This topic is to discuss Marxist RTS's that use Labour as one of the game resources, like Corporation-States, the game I am currently working on.
This thread is also to discuss MMORTS's that span many platforms, like my game, which has a Java client for Windows/Mac/Linux and an iOS client for iPhone/iPad/iPod touch (and in the future might expand to Android, Blackberry, Windows phone and Symbian).
http://www.gamedev.net/topic/607514-mmo-corporation-states/page__pid__4843001
Marxist RTS
Maybe you should bring up some more specific topics of conversation, or ask a question, or something.
Author
What do you think of this economic model.
http://www.gamedev.net/topic/608268-do-i-need-a-gambling-license/page__view__findpost__p__4847828
http://corpstates.myftp.org/?Design
http://www.gamedev.net/topic/608268-do-i-need-a-gambling-license/page__view__findpost__p__4847828
http://corpstates.myftp.org/?Design
Author
My other posts aren't there to discuss the game design, though.
The first one was in the Business section, asking a legal question.
The first one was in the Business section, asking a legal question.
Author
Okay, so nobody wants to read my long texts.
How do you think Marx can be incorporated into RTS games?
How do you think Marx can be incorporated into RTS games?
Carefully?
A central figure dictating what people do and when and how with their immediate and unhesitating obedience (which is how RTS games typically go) doesn't have anything more to do with Marxism or capitalism than any other RTS. RTS games generally don't have much of anything to do with economics anyhow. A supreme leader oversees the extraction of resources, which are converted directly into buildings and weapons. It's hyperauthoritarianism, more like Soviet Communism than Marxism or free-market capitalism.
A central figure dictating what people do and when and how with their immediate and unhesitating obedience (which is how RTS games typically go) doesn't have anything more to do with Marxism or capitalism than any other RTS. RTS games generally don't have much of anything to do with economics anyhow. A supreme leader oversees the extraction of resources, which are converted directly into buildings and weapons. It's hyperauthoritarianism, more like Soviet Communism than Marxism or free-market capitalism.
Yes, because all RTS's are based on WarCraft.
A lot of them do follow in that mold, yes. Since your post gave absolutely no context and no direction, what else would be reasonable to draw as a comparison besides the overwhelmingly dominant model of the game genre you've chosen? Not to mention this little nugget from your own website:
[color="#808080"][font="Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica"]This game is going to be like any other RTS like WarCraft or Age of Empires but it will have money[/font]
[/quote]
So regardless of whether or not all RTS's are based on WarCraft, it certainly sounds like yours will be.
And your snide, unreasonable, topic-ignoring comment aside, you haven't addressed my point at all. A game in which the player has special influence or dominance over the simulated citizens is one in which you don't have Marxism, you have a dictator. For real-world instances of applied communism on a large scale you have central dictators with government distribution of goods-- on the whole not especially Marxist. Marxism isn't just a collectivist economic distribution system, it's also a deep social and political philosophy.
You can definitely have a system where simulated citizens contribute to decision making in addition to supplying their labor, but the more decision making power is devolved from the player the less of a game it is, and the more of a "watch and see" proposition it is. Additionally, it's hard to make simulated citizens complex decision-makers able to participate in the political process in a meaningful way. The less meaningful that interaction is, the more of the traditional dictatorial gameplay there will be.
The easiest route to including such a philosophy into a game without the above would be to adjust metrics of the population for any collectivist settings, i.e. adjust productivity and happiness metrics for citizens as a direct result of the decision to lead a nominally Marxist society. That's a doable but shallow approach, and doesn't really incorporate Marx into the game. But it would provide some difference between different economic systems which the players could select.
Author
I wish people understood my economic idea.
[color="#808080"][font="Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica"]This game is going to be like any other RTS like WarCraft or Age of Empires but it will have money[/quote][/font]
[color="#1C2837"]So regardless of whether or not all RTS's are based on WarCraft, it certainly sounds like yours will be.[/quote]
I was using that as a way to gradually introduce my idea lulz; Workers will be able to own money and spend it on what you sell.
And I wasn't talking about Marxism as a social philosophy but about the hardcore economics.
I found a way to simulate it all. Like, you can increase automation in your buildings by upgrading them, which will require less Labour. Forget about Civilization III. It fails to realistically portray different economic systems at all. As the building requires less Labour, there will be less money going to the workers, and the workers who have lost their jobs (or those that have increased time-spent-looking-for-work) will be willing to work for the second-best job (that has a lesser profit ratio for them), bringing down the price of Labour. So other will be able to hire workers for a smaller wage. A slightly smaller wage, depending on how dampened the effect of the building upgrade is.
I could simulate taxes too, but I'd have to include some benefits that everybody gets, like education and healthcare and police, which I haven't figured out how to elegantly simulate yet.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
