Deliberately making the Chinese version have a different name would look ulterior, giving radical nationalists a strong excuse to complain to the CCP.
A lot of games do it I believe
Chinese nationalists are radical and sensitive year by year. Based on my understanding of Chinese Internet culture in recent years, you will be criticized as “insulting China” if you do so.
Gokturks can be Gokturks.
I sincerely advise that do not to be self-defeating.
Also, Turks and Gokturks use different terms in Chinese, “土耳其人” and “突厥人” respectively. Feeling silly is the business of the English version.
Does Pokémon have ulterior motives when it renames thousands of names of people places and creatures?
The problem with the Uyghurs is that there were two different Uyghur civilizations, speaking languages from different Turkic branches. The first ones broke off from the Gokturks (but could still be covered by that civ, if necessary) while the latter seem to be more related to the Karluk-speaking Muslims, which in my opinion are kind of covered by what the game calls “Tatars”
2 Likes
There’s another solution: the Gokturks are represented by the Kazars (I had to misspell it because of MS’s stupid censorship). Since the Khaganate was initially founded by Gokturks, they can represent both.
1 Like
From what I have read they are the same people, they just lost their language and developed another one later
Kazars are fairly different from Gokturks and the Kazars dont represent the Turks from the far east which is the region that needs representation
1 Like
Yeah, but the Kazar Khaganate was founded by Gokturks, so if we were going to represent the Gokturks in a China-safe way, they’re the way to go.
1 Like
Kazars are represented by Cumans.
More importantly, CCP would not ban Gokturks.
2 Likes
Considering the Cuman history section makes no mention of that and the only pieces of evidence for that are some of the AI player names and the Wonder, I’d say that that’s largely speculative at this point, and even if it isn’t, it can be easily changed, just like all the other decomposite civs.
Aragonese are missing.
1 Like
That’s a big part of civ design though. I don’t think it is speculation.
1 Like
I think it is possible to add the Tibetans if…
- they only represent the Tibetan Empire (618-842).
- the history section does not go beyond the 10th century.
- they do not have a monk UU (because of the resemblance to the Dalai Lama).
- they use the East Asian architecture (same architecture as the Chinese).
1 Like
Sure, that could be… a 50/50 would be ideal…
As a Chinese person from the mainland, I’d suggest the devs to stay away from the murky waters of Tibetans and Uyghurs.
Though Jurchens, Khitans, Tanguts, and Dians / Baipus have no problem to be added according to my knowledge.
1 Like
Tibetans and Uyghurs make sense to be added, but with the current politic madness, they should stay away from those 2 for now. The other are fine, I would like to see the china separated into smaller ones like they did with slavs and Indian.
Anyway, Uyghurs have this good mask of Gokturks.
Even the Chinese community, I believe, still welcomes more than resists the Tibetan civ. The history of the medieval Tibetan Empire has always been a favorite subject for Chinese history buffs. The marriage between the Tang princess and the Tibetan emperor is a well-known story.
As long as Microsoft is careful to avoid words and expressions in the game’s text that may be brought into modern political issues, I believe there is still a chance. The AoE2 community is much smaller (compared to super hit games like Apex Legends, Pokémon, Animal Crossing etc.) and is fairly loyal and loving to the game, so I’m also willing to believe that there won’t be a lot or serious amount of abuse leading to CCP wants to take control. Otherwise, any game that can freely name IDs and freely communicate through text or voice will be banned by the CCP, because people can show their dissatisfaction and contempt for the rulers in these ways.
As one of the most anticipated civs by players around the world for more than 20 years, Tibetans are either their own civ, or they are under an umbrella. If it’s the latter, maybe it’s the Qiang people. Qiang people are the common ancestor of Tibetans and Tanguts, so it is a feasible term that can cover both.
1 Like
Or don’t release it in China. Will be big financial loss for MS I guess.
You cant not release it in China
China has the same matchmaking as everywhere else and tournaments would probably still use the new civs
Aren’t Uighurs already in Genghis Khan, even if only in name? What are they called in the Chinese translation?
2 Likes