The future of Role-Playing Games

[Gahbreeil]

Sorry to cut you short, but no developer in their right mind would sign on doing such a demanding project, it is too ambitious and expensive for too little chance of profit since it would only appeal to niche audiences. If you really want to become a game designer you should work on small projects, so you can learn fast the inner works of the medium and gain credibility if you have any competence.

If even designers need to code then I'm out of luck. I believe small projects is exactly what makes the RPG appeal to niche audiences.

10/10 thread, codexian jimmies rustled / 1/10 writing skills, might actually have a future in the industry working for Obsidian

To my defence, the book is written from the point of view of a child as the story warrants.

Try making small RPG Maker game first. Seriously.

I do not believe the game framework allows for anything I want to do. Besides that, the JRPG in all of its forms is a child oriented genre to oppose the more mature WRPG. I prefer the latter.

Consider that any game you make has to be easy & fun to digest by gamers to be enjoyable to the majority of them.

The OP's OP wasn't. At all.

Before you start designing a game find a way to convey your ideas in a more digestible format on here. In doing so you'll be honing your skills of external perception, which will allow you to create the best experience for those on the other end of the gaming telescope.

Wax on, wax off.

The point is the game would be easy to digest, play, have fun with and would be nice to enjoy at a set difficulty level when it would have a storyline? I remind you the roaming system would allow for countless generic adventures as people go missing or roads become untraversible.

I have some bad news for you.

And what are those? I shouldn't be? I know that by now.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Now tell me how a market can exist under communism

Liberal propaganda since the 60s has been brainwashing people that socialism = planned economy... justifying it with a couple of tactical articles by Lenin relating to the disastrous situation of 1918 and the "withdrawal" from the NEP in 1927-1928. And they feign absolute ignorance of the postwar article by Stalin on the political economy of socialism, in which he openly talked about the INEVITABILITY OF THE MARKET UNDER SOCIALISM and speaking about the market's potential possibility to wither away, along with the money, only in the context of transition to communism in the indefinite future, when the development of the productive forces will allow the slogan "to everyone's needs".

Stalin talked about the inevitability of limited commodity production continuing under socialism, including that of consumer goods. Yet the selling of the latter to the general populace does not constitute markets since both the salaries of the workers and the prices of different commodities are set in advance as part of economic planning ergo there being no profits to be made by the state through the monetary exchange of consumer goods. For production towards profits and thus markets, you'd need independent producers competing over the selling of the same type of commodity at their own distinct prices thus generating a price fluctuation. Yet this is nonsensical within a planned economy since there is no surplus value to be had on the part of a publicly owned business regardless of its productivity levels since both the infusion of capital goods for its functioning and the paying of its workers' salaries is done by the state directly. Historically there are of course exceptions such as the farmers' markets done by the agrarian co-ops in which the state allowed for price fluctuations between competing vendors, but these are capitalist practices occurring within a society which nevertheless has socialism as its dominant mode of production (just as under a capitalist system you can have remnants of the feudal mode of production).

As for the rest of your post, it seems to me that your argument is mostly a critique of the inefficiency of planned economies in accounting for the need for diversity in consumer goods. And here I don't necessarily disagree with you, but this is mostly a matter of technological limitations as they had existed at the time. Computerization today would allow for a much more precise assessment of both particular consumer demands and of the ways in which the resources which are available could be divided to meet such diverse needs within the broader allocation of such capital goods within different lines of production.

Anyhow, Bester, I'm not sure if part of our disagreement isn't due to terminological differences (thinking about the usage of the 'market' term in particular). So I guess that a more productive thing to do would be to ask you to define how you'd envision your preferred form of 'market socialism' as functioning? Are you talking about something akin to contemporary China and Vietnam? In our previous talks, you struck me more as the type of nuLefty who advocates for a strong social democracy (i.e. strong public healthcare, public education and so on) alongside the abolishment of wageslavery and the restructuring of businesses into co-ops (+/- self-employed entrepreneurs working by themselves).

 

[Gahbreeil]

Communism conversation

Communism conversation

Can both of you refer to me being an utopianist? I believe it to be the first communism. Fair distribution of wealth is important in a capitalist society by a communist point of view. Now would you start messaging yourselves instead?

 

[Morblot]

Gahbreeil

Try making small RPG Maker game first. Seriously.

To be serious for a moment, this right here is the best and most useful advice to anyone thinking of doing a game of their own. Start small, learn, improve. Then do another, then another. One day you might actually have something worth playing, most likely you've burnt out long before that.

 

[CanadianCorndog]

When you have survivor bias and you look at that 1 out of a million that spent seven years on an RPG...realize they wasted a huge chunk of their life on trivial bullshit. They gave up on having kids and a family to make beep boop games. Make a small game that you can finish quickly by yourself. There's no shame in making a fun little thing instead of CyberFalloutSkyrimUnfinished 2078.

 

[Johnny Biggums]

Will your game have full nudity like in Witcher 3?

 

[Ol' Willy]

guaranteeing people's access to the goods that should be made equally available to everyone due to moral and/or logical reasons: education, sports, culture, basic food, shelter, medicine.

One of the reasons why USSR "project" was doomed to failure. When hardworking Russian somewhere from Tula and donkeybanger somewhere from Dushanbe are entitled for the same amount of good and social support - it's a question of time when actually working citizen will be tired of supporting some kebabs who spend half of their day praying and another sneaking from work.

 

[Gahbreeil]

To be serious for a moment, this right here is the best and most useful advice to anyone thinking of doing a game of their own. Start small, learn, improve. Then do another, then another. One day you might actually have something worth playing, most likely you've burnt out long before that.

Why not, I'd try. I cannot burn out as I do this for a living. There is nothing to learn in design for me as I have played countless video games. If the post was meant to be answered by me at all.

Will your game have full nudity like in Witcher 3?

Upper waist nudity for beth genders or no nudity would be my standing point. The game cuts off at the bed and it would work like a workstation that you have sex in blackout and time advancing. I've played Witcher III and I do not remember full nudity in the game. Are you sure it was not a mod? I would prefer the game to be coded not to allow modifications of this sort so that the setting and art style is not changed.

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

Stalin talked about the inevitability

Of the market.

ask you to define how you'd envision your preferred form of 'market socialism' as functioning

The plan cannot objectively estimate the value of products. Given today's computers, and I'm a programmer, so I know this stuff, the best it can do is re-calibrate itself ever so often, trying to SIMULATE THE MARKET and always trying to catch up to the already existing shortages, but always with a significant lag. Because the market is what tells you the value of socially useful labor, via the value of products, which are formed by the demand.

An example: you're buying spaghetti. Suppose there's a 1% increase in demand. We're assuming the most optimal IT infrastructure - a just-in-time plan - the automated cashier is already sending a silent request to the spaghetti factory. The spaghetti factory is sending requests for additional flour and cardboard. Cardboard factory is sending additional requests to the forest cutting companies. But suppose we're already at the limit of our capacity in terms of forest cutting, because product A, B and C (high volatility products) already rose up in demand SIGNIFICANTLY and UNEXPECTEDLY just yesterday. So the forest company sends a request to the government to create a new branch. How long this will take - who knows, it's a slow process to form a new company, get equipment (gotta send in those requests for machinery too).

Meantime, people are experiencing shortages of pasta, as well as product A, B and C. It could be fixed with an increased price due to HIGH DEMAND AND LOW SUPPLY. But this is exactly what the MARKET is.

I'm not defining "market socialism" as anything. Communism and socialism is this: illegality of theft of labor. You can take any country today and put in place laws and regulations to enforce the inability to steal labor. I'm not going to write a detailed program here, it's not a difficult though process. As soon as you make money through anything but labor, this money goes into public funds, because it's not yours to take. I don't know what else is there to explain.

 

[Morblot]

There is nothing to learn in design for me as I have played countless video games.

:D

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

One of the reasons why USSR "project" was doomed to failure. When hardworking Russian somewhere from Tula and donkeybanger somewhere from Dushanbe are entitled for the same amount of good and social support - it's a question of time when actually working citizen will be tired of supporting some kebabs who spend half of their day praying and another sneaking from work.

Typical nationalist rhetoric. Literally the same thing was being said on their side in regards to you. How fucking stupid you gotta be. Now you're all in shit, enjoy.

 

[Ol' Willy]

Literally the same thing was being said on their side in regards to you.

Kebabs may say whatever they want, statistics say otherwise

 

[Ol' Willy]

Communism and socialism is this: illegality of theft of labor. You can take any country today and put in place laws and regulations to enforce the inability to steal labor. I'm not going to write a detailed program here, it's not a difficult though process. As soon as you make money through anything but labor, this money goes into public funds, because it's not yours to take. I don't know what else is there to explain.

I wonder, do you know how ст.153 УК РСФСР was working? Theoretically, if I'll ask you to code me some program for some monetary reward - in your free time - will you decline my offer because of aforementioned reasons?

 

[Heroic Liberator]

So the forest company sends a request to the government to create a new branch. How long this will take - who knows, it's a slow process to form a new company, get equipment (gotta send in those requests for machinery too).

Meantime, people are experiencing shortages of pasta, as well as product A, B and C. It could be fixed with an increased price due to HIGH DEMAND AND LOW SUPPLY. But this is exactly what the MARKET is.

So whether it's a planned economy or not, it'd take time in both cases to accommodate for the increased demand. And simulating demand and supply can be done by a computer just as well. And FYI, there are contemporary computer scientists such as Paul Cockshott who have argued in favor of planned economies, so your appeal to authority isn't much.

As for the rest, such a a market system cannot guarantee the right to work for everyone since you'd always have unemployment due to the fact that the demand for labor would fluctuate. So you're left with paying people to leech off government bucks whenever they can as they do in wealthy social democracies today.

Likewise, given that theft of labor would not be permitted, getting employed would be much harder since people in co-ops would be reluctant to bring strangers in since - presumably - you'd be in favor of workplace democracy and thus every new employee would have a voice in the internal affairs of the company. Not to mention that it isn't hard to envision a fall in long term productivity since the intent of any company under market conditions is to generate as much surplus value as possible for its sold commodities ergo preferring to overwork themselves with a smaller team than to diminish their returns by a good amount when hiring a new employee and having to pay him for the true value of his labor.

And there are also plenty of other things which capitalism suffers off currently that'll be maintained such as planed obsolescence of products since you are still operating under production for profit ergo better to make a lot of shitty products that people will have to repurchase every now and then than making something that'll last forever and thus suddenly kill your customer base once the original demand is fulfilled or a decrease in overall productivity since each company would guard its methods of obtaining greater productivity since it finds itself in competition with other producers of the same types of commodities and so on.

But you do you, Bester. I respect SocDems up to a point and it's no difference in your case.

 

[samuraigaiden]

There is nothing to learn in design for me as I have played countless video games.

I challenge you to create a board game adaptation of the game you described in your initial post. Make it work with cue cards, dice, rocks on a cardboard drawing, whatever. The details are up to you. BUT it has to be playable from start to finish.

If you have nothing to learn in design I'm sure this will be an easy task for you.

 

[Morblot]

inb4 "video games are not board games"

 

[Gahbreeil]

:D

Seriously. An avid video game player is a better video game designer than someone out of college, it's true. The gamer won't write dialogue or settings unless he or she knows what's going on. Imagining a game is all about liking games.

I challenge you to create a board game adaptation of the game you described in your initial post. Make it work with cue cards, dice, rocks on a cardboard drawing, whatever. The details are up to you. BUT it has to be playable from start to finish.

If you have nothing to learn in design I'm sure this will be an easy task for you.

Like Talisman? I've already created an RPG system that avoids using anything D&D does while being original in all aspects and it is developed beside my video game. The only thing missing is the combat system which is easy to do. It works based up to four six sided dice rolled at the same time. You want your board game, I'll describe it. It's fairly easy.

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

So whether it's a planned economy or not, it'd take time in both cases to accommodate for the increased demand.

Not so. In my example, the market makes pasta more expensive in response to a higher demand, and people go buy other stuff instead, but the pasta remains available. This is the crucial point.
However, in case of a planned economy, people have the money, but there's not enough product for everyone who can afford it. People who were unable to get it, for them the money loses its purchasing power. This creates two things:
- a black market of goods, where the prices are ten times higher and speculators make money illegally with a silent consent of the majority.
- a disillusioned feeling that money isn't a very useful thing and it's better to keep your savings in GOODS (any goods will do!), so people felt compelled to buy anything they estimated valuable, which in turn created MORE SHORTAGES - and this led to bartering. This is the late USSR experience.

As for the rest, such a a market system cannot guarantee the right to work for everyone since you'd always have unemployment due to the fact that the demand for labor would fluctuate

Not a problem in industrialized societies. It was an important talking point in Lenin's times, but not now. Due to COVID almost 30% people lost their jobs during some periods of time, but it only showed one thing - that there is an already existing 30% SHADOW UNEMPLOYMENT - people are "working", but it's an illusion, they're useless to the economy, and their loss is unimportant. They were compensated and they didn't die of hunger. In western countries, the production of food directly requires 2% of the population. Add some 5% on top for production/maintenance of machinery. The rest is superfluous things and services. Just to survive, we only need 7% people to work. But if everyone works, and there's some ~5% unemployment, it's simply not a problem.

since - presumably - you'd be in favor of workplace democracy

WHAT? We live in the times of highly specialized professions. People are incapable of doing anything besides the things they've been trained for. And you want them to run a company, which is 100% outside of their competence? WHY? Their bosses, the MANAGERS, are the most efficient ones to MANAGE the workforce and the company, that's what they're paid for.

overwork themselves

Jesus Christ, where do you live? A lot of countries already have maximum work-hours conventions depending on the type of work. Most types have a maximum of 40 hours/week in Russia.

planed obsolescence

First interesting thing you bring up. Audits would have to be performed.

I respect SocDems up to a point and it's no difference in your case.

Can't say the same to you, little respect for trolls. I'm a communist.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

So whether it's a planned economy or not, it'd take time in both cases to accommodate for the increased demand.

Not so. In my example, the market makes pasta more expensive in response to a higher demand, and people go buy other stuff instead, but the pasta remains available. This is the crucial point.

And that can be replicated by computerized planning ergo it's a non-issue.

As for the rest, such a a market system cannot guarantee the right to work for everyone since you'd always have unemployment due to the fact that the demand for labor would fluctuate

Not a problem in industrialized societies. It was an important talking point in Lenin's times, but not now. Due to COVID almost 30% people lost their jobs during some periods of time, but it only showed one thing - that there is an already existing 30% SHADOW UNEMPLOYMENT - people are "working", but it's an illusion, they're useless to the economy, and their loss is unimportant. They were compensated and they didn't die of hunger. In western countries, the production of food directly requires 2% of the population. Add some 5% on top for production/maintenance of machinery. The rest is superfluous things and services. Just to survive, we only need 7% people to work. But if everyone works, and there's some ~5% unemployment, it's simply not a problem.

How is it not a problem? Do you think that allowing 5% of the working age population to leech off the state isn't a big expense? Or that it doesn't incentivize more and more people to apply for that rather than to work?

since - presumably - you'd be in favor of workplace democracy

WHAT? We live in the times of highly specialized professions. People are incapable of doing anything besides the things they've been trained for. And you want them to run a company, which is 100% outside of their competence? WHY? Their bosses, the MANAGERS, are the most efficient ones to MANAGE the workforce and the company, that's what they're paid for.

But in lack of private property, those managers would be either hired by or elected from among the workers. That and them having to join as co-owners of the company.

And speaking of that, how do you expect businesses to get of the ground in such an environment? You have a business idea that requires employees, yet you are the only one with the money for it. Are you just going to risk that money for a business that you'll have to share with all your prospective co-workers?

overwork themselves

Jesus Christ, where do you live? A lot of countries already have maximum work-hours conventions depending on the type of work. Most types have a maximum of 40 hours/week in Russia.

Then you'd have a system dominated by small businesses since each member would prefer to have a say in company matters rather than being one in thousands of voices and beyond. Not to mention that in lack of surplus labor to leech off, being part of a small business carries roughly the same financial benefits as being part of a larger one (excepting businesses which can be automated, but there you'll instead have 'socialist billionaires' since they have the capital to do that and no need to hire more than a few workers). So instead of proper industry, you'd get a return to the modern day equivalent of craftsmen. After all, better to sell 10 commodities in X amount of time with 9 other guys that you can count upon rather than sell 100 commodities with 99 other fellow workers since it might not be as efficient and the 10 times higher profits would be divided just as before.

planed obsolescence

First interesting thing you bring up. Audits would have to be performed.

Audits regarding what? It's a free market, businesses can sell whichever product they desire and if there's demand for it they'll do so. If you make it illegal to have such practices, you'd have to apply draconian measures that would scare people away from starting such businesses since theoretically the Razor co-op can make shaving razors that'll last decades and never rust or get blunted, but they are aware that they'll be out of business after they hit it big and instead would prefer to make shitty razors that need to be thrown away after a few uses. But if they risk an audit for opting for the latter, then it's a damned if you do - damned if you don't sort of situation, so they might as well not start a razor business in the first place.

 

[agris]

Three pages in and we already have a great communism vs more-communism argument, OP learned their design skillz through the school of hard (video game) knocks, and the project only takes a meager 10 year investment.

We haven't had a good barn burner in a while. This is nice!

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Three pages in and we already have a great communism vs more-communism argument

To be fair, OP first brought it up tangentially.

 

[just]

can i join your team?
i'll make a logo

 

[Gahbreeil]

To be fair, OP first brought it up tangentially.

That is quite unfair, you did not get the joke. Mordblut wanted to know who will work for me, I answered, the people.

can i join your team?
i'll make a logo

Why not, show us all what you've got. Do you need a game title or do you already have an idea?

 

[Heroic Liberator]

To be fair, OP first brought it up tangentially.

That is quite unfair

Such is life, eh?

 

[Sranchammer]

RPGs will be dead by 2022 - The time of LARPing is over.

The return of the Kingdom of RTS is at hand. Repent!