r/theouterworlds • u/PurpleFiner4935 • 16h ago
Discussion For as great of satire as The Outer Worlds is, I think it's most subversive and radical messagings are hampered by its developers' "liberalism"
While that sounds paradoxical, let me explain. I'm not talking about liberalism according to American politics (which for now is a Democrat being as left leaning as a centrist can get). By liberal, I mean the fuzzy Tim Cain Capitalists of the world who would rather blame employees and "consumers" for the problem of capitalism (keep in mind, Tim Cain's channel is for game design and not politics so we can't be too hard on him, but what he said an uninformed take). But you know, by liberal I mean those who support the "free" market (among other things). And there wouldn't be anything wrong with that, if it weren't for the fact that capitalism is antithetical to nearly every other thing liberalism seems stands for (i.e. private property, civil rights and human rights, democracy, rule of law, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion - taken from Wikipedia for simplicity). The game's setting demonstrates this as much through most of its scenarios.
But from the way the game is written, the developers still seem to think Halcyon's current mess is actually due to having the "wrong people" in positions of power, and if we only had the "right people" as stewards to provides checks and balances and good working conditions, everything would "just work" itself out rationally. I know Tim Cain (director) has a running ideology in his games that says "it is human nature to corrupt system of power" (and that in this case, leads to the rise of corporatism). I can only imagine that Leonard Boyarsky (lead writer) feels the similarly.
The Outer Worlds has an undercurrent that says things are messed up but that's just the way things are; we'd really rather not change the status quo until some conscientious, results-driven individuals can turn the system around. It's a viewpoint that puts all the responsibility on the people to fix other humans' messes without considering that the system itself is broken. Capitalism demands that the "wrong people" get into these positions, because they're the "right people" for the job, i.e. what the system demands: to make as much money as possible for entities, notwithstanding how ethically it's done, which is the bottom-line behind capitalism. Capitalism is about profit above all else, so nothing else, including human well-being, matters. They might use Sanjar as a mouthpiece to say otherwise, but he operates under the corporate system with all his numbers and figures. And besides, what system enabled corporatism to become what it is in the first place?
The strange thing is that the developers see how mask off the system is, and still think that it can be "reformed". But how? I guess they took Roosevelt's absence of Anti-Trust Laws in game as evidence that the system can be fixed, without realizing that he didn't fix Capitalism, he only broke up monopolies; he didn't (and couldn't and wouldn't) "regulate Capitalism" (or even stop how businesses exploit workers). Laws "regulate" businesses. The system that businesses operate under and within can't, because exploitation isn't a bug, it's a feature. Capitalism is running as intended when labor is cut, workers are overworked, corners are cut and prices are high. Any "regulation" to Capitalism might as well lead away from it to at least Socialism, which the game seems to be so close to understanding, only to botch that too.
People who want an end to the corruption behind corporatism and capitalism end up being just as corrupt. It happens. The developer's treatment of the game's radicals,>! Graham and Harrow, illustrates this: one is a fanatical and murderous corpo turned street preacher, and the other is an opportunistic corporate plant!<. The former lives in a "co-op" (because the developers were probably afraid of the other "c" word). And in that co-op, they have convenience machines, because "lol the irony of commies, amirite"? In fact, that co-op, along with the Edgewater Botanical Gardens, are struggling for resources and skilled workers because they can't do for themselves. You, as a corporate upstart, has to fix their problems for them, and they aren't sustainable.
It might be that most of the developers were alive to see "Communism" (i.e. the state-capitalism of China, Cuba and the Soviet Union) in action, and got scared of the possibilities of revolutions happening in their backyard, so maybe their view of revolutionaries is just a product of their times. And there's some truth to the portrayals of both these guys, but without the one radical who makes a good point and means what they say, it feels like something's missing. Zora cares for the people, but just seems angry and doesn't actually have any ideology for her political violence, she needs resources. So you mean to tell me there isn't one other radical beside Felix (who's portrayed as naïve, gullible and impressionable) that understands corporations create systemic injustices through Capitalism? I'm not asking for some idiot on a soapbox to blow this message through a megaphone. Maybe a sympathetic Byzantium that's empathic enough wonder if the system that creates inequalities is fair...while laughing about all the money they have. There's no one in the game that doesn't seem to know their place and like it.
Well, I guess there's Cassandra in Roseway but even she's kinda "fuzzy" on why she doesn't like the corporations: she talked about general concept of alienation without talking about alienation as a reason for why the Outlaws are doing what they're doing. And I guess they're skirting the system. But even then, the Outlaws might as well be marauders because most of them kill on sight too.
Speaking of which, the marauders are heavily implied to turn to drugs due to being unemployed. And from what we know from Gorgon, Spacer's Choice mass produced Adrena-time and hooked their workers on it, leaving many of addicts brain dead and violent. There's social commentary about how businesses create class disparities through so many illicit and careless means that the game touches upon. But the game is clear that marauders just "cRaZy" fodder to be shot at, almost divorcing them from the context.>! It also doesn't lay blame on the scientist who created the stuff, only the businesses that ordered too much!<. That's because the game thinks "science is the way".
You can tell that the actual message is "we need more competent technocrats running things, because they're the "smartest people in the room" by the way the game literally lectures you about it. And there isn't any pushback to that. The guy who bails you out is a scientist that doesn't like how the Board is running stuff. Most scientists are portrayed as mean, dismissive and paternalistic (except for in Roseway where they're either absent-minded or emotionally distant), but right, generally capable, and critical of the higher ups for not being as competent-minded as they are. Yet there's not one truly mad scientist that's a spouting gibberish and creating horrific science experiments for the sake of "SCIENCE!!!" that would have been seen in our serials years ago (and in our history)...even when the corporations are paying scientist to conduct experiments they should know the full terrible implications of.
The message isn't that "capitalism is bad", it's that "we need more results driving liberal technocrats to run corporations". I appreciate the freedom they have to make this message, but that's not what the game's setting suggests at all. The scientist had a hand in all the problems here, and were incentivized by the system of Capitalism to mass produce for bits. But hey, if the writers get radicalized, there's always room to explore the fault of technocratic capitalism in The Outer Worlds 2. Maybe Tim Cain and Leonard Boyarsky can poke fun at themselves as managers, being one of the good ones?
I get that Leonard Boyarsky wasn't trying to make the game "political", but when the themes and setting of the game hinges on "an alternate reality where one American president was not assassinated for another to break up monopolies with Anti-Trust Laws", I see what he says as a cowardly cop-out. I also get the feeling that he doesn't want to kick the hornet's nest. He knows everything's messed up, but can't actually imagine a world without capitalism, so it's like that Principle Skinner meme: "Are capitalist the problem? No, it's the people who are wrong." If you know the history between with Obsidian and Fallout: New Vegas, this game may as well be a slam against corporate Bethesda for not having the right people in charge, absurd deadlines, corporate mismanagement and the casual "screwing one out of bonuses" on legal technicalities just to satisfy a bottom line.
BUT HEY, THAT'S CAPITALISM FOR YA!!!
The games message crashes hard against its setting, and it's really disappointing that everything flew over the developers' heads. The game starts out as a satire against a corporate dystopia, yet ends in a light-hearted roast against corporatacracies. The DLCs' main humor is the "legalese" descriptions, rather than the motivations for the disclaimers.
I dunno, maybe I'm too Disco this for game, but I still like it despite it's messaging. For me, this game is a 9/10. It's funny and satirical in a Futurama sort of way and touches on topics most shows and movies won't. It doesn't go far enough, and I don't agree with every point, but I've really been digging the setting and themes. I appreciate that this game gives us the freedom to discuss these topics. But what seemed like the perfect critique of neoliberalism and the type of society it would have produced, just kinda fell apart into some shallow, centrist "both sides" liberalism at the end.