“Looking back at the Chinese translation of the word ‘fighting’ after understanding it will add a layer of irony. You know that, even though it is all a struggle, the struggles of the rich and poor are hardly the same thing.
“The struggles of the rich are in the ethereal cloud. You can only fight if you fly up. If you don’t want to fight, you can lie down and roll. However, no matter how you struggle, you will still be in amongst the clouds…
“However, the struggle of the poor is always sinking into the quagmire, and hard work is just to prevent oneself from falling any deeper. Once they stop struggling, they will be swallowed by the quagmire.
“[3] Why are the characters in the game so lacking in individuality?
“When playing games, everyone would find that the rich are handsome and glamorous while different poor people are in line without stereotypes of such people.
“The style of the game exaggerated the appearance, demeanor, and expression of each character so that they no longer look like the faces of real people.
“This obviously was not in line with the theme of the game because the realism theme wanted to highlight the sense of reality. It must be as real as possible, and the facial features and exaggerated art would weaken this sense of reality.
“On the one hand, it weakened the player’s discomfort; on the other hand, it always allowed players not to indulge in the perspective of the character itself. To look at these issues with a higher dimension and a more detached mentality.
“The facial makeup was the highly condensed image of each character. At the same time, it also symbolizes that the story of Struggle is the highly condensed story of many stories.
“In the game, each face is used to represent a certain type of person, and the game also uses the lives of a rich and a poor person to reflect the lives of the poor and the rich.
“It was the same with publicity. It was obviously an implicit expression full of symbolism.
“[4] Why does the game only have one ending and cannot be changed?
“The rich will be killed no matter how they choose. The poor will fall into a poverty cycle no matter how they choose.
“At the beginning, I thought this is fatalistic thinking, implying that you cannot change your own destiny no matter how hard you worked.
“But I quickly realized that this is clearly wrong.
“The reason is very simple… because the producer of this game, Boss Pei, is not a person who believes in fatalism!
“I have never met Boss Pei myself, but anyone who knows the inside story knows that Boss Pei is different from the protagonist of the rich man in the game. He really started from scratch!
“From ‘The Lonely Desert Road’ to successful games and then industries, we have witnessed the rise of Tengda in the past two years. No matter how hard we worked, we have not been able to find any signs of capital intervention. All signs indicate that Boss Pei is someone who was born in an ordinary working-class who took things one step at a time.
“Boss Pei is someone who changed his life entirely on his own. How is it possible for him to preach about fate?
“It is like a student who studies diligently and took 100 points in every test but tells you that studying every day is useless; would you believe it?
“If you use your brain a little, then you will know that this view is totally unfounded!
“Then why does the game only have one ending and cannot be changed?
“As I said before, the lives of a poor man and a rich man are used to reflect such lives.
“Everyone’s life is different. The difference between people of the similar class is also huge. Once there are multiple endings, it will dilute the thoughts that the game wants to express.
“The game imposed a unique outcome for the poor and the rich. There are two considerations.
“First, like most stories and movies, a single ending can ensure the integrity of the entire story and allow the creator’s ideas to be expressed.
“If you don’t limit the ending, you will not be able to make the beginning and the end echo with each other.
“The kind rich people ended in tragedy and the kind poor people also ended in tragedy. The story will be tenser. If a happy ending is used, the tension of the entire story will be diluted, and the ideas that the creator wanted to express will be going off-track.
“Second, this is a more advanced form of ‘fatalism’. It does not emphasize that people cannot change their own destiny but emphasize that, in this social environment, a certain individual’s choice cannot change the entire class.
“It is possible for the rich to die or enjoy their twilight years, and many of them would enjoy their twilight years. However, the hatred between the classes has been established and the hatred of the poor for the rich is irreversible so ‘kill the rich’ will become an inevitable event—the difference is ‘who killed the rich’ and ‘which rich was killed’.
“The poor may counterattack and become rich, or they may go bankrupt and become beggars. However, the relationship between the rich and poor remains unchanged. Like in a game, if the poor are always exploited by the rich in various ways, then the poor will always be poor. Even with individual exceptions, the perspective of the entire group… will become increasingly unsolvable.
“Therefore, the game deliberately locked the ending, letting us open up various branches in the game over and over again, make different choices, look for two versions of the hidden plot… but in the end, nothing was changed.
“Why can’t we change the ending? The game machine is restricting us.
“And by extension, the poor in the game cannot change his life through struggles because the game mechanics of the entire society restricts him.
“Here, the dimensional wall of the game is broken again. In a certain game rule—no matter how hard you work, you will not become a real winner.
“[5] There is only one clothing brand that repeatedly appeared in the game. What does this mean?
“Many people should have seen the luxury brand, which is that golden ‘LL’ logo. This is the only brand that appeared throughout the game, which was controlled by the protagonist’s father and inherited by the protagonist. It has also appeared on many characters.
“From the perspective of the game, a player’s memory is very limited. You might be confused if there are two brands so the best way is to make only one brand representing luxury goods. The ones without the label are ordinary products. This is the basic idea of game design: Occam’s Razor Law[1] which expresses something in the most concise way.
“But this expression is very magically integrated into all aspects of the game. It is just not a decoration.
“Have you noticed the biggest difference between the rich and the poor version? In the rich version—no matter what you choose, you will only change from one kind of success to another. In the poor version, you have limited choices. You will immediately fall and be ushered faster into the poverty cycle if you made any mistake.
“What is the difference between them? In fact, the hint was given in the game, and it lied in the numbers.
“For the poor, it is a lifetime of long series of numbers because you have to calculate carefully. Once one number is wrong, it will trigger a chain reaction which will cause the entire chain to collapse instantly. All previous efforts would be grounded to zero then.
“Now, look towards the rich. No matter what he chooses—no matter how much money he spent, there will always be more money and resources.
“Therefore, the game mechanism had been controlling the money in the game, constantly ‘setting the struggling poor man back to the right track’, trying to clear his money back to zero, and finally ushering in the only ending.
“Why do poor people continue to spend more money as their income grows? Some people think that it is because many poor people lack financial awareness and are brainwashed by consumerism. However, we must pay attention to the fact that there are many expenditures
in the game that we have no right to choose.
“For example, why did the poor man need to spend one month’s pay to purchase a luxury suit, a belt, and a briefcase? Does he really need these things? Can he really not use the cheaper items?
“Yes, he really needs them.
“Because in the game environment, if he were to wear cheap clothes, he would be outcast by his colleagues and others around him. He will never be able to integrate into that circle.
“That is why so many people want to maintain their ‘face’… because it is just not a matter of face, but a real issue of self-interest.
“That’s right, this is what we know as consumerism.
“And this brand, luxury, is the condensation of consumerism; it is a concrete symbol.
“In the game, both the poor and the rich wear this brand. The only ones who did not wear it were the homeless.
“Once the poor protagonist finds a better job, he must use luxury items, live in better houses, and drive better cars. Because if you don’t do that, the people around you would use malicious or well-intended means to remind you.
“Malicious people will stay away from you, repel you, and prevent you from entering certain circles. Well-meaning people will remind you and tell you why you need these things.
“Therefore, no matter whether you are the protagonist or a player, you have no choice. This is another design that broke walls.
“You are very angry because you obviously made the right choice but are still unable to save money. Mes, the poor protagonist in the game feels the same in the game.
“What’s even more ironic is that the protagonist of the rich never wears luxury. Is that because he is more disciplined? No.
“That is because he is the son of the President of Luxury. He has a private racecourse. So what if he did not wear it? No one will have any doubt if he can afford it or not. It is normal for him to wear it to support his own family brand. Not wearing it would afford him the virtue of simplicity.
“The rules and regulations that bind the poor do not exist for the rich because no matter what the rich choose, it will become a virtue under the blessing of a certain halo effect.
“If you think a little deeper, the rich might not be wearing luxury, but they are using the brand to harvest high profits from the poor indefinitely. The rich desperately advocate consumerism and the quality of luxury goods. It makes you feel like you can have the same life as the rich if you use it. The entire group had formed a consensus that will spontaneously reject the poor who cannot afford it. That in itself creates a cage for the poor where the rules cannot be broken. The rich wishes no matter how they choose.
“It is like playing dice. The poor are fighting with luck while the rich profit no matter how they rolled.
“[6] Does the game really only have two classes?”
“Obviously not.
“I believe many people are trying their best to find the connection between the rich and the poor protagonists. They may even feel that the rich protagonist was killed by the poor protagonist or his son.
“But the game denies this point with all their might. You cannot find any connection between the rich and the poor.
“Why? Because this is not a complete closed loop.
“There is actually a third class in the game which is the ‘homeless’. You will find that it is the link that connects the entire closed loop, and it actually runs through the game and is everywhere.
“In the beginning and the ending of the rich version, those who held the protagonist’s mother hostage and killed the protagonist were the homeless.
“In the beginning and ending of the poor version, the protagonist’s father worked hard to keep the protagonist from becoming a homeless person so the protagonist is grateful to his father; the protagonist struggles for the rest of his life and deceives his son to continue his fight, all so that both him and his children would not become homeless.
“Like my previous analogy, in this game, not only the poor would struggle in the quagmire. The homeless are completely swallowed up at the bottom of the quagmire.
“The poor had been telling us from the beginning that these people at the bottom of the quagmire are dropouts from sh*thole high schools, prisoners in the prison, beggars, and mentally ill people in the subways. A tramp who can only live on the streets for a lifetime.
“Once the poor give up, they will become homeless so they have to struggle in the quagmire. You might not be able to climb up if you struggle, but you will definitely sink if you don’t.
“The faster you give up, the faster you sink.
“Therefore, why did the protagonist say that to his child? Didn’t he know that he was deceived by his father’s lie all his life?
“Perhaps, he has this mentality of chance that his child will be different; maybe he just had to tell this lie.
“Because if he were to tell the child that there was no use in struggling, then his child would also sink deeper down and become a member of the homeless. The protagonist knew exactly how tragic that life would be.
“Therefore, the poor protagonist had no choice but to tell his child to struggle. If you look at the results, such a fight was meaningless because you will not be able to better yourself; but you know that it is meaningful if you were to look at the bottom of the quagmire as it would keep you from sinking at the very least.
“As for the rich?
“The rich protagonist almost died when he was born, but he still did not believe what his father said. He knew poor friends. He worked hard to write a book to help the poor change their destiny.
“But he did not realize that it was not the poor who kidnapped his mother but the homeless. It was not the poor that killed him, it was the homeless. He could make friends with the poor in college, but he would not take another look at the beggars in the subway.
“Therefore, he thinks that the rich and poor can become friends; that is correct. However, he did not realize or understand that the two different classes were actually the rich and the homeless. The poor only managed to pop out of the quagmire; they were the ones that he could see. However, he could not see more people rotting under the quagmire—being so high above.”
“The most ironic thing is that what made the poor homeless is exactly because of the rules of the game set by the rich.
“Therefore, the homeless person said that the rich protagonist is a liar because, in the eyes of the homeless person, this person took everything away from him while advocating for them to struggle.
“And this is something the rich protagonist will never understand.
“[7] In the game, there is only one relationship between the rich and the poor. How many relationships did Boss Pei want to express between the rich and the poor then?
“This is the last question, which is the final content that game makers want to express after combining all the above details.
“In fact, Boss Pei has already stated his stand on this.
“Does everyone remember the movie ‘Tomorrow is Beautiful’? It has a more tragic setting than Struggle.
“It is conceivable that the society in Struggle will become the society in Tomorrow is Beautiful within a few decades.
“In ‘Tomorrow is Beautiful’, there was an Easter egg at the end. Someone threw a gun into the protagonist’s room. The implication is obvious: when social conflicts reach the level as in Tomorrow is Beautiful, the poor would have only one choice.
“And in Struggle, there were no similar choices because the environment they described is different, and the focus to be expressed will be different.
“Violent resistance does not cure all diseases. It is not the best choice in any situation. In the environment of ‘Tomorrow is Beautiful’, this may be an option; but there was no such option in ‘Struggle’.
“Then, is there a third situation?
“There is, in fact, it is in our reality.
“The poor did not have a channel to rise to better lives, but in real
ity, we do.
“In the game, the poor cannot fight consumerism, but we can actually fight it in reality.
“In reality, most people do not actually define a person by their clothing and luxury goods—other than those deeply influenced by consumerism.
“Therefore, solutions that did not exist in games do exist in reality.
“In the game, the poor have no choice but to continuously improve their consumption level. Eventually, an unexpected factor causes a number of errors in a certain link, and everything collapses and returns to zero.
“But in reality, we have a choice. We can reject consumerism, continue to save money, and complete the initial wealth accumulation—change our own destinies through struggle.
“Those with hands and feet… work hard and get rich. You will then get rid of the quagmire.
“No one tells the rich and poor what they should do in the game.
“But in reality, someone is telling us what we should do. The game ‘Struggle’ is a way to break the dimensional wall and tell us what we should do.
“It actually tells us that we should work hard in the real world because our current struggle is meaningful.
“A lot of people complain that we are living in hell because we have not seen the real hell.
“And now, seeing the world in Struggle, we will realize that, in fact, we are already living in heaven.
“This heaven might not be so perfect, but at least we are still filled with hope.
“Many players did not have a good understanding of the plots in the game because the plots do not fit our real life. There would be a distant feeling and feel that the choices of the characters are very weird.
“And this proves that what we think are common things are actually a type of happiness.
“Playing the game ‘Struggle’ makes us realize the happiness of real life and encourages us to cherish the present and work hard. This is the profound meaning of game producers in making this game.
“For all game producers, ‘Struggle’ is a textbook level work because it repeatedly breaks the dimension wall in various ways. It truly expresses the biggest advantage of the game as the ninth art. You are just a bystander in the game while you are a participant.
Losing Money to Be a Tycoon c1-883 Page 416