Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GreatWyrmGold]

This isn't about video games which exist in a world that works only on barter; those could presumably work like trade in DF's Fortress Mode would. This is about a hypothetical world in which people (for the sake of the argument, let's say humans, although it shouldn't matter) have ascended to roughly our level of technology without developing even the concept of currency.

How would their video games deal with it?

Many real-world games base a surprising amount of their gameplay on advancement by buying gear, or at least have their gameplay determined in part by buying such gear. Pretty much all RPGs and many other games include some kind of in-game currency to buy in-game benefits. How or would this be accomplished in a world where the idea of assigning a numerical value to an item as a price was foreign? Would they make a list of what items are worth each other, and what items are worth more than each other, or something to that effect? Would they have the equivalent of shopkeepers give certain items in exchange for specific other items or quests? Would they simply not have shops or an equivalent? Would something I haven't thought of happen?

[Criptfeind]

I don't think a society like that is possible.

But if you want to imagine a magical world where it did not happen, then apply logic to how video games would handle it:

Video games would invent currency. Since the lack of such a concept would leave such a large void, if the world was magically held back from creating it, then the world started working normally in video games, the concept would just appear in video games.

I think specially it could come about in two ways, actual points that can be spent, and are basically directly modern currency, or they could go the way of that Diablo 2 style game where there are currency items like town portal scrolls that have a specific constant value and take little to no space.

At any rate, the vacuum would collapse.

If the games themselves were also magically held back from that concept though, then they would likely not have shops or exchanges at all.

[Lectorog]

Like Criptfeind said, currency is such a natural thing that I believe it would exist in any video game with an advanced trade system. Disallowing that really narrows things, but I'll try to speculate.


All in-game items could be put on a list. Steel armor would be above iron armor - it's more useful. A meal would be above a piece of bread. But would iron armor be above a meal? Would iron gauntlets be above iron boots, if neither is assigned a numerical value? If values are not assigned, then separate lists must be kept for things that have definite superiority in order. Such a system would require more - or different - player interaction. An individual in the game "knows" what they have, but not what the player wants/needs, as well as their own wants/needs. The most likely thing would be for the individual to define their needs and ask the player what they want in reward, unless a particular reward seems more fitting. This is basically questing as it is currently, but with an increased chance that the player already has the goal in their inventory.

To get armor, the player would have to complete "quests" from assorted individuals around town that have bits of the desired set, complete one big job or trade with someone who has a full set, or do a lot of work for the local smith while still managing to stay fed.

As for food, most people before currency worked all day for a full day of food. That's boring in an RPG. The player's best approach would be to trade loot from monster killing, raids, etc. Finding the right person to sell to would be a bit of a pain - jewelers didn't have much work in such a society, it just doesn't work. Some might only give you a couple of small meals for a gem, because they're short on food and don't have any use for it but further trade; nobles have more to offer, but do they really want to bother adding such a small thing to their collection? Lack of value presents a serious problem here. What's to differentiate that 4cm emerald from the golden spoon? The only solution I have to this is to undifferentiate loot, so to speak. Make all objects the same value and/or define it as units. Again, here value of loot isn't really based on value but the desire of in-game individuals and their current assets. Such a system would then be much more complicated to put in a game than currency-based systems, though entirely possible.


This was kind of rambly, but I think I got my points across. Basically, it's unlikely that this would be in place, but if so it would be a sloppy mess tracking the desires and stocks of every local.

[Max White]

Game makers, especially as far as programming goes, often needs to assign numerical value to things that might not have a corresponding value in real life. Take HP for example, nowhere in medicine does such a thing come up, but it quickly became popular in video games because of the fact that pretty much everything has to be quantised.
As such, it isn't a great leap to assume that a similar system would be implemented in game. Even if the player never got to see the IP (Item points) of any one thing, they would still exist somewhere, most likely.
Otherwise, just play Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup or Spelunky or The Binding Of Issac and don't use any shops, should be exactly what you are thinking of. You can still get hold of most items without having to use a shop. Just use a different procurement system.

[Lectorog]

Otherwise, just play Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup or Spelunky or The Binding Of Issac and don't use any shops, should be exactly what you are thinking of. You can still get hold of most items without having to use a shop. Just use a different procurement system.

I was thinking for more "realistic" games (as much as that term pertains here). Like Oblivion and other open-world RPGs. You could kill bandits and take their armor; but what are the bandits stealing? Would there be bandits to loot without currency? If someone has better gear than you, they're probably going to kill you. I don't think a more direct procurement method would work well for the player.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

urw?

[Max White]

What I would find impressive is video games without written language.
Very early games were nothing but text, looking at you Infocom! I wonder how games would have gone if we only ever had verbal communication.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

it would be hard to develop the math required to make computers possible without written language. that said, depending on how you define computers, nature was able to create computers capable of playing games, and depending on how you define games, nature might also have designed games for those computers to play. eat and drink a minimum amount of certain items in a given time to keep playing, produce the maximum number of offspring during your play time for extra points.

[Hubris Incalculable]

What I would find impressive is video games without written language.
Very early games were nothing but text, looking at you Infocom! I wonder how games would have gone if we only ever had verbal communication.

it would require a completely different standard of computing than we have now. EVERYTHING we do with computers involves, ultimately, the input of text, whether at the coding level or the input level.

A non-written computer would have to have some very interesting ways to do it differently.

anyway, without written language, how would we store up the knowledge of the technology required to make a computer?

[SalmonGod]

I think trade would simply be more pre-determined and written directly into the story.  It would be "I'll give you this thing if you can get me that thing".  If you don't have that thing, then you have to get it or deal with the person who has what you want in some other fashion.  Trade doesn't necessarily have to involve merchant npcs or large selections of stuff. 

Even if it's an open world type game without much pre-written, I can easily imagine the same thing.  You determine what you need, encounter npc who has what you need, and npc tells you what they need in return.  So you decide you want to upgrade from iron armor to steel armor.  Let's say you meet an ex-soldier, a recent deserter who is laying low on his own in the wild for a while.  He's starving and his armor isn't doing him much good.  He needs food and/or survival gear.  He'll give you his armor if you can get him X amount of food and some hunting gear.  Instead of shopping being a very dry meta-interaction, it's now a minor story-driving element, especially if it's recognized that the value of an item is subjective to a character's circumstances rather than tied to a hidden meta-value rating.

[lordcooper]

I don't think we'd have videogames.

[Loud Whispers]

Like Criptfeind said, currency is such a natural thing.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat

[Askot Bokbondeler]

it is. even in bartering systems, currencies occur naturally, people start to hoard small, valuable, non-perishable items that they don't necessary need, so that they can preserve\carry the value of items that cannot be preserved\carried. picture you and your tribe just killed a mammoth and have more meat than you can eat before it rots, you'll probably try and trade it with the first tribe that shows up even if they don't have anything that interests you, hoarding items of equivalent value for later trades. those items might be large and cumbersome when you're travelling from one place to another, so you might also trade them for a number of arrowheads or pretty stones or shells of equivalent value, or any number of small items that might interest anyone that you come across. there you go, you've invented currency... only it was there all along!

[Loud Whispers]

it is. even in bartering systems, currencies occur naturally, people start to hoard small, valuable, non-perishable items that they don't necessary need, so that they can preserve\carry the value of items that cannot be preserved\carried. picture you and your tribe just killed a mammoth and have more meat than you can eat before it rots, you'll probably try and trade it with the first tribe that shows up even if they don't have anything that interests you, hoarding items of equivalent value for later trades. those items might be large and cumbersome when you're travelling from one place to another, so you might also trade them for a number of arrowheads or pretty stones or shells of equivalent value, or any number of small items that might interest anyone that you come across. there you go, you've invented currency... only it was there all along!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire#Economy
Or it just got wiped out by Europeans.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

there's relatively little trading in a centrally planned economy, so there's neither widespread currency nor bartering. your link mentions axe-monies, so there was an established currency in the parts of the empire where it was justified

E:i'm also willing to bet that other commodity monies were also used in other parts of the empire, possibly informally, and we just failed to recognise them as such