you probably wouldn't play that much, because engaging with your community in the real world would be more rewarding, and you wouldn't be seeking escape from a massively alienating social regime
I like repetitive shit, I like busy work. That shit works for me, I think because I'm autistic. The idea that post-capitalism every single game is going to be a deep artistic experience is actually kind of depressing to me. I don't tend to enjoy those games, unless they are also, yaknow, fun.
Under socialism, people will generally be able to make whatever game they want to make - profit is no longer a necessity because people won't starve if they don't get paid and therefore people will no longer have to water down or otherwise compromise their vision. So while yes, most people will try to make the next what remains of edith finch, or journey, or what have you, there will be plenty of people making old school FF-style games, disgaea, monster hunter, etc
Basically, everyone gets what they want (except capitalists, fuck 'em)
While I agree that there will be more Journey and Edith Finch, I dont know that I agree that it'd be a majority? I think we'd see a lot of projects along the lines of Cave Story and Undertale though. Ie, games that have artistic vision but also work as just fun games to play (jury may be out on whether Undertale is fun, but Cave Story definitely is). Not saying that Edith Finch and (especially) Journey aren't fun, but they are definitely moreso experiences than they are fun games. And I think quiet a few game designers are going to be more focused on making fun games than artistic experiences. Like keep in mind, most devs are going to be people who enjoy playing games. If they're making the games they want to make, many of them are going to be more focused on being fun than being artistic. All in all though, I think things like Cave Story are probably going to be the backbone of video games post-capitalism. Stuff thats both fun and artistically deep.
The only thing I think might entirely or at least mostly go away is massive open world games. At the very least, we wouldn't be getting them all the time, as without worker abuse they'd take many years to make baring technology developments start going the way of making game development more accessible. There would still be a demand for them, because there are people that enjoy them (myself included), but I'm not sure how many people would be willing to make them.
Actually, another thing I just thought of is sports games. We definitely (thank god) wouldn't be getting yearly releases on every sports franchise. The thing I'm wondering though is like, are sports games actually interesting to work on? Would there be devs who want to work on them around? Again, I'm quiet certain there would still be people that want them, NBA 2K and Madden remain extremely popular. But unless those people all decided "well noones making the new Madden so I guess I'm going to learn the necessary skills to work on them" I don't know who's going to be making them.
Military shooters wouldn't go away, but there'd be less of them for sure and there would be much less of a focus on graphical fidelity and more focus on fun. We'd also probably see a return to a focus on narratively deep campaigns. Not saying every military shooter would be Spec Ops the Line though, that would be grim lmao.
I've thought about the open-world question a lot, and I think we might see a lot of cases of teams of artists making the open world, and then making it freely available for other teams to put their stories and things in. I know a lot of my artist friends like working on big singular projects like that, so it's something that will still be made, definitely, but won't be made in the same way. Open world games that are at a fnv/fo3 level of fidelity would see a resurgence, I believe. Mainly because fnv/fo3's open worlds are considerably less time consuming to create.
Yeah I can't imagine we'd get many if any games along the lines of Ubisoft stuff where there's a big open world filled with lots of busy work. Thing is, those types of games work for me because im an aspie who loves busy work and completionism, but I totally get/agree that they're kinda artistically vapid and I can't imagine devs given artistic freedom wanting to make games like that. Like I imagine Assassins' Creed and Farcry would continue as franchises, because I think most franchises would continue (and many would be revived) in a world without IP laws restricting fans from making games in the franchise, but they'd probably be fundamentally different. Like less busywork and the worlds wouldn't be as huge as Odyssey's and Valhalla's, like smaller worlds and the stuff to do would be way less repetitive.
I'd have to imagine that much of the busy work in many modern open-world games is somewhat procedurally generated, so it'd be pretty likely, with those tools being freely available, that creating games just about simpler busy work and stuff wouldn't be too hard, especially if full environments are freely available. I think something like Destiny 2 would get a lot of benefit from freely available assets, cause so much of the production time and cost of Destiny 2 is tied up in creating its environments. Of course, you get issues with visual continuity and such, but that's all fixable, especially as procedural generation tech gets more and more mainstream in 3d art.
Yeah I've thought a LOOOOOOOT about how developing technology will make game development a lot more accessible over time and especially so without IP laws preventing the sharing of assets and code.
Like especially interesting to me is how complex of a game you can make as a one person job. Cave Story is probably the most complex one person job game I'm aware of so far, though its possible one missed my notice. And that is very impressive mind you. But will we reach a point in technology where a game on the scale of say, GTA5 could possibly be a one person job if the person felt like doing so? Some things you still need people with special skills to do, like soundtracks and voice acting, but I'm guessing tech can develop even on those fronts. Can you imagine how much it would open things up creatively if you could have synthetic digital voices that actually sound like real people? [Mind you, I don't think professional, flesh and blood voice actors would ever be fully replaced, or at least not in our lifetime, but it would be really cool to have it as an OPTION. Especially to like, create the perfect voice for a character that no living voice actor can reproduce, or even digitally resurrect the voice of a deceased actor wow]. And how about entirely digital orchestral soundtracks (hell actually for all I know thats already possible lmao).
Also I'm not saying that just because it becomes POSSIBLE to do a huge game as a single person means that the majority of games would be, because collaborative projects are fun and sometimes there are things you aren't very good at that you could use someone who is good at it to help you. But it would be cool because some person with an extremely niche idea for a game who can't find anyone to collab with could one-person their passion project and make it real.
I really disagree with you and all these other replies. They're kinda utopian and sort of shit on me as an individual.
Socialism isn't going to stop me from being a consoomor aspie introvert home body who prefers single player experiences and doesn't have the critical lens to really enjoy artistically deep media without having someone else explain it to me. And it isn't going to stop people from wanting to make those types of games either.
I find the idea that socialism is going to end the existence of introverts and people who's taste isn't for deep artistic experiences kind of silly. Obviously some resocialization will occur but it won't be instantaneous and it won't prevent people from being individuals.
wouldn't say they have to be as escapist as the the forces acting on culture in this capitalist moment make them, but from the perspective of Becker's The Denial of Death and terror management theory they're part of a larger cultural attempt to distract ourselves from our own mortality that will remain even if we achieve socialism. the initial reaction might be "well then escapism is a meaningless term" but what would be a narrower definition of escapism that excludes say, reading fiction books but still includes video games.
it's all a matter of degrees, I suppose. they'd likely become less escapist and more artistic, connective experiences like jabrd and kristina said
every game is a virtual interface designed to make you more intimate with your comrades and forge everlasting bonds based on mutual respect and love easier
yes there will always be a range of people's preferences for interaction. just saying the range would shift because of the reduced negative pressure. living under FALGSC would remove a lot of the stress and negative outcomes around interaction
EDIT: looking back at it now I wish I had said "as much" instead of "that much" which would have made it clearer. people seem to have wanted to interpret it as "never", presumably because they define their identity around their introversion and the idea of it being partly a product of material conditions is threatening for some reason, as if they won't have as many identity-mates or something. folks, we're probably gonna get barbarism instead anyway
imagining living on an orbital in The Culture, everyone has thousands of hectares of personal space, leisure to relax and recharge, advanced medicine, arbitrary control of their own gender... it's helping the hangover
fighting game communities still resemble this, my local guilty gear is doing weekly netplays due to covid but they would meet in person weekly which i found rad
you probably wouldn't play that much, because engaging with your community in the real world would be more rewarding, and you wouldn't be seeking escape from a massively alienating social regime
We'd go from repetitive, escapist skinner boxes towards artistic experiences
I like repetitive shit, I like busy work. That shit works for me, I think because I'm autistic. The idea that post-capitalism every single game is going to be a deep artistic experience is actually kind of depressing to me. I don't tend to enjoy those games, unless they are also, yaknow, fun.
Under socialism, people will generally be able to make whatever game they want to make - profit is no longer a necessity because people won't starve if they don't get paid and therefore people will no longer have to water down or otherwise compromise their vision. So while yes, most people will try to make the next what remains of edith finch, or journey, or what have you, there will be plenty of people making old school FF-style games, disgaea, monster hunter, etc
Basically, everyone gets what they want (except capitalists, fuck 'em)
While I agree that there will be more Journey and Edith Finch, I dont know that I agree that it'd be a majority? I think we'd see a lot of projects along the lines of Cave Story and Undertale though. Ie, games that have artistic vision but also work as just fun games to play (jury may be out on whether Undertale is fun, but Cave Story definitely is). Not saying that Edith Finch and (especially) Journey aren't fun, but they are definitely moreso experiences than they are fun games. And I think quiet a few game designers are going to be more focused on making fun games than artistic experiences. Like keep in mind, most devs are going to be people who enjoy playing games. If they're making the games they want to make, many of them are going to be more focused on being fun than being artistic. All in all though, I think things like Cave Story are probably going to be the backbone of video games post-capitalism. Stuff thats both fun and artistically deep.
The only thing I think might entirely or at least mostly go away is massive open world games. At the very least, we wouldn't be getting them all the time, as without worker abuse they'd take many years to make baring technology developments start going the way of making game development more accessible. There would still be a demand for them, because there are people that enjoy them (myself included), but I'm not sure how many people would be willing to make them.
Actually, another thing I just thought of is sports games. We definitely (thank god) wouldn't be getting yearly releases on every sports franchise. The thing I'm wondering though is like, are sports games actually interesting to work on? Would there be devs who want to work on them around? Again, I'm quiet certain there would still be people that want them, NBA 2K and Madden remain extremely popular. But unless those people all decided "well noones making the new Madden so I guess I'm going to learn the necessary skills to work on them" I don't know who's going to be making them.
Military shooters wouldn't go away, but there'd be less of them for sure and there would be much less of a focus on graphical fidelity and more focus on fun. We'd also probably see a return to a focus on narratively deep campaigns. Not saying every military shooter would be Spec Ops the Line though, that would be grim lmao.
I've thought about the open-world question a lot, and I think we might see a lot of cases of teams of artists making the open world, and then making it freely available for other teams to put their stories and things in. I know a lot of my artist friends like working on big singular projects like that, so it's something that will still be made, definitely, but won't be made in the same way. Open world games that are at a fnv/fo3 level of fidelity would see a resurgence, I believe. Mainly because fnv/fo3's open worlds are considerably less time consuming to create.
Yeah I can't imagine we'd get many if any games along the lines of Ubisoft stuff where there's a big open world filled with lots of busy work. Thing is, those types of games work for me because im an aspie who loves busy work and completionism, but I totally get/agree that they're kinda artistically vapid and I can't imagine devs given artistic freedom wanting to make games like that. Like I imagine Assassins' Creed and Farcry would continue as franchises, because I think most franchises would continue (and many would be revived) in a world without IP laws restricting fans from making games in the franchise, but they'd probably be fundamentally different. Like less busywork and the worlds wouldn't be as huge as Odyssey's and Valhalla's, like smaller worlds and the stuff to do would be way less repetitive.
I'd have to imagine that much of the busy work in many modern open-world games is somewhat procedurally generated, so it'd be pretty likely, with those tools being freely available, that creating games just about simpler busy work and stuff wouldn't be too hard, especially if full environments are freely available. I think something like Destiny 2 would get a lot of benefit from freely available assets, cause so much of the production time and cost of Destiny 2 is tied up in creating its environments. Of course, you get issues with visual continuity and such, but that's all fixable, especially as procedural generation tech gets more and more mainstream in 3d art.
Yeah I've thought a LOOOOOOOT about how developing technology will make game development a lot more accessible over time and especially so without IP laws preventing the sharing of assets and code.
Like especially interesting to me is how complex of a game you can make as a one person job. Cave Story is probably the most complex one person job game I'm aware of so far, though its possible one missed my notice. And that is very impressive mind you. But will we reach a point in technology where a game on the scale of say, GTA5 could possibly be a one person job if the person felt like doing so? Some things you still need people with special skills to do, like soundtracks and voice acting, but I'm guessing tech can develop even on those fronts. Can you imagine how much it would open things up creatively if you could have synthetic digital voices that actually sound like real people? [Mind you, I don't think professional, flesh and blood voice actors would ever be fully replaced, or at least not in our lifetime, but it would be really cool to have it as an OPTION. Especially to like, create the perfect voice for a character that no living voice actor can reproduce, or even digitally resurrect the voice of a deceased actor wow]. And how about entirely digital orchestral soundtracks (hell actually for all I know thats already possible lmao).
Also I'm not saying that just because it becomes POSSIBLE to do a huge game as a single person means that the majority of games would be, because collaborative projects are fun and sometimes there are things you aren't very good at that you could use someone who is good at it to help you. But it would be cool because some person with an extremely niche idea for a game who can't find anyone to collab with could one-person their passion project and make it real.
I really disagree with you and all these other replies. They're kinda utopian and sort of shit on me as an individual.
Socialism isn't going to stop me from being a consoomor aspie introvert home body who prefers single player experiences and doesn't have the critical lens to really enjoy artistically deep media without having someone else explain it to me. And it isn't going to stop people from wanting to make those types of games either.
I find the idea that socialism is going to end the existence of introverts and people who's taste isn't for deep artistic experiences kind of silly. Obviously some resocialization will occur but it won't be instantaneous and it won't prevent people from being individuals.
deleted by creator
Why do videogames have to be a form of escapism?
wouldn't say they have to be as escapist as the the forces acting on culture in this capitalist moment make them, but from the perspective of Becker's The Denial of Death and terror management theory they're part of a larger cultural attempt to distract ourselves from our own mortality that will remain even if we achieve socialism. the initial reaction might be "well then escapism is a meaningless term" but what would be a narrower definition of escapism that excludes say, reading fiction books but still includes video games.
it's all a matter of degrees, I suppose. they'd likely become less escapist and more artistic, connective experiences like jabrd and kristina said
every game is a virtual interface designed to make you more intimate with your comrades and forge everlasting bonds based on mutual respect and love easier
Death Stranding but without the depressing, dystopic environment.
this is introvert erasure :angery:
was gonna build global communism, but then I realized my identity might be rooted in material conditions
idk what you mean by this
deleted by creator
yes there will always be a range of people's preferences for interaction. just saying the range would shift because of the reduced negative pressure. living under FALGSC would remove a lot of the stress and negative outcomes around interaction
EDIT: looking back at it now I wish I had said "as much" instead of "that much" which would have made it clearer. people seem to have wanted to interpret it as "never", presumably because they define their identity around their introversion and the idea of it being partly a product of material conditions is threatening for some reason, as if they won't have as many identity-mates or something. folks, we're probably gonna get barbarism instead anyway
imagining living on an orbital in The Culture, everyone has thousands of hectares of personal space, leisure to relax and recharge, advanced medicine, arbitrary control of their own gender... it's helping the hangover
Or maybe video games would be a more social activity, like arcades of old
fighting game communities still resemble this, my local guilty gear is doing weekly netplays due to covid but they would meet in person weekly which i found rad