It's from Civ 1. Lenin is the leader in Civ 2. Mao was the leader of China all the way up to Civ 4 and was later added like Stalin.
India meanwhile? Gandhi always :sadn
It's from Civ 1. Lenin is the leader in Civ 2. Mao was the leader of China all the way up to Civ 4 and was later added like Stalin.
India meanwhile? Gandhi always :sadn
Sure, but in Stellaris you can win the game that way. I guess all I'm trying to get at is that in a story about an imperial power trying to conquer everything, you can just as easily focus on the ones resisting imperialism as you can the ones doing imperialism. The problem is that typically in the 4X format, everyone is trying to out-imperialism everyone else, but that doesn't necessarily need to be the case.
the game is 100% set up to get you to play the 'everyone is trying to out-imperialism everyone else' game. but, that aside, there are still so many other things in the genre, such as this idea of 'empty unclaimed land' that is just free to be taken and settled, the inherent nature of any kind of historical roster reflecting biases, the unchanging nature of polities as this direct linage back to 'the first ancestors'. it's inherently filled with reactionary ideas and none of the games directly challenge this, they paper over it by saying well you could play tall if you want, or you could play as native americans if you want, that's not a critique of these fundamental conceptions.
I'm not saying don't play these games, I have thousands of hours in genocidal colonialism simulators like EU4, Stellaris, Civ, and so on. they are fun games. but we as communists must take a critical lense of analysis and dig to the core fundamental ideas being reflected in the ideology of our media, not the mere surface level