The premise of the progression arc is wrong

NoTruePunk · 2019-07-30 22:27:54

So I just caught up on development news and I have some thoughts.

The premise of the game is to develop civilization from a basic state over several generations into a full fledged society, right? But there's a small issue with this premise when the developer has little to no understanding of anthropology

First of all the concept of "society" and what he intends to turn this game into is extremely biased in favor of western imperialism. There seems to be an impasse encountered with the current state of the game, a conflict: How can the development of society in the game progress linearly the way society today progresses?

There's a huge problem with even that question though, and that's because society doesn't progress in a linear fashion, it is cyclical. For centuries nomadic people went through their social processes in a cyclical fashion, they would move into a new area, forage and hunt and build shelter, then move onto new areas when resources become scarce or conditions change. Leaving nothing behind but their footprints, the depleted areas would slowly recuperate from human influence and even be benefited by it, much in the same way beavers change their landscape by building dams, then leave behind lush clearings in forests after their ponds are drained. Humans often literally went in circles over years, returning to their previous settlements to re-use the packed earth foundations for their structures and generational knowledge of the local geography. Far northern first nation people would literally go back and forth with the seasonal melting and thawing of ice. This cyclical social time represents the bulk of human history.

Real pre-agrarian nomadic societies developed agriculture by generational knowledge of edible foraged plants, and eventually began to seed these plants themselves while remaining nomadic. When they found their waste in the form of discarded seeds and pits had grown into new perennial plants they started to do this on purpose.

Those cyclical processes were extremely stable both ecologically and socially. When agriculture was developed the cyclical nature of society remained, but was lengthened. Instead of moving from site to site on a seasonal basis villages remained stationary. Those villages maintained the seasonal nature of their economic functions with planting, harvesting and storage corresponding to seasonal conditions, while changing their social processes to adapt to a long term sedentary lifestyle. These more durable long standing social relations paved the way for technical advancements like pottery and history, but also added instability due to isolating conditions and resource depletion. Villages lost the adaptability of their nomadic ancestors and became vulnerable to famine and disease. That instability isn't some inherent property of survival or human nature, it's created by the social conditions those people lived in.

The more durable and less adaptable social conditions of agrarian villages also created the conditions necessary for feudalism to take root, and eventually capitalism. Much in the way agriculture added instability and lengthened the cyclical nature of social time, feudalism and capitalism each in turn added more instability and extended social time to appear linear. Social time isn't linear. There is no forward technical or economic progress that will not eventually be reversed. Even under capitalism, with our calendar marked by unceasingly incrementing numbers and our economy requiring unceasing expansion, those calendar numbers will eventually stop, and unfortunately that may very well be the moment when there are no more people around to add to them.

Feudalism and capitalism are important to talk about because we haven't even figured out basic agrarian society. Simply putting coins or swords or property or cars into the game isn't going to simulate the social environment which leads to feudalism or capitalism or war or whatever because those things developed over a long period of time and social conditions influenced their development. Their development isn't purely technical, there are social requirements which they need in order to exist. Out of context from those social conditions the implementation of these things is tone deaf and arbitrary. There's no point in having a car in an agrarian village with no elder, no council, no social structure. Those social tools are just as important as the technical ones.

I'm going to write a suggestion and link it here separately:

https://old.reddit.com/r/OneLifeSuggest … omadicism/

Last edited by NoTruePunk (2019-07-30 22:32:00)

jasonrohrer · 2019-07-31 00:00:46

This game takes place in the future.

NoTruePunk · 2019-07-31 02:33:47

jasonrohrer wrote:

This game takes place in the future.

okay

Morti · 2019-07-31 03:09:43

SpiritBomb32 · 2019-07-31 04:38:54

jasonrohrer wrote:

This game takes place in the future.

Deep lore

BladeWoods · 2019-07-31 05:10:14

The game isn't a historical simulator. It's apparently about future people.

Jason has mentioned before that it's about modern people with knowledge of modern civ rebuilding it, so for example they don't need to waste time in the stone, bronze, or iron age before they figure out how to make steel. They already know.

Saolin · 2019-07-31 16:48:55

Morti wrote:

https://i.imgur.com/aqYIRqN.jpg

I had to try so hard not to lol at work.

What is that expression again..? Oh yes, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Aptly described Morti.

What a shame.

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2019-07-30 22:27:54

The premise of the progression arc is wrong

#2 2019-07-31 00:00:46

Re: The premise of the progression arc is wrong

#3 2019-07-31 02:33:47

Re: The premise of the progression arc is wrong

#4 2019-07-31 03:09:43

Re: The premise of the progression arc is wrong

#5 2019-07-31 04:38:54

Re: The premise of the progression arc is wrong

#6 2019-07-31 05:10:14

Re: The premise of the progression arc is wrong

#7 2019-07-31 16:48:55

Re: The premise of the progression arc is wrong

Board footer