>>57246632

>Propaganda, not the reality of Soviet existence

Dude, even Russians don't deny it.

It's not about whether they deny it, it's whether it appeared in the propaganda, which is all about showing an idealized vision.

>Optimistic as hell.
Only in the 50s and early 60s. Gee, guess how space exploration was portrayed in that period in the West!
>The cosmonauts is the best of humanity can offer - physically and mentally.
Objectively true to this very day, regardless of nationality.
>Alien creatures and worlds are weird.
If it's written before mid 60s, then they also have functional communism, the "true" one. After that period, the main focus of "first contact" is inability to communicate due to, well, being "too alien" to even grasp. Think Lovecraft, but without insanity caused by this, just baffing.
>Clunky tech can withstand everything.
Pick one. If the tech can withstand everything, it's also aesthetically pleasing. If it's clunky, then it's the efect of being operational for decades/centuries and simply showing the wear and repairs.

The first part never ever happend, the second part stopped showing up by the start of Brezhnev era.

Also never happens

(You)

... and that relates to Soviet sci-fi... how?
Also, Holodomor happend in 30s. The implosion of Soviet sci-fi happend by mid-50s. I'll give you a clue that Stalin died in '53. What that could possible mean?

(You)

No, he's not saying that the famines were american propaganda. He's saying that he's talking about the aesthetic that Russian propaganda would produce, not the reality of what was going on in Russia at the time.

The Soviet ideology, and especially its reflection in sci-fi, has greatly changed over the course of its existence, so you'll need to narrow down.
Talking about Stalin era in particular, it'd be near-future sci-fi with Soviet miracle tech that evil capitalists try to steal or sabotage. No cosmonauts though, Gagarin did his flight long after Stalin's death.

>true to this very day

I don't know how you accomplish this, but I will personally give you the internet if you make this fully compatible with Myfarog, so we can finally fulfill hunmanity's longstanding dream of seeing a Soviet cosmonaut fighting a Nazi viking

I never ran it, but I did extensively plan a game where the players were neo-soviet explorers from the future in a world where the cold war went hot and the soviets (somehow) won.

They would be in command of a new lunar mission using ramshackle gear and outdated systems, only to discover a secret long-lost NASA base with the genetically dicked-up decendants of the crew stalking it.

Like S.T.A.L.K.E.R meets Dead Space 1

Everyone starves to death.

>BATTLE OF THE IDEALIZED NATIONALIST DELUSIONS
>The only winner is the Jews

Also, just so this doesn't (fully) count as spam: you might want to check out this: drivethrurpg.com/product/199932/Red-Planet-o-A-World-of-Adventure-for-Fate-Core?src=newest

It's literally what you're talking about. A science fiction setting inspired by Soviet propaganda. Featuring an advanced, communist workers' utopia on Mars, evil capitalist infiltrators for them to fight against, and weird ass aliens from the 2nd dimension. All in glorious retro-futuristic "rockets and rayguns red", to the sound of the Red Alert 3 main menu theme.

Not even him, but how fucking stupid are you? How the FUCK you think people can groom themselves when on orbit? Taking piss without gravity is a feat all by itself and requires a fuckload of equipment and you are surprised that people look like unwashed savages, after being unable to properly wash themselves for few weeks.

Pretty sure that picture on the right is a mugshot, user.

>All this shit
>It's like STALKER!
You didn't read Roadside Picnic, did you? Because the game barely has any relation with it or the film adaptation (which is probably the most under-rated sci-fi EVER produced).
Part of the reason why Zone is so fucking scary in the original is the fact it's completely devoid of life, or at least animals. Assuming those algaes growing on anthennas aren't in fact animals, but that's just a stretch.

Nah, it's just a mugshot of a love-crazed bitch that pulled real-life yandere.

>>BATTLE OF THE IDEALIZED NATIONALIST DELUSIONS
I would unironically love to read this. I'd say to add a Jewish genre fiction element to complete the /pol/ trifecta, but I can't really think of any.

>I'd say to add a Jewish genre fiction
I don't even think that exists in the first place. At least not in the desired context, because all Jewish genre fiction I can come up was written in past 20-15 years and is almost entirely focused on extrapolation of Israel-Palestine issues into future/space. Rest of the world literally doesn't exist in those, that's how narrow is the focus.

Either that, or stories from 19th century depicting goy women as vampires looking to seduce and destroy good Jewish men.

The Jews didn't quite grasp the point of genre fiction. They're better at logical fairytales.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dybbuk

"Jewish" fantasy (as opposed to Israeli fantasy/science fiction) is mostly of the horror variety. This is a culture for which, with a few notable exceptions, everything supernatural is evil and wants to kill them.

>The first part never ever happend
Do you even Kin-Dza-Dza? Or Neznayka on the Moon?

>Be persecuted since fucking forever
>Surprised all they can come up with is horror fiction
But yeah, it's pretty one-note. The Israeli genre fiction is also extremely one-note, as it's all that described

No, its on my list.
My S.T.A.L.K.E.R experience is just me getting brutalised by Call of Pripyat Misery mod.

The idea was to have a small number of unique enemies, as opposed to an undead horde, each with their own twist and area. As I say, it never really went anywhere

>how fucking stupid are you?

You tell me.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Nowak

>Hey look, out of dozens of people send in space, one turned out to be love-stuck!
Wow, that proves the point soooo much.

Then fucking read-up ASAP. You will understand how weird the games were and how hard they've missed the point of the book, only picking general ideas from it and running wild with them.
In other words, try to imagine playing a FPS game based on Sense and Sensibility

Well since this is going to fantasy fiction by definition, anything goes.
I'd make it like Stalker, but in SPAAACEEE

>I'd make it like Stalker, but in SPAAACEEE
Another faggot who never read Roadside Picnic. And the book is what? 200 pages long?

Explain us all how you are going to set in space a story that is about Earth being so meaningless we are animals that just watch the trash left by bunch of aliens that take a break on their journey through space and had a picnic on Earth.
Because that's what it is about. Setting it in space is... just HOW?!

Our entire universe, alternatively the observable "known" universe, is meaningless for [unknown] who has been theorized, if not directly proven, to be jumping around dimensions.
Imagine Roadside Picnic set in the humanity Golden Age of let's say, 1.000.000 DC. Then, [unknown] do exactly the same thing as in the book, but at a cosmic escale.

Protip: Since you're posting anonymously, there's no point in trying to defend your ignorance. You misunderstood that other user and thought Lisa's mugshot photo was a picture of her immediately after returning to Earth, some other anons told you that you were wrong and explained the context of the mugshot, and now you have the opportunity to fade back into anonymity and not spend any more time getting upset that people showed you that you were wrong.

Actually, MyFARoG may not be a bad inspiration to look to. If you've actually read the book, you'd notice that its writing is characterized by a certain (dare I say, very charming) "innocence", a sort of charming naivete that creates the impression that the writer is genuinely writing what came to them as a "fantasy" setting. Which, as it just so happens, is a laughably idealized version of ancient Scandinavia inhabited by perfect Nordic demigods who (as the book makes sure to mention about three times a page) are universally brave, honorable, healthy, beautiful and intelligent, especially compared to DEGENERATE MODERN MEN (and remind you every textbox that if you've heard anything else about the ancient Scandinavians, it's propaganda!), due to HEALTHY NATURAL LIVING. And whose perfect way of life, free from the corruptions of Christianity and toilet paper, is now being threatened by the subhuman and predatory darkskins led by an insane, evil "Masshiah" whose symbol is a fish.

Basically, imagine that you're the most starry eyed, idealistic young Communist science fiction affectionado and you're writing without a shred of irony about what you think is great fantasy (that is, science fiction, since an idealized Communist youth is a forward thinking, scientific atheist, not some superstitious peasant!).

Guided by the principles of Communism (in its purest, Marxist form, logistically enabled by conveniently vague but "advanced" productive technologies), humanity has spread across the galaxy. Nobody lacks for anything, for everyone has free access to the miraculous, technological means of production, and everyone is moral, healthy, and considerate, free in both body and mind, constantly occupied with creation and self-improvement due to their overwhelming drive rather than any need.

(cont.)

But alas, their perfect existence is constantly under threat by the powers of CAPITALISM, which seeks to enslave all minds, and reduce mankind into economic assets whose best qualities are subjugated for the benefit of few! (if you've ever actually read Marx, you'll realize the sheer irony of what trying to force Communism on people always results in). Thought most Capitalists are, thankfully, innocent and merely misguided (and will no doubt flock to the cause of Communism once made aware of its superiority, as mankind is RATIONAL and SCIENTIFIC!), they may be lead by fascist leaders whose anti-revolutionary sentiments are nothing more than a backwards, animal consumptive desire which is beyond aid, and must be FOUGHT AGAINST FOR THE GOOD OF ALL!

etc. etc. etc.

Basically imagine you're writing propaganda, is what I'm saying.

This is one way of doing it. Keying it down to near future and humans only expanding to the solar system and encountering incomprehensible and dangerous alien litter and detritus would be the simplest way of doing stalker, but in SPAAACEEE

I get the feeling that a lot of the posters ITT don't know much about Soviet-era fiction or politics and only know the USSR through the lens of video games.

>After that period, the main focus of "first contact" is inability to communicate due to, well, being "too alien" to even grasp. Think Lovecraft, but without insanity caused by this, just baffing.

I too have read Stellaris

The Paradox Interactive game?

Whoops, I meant Solaris by Lem.

>Play stellaris
>Rename all the new stuff you build with weird socialist names like: "Frontier station Yuri Gagarin"

BAM Space soviets.

>Scandinavia inhabited by perfect Nordic demigods who (as the book makes sure to mention about three times a page) are universally brave, honorable, healthy, beautiful and intelligent, especially compared to DEGENERATE MODERN MEN (and remind you every textbox that if you've heard anything else about the ancient Scandinavians, it's propaganda
To be fair, even anti-nordic propaganda describe them in a good way compared to what the modern "men" is

Soylent grin strikes again

Remember, when you tell people to go back to /pol/ because they're shitposting about identity politics on Veeky Forums, it's exactly the same as condoning shitposting about identity politics on Veeky Forums.

I'm not shitposting though

What identity politics was I condoning?

Soylent Grin was a term invented on Veeky Forums.

Kin-Dza-Dza is not about capitalists.
Sure, there are a few lines that make fun of aliens tricking and lying and scamming their way to the cream of society, but it's not really political.
Aliens are selfish pricks, but it's just because that works for the plot, wouldn't be much of a movie if heroes ended up on a planet of altruists who immediately help them get back to Earth.
Besides, there are incredibly advanced aliens from a different planet, probably commies, and they are holier-than-thou assholes who are way less likeable than the charismatic bastards from the capitalist planet.
Neznayka on the Moon is a children story. It's a fairy tale without fairies, and it has simple black-and-white morality about our good guys and their bad guys. It shouldn't be used as an example of typical Soviet sci-fi work.

How’s that name any weirder than “Frontier Station John Glenn” or something?

>You will never dock your shuttle inside Yulia

why live

>How would Veeky Forums make a science fiction game based on Soviet/Stalinist Russian ideology and propaganda aesthetics?
What we need to do before we can answer this question is ask ourselves what American science fiction is. I think we can see this very well in Stark Trek which often refers to space as "the final frontier". Where does this phrase come from? Well, Alaska was often called the final frontier itself, and early in its history America was almost in its entirety "the frontier". The line between the known and the unknown, between civilization and the great unknown. And what is humanity's duty? To "go where no man has gone before", or to push the 'frontier' from coast to shining golden coast (or edge to creepy unknowable edge). That is an often recurring theme in American fantasy: this drive of exploration, often involving fighting a tyrannical opponent by the forces of freedom. Even in the newest Star Trek shitfest we see the struggle of gauche caviar against the "evil" alt right. The Klingon's desire to remain Klingon and damn it, we're going to eradicate their ethno-state even if it kills us.

Now what would Soviet science fiction push as one of its central themes? By the time the Soviets were around Russia's borders were more or less cemented and there was nothing unknown left to explore. I imagine Soviet sci-fi would place less emphasis on exploring the unknown and more on old enemies and glorification of a global, perhaps even intergalactic, eternal revolution following the principles of teleological history laid out by Marx. It would in many ways be about the bourgeois overthrowing the nobility, and the proletariat overthrowing the bourgeois.
cont.

What I can imagine as a basic storyline for Soviet sci-fi is something like this.
>The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (ie. Earth) comes across a backwards planet ruled by a tyranical nobility and deceptive clergy
>The young, plucky Soviet Man of a protagonist is the captain of a ship and lands on that planet
>He discovers that the masses are oppressed, hungry and treated like shit by an exploitative economic system
>The Soviet Man captain and his crew organize a revolution to overthrow the ruling class
>They present the masses with a proletarian-centric mode of governance
>A golden age of peace and prosperity between humans and this planet emerges
>Soviet Man protagonist captain leaves, only to land on another planet
>Rinse and repeat
Star Trek: to boldly go where Marxist history has preordained.

Man, threads about anything Russian invariably turn into the biggest shitshow.

It really was a recurring theme.
There was a Mowgli-raised-by-aliens story where the aliens could not even be reasonably perceived by the expedition that found the kid.
There was the Courier/Emissary. An advanced alien that appeared human and set moral challenges as conditions for contact.
There's Roadside Picnic of course, where the brightest minds cannot figure what all this shit is FOR.
Other cases of finding alien tech as well, with no hints of actual aliens or what they were like. One interesting story has a team of cosmonauts discover that Phobos and Deimos are ancient spaceships. They almost get killed trying to contact anyone or figure things out. The ships were actually automated in a logical manner but their being alien made the cosmonauts walk on eggshells and miss the obvious - an interesting theme in itself.

Basically, aliens should never be a playable race.

In reality, Soviet sci-fi was a lot more pessimistic and commonly had bad endings. What you just described is the plot of It's Hard to be a God, only it ends badly. The primitive planet and its cutthroat ethics corrupt the noble hero, he degrades to the level of the locals and eventually abandons the planet to wallow in misery. It can be interpreted in many ways, but one common interpretation is the eternal Russian ontological pessimism, proclaiming that humans, by their very nature, suck and will corrupt any beautiful idea you may try to implement. The golden age of Soviet sci-fi starts shortly after the end of Stalinism, so many of the authors knew from their experience or from their parents how the beautiful ideas of communism can be used to create something that is its polar opposite.

There were several such works early in Soviet history. But without a profit motive writers were less likely to reuse formulas directly and tried to write something new.

Now let me give you an outline of an actual Soviet sci-fi story:
>The mainstream of humanity is a stable and prosperous (implied communist) utopia
>It is also completely pacifist and non-violent
>But during the Bad Past various undesirables were exiled to throwaway colonies
>Violent and often barbaric they cannot be easily integrated
>So these clean pacifists have a small cadre of trained agents and killers that spy on the primitives, try to guide and influence them when possible
>One of these is sent to check on a world. Finds a seriously fucked up society. Slavery and lack of culture, subhuman mutants that are allowed nearby to deter (or eat) escapees, and so on
>But their exile spaceship is miraculously still operational. And armed.
>If that ship took off it could ruin everything because no space pilot has the will to fight, even in defense
>He uncovers a secret plot to deliver special space fuel to them, has difficult experiences along the way
>Hero returns to his utopia, wondering whether a utopia that excludes barbarians is moral - and whether pacifists that could be overthrown by a single pack of savages deserve to live

So if you want a caricature of Soviet sci-fi in your game, sure have fun.
But the actual thing was used more to explore complex themes that would have been too uncomfortable (and censored) in a "real life" setting

Star Trek: The Next Generation

Next?

Too American. It's all about diplomancy and understanding rather than shooting anyone who disagrees with your concept of the Greater Good.

>Man, threads about anything Russian invariably turn into the biggest shitshow.

Yeah. I miss the days when we could talk about things like fantasy India without DESIGNATEDDESIGNATED or fantasy Egypt without WEWEWE.

At this point Engine Heart is the only RPG that we can discuss without /pol/ showing up to sperg out about ((((((((whatever)))))))))))))))))))

I don't get the joke.

>Basically, aliens should never be a playable race.
As a matter of fact, they are.
In the final book of the Noon Universe, it is revealed that there exists a way for humans to transcend, becoming "ludens", posthuman beings on entirely different level of reality. The whole thing is kept under wraps, because it is possible only for a tiny fraction of the population, and it would only make the unlucky masses jealous and unhappy. There is nothing humans can gain from ludens, as their knowledge is incomprehensible for a human brain, and there is nothing ludens can gain from humans, as humans are basically cute but dumb animals from their point of view, even former loved ones and friends. In the end, ludens promise to interfere if there is some kind of humanity-ending threat, and fuck off after that.

The Red Alert video games

>and there was nothing unknown left to explore

I must disagree here, Siberia to this day is large part capital W Wilderness

Replace the pastel colours with hideous wallpapers and concrete, make red the primary colour, make klingons into capitalists, romulans into space Japanese, vulcans into space red China. Make all the preaching about the party and glory of the worker, who rose from the ashes of US created nuclear holocaust and crafted a new, brighter world. Picard drinks his tea with a twist of lemon.

Quit your whining, no country is immune to this shit. You can't talk about America without mongrels, you can't talk about France without surrender jokes, you can't talk about Canada without... wait... what was I talking about again?

Eh, that sounds more like North Korean show.

Actual soviet scifi was more subtle (at least the decent ones), propaganda was sometimes tacked on, but the amount varied and was often pretty limited to certain parts of the work.

Like in the film Ikaria (or something like that), where most of the story doesn't revolve around politics, but in the middle of the movie is a segment centering around exploring ancient space ship, that belonged to capitalist escapees. Pretty comical really, with corpses laying over gambling tables, evidence of murder and some nukes laying around to top it off.

>ITT: Dumb burgers high off cold war propaganda tell eastern yuropoors what soviet sci-fi or socialism is

The socialist sci-fi works can generally be split into three categories.

Utopian
About social advancement, progress
& exploring the unknown, the completely alien.

With the utopian works usually you have capitalism as a far gone past era and true communism has been achieved, where overproduction is to such an extent that you don't need to make goods for exchange anymore, there is enough to go around that people can just take things off the shelf and there will still be more in stock. It is usually centered around interaction with alien races, exploration or exploring the horrors of the old (capitalist) world, usually when a stash of nuclear weapons are found etc.

You have your works about social advancement, centered around basically space agents of the galactic soviets trying to progress planets to help their development, guiding them trough their developmental stages. Helping feudal worlds smoothly transition to capitalism, helping capitalist worlds smoothly transition to communism etc, trying to minimize the loss of human life.These works also have heavy social themes as to the morality if this should be done or not, with at one point some aliens becoming aware of what is happening, in a capitalist society, and discarding what the progressors were attempting to do, after which they just left the planet. They have heavy themes usually and deal a lot with human interaction, most of these works were done by the Strugatsky brothers.

Then you have the works that are almost absolutely about exploring the unknown & the abstract, the incomprehensible and horrible things which are possible and out of humanities reach or understanding. Works like Solaris with the living planet, or works like the snail on the cliff's edge, where the aliens or world is so alien there is nothing really to compare it to of the animals we are familiar to. 1/2

That's part of the problem, rather than reason to devolve the discussion further.

or as I mentioned horrors, such as objects or creatures that exist outside of the 3rd dimension which we cannot perceive but influence our world, almost as background radiation which we could never ever be aware of. Then you have Lem tackle the thought of cyborgs infiltrating society, made souly for the gains of some corporation and whether they should have the same rights as man or not if they are capable of thought, reasoning and learning but not emotion, and if they are capable of creating themselves trough factories, with these cyborgs in question being indistinguishable from humans in appearance. But one thing is established: They have self-preservation and material interest, so in that sense they are human. These things are most characteristic of soviet sci-fi.

>most of the story doesn't revolve around politics

Neither does TNG. But at times it's brought up. So all you need to do is make the politics lean towards Soviet ideals, not free liberal democratic ones. That's all.

So Star Trek.

Also
>(if you've ever actually read Marx, you'll realize the sheer irony of what trying to force Communism on people always results in).
You've never read Marx.

I see you guys have only read entry level ussci-fi like ABS or Lem. Is anyone even familiar with Beliaev's transhumanist books like Ariel or Amphibian Man? They would play like superhero campaigns, if anything.

>free liberal democratic ones

Those would actually be more in line with Marx' original ideology than "equality and soup lines for all".

I hate to be the guy who brings this up, but there are a lot of misconceptions people have about Marx' writings, and a lot of them are really, really fundamental ones, too. And because people are so attached to their views on the subject, and because the misconceptions are so essential, they no only completely refuse to admit their existence (even as they, without a shred of irony, refuse to read any of Marx' work since they "already know" they disagree with it), but will accuse anyone who points them out of lying to them.

Marx' vision of communism, whether you like/agree with it or not, was not about equality, work or control. In fact, Marx was *extremely critical" of the kinds of communists who espoused complete equality (naming their approach "crude communism"), arguing that when people obsess over equal portions of everything, they attribute even more unjust value to material things and people's individuality is crushed even more - his very criticisms of capitalism.

In fact, the core of Marx' ideology was not the promotion of equality, but of *freedom*. Marx saw capitalism as a (ironically) a great, grey, grinding gear, crushing down human beings into soulless automata who toil their whole lives among numberless, nameless others, sacrificing joy and personal fulfillment for enough money to come back to work come Sunday and start the process all over again. He wanted to give people freedom, not just from factory owners or the church, but from the psychological bondage of "greed" and "lack", those desperate drives to work, work, work, forever, and want, want, want, always more.

(cont.)

Marx didn't hate capitalism for being unequal. In fact, he didn't hate it at all: he thought it was a step in social evolution, a rational response to the circumstances of the industrial age.

He believed (some would definitely say "naively") that what we think of as the human tendency towards greed is, also, simply an evolutionary response to the threat of "lack". People have always existed in a world were "lack" was a looming danger. It was only natural that they develop an obsession with "having" and "hoarding" (the opposites of "lacking"), and attribute great value to useless luxuries which indicate wealth, the manifestation of "having".

However, he argued that there will come a time (he thought it already did) when technology has progressed to the point that lack would no longer be an issue. If people were to grow up in a society were "lack" was never a concern, not even in theory, and there was never even question of whether they could have a thing they truly wanted, "greed" would cease to serve an evolutionary purpose and disappear. When neither you nor anyone else, a hundred generations back, have ever had to work a day in your life if you didn't want to in order to get something you did, you would be able to truly focus on the pleasure of it rather than on "having".

In Marx' communist future (he never referred to it as a "utopia" - people will still be people, and would still have non-material problems), he imagined a humanity were products weren't just distributed equally by some central power (that would be the opposite of emphasizing individuality and freedom): they would be available for all, always, in any amount.

(cont.)

I mean you're right but you also have to bear in mind cultural Marxism is just a rebranding of cultural Bolshevism - a phrase which the Nazis used as a catch-all term for anything they wanted to demonize and repress. I'm sure you must know this already.

So people that use it, in and of itself a nebulous defined term that therefore cannot be sincerely argued for and against, are not interested in sincere debate.

Why wouldn't anyone just decide to "take everything for themselves"? Because like we said, in such a reality, why would they see a need to? Why feel the urge to hoard anything when you know that it always is and always will be available the next time you actually *want* it?

Why wouldn't people crave extravagant luxuries? Because, again, why would they feel the need to? Those things do nothing but indicate to the world that you're wealthy. "Wealth" would no longer be a concept.

Why would people do any work, rather than lazing around all day? Marx argued that people in a capitalistic mindset have it all backwards: they take it for given that people, as in the bleak machine of capitalism, don't want to work and have to be forced to by the constant threat of "lack" or the petty carrot of "payment". In Marx' vision of the future, any work would be done out of a desire to, because fundamentally Marx was an optimist and believed that all people had a creative, productive potential, and when given the freedom to choose to do anything, including what they like, will inevitably find a useful job that they do. As for the jobs that nobody likes - people will decide among themselves how to handle them (a good example for the type of society he imagined would be a healthy family - nobody wants to do the dishes or take out the garbage, and they don't get paid for it or threatened with being kicked out of the family if they don't - but they do it anyway because they care about each others' well being).

Why wouldn't people just lie around at home doing nothing? Marx believed that, like greed, "laziness" as something desirable was a product of the mentality of creatures who experience lack. When you don't have to work, what appeal is there to not working? It's just boredom. The empty pleasures that pacify the masses in a capitalist world (reality TV, video games, etc.) are sicknesses inherent in the system, not things people would actually like to enjoy.

(cont.)

/pol/ delenda est user. It's just been Poe's Law in action.

More than anything else, Marx was a starry-eyed idealist. The biggest tragedy of his philosophy is that in all the most critical ways, it can almost never survive contact with reality. It can only work in a reality in which it has worked for generations, meaning the transition to such paradaiscial communism is never more appealing than the status quo of an industrialized nation. It is appealing to backwards, failed states, but Marx himself actually MOCKED the idea that places like Russia would see a succesful communist revolution: after all, his ideas depended on the existence of advanced technological infrastructure to take care of everyone's material needs! Of course you can't FORCE people to live in a society that runs on them being nice to each other, etc.

It was an idea that could only exist within itself, and in practice, virtually doomed to not only fail, but fail in the worst, most ironic way possible.

>In Marx' communist future (he never referred to it as a "utopia" - people will still be people, and would still have non-material problems), he imagined a humanity were products weren't just distributed equally by some central power (that would be the opposite of emphasizing individuality and freedom): they would be available for all, always, in any amount.
Well, we're talking about the USSR here, and they explicitly adopted Proudhon's formula "Everyone contributes what he can, receives what he deserves", rather than Marx's more utopian "Everyone contributes what he can, receives what he needs."

>Those would actually be more in line with Marx' original ideology than "equality and soup lines for all".
Not really, considering liberalism (in the French sense, not the fucked up American sense) means freedom from government intervention. Marxist society would be neither free nor liberal as it demands government intervention to the extreme (dictatorship of the proletariat). Unless of course you mean the communist utopia, which would be stateless. That would somewhat be in line with liberalism (after all, Proudhon's declaration that property is theft was merely pushing Rousseau's arguments to the extreme and he ended up arguing for the abolition of the state rather than its chaining), except for the fact that Marx considers the dictatorship of the proletariat a needed step to reach that utopia. The problem is that "to everyone according to their needs, from everyone according to their ability" is a very nice idea, but nobody will operate like that by their very nature. You can just say that human nature is corrupt and drop it at that (like Christianity does, the supposed opiate of the masses) or you can go the Marxist route and try to fit a square peg in a round hole until everything around you collapses. That oh so pleasant Marxist phrase in reality becomes a popular saying among the Russians: I pretend to work, you pretend to pay me.

Liberal economics like the Chicago school assumes that humans are horrible, self-serving creatures and bases its economic policies on this. Marxists see that humans are horrible, self-serving creatures and seek to deny human nature through state-wide social engineering and nation-wide re-education in preparation for the paradise to come, like some fucking suicide cult. The biggest flaw in this is something we already learned from Locke: if men were angels, they wouldn't need governance and if men were governed by angels, governments wouldn't need checks and balances.

A fucking Ukranian game at that.

>The problem is that "to everyone according to their needs, from everyone according to their ability" is a very nice idea, but nobody will operate like that by their very nature.

Mind you, in a game based on the propaganda aesthetics it could work. I mean, Star Trek is pretty heavily based on the idea that humanity has improved it's nature over time so you could do something like that.

>no one talking about /pol/
>HEY GUYS ISNT /POL/ HORRIBLE?
>LETS TALK ABOUT IT!

Classic.

Marx considered a dictatorship of the proletariat a needed step TOWARDS a desirable communist society, not an end goal by itself.

Rocketships, rocketships everywhere.

That's some bestgirl material right there.

...

>make a science fiction game based on Soviet/Stalinist Russian ideology and propaganda aesthetics?
Its space but everyone is super terrified of the dictator in charge. People will inform on their own mother, dissidents or old enemies of the one leading party simply disappear to a space gulag somewhere, or get shot by space NKVD and buried in space Katyn.
Culture and artistic expression is for the glory of the state only and anyone who tries to make art/music/cinema/literature/dance that the ministry of culture doesn't approve of will have no career and be ostracized.
Everything is mass produced and shoddy, the government is incredibly bureaucratic and getting anything done takes a lifetime. Even longer considering the vast distances of space travel.

Enemies of the state and foreign races or aliens are crushed without a thought and subjugated to work as part of the state, albeit as lesser, second grade citizens.
Any disaster is treated as a war and every able man in the area is drafted to help deal with it. Problems are solved by throwing pure manpower at them - robots keep breaking because of the high radiation? great, draft in everyone from the nearby planet - they are now "bio robots".

The state is generally run by a cold and ruthless dictator - he has no friends, holds everyone at arms distance except for his favorite daughter. After his son tried to kill himself with a laser pistol, he was heard saying "can't even shoot straight.". He is an incredibly shrewd and cunning man, all while promoting a friendly uncle persona to the masses.

While technology does leap forward at times, often things aren't done right or things leap too far with adverse repercussions. The hydroponic machines for a new colony somehow don't make it, and due to the long wait for new machines, everyone on the upstart colony starves to death. These kind of catastrophic failures are abundant, but almost always underplayed or kept quiet by the state.

>Those would actually be more in line with Marx' original ideology than "equality and soup lines for all".

But we're not talking about Marx, we're talking about Soviet/Stalinist Russian ideology and propaganda aesthetics.

OP was asking how to do a game based on propagandist aestethics, not the underlying reality. I wonder how long it will have to take until things start being history and stuff liek this can get discussed in peace. I will can never ask Veeky Forums on how to make a sci-fi game based on aestethics of Hitlers Germany without having people losing their goddamn minds

Aren't those just katuysha trucks?

Roughtly 3/4 of Lem's output is like that, not just Solaris.
Unless, of course, we are talking Robot Fables, then it's all over the board, from slapstick comedy to solemn post-apo philosophics

So let me get this straight - you never in your life read or had any contact with Soviet sci-fi, but instead jump into conclusions?
And said conclusions are so far from reality it's not even funny in the way how stupid you sound.