Civilization IV: Not Realistic

Well, at least according to this article on Tech Central Station, which my father posted about on his blog.

The gist:

But as much as I love Civilization, I can’t embrace many of the historical assumptions that the designers coded into the game. A Whiggish progressivism permeates the game’s outlook; civilizations invariably grow and flourish unless outside forces stunt or destroy them. Governments and religions have only utilitarian value; freedom and decency are not uniquely useful in Civilization IV. The superiority of the modern to the medieval is everywhere assumed, and the atomization and ennui of contemporary life is thoroughly ignored. To be sure, the game takes cognizance of unhappy citizens and social unrest, but civil wars, religious schisms, and collapses into barbarism simply don’t happen in Civilization IV. These absences make for a smoother and more entertaining game, but not a more realistic one. . . .

In the great Civilization IV game that is the modern world, the West is in no danger of losing to an outside civilization. Osama bin Laden will not beat us to Alpha Centauri. China will not acquire cultural hegemony over the world with its thrilling movies and catchy pop tunes. Africa will not send tank columns to capture our capital cities. But the West may lose to its own self-disgust. Our appetite for wealth outpaces our willingness to produce it; our sense of justice grows ever more rarefied even as our capacity for self-discipline declines; and our achievements cannot keep pace with the speed with which we forget our own history.

A fair indictment, to be sure.