It’s a game that constantly gives you overwrought “tough choices” where the two options are either a) fascism or b) you are soft and naive and everyone will die.
That comment is misrepresenting it. Frostpunk is not a sandbox city builder, it is a much more linear game based on the question of “How much of your humanity are you willing to give up to survive?” Picking the fascist options does make the game objectively easier, but the game will effectively tell you that your victory is hollow at the end.
For example: There are 3 people outside your city, asking to be let in. Their limbs are frozen and need to amputated, so they can’t work. They will purely be a drain on your limited food and medical supplies. Many of your people (though not all of them) will be against taking them in too. There is little to no in-game benefit to taking the 3 people in, it makes it more likely that you will run out of food and everyone will die, but the whole point is that you’re supposed to take them in anyway because it’s the right thing to do.
Yes, it is certainly fair to take the reading that the point is to play the game by continually resisting the fascist options that are provided. However, I’m not sure if the “was it worth it” hollow victory screen at the very end forgives the many hours of fascist “hard times make strong men” scenarios that precede it. If anything, the “was it worth it” further underlines the “hardness” of those “hard choices” and therefore does not contest or critique the fascist frame. The fascist would proudly answer “yes” and the game would appear perfectly coherent to them.
It’s not that one needs to take a fascist reading of the game, but to borrow from Stuart Hall, the dominant reading of this game is clearly a fascist one. Yes, an antifascist reading is possible, but that reading is one built through a very careful process of negotiation with the text.
does this mean a principled 4X-er will hate it? Or do you mean it’s linear the way Pixel Dungeon, Civilization, and A Dark Room might (or might not) be called linear?
It’s linear in the sense that you have a sequence of scenarios and the game is pretty much completed afterwards. You don’t have different factions, randomized starting positions or random events to add variety to your campaigns. It’s all pre-determined. Think of it as a story-driven singleplayer game which you play through once or twice and that’s it, rather than a game like SimCity or Civ.
It’s a game that constantly gives you overwrought “tough choices” where the two options are either a) fascism or b) you are soft and naive and everyone will die.
I do not like that.
That comment is misrepresenting it. Frostpunk is not a sandbox city builder, it is a much more linear game based on the question of “How much of your humanity are you willing to give up to survive?” Picking the fascist options does make the game objectively easier, but the game will effectively tell you that your victory is hollow at the end.
For example: There are 3 people outside your city, asking to be let in. Their limbs are frozen and need to amputated, so they can’t work. They will purely be a drain on your limited food and medical supplies. Many of your people (though not all of them) will be against taking them in too. There is little to no in-game benefit to taking the 3 people in, it makes it more likely that you will run out of food and everyone will die, but the whole point is that you’re supposed to take them in anyway because it’s the right thing to do.
Yes, it is certainly fair to take the reading that the point is to play the game by continually resisting the fascist options that are provided. However, I’m not sure if the “was it worth it” hollow victory screen at the very end forgives the many hours of fascist “hard times make strong men” scenarios that precede it. If anything, the “was it worth it” further underlines the “hardness” of those “hard choices” and therefore does not contest or critique the fascist frame. The fascist would proudly answer “yes” and the game would appear perfectly coherent to them.
It’s not that one needs to take a fascist reading of the game, but to borrow from Stuart Hall, the dominant reading of this game is clearly a fascist one. Yes, an antifascist reading is possible, but that reading is one built through a very careful process of negotiation with the text.
does this mean a principled 4X-er will hate it? Or do you mean it’s linear the way Pixel Dungeon, Civilization, and A Dark Room might (or might not) be called linear?
It’s linear in the sense that you have a sequence of scenarios and the game is pretty much completed afterwards. You don’t have different factions, randomized starting positions or random events to add variety to your campaigns. It’s all pre-determined. Think of it as a story-driven singleplayer game which you play through once or twice and that’s it, rather than a game like SimCity or Civ.
It’s poo