Skip to main content

On Sale: GamesAssetsToolsTabletopComics
Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(+3)

Thank you for the reply! 

It seems to me that this dichotomy between the government and the forces of the free market is a fictional one, since the current government's role is the upholding of the "free" market, the two being a symbiotic relationship, rather than two combatting forces. In my country some people like to say we live in socialism because a large chunk of the natural reserves market is owned by government corporations, even though they act not in the best interests of the country, but solely to gain profit. So to say that a government should control where money goes to undertake such a vast project as outlined in your game would require a separation of the existing federal order from the profit motives, the impossibility of which is precisely the problem of the current economic order. 

Spelling out that the government was already inherently socialist could have worked, but I prefer the existing version of the game. It may be wholly unrealistic (in my opinion), but it focuses directly on the various ways of dealing with global warming without getting bogged down in the "alternative universe USSA" scenario. Which, for a edutainment game about the ways of lowering carbon footprint would be too much.  

In my view, denying the efficiency of climate change reforms within the current capitalist society is similar to denying the usefulness of electoralism. Both can be seen as discouraging rhetoric, or a call to action. The reason this seems as a discouraging rhetoric is because the first and second world are so far removed from any revolutionary movement, so when reform is denied as a possibility, the alternatives are almost non-existant. I would blame this on the current world situation rather than on the falseness of the rhetoric.

The reason I say neither of our opinions matter is because as individuals we are unable to enact meaningful change, and that a coherent political organization is needed to transmit and enact upon these ideas. I have assumed that you are not a part of such organization, and am happy to stand corrected in case you are. 

I also understand that having an online argument in an itch.io comment section is not the best use of your time. I'm eager to learn, so if you think there is anything pertaining to the discussion at hand I need to read to educate myself, please say so.