Have there been any new turn-based 4X games in recent times? I remember looking for a 4X flash game in 2010 and coming up empty handed. I don't really have time to play that kind of game anyway, but those were good memories.
It was absolutely terrible, I got it and was crushed by how bad it was. It felt like a Colonization-themed Civ IV (which I guess is what it was), rather than a Colonization remake.
And that isn't to say it's a bad game when divorced from the failure to accept and reasonably present the historical context that Meier wanted to play in. It's a tremendous game. I still think Colonization is a more fun experience than Civ, and the Religion and Revolution mod for Civ4Col is absolutely fantastic. But the game cannot be divorced from the astonishingly shitty historical context. RaR also does a lot (not as much as it could, but a lot more than anything Meier or MicroProse or Firaxis ever did) to make you answer those questions, too, and is a much, much better game for it.
It's a bandaid over frigging slavery.
And you know it's indefensible, so let's not play dumb.
You are taking for granted that everyone here prefers the 20th-century Marx-Zinn (yes, politically correct) version of American history, and as a consequence of that, that Meier was deliberately trying to "lie" about that history (which is itself false). If you drop your problematic assumption, there's no way to get to "indefensible" and "play dumb" from this feature/bug you're describing.
As for your second paragraph: "Marx-Zinn" history? Dude! We have the receipts for people that done got bought and sold. Forget your attempts to cast history that happens to not glorify every white person ever in that "politically correct" light, these are primary sources. Are primary sources hissssssss socialist hissssssss too?
There is nothing "politically correct" about "the people you are making a game about systematically enslaved and exterminated people and you have a duty to not look the other way." That's not even "lefty", that's just being a basically functional human being. Does it make you upset that you are not entitled to rework history because it looks bad for Dead White People? That's a shame, but it's minimum viable humanity. I promise you that it's not that hard to meet that low, low bar.
We did it. It is our job to fairly and accurately represent our history. Guess what? The facts are clear as fucking day: We. Imported. Black. People. We. Enslaved. Natives. There is no dodge to that. There is no escaping that. There is only acknowledgement of it. This is not "narrative", we have the receipts.
And omitting it in a "historical" game in favor of heroification is unforgivable.
Look: We did not enslave anyone. Slavery is not among the things that we celebrate about the colonization of the new world. We celebrate the brave explorers who sailed off into the unknown, and the Pilgrims who left the safety of home to build a "city on a hill". We celebrate the poor and outcast who took the risk of building their own businesses and farms so they could pass on a better life to their posterity. We celebrate colonists who found out how to govern themselves as equals, and ultimately charted their own courses as free men. This is what the game was about.
Slave-based agriculture existed at that time, and it spread to the Americas, but it was not the "big idea" of colonization, it was not invented in that era and it was not characteristic of it. It's just a fact of human nature: in every time, in every place, there have always been Democrats.
I don't agree. Colonization as a game clearly shows there were different methods to colonize the new Land based on the nations' strategies. The French, for example, were rarely known to exterminate locals, on the contrary usually forged alliances and friendship with local populations. That's what you see as well in "The Last Mohican": french colons being very close to Indians, and there are many sources to confirm that point. So Colonization was not all done the Spanish way, and most of the deaths the locals endured came from viral infections spreading in non-immunized populations and certainly not slavery or battle. There were reports from Spaniards entering cities in south-America, expecting resistance but instead finding most of the people dying from infections.
So, sure, you're right, #NotAllColonizers--but seriously, do you think that the ability to play in that way obviates the duty to actually present history as it, like, was, and not as will make your purchasers feel comfy?
Art is hard. Come correct or don't come at all.
OK, I'll grant you that, but at the same time, massive slavery scale occurred mainly after 1600-1700 (see Wikipedia reference below) so while slave trade started earlier it was not prominent in the early colony days, and it was first led by Portuguese and Spanish before other nations opted in.
> It is estimated that more than half of the entire slave trade took place during the 18th century, with the British, Portuguese and French being the main carriers of nine out of ten slaves abducted from Africa.[44]
Certainly the game is not perfect on that aspect, but since it's an American game, it would probably be very sensitive to touch upon that subject in the first place. I can't even imagine how that would be sold there if slavery had been integrated.
The game ends in 1850 if you haven't completed the Revolutionary War before then. And Simon Bolivar is available as a "founding father". He was born in 1783. The 18th century is very much in play.
> Certainly the game is not perfect on that aspect, but since it's an American game, it would probably be very sensitive to touch upon that subject in the first place. I can't even imagine how that would be sold there if slavery had been integrated.
You are really underselling it. It's not "not perfect", it's bad. And I am an American, saying this. If honesty won't sell, fine. Don't make it. That's a better alternative than to whitewash history.
And, what do you mean by "correct" anyway. You mean the current view of what you deem to be correct - which may not be others viewpoint, and which probably was not the viewpoint of people in future or the past. And, anyway the only viewpoint that matter is that of the creator of the work.
So no sorry, I think you mean "if I did something about Colonization I would do it differently and the current work does not properly represent my viewpoint".
Not as pithy though.
This isn't merely disagreement on something that's opinion-based. This is ignoring factual things that happened. White guys rewriting history to make then look good is objectively bad. This is simply not that complex.
If one is after a modern turn-based game I'd still recommend the new Civ and XCom games by Firaxis.
Its supposedly spiritual sequel to Alpha Centauri.
The last one I played was III, so it's been over 10 years, but they were always fun.
[0] Though I prefer the King's Bounty remake[1]
[1] Although 1C is excessive in its milking, Armored Princess + Crossworlds had a somewhat better balance and interesting new units wrt The Legend, but Warriors of the North got seriously long in the tooth, felt like "well we'll just reskin a few units and change the magic/rage balance and call it a day
You should probably check out http://www.reddit.com/r/4xgaming
There are occasionally new 4X games that appear on Steam but I haven't found one I like yet.
Actually, maybe you shouldn't try Imperialism if you don't have a few days free. It is a dangerously addicting game, especially the second one.
Then not turn-based, and not necessarily 4X, but the Paradox games like Crusader Kings 2 or Europa Universalis IV can be fun too.
Slow, real-time 4x strategy game with no randomness and lots of fun.
There are all sorts of scenarios available, and depending on your starting resources and chosen strategy the game can provide a vastly different feel. It's really good, I recommend it.
One big downside compared to traditional 4X games, though, is you're never really in control of anything. So if you really crave that sense of control that you get from having a well-organised empire and steamrolling over your opposition in the controlled environment of Civ-like games then you will want to go back to the traditional computer-based versions from time to time.
If you had spent some time playing Civilization, you would know that taxes allow your country to have things like roads, an army, public education, and many other things that put together create the conditions for you to play "business" :)