should any of the civilization titles ever include religion?

cookieman · May 20, 2003, 07:02

I have been considering this for a long time. There should definitely be some religion included in a future civ xp or civ4.

I mean if there wasnt any religion then there would have been no 9/11, no intafadeh, no holocaust, no crusades, you get the picture. Thats why I thought religion wouldve been included in this game.

I have always thought that at least in the middle ages firaxis would attempt to include some sort of religion. I mean come on we all know that in the dark ages the church ruled europe. So thats why i would love to see at least some sort of religion included rather than "monotheism" or "polytheism"

Whether the religious system would be a religious gvt. such as theocracy or selecting a religion as one would a gvt.

I figured they could do this by using a couple major religions (i.e. Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, fanaticism (in place for god-king worship). I dont know how well something like that would work but after considering all of the religious based conflicts i think there should be some sort of religion in a future game.

statusperfect · May 20, 2003, 07:14

I think names of IRL religions isn't a good idea... maybe something that looks like social engineering where you compose your own religion.

cheers

Robert Plomp · May 20, 2003, 08:57

Quote:

I mean if there wasnt any religion then there would have been no 9/11, no intafadeh, no holocaust, no crusades, you get the picture. Thats why I thought religion wouldve been included in this game.

religion comes with more positive things than with negatives.
About all of our culture is because of religion.
Science, arts, morals, it's all a result of religion.

TheStinger · May 20, 2003, 10:27

Well alot of science and arts were a backlash against religion.

Azeem · May 20, 2003, 11:34

Not necessarily. Some religions openly embraced science and the arts such as Islam during the golden ages of the Islamic Empire.

A significant amount of European art was religious in nature such as Michealangelo's "David" and his Sistine Chapel painting or Da Vinci's "Last Supper" painting.

Gramphos · May 20, 2003, 11:51

I think that taking real religions is a bad idea. However, you could hve a system where the citizens in your cities develop their own religion during time. You could then make some political decisions on the religion. For example you could allow freedom to choose religion, or force the people to have one religion.

Chemical Ollie · May 20, 2003, 12:54

Basically, without religion there would be no civilization, so it should definitely be in the game. But using real world religions as some kind of "government" (which is my interpretion of your suggestion) is perhaps a little too controversial.

I think it is good as it is, except that I miss the fundamentalism government from CIV2.

cookieman · May 20, 2003, 15:08

i see where you guys are coming from. it was probably dumb of me to think of inputting real religions, i like the idea of social engineering though

I just definitely think there should be some kind of religion put into the game whether it slightly affects corruption,happiness, income whatever. I strongly believe it should be put in due to its huge historical signifigance

I am sorry if offended anyone in my previous post by not including their religion. that was not my intent just the only ones that came to mind (i was in a hurry at the time)

Azeem · May 20, 2003, 16:12

How about we make it customizeable? We research certain techs and mix and max certain aspects to create our own religion?

For example, we start off with basic Polytheism. Take that further by adding "Temple Cults" and the concept of "Priest-king" (both of which acquired from certain techs). Now we have a Polytheistic religion with more effective temples, as well as temples that reduce corruption.

Gramphos · May 20, 2003, 16:56

Well, religion can be controlled at some level, but it shall take it's own way. (Possibly controlled by how mush access each citizen would get to religious improvements).

I think that your coltrol should be very limited in the early game, but the more advance you become the more control options you should have.

You should have the option to go for war in the name of the religion, but it wouldn't be a must. I think that in early game both random events and things you can control should have an effect on the believes of your citizens. If there were lot's of extra food it would be seen as the god(s) were happy.

Pop-rushing could also be allowed to be done in the name of the religion.

Now as long as your civ is the only known civ you religion would develop on it's own, and maybe, if some cities are handled very different split within your nation. But as soon as you get contact with another civ the ideas of that civ will affect yours. Of course you should be able to control if you should be open, neutral or closed to there religion...

Actually I think I'll never see something like that that really worked in a civ-game, but it's a good idea

And who knowes what Civ4 might bring.

One thing that should be possible anyway is to have religious building produse religion points, and also have priest specialists produceing them. It could add some more depth to the culture concept by adding a similar, but yet dirrerent religion concept. Of course culture and religion are tied close together.

CiverDan · May 20, 2003, 17:00

Leave religion out of it. All it will do is make someone from that religion upset about not being portrayed right.

Gramphos · May 20, 2003, 17:09

Quote:

Originally posted by CiverDan
Leave religion out of it. All it will do is make someone from that religion upset about not being portrayed right.

Yes, that's what you get by having real religions, which is a bad idea. But having some sort of dynamic religion, or just a religious representation would be good.

However, I think that for the level of Civ3 culture does a lot of what religion could do. Still I'm for a religion concept that would work side by sidde by culture with some other attributes, and some other control by the ruler (you can seelct to have a freedom of choice, or force then to follow a culture. Freedom would give more war werriness, and a forced culture woud make assimilation easier, but increase unhappiness).

statusperfect · May 20, 2003, 17:37

Quote:

Originally posted by cookieman
I am sorry if offended anyone in my previous post by not including their religion. that was not my intent just the only ones that came to mind (i was in a hurry at the time)

i don't think you offended anyone

relax

cheers

Falconius · May 20, 2003, 19:19

Quote:

Originally posted by CiverDan
Leave religion out of it. All it will do is make someone from that religion upset about not being portrayed right.

You may have a point. On the other hand...
Religion as it is currently portrayed in the game serves to keep the population under control, since it leads to happiness wonders and city improvements. This same purpose is also served by entertainment and luxuries. Yet this comparison doesn't seem to upset anyone that I've seen on these forums.
But this is the role of "Religion" in general, without naming any specific religion. One example of specific religions in a game is Europa Universalis I & II. Some religions have better economic qualities than others, and your nation's religion affects your relations with other nations. Despite this, I've seen no complaints on that forum along the lines of "My religion should be better than its represented here"

So I think it could work. But then, I'm not a Firaxis employee concerned with fanatics setting off car bombs outside the building!