~I'll cut this off and, if my newly gained mod powers in this narrow region of the forum allow it, move to somewhere it fits better. I hope... if it's still here in a couple minutes, I probably failed
Vaclav, please be aware my points were about pak192.comic. I think the public release has no climates at all, and the current idea is to do something Germany/Austria centric, because of the material existing so far. I think that clears up a lot of the points earlier made, but I'll take the time to answer all of them.
All three monotheistic religions have own churches (called churches, synagogues, mosques). I don't know situation with graveyards in islam (but I think that they have graveyards too), but jews and christians have graveyards. So no problem.
It would be a problem to try and depict a culture without depicting it's inherent religion. Beside wayside crosses, Marterl, the church in every town, the christian graveyard in every other town, Saint Florian on almost every firefighter station, pike crosses, via crucis on a lot of hiking routes (which could all be depicted in Simutrans) you also get all the customs, like the first of may, harvest festival, christmas, eastern,... which are not in Simutrans, but still, they are part of what defines the region. Not allowing any of them is something I wouldn't do.
Yes, there are synagoges and mosques as well, but they obviously look different and, to a degree, out of place. While there are Synagoges and Mosques in Austria and Germany, you'd have a spawning rate thats less then a hundreth of churches. Basically, most player wouldn't ever see it, which means the situation wouldn't be much different then now. The same would be true with an arabien climate zone. I wouldn't plant any churches there at all. Maybe an orthodox one. But mostly, they would be mosques (both sunni and shia, I guess).
Problem may be in wayside crosses and marterls that probably have not analogues in islam and judaism. Religion buildings are mostly case of city buildings, not countryside buildings.
I have no idea if there are any similar structures anywhere else, but at least not in the regions those crosses get placed. So, even if you could find islam wayside shrines in, say, Turkey, it wouldn't mean anything to the wayside crosses in Austria, right?
[...] why not to avoid being of some structures present in Simutrans. I think that churches of all shapes could be sufficient, mostly if city buildings have greater chance to be built - than countryside buildings
But even if you dispose of the cross and Marterl, you'd still have the churches and graveyards, but no synagoge or mosque (in that region, anyway). So what's the point? If someone wants to be offended because his religion is not represented, he'd be either way. I don't think a wayside cross changes that. If someone want's to be offended by an arabian climate zone depicting crescents, (s)he'd be, too - but I still wouldn't remove them.
And to issue of equality of presence of buildings of other religions in paksets: Most paksets are mostly based on Europe, so following words are related to Europe too: Jews have lived in Europe for very long time. And in great numbers. But it is not good to think that Muslims came to Europe in few last years.
Well, as I said, this is not about most paksets, but about this pakset. Yes, jews lived in Europe for a long time, but never in numbers great enough to define the culture. Sure, there were the Khazar, although one could argue that's not europe. So there impact on culture, at least with religious signs, is insignificant. As for the islam, whose regions are not part of the pak. They could be, if someone was to do it, but right now they are not. Not sure how many religious signs survived anyway.
See previous point - to know more. Because in this you are wrong.
Again, you are wrong - in skin colour. Crimean Tatars are (more or less) white. And Jews (and Muslims from Middle-East) are mostly white too.
I don't think I was wrong just because you assumed spain and poland were included in the pak. Currently, they are not. And I don't think I ever said that those of other religions have different skin color, that was a question asked out of curiosity. I just wanted to know if anyone ever thought about that issue, which is in my mind similar to what you brought up. ("why christian symbols and not [other religions]" is, in my mind, similar to "why white and not [other skin color]", with the difference that we should include ethic minorities, even if only at a low rate.