including the US and Britain, France..even Iroquois nation. Why isn't Canada portrayed? I'm sure there are thousands of people who would use that portrayal. Just curious as to why Canada isn't here. It has an incredible history -still unfolding today. ....just asking ;-)
trollolol, eh?Originally Posted by Blues
Almost got a +1 though because I thought I learned a cool, new fact. Looked it up and I don't think you're correct. It was always Canada, it was never actually named Kanata. Kanata may only have been the native word that inspired the name, Canada.
Wikipedia isn't much, but here it is anyway:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Canada
This one says that it wasn't even kanata:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanata
Okay, I'll give ya the plus one anyway. +1
And to answer the original point of the thread: uhmm... no.
You could go on, why haven't (Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, Australia, Mexico, Italy) been included, and it's because they are 'Nation States' - very little history, most of your examples (Britian, France etc.) have had a long history beyond that of the modern nation, and America is a major world power across the last century and a half. The Iroquois simply add flavour to the game.
@Pouakai Although I think when we're looking at CivIX in 2023, Brazil will be in the game. They're an up-and-coming major player in the economy of the western hemisphere (#6/7 GDP in the world right now) and are likely to be overtaking the U.S. for economic control in South America in the coming decade. Hmm, could Carnival be turned into an appropriate civilization bonus?
Canada though, not so much. They're not positioned to overtake the U.S., or anyone else, at anything international right now. If nothing else, a country needs to be a meddler to some degree in local or international politics to get into civ. There's never been a time where "power players of international politics" has included Canada; the country has been much more content to stay out of the puppet state business.
The Portuguese should make it before the Brazilians, jes' sayin.
Canada Never. Of the modern nation states none are truly likely to get in. The most likely of the unlikely would be Brazil though, and I feel like a lot of people on CivFanatics and here agree with that. I dont see a Brazil getting in for a nother 3-4 Civ incarnations though.
You mean England
I want to play Meksyko and Awestrailya too (original names used).
Let's have a completely redundant conversation about Kanata though.
Kanata is a town outside of Ottawa. Other than the high-tech (telecom) park, I don't see them being worthy of a civ in the game.trollolol, eh?
Almost got a +1 though because I thought I learned a cool, new fact. Looked it up and I don't think you're correct. It was always Canada, it was never actually named Kanata. Kanata may only have been the native word that inspired the name, Canada.
Wikipedia isn't much, but here it is anyway:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Canada
This one says that it wasn't even kanata:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanata
Okay, I'll give ya the plus one anyway. +1
And to answer the original point of the thread: uhmm... no.
Otherwise, the Dominion is generally added by a modder eventually. For the core game, I prefer ancient/near ancient civs to modern ones anyways.
I'm Canadian and as much as I would like my country represented, having it in the game wouldn't add anything because there are already representative nations of the culture here, specifically France and Great Britain. Some would say that the US doesn't belong either but it's understandable why it's in the game.
I'm sure there are or will be mods released that will include Canada at some point. You could check the mod browser in the game to find out.
I always cringe when I see threads about 'why is my country not a Civ' because it always seems to draw people who like to trash that country. I hope that this doesn't devolve into that here.
I'd love to see Canada here anyway,
but I understand why it isn't here.
Might be a nice DLC though.
However, the worldwide appeal is likely not there to pay for its development.
Many are right about the word kanata/kanada/whatever but I see why the OP thought that this was a good name to use: Gives it a sense of history, even if it may or may not be historically correct.
Regardless, people (in general) on this forum tend to be very negative towards the idea of bringing Canada in the game. There have been many threads on the subject and in each one there are forum members who are quite adamant that Canada doesn't belong in the game.
Maybe in Civ6 they'll have a third class of nation: The 1st class would be empire, the 3rd class would be city-state, and the 2nd class would be where nation-states like Canada could fit-in and have a slightly different rule-base.
The more contries/nations the marrier.. But they should change Denmark into Skandinavia, like in Civ4.
Yeah, I wouldn't mind seeing Canada added to the game at some point, although I think it should be quite far down the list.
Denmark should have been named The Norse, IMO.
Australia's original name was New Holland and Mexico's original name was pronounced Mehico.
Denmark should have been named either Denmark-Norway (satisfy the Norwegians) or the Norse (or the native equivalent). In fact, the Iroquois should have been called the Haudonausee, or however it's spelled, but I see why they didn't.
But no nation-states. Brazil is the only possible exception, but that would be after a long line of much more worthy civs. And you couldn't have Brazil without Portugal.
I thought the Iroquois were originally the Eeriecoy like how Canada was originally Kanata.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote