Since its inception, video games have been entangled in endless moral and legal disputes. But as the most popular medium of the emerging internet, we must consider whether this medium can also play a positive role in our future proletarian struggle.
Video games shaped by the capitalist market are tools for profit and consumer entertainment. The stories they depict are often not especially noteworthy, but video games are by no means only sensory stimulation for enjoyment. From my own experience, the greatest value of video games lies in their media nature. A well-crafted video game can evoke myriad emotions and stimulate thoughts about life, nature, and society. The stories they tell will subtly transform people’s thinking.
The powerful means of dissemination bring strangers together to form a community of players; could this also promote the formation of new social forces? Even further… shape a revolution?
We adapt to the development of the times. We must face squarely the crucial role of video games in modern internet development and social interaction. It must not be a matter of blind rejection and avoidance. If excellent writers, strong program design, and artwork can serve players, allowing players to feel satisfied, then there is no reason why talented people should not enable players to access and understand proletarian revolutionary ideas and the spirit of struggle. Game designers can spread real emotions and reflections by telling virtual stories. We can also传播 the flame of revolution, making more people realize the importance of revolution.
Compared with film and books, games have even greater传播力. More suitable for the new era. We need to give this medium the attention it deserves; this blank sheet of a game must not be filled only with the strokes of reactionaries.
We welcome comrades to share their views, criticisms, and suggestions.
My ideas: 1. The game must be completely free if it cannot generate profit. 2. The game content must not contain reactionary ideas like Anto Xiu. 3. There should be no discrimination against women. 4. When promoting Mao, Marx, and Lenin, pay attention to the tone of the speech to avoid being directly censored or the author being implicated and taken in for questioning or imprisonment. Welcome comrades to offer criticisms.
If we put it that way, then what is a “revolutionary” video game? Why can video games serve the revolution? This requires a specific explanation. At least for now, all video games are of bourgeois nature. I don’t know what exactly you envision as a “revolutionary” video game—what kind of social ideas it should embody, what artistic principles it should follow, which social classes or strata it should reflect, the character and plot design in the script, the logical structure in programming, the drawing style and content in art, etc. Have you seriously thought about these questions?
If none of these exist, then talking about “revolutionary” video games is completely empty talk, because empty talk is easy to say. Anyone can put a “revolutionary” coat on a video game, but what kind of game to make, how to realize it, and how to ensure that the game is truly revolutionary cannot be proven in a few words. It requires long-term arduous practice to demonstrate that there are truly so-called “revolutionary” video games, or perhaps there are none at all. The form of video games can only serve the bourgeoisie and cannot serve the proletariat, and so on.
Revolutionary video games should be those that promote progressive ideas such as the proletarian revolutionary thought, dialectical materialism, and the people’s historical perspective, generally encouraging reflection beyond low-level entertainment. The birth of video games was initially for pure entertainment. Just as manuscripts and writing were originally for recording, video games have become capable of carrying information and more so, ideas. The class nature of video games stems from their primary role as entertainment consumer goods, similar to chess, board games, dice, and mahjong. When their production and service objects change, their nature must also change.
Our revolutionary video games must reflect the oppression and exploitation suffered by the proletariat, embody the spirit of unity and unwavering struggle. They should mainly depict the lives of workers and peasants, and secondarily, the lives of petty bourgeoisie in cities.
In terms of scripts, we should create vivid and lively images of the proletarian working people that the masses can feel close to. We must present class contradictions and expose reactionary acts in the best possible way within the script. The plot is open to imagination, so not much needs to be said.
In terms of art, we can adopt the artistic style of propaganda from the last century or try to find a newer, better style. It should also actively distinguish itself from popular culture.
In principle, these ideas are easy to state mechanically, but there should be specific research. How video games serve the proletariat, and how to rid current video games of bourgeois characteristics, cannot be solved by vague discussions of principles. Only principles that can be applied to concrete situations are truly principles; otherwise, discussing principles abstractly makes them empty.
If you want to argue your point, at least you should give an example, talk about how current bourgeois games are, why they are bourgeois, and then if you want to change the class nature of video games, what specific steps should be taken.
And the particularity of games as a form of art lies in the fact that the audience has a dual role: they are both spectators and actors, and players themselves are a special character within the game. In the game, the audience can actively influence the effects through gameplay. If players ruin the game, then even the best game cannot serve to promote revolutionary ideas. How to transform the players’ own thoughts so that they play the game well is a further issue. If one truly wants to create a “revolutionary” game, this problem must be addressed first. This is a fundamental issue of the game form; without solving it, nothing else can be discussed.
Yes, the interactivity of the game makes it more complex. Proletarian games cannot be solved simply by changing themes. For example, FPS games inherently contain bourgeois violent elements; it’s not that changing the protagonist from mercenaries in the US to the Red Army of the Soviet Union can transform it into proletarian art. Moreover, most current games are designed to induce addiction and escapism. Proletarian games, on the other hand, should make players face reality after playing, rather than immersing themselves in game time.
The characteristics of video games determine that, generally speaking, those who play video games are students who are out of school or mental laborers, as well as intellectuals from the bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie. Only these people have the leisure, money, and equipment to play video games (for workers and peasants, on the one hand, due to heavy oppression and long working hours in the current society, there is basically no time to play games, and their electronic devices cannot run games that require extremely high memory). So for these people, if they want to understand the oppression and exploitation suffered by the proletariat, and learn about the lives of workers and peasants, isn’t the best way to truly participate in social practice, do physical labor, and become members of the working people? Sitting at home playing games cannot truly experience this hardship (this is especially true for those who hope to transform themselves and become laboring, not to mention that a large part of those who play games pursue low-level pleasures, seeking the simplest and quickest gratification, and have no interest in seeing these contents in games). From this perspective, such revolutionary video games have no space for existence. Moreover, as Luanma said, in principle, it’s easy to state mechanically, but without discussing specifics, it becomes very abstract and empty.
Yes, for there to be so-called “revolutionary” video games, the first step is to address the problem of video games detaching from practice and诱导 people to become addicted. If this issue is not resolved, then politically it can only serve reactionary art that benefits the bourgeoisie. If we want to resolve it, then we must ultimately provide a solution.
The reactionary nature of this bourgeois electronic sports and shooting games is not simply about replacing the U.S. imperialist army with the Soviet Red Army or changing the background from aggressive war to anti-aggression war; a different skin won’t solve it. On the contrary, many people in the left circle like to deceive themselves in the game world, pretending to be Red Army soldiers (some games even let them play as “Red Army”), but in reality, their thoughts are becoming more and more reactionary. Because regardless of how the plot, mechanics, and so on change, the core of these games inevitably revolves around killing each other (or NPCs) to score points or pass levels. The focus is on depicting the process of how to kill, methods (such as various weapons available, setting various so-called values, etc.), and then letting players choose which method is most efficient and most violent to kill. In essence, it immerses players in the pleasure of fascist slaughter.
Video games just need to serve production skills, for example helping to learn various production skills, such as simulating how to farm, how to drive, how to master the performance of various machines in a factory, simulations of first aid methods, practice with various fire extinguishers, simulated firefighting and rescue, as well as various scientific experiments, chemistry experiments simulations, there are too many. Games can serve as an aid to production and have great development potential.
In short, all technology and tools have no inherent good or bad; it only depends on whom they serve, which class they serve, and whether they benefit social development. The appearance of new products follows objective laws, and it’s about how to utilize them. Just like the realization of communism requires the use of capitalist production tools.
Two basic requirements of artistic creation are: one is to serve the workers, peasants, and soldiers politically, and the other is to have extremely high artistic quality. Such so-called “revolutionary” video games only utter some hollow slogans, without concrete political stance or artistic techniques. No one would truly believe in such things.
Especially regarding the most important political issue, how can we ensure that video games definitely spread revolutionary ideas? This is something no one has done before. It’s not that we can’t try just because predecessors haven’t done it, but at least we should be more cautious. It is clearly inappropriate to casually express such ideas so lightly.
The fundamental way to ensure that video games propagate revolutionary ideas is through our game’s script, which must undergo strict review and revision. Our scripts must make players think, and our games themselves should encourage players to think. The plot must be reasonable and logical. The story should not involve idealistic fantasies. Texts and plots related to reality should have clear sources, and should tell a rigorous story with a serious attitude, so that once players think, they enter the true rhythm of the game. I believe this can truly achieve dissemination.
In other words: the story should be reasonable, rigorous, and well-researched. The sources should be clear, facilitating inquiry and reflection. The game should encourage thinking, promoting subjective initiative and deep learning.
These are all very abstract, and do not discuss any specific issues, nor do they offer concrete solutions. At least there should be an example or something.
