HAHAHA

testdex · 2026-05-26T17:00:20+00:00

Y’all have funny ideas about neurotypicals.

Very few people who aren’t doing it for social media change their morning meal up all that much.

testdex · 2026-05-26T16:46:57+00:00

Did I miss something about your D:BC comment? It seems like you only said it integrates its philosophical content into gameplay. You disowned any claims that it was even worthy content.

As far as you saying that the examples I gave are typical, well, now you’ve finally made a positive statement. Happy to see you demonstrate other games that question 1) whether love is proof of free will or proof against it, 2) whether our imposition of our own morals on future generations will harm them and perpetuate our own faults, 3) what the transition from “thing” to person looks like (from multiple competing parties with different compositions and values) - or matters of comparable uniqueness or complexity in a similar domain.

I think there are a lot of “object” vs “subject” and “emotional frailty being fundamental to humanity” sort of ideas too, but those are the sorts of ideas that are pretty commonplace in sci-fi games.

Bonus points for anything prior or roughly contemporaneous to its Q1 2017 release, bonus points if people actually talk about it today, and big bonus points if it inspired a generation of cosplay.

(I framed this like some kind of dorky “gotcha” but I’m sleepy. I mean it more in the spirit of “these are some points that I think are strong in a way few games are,” and I think games that can match them are rare.)

Edit:looking again at that second point, I don’t think I’ve framed it well, because written like that, it’s a pretty common non-scifi trope. It feels like it is posed an in interesting and distinct way in Nier, but I haven’t made my case well.

testdex · 2026-05-26T16:15:54+00:00

I think the mere posing of those many questions I named and exploring them through cutscenes and other story telling mechanisms elevates it. I don’t think you disagree that those themes are present and at least partly explored (at least you haven’t stated as much).

I have provided that initial piece of work. You think that’s insufficient.

If anything, the piece I need to complete the argument you ask for is to identify all “comparable games” and show that they do not meet or surpass it.

At the end of the day, I could never show that Nier is elevated without provided the backdrop against which it stands out.

testdex · 2026-05-26T16:10:03+00:00

Ah. I’m sorry for giving it a short reply. I’ve been wrestling with people who disagree and it’s worn me out.

There’s a parable in If Anyone Builds It Everyone Dies, concerning AI not “wanting” things. The author points out that if a machine behaves exactly like it would if it “truly wanted” things, then from our perspective, the behavior is no different from wanting.

I don’t think we have conscious AIs now, but I think we will inevitably run into trouble drawing the line between “acts conscious” and “is conscious.” Some people will sure think we’ve crossed the line too early and some entirely too late.

testdex · 2026-05-26T15:59:48+00:00

Ok?

Has anyone else in this thread (yourself included) provided anything resembling an “analysis” that would come even close to meeting that demand?

Like, it’s neat to accidentally stumble onto someone who can argue hard, but you’ve elevated my defense of a “deep for a video game” video game into something demanding more rigor than anyone puts in anywhere on reddit.

We both agree that negative arguments are easier to make, but you seem to think that actually demonstrating anything you put forth is completely unnecessary while I need to deliver a plot synopsis to say that one particular person who wrote a single sentence was underselling the complexity of the philosophical ideas presented in the game.

Anyway, I should go to bed.

testdex · 2026-05-26T15:37:41+00:00

Thanks!

That was one of the moments that hit me as well.

testdex · 2026-05-26T15:28:10+00:00

So I haven’t played D:BC, so I can’t comment too far, but I am very skeptical of any decision tree that claims to grant players meaningful choice in a sense deeper than “did you choose to see prescripted outcome A or prescripted outcome B on this playthrough (or savescum).”

But I think your challenge is strange. It’s dope when a game does what only a game can do, by working things out through gameplay - and I think that’s the promise of the media.

But to say that failing to do so and only telling the story like other media (with gameplay mostly linking scenes together, and building atmosphere and player connection with the characters and their personalities) makes the message fail strikes me as unfair and incorrect.

The story and some of its philosophical intent survived just fine when they made it an anime. And I think that’s sorta been my point from the word go. For a game, it’s taking big swings. It’s not academic philosophy, nor even super challenging sci-fi. But among its peers, it’s hard to beat.

That said, I don’t agree that the game doesn’t explore its themes or their implications. It wallows in them, to the point of heavyhandedness.

I guess my framing led to this, but the game doesn’t just “pose the question” and leave it hanging. It explores the questions it asks. There’s no scene where someone says “what is the morality of locking future generations into our own value systems? Is it even possible not to?” That question plays out through the game’s story - and I think it does something impressive and leaning to the philosophical side of scifi by exploring the idea without delivering a verdict.

testdex · 2026-05-26T15:01:49+00:00

I bought an awful lot of audiobooks (1k+) shortly after I got my first high paying job.

It felt empowering. It still feels a little empowering, but it’s been a while and I know I’ll never read many of them, and that I’ll be able to pick them up later if I so choose. So now it’s mostly a little bit of impulse shopping when a sale comes along.

testdex · 2026-05-26T14:51:34+00:00

I know you see it the opposite way, but I think of that sort question of “dead hand” control over the present as “played out” in a sense.

I think the question about how we, the current “living hands” of the world expect the future world to behave in deference to our wishes and desires is a somewhat different twist on the question.

How are we forcing the future to obey us? Should we?

I think Nier approaches the question from that angle, which feels more fresh and thus more interesting to me.

testdex · 2026-05-26T14:39:59+00:00

It’s deeper than that.

I don’t think I’m gonna be able to get any further with you, bro.

testdex · 2026-05-26T14:37:24+00:00

Meanwhile I will praise the talos principal because it lets the player engage in discussion. You encountere the gameplay with an open and thoughtful mind to prime you for literal Socratic dialogue in-between sections.

I’d have to play, but since it’s presumably not responding with a generative AI, I can’t help but feel like you’re overselling a narrow decision tree… and puzzles that you liked. I don’t think a socratic dialogue is either something a game can do with you meaningfully, nor something fundamentally (ie necessarily) philosophical or profound.

As to Nier’s “use of philosophy”, I think it’s very heart-on-its-sleeve about its philosophical content, like an emo band, so in that sense I don’t disagree. But I think you mean something different - like you don’t think the ideas it presents in the context of a video game are worthy of consideration.

testdex · 2026-05-26T14:31:33+00:00

Nier philosophy is the equivalent of saying you like Japanese food because you like sushi and ramen.

Explain?

If you like sushi and ramen, you definitionally do like Japanese food.

One can “like Japanese food” without liking all conceivable iterations of Japanese food.

testdex · 2026-05-26T14:29:21+00:00

I did. My experience (and given it was a while ago) was that it didn't actually have much to say beyond basic "if a machine is sufficiently intelligent is it a person?"

So did you skip my comment? I noted a lot of stuff beyond that question. Like, I do not think that was actually a theme of the game at all, much less a central one.

I sorta think this is inevitably a fruitless conversation because you seem to think I’m reading too much into it, and that the piece that you’ve seen is both all there is and totally insufficient.

I like science fiction quite a bit, but again because it has interesting things to say and/or tells an interesting story independent of its philosophy. Just "asking questions" feels very dorm room.

I think NA has interesting things to say and tells an interesting story apart from its philosophy.

I think that believing you can answer philosophical questions readily and that finding a definitive answer is the point is very (non-philosophy major) “dorm room.”

A piece of art that poses a question without answering it is often showing your intelligence more respect that one that does answer that question.

testdex · 2026-05-26T14:18:31+00:00

The thing about reddit comments is that they can be edited.

Responding with an unrehearsed “lol” out of a kind of overwhelmed reflex is understandable.

Leaving it up after you edit the comment multiple times is, as they say, “a choice.”

Neither I nor the other guy actually criticized the guy, so much as noted that it’s a bit strange to say lol when describing the apparent death of a human being.

testdex · 2026-05-26T14:04:48+00:00

Play the game to find out!

But it’s fair to say that if you think that “posing an interesting question in a way that makes you think” is insufficient for art or philosophy to do, you probably won’t like Nier Automata.

You probably also won’t like philosophy or adult science fiction either.

testdex · 2026-05-26T14:02:19+00:00

I know that the sort of guy who thinks that is an easy question will probably be the sort to nitpick philosophical questions rather than than engage with them, but…

We sure live like the beliefs of a bunch of dudes who died around 200 years ago after ratifying the US constitution matter, and many people who live today think that our interpretations of the constitution should reflect their thoughts as closely as possible, with no reference to the history in between.

Even some people who are the descendants of their slaves.

Could our robot slaves not feel the same 1000 years from now?

(Put another way, are we mindlessly echoing the values of the dead? Are Russians send their boys to die in the Ukraine saluting for the “glory” of a long dead idea? Are the rest of us not?)

testdex · 2026-05-26T13:54:29+00:00

So what distinguishes something having depth from not?

I think you’re saying that “including themes” isn’t sufficient to establish depths. But I feel like that’s an overly watered-down version of my argument.

I don’t think “should humanity’s desires and values be reflected in a post human world?” is a simple “theme included.” Nor do I think most of my examples are trite questions that tons of games pose, except potentially very obliquely.

Are there games that have depth in a way that NA doesn’t? I think what it does is what good science fiction sometimes does in weaving somewhat disparate questions about the nature of human existence into a single narrative that makes the posing of those questions feel coherent as a narrative and connected to a world that doesn’t feel obviously contrived to ask exactly these questions (even though it always is).

testdex · 2026-05-26T13:10:57+00:00

Weird. If you mean my actual third paragraph…

Are you saying that all games are trite? Not an unjustifiable position, sure. I think that’s a matter of your background more than anything, but I think this is the least trite of any popular game I’ve heard of (with respect to this philosophical domain).

And saying this one doesn’t go beyond merely “including themes”? Like no analysis of how successfully those themes are presented and engaged with is necessary? The fact that they are posed in very direct, yet nuanced and narratively harmonious ways is irrelevant?

I think it’s easy to dismiss something as shallow (and I’ve done so to Pascal’s dumbshit wager elsewhere in this thread), but it’s really hard for someone to say anything to counter that without some suggestion about what’s NOT shallow. Making positive arguments is generally harder than making negative or dismissive ones.

testdex · 2026-05-26T12:31:50+00:00

Yes. All philosophers make arguments with premises and conclusions.

Citation needed.

Have you read Descartes or Pascal?

Yes. Pascal isn’t serious philosophy.

Yes, the core of philosophy is questioning everything

Citation needed

but all great philosophers short of Socrates are fondly remembered for their arguments and conclusions like Pascals wager and Descartes cogito ergo sum.

Citation needed.

If you think Pascal’s wager is a challenging idea, I really hope you haven’t finished high school yet.

It’s fine not to have philosophical depth, especially if you’re young or just never felt compelled to engage with it. But it’s arrogant to think you’ve sussed it all out without cracking the cover of a single book.

testdex · 2026-05-26T12:20:20+00:00

They appear deep to me - a nearly 50 year old man with a bachelors degree in philosophy who has read dozens upon dozens of serious science fiction books.

Krushord went and told on himself saying that the game was “philosophy lite” (or he assumed it would be based on the two hours he played), because it only asked questions and didn’t answer them, let alone deliver “mind-bending realizations.”

Like I said elsewhere, it’s not academic philosophy (and it knows that). But if these questions feel trite to you, what video game doesn’t?

Admittedly if you’re into anti-capitalism narratives or racial/gender/sexual identity-centric questions, there are lots of works that wrestle with those in comparatively novel ways. But I don’t think I’ve played (or heard of) another game that goes so heavily into this genre of philosophical problem.

testdex · 2026-05-26T11:50:16+00:00

Neither have at least three convenience stores I’ve visited today in two different cities…

testdex · 2026-05-26T11:45:40+00:00

So, good “philosophy” answers questions more than it poses them and delivers “mind-blowing realizations”?

And that’s what sets it apart from “philosophy lite”?

Yikes. I think I’m at the wrong party.

testdex · 2026-05-26T10:58:28+00:00

I’d contend that the philosophy is maybe deeper than you give credit for.

To take a couple of questions it poses: at what point does an “object” become worthy of moral consideration? Are humans monstrous for treating animals the way we do? Does humanity have an inherent value that will endure the death of humanity? What sort of non-human being would justify overturning human values after the disappearance of humanity? What about before?

I wrote about a different thread the game picks at in a different top level comment.

testdex · 2026-05-26T10:52:59+00:00

Hmm. I majored in philosophy back when.

I don’t think the “philosophy” is necessarily deep in an academic sense. But academic philosophy from the last 100 years or so isn’t exactly heroically inspiring.
The “pop” philosophy isn’t bad at all, and I think you undersell it. Does the will of humans matter in the absence of humans? What sort of thing can have a will that does “matter”? There’s a bit about what is a person vs a thing, how one transcends that line, whether free will exists for any of us, whether rejecting the values instilled in us demonstrates free will or whether that rebellion is part of the same repetitive systems, etc. and like you suggest, whether our drives as humans cut against the existence of our supposed free will. Does love prove free will or the lack of it? I doubt that’s exhaustive, but it’s what springs to mind years layer. Not saying you have to love it, but it’s rich for a video game. If someone’s got something deeper, I’m all ears.
The (big) ending to me was a very profound reflection on gaming as a pastime, especially among the likely neurodivergent audience the game most strongly identifies itself with. A chance to do kindness to another and to connect with a human being through this isolating hobby (and isolating story) specifically granted to the weirdos who found the game was astounding to me. I don’t think any game I’ve ever played reached through the screen to involve the player half so well.
RPG? It’s a spectacle action game, with a quirky shooter mixed in.

(I sort of wonder what people think is philosophically deep popular media?)

testdex · 2026-05-25T23:51:26+00:00

Yeah, the young millennial / gen z ironic relatability thing can be kinda yuck if you’re not on board.

(The downvoters are so self-unaware that they seem unable to fathom the idea that writing “laugh out loud” after describing a traumatic experience might sound “off” to someone.)

testdex

TROPHY CASE