Since ethics are clearly off the table at this point, why not have the ability to enslave either your own kind or other species to do labor for you, (maybe in the society or industrial phase)

1 Like

I think that slavery will have an effect on your society like more manpower for your army,better building speed,…but the negative side is more revolution and resistance,aggresive behaviors from all of the species you enslaved,…

1 Like

Maybe not just from the species you enslaved, but if they have allies they’ll declare war with you too.

Maybe racism have an effect on slavery,the more racist your society the more slaves from a species you can have,but it also make you and the other sevie hate each other

That would be a really cool concept. Maybe have creatures commit hate crimes out of pure racism.

If the game made a system of behavioral trends in populations (with dynamic prevailing mindsets), then something like this could apply to any form of tribalism, be it genetic, ideological, or just historic.

The logical conclusion is bad blood between organics and synthetics culminating in all-out war. Imagine something that awesome in your playthrough!


Holy shit, that would be awesome

Please change it to holy belgium :slight_smile:

Just to have a game with the possibility so wide that you can ethicaly choose or not what workforce you will focus… Is really awesome!!

Yeah but those are “the peasants”. Nobody on the top cares about them, and the rich don’t think the plebs matter enough to count with the GDP. The only reason they are included is because of the westerners with their “equality”. As long as the slaves don’t revolt, slavery will probably be a rather effective way to boost productivity, though it won’t be great for happiness (unless you don’t count the slaves as part of the population)
//end psychopathic efficiency

I meant care about them for empathic reasons. They do care, since they make them money, not in a “oh no our slaves are too poor, what should we do” kind of way

I think you missed my point: I didn’t mean GDP as in “official definition”, but more as “wealth”.

But… then why does almost all slavery work until they revolt/another country frees them? I feel like if slavery really is as inefficient as you say it is, someone of the many people owning slaves must’ve thought “huh these people are actually creating a net drop…” at some point

You two chill a little bit and please dont double post @GreatEscapegoat i see you replying

Are you a spammer why are you using the same meesages? There is an edit button at the bottom of the message and i’m talking to you @GreatEscapegoat

No, I think it had something to do with the fact that the forum glitched, because of the “It just seems like a very easy way to distinguish it from Spore is if right away, the cellular stage was 3D. Is there a reason this people decided against that?[quote=“Omicron, post:13, topic:245”]
I think you missed my point: I didn’t mean GDP as in “official definition”, but more as “wealth”.
[/quote]” part.
But back to the point:

That what I meant: The lack of ethics is what leads to slavery, so the slaver don’t care about the slaves in an emotional way.

Well… according to this article, slaves have a rate of return of higher than 0%, so they are useful.

Yeah but those are almost never because from “free will”, except for the moments when they decided slaves were people too and that it was a bit of a dick-move to force them to work.

Also, another reason for slavery: The slaves are usually seen as “inferior”, because they are of a different race/religion (except for some cultures, but those cultures usually treated them rather well for a slave), which allows the slavers to exploit them without the general populace complaining.

Boy here goes the never ending agrument that i hope wont get political soon

I didn’t say that though…

The slaver didn’t really care about that though

That doesn’t mean it’s therefore incorrect.


  1. make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource).
  2. make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand.
    Slaves are usually treated both unfair and in a way that gets every (short term) benefit from them.

But all in all, let’s stop arguing about this, since it’s clear that we probably won’t end up convincing one another

Yeah but I always prefer saying that I’m not planning on replying of just ignoring it.
Also; I don’t think the people that will think people like Obi are therefore for slavery because they like complex games (and even if they did, what are they going to do? I feel like a media scandal might even be useful to Thrive in the long run since it’ll allow more people to find the game)

Which is why I’m going to lock this thread. Sorry everybody, but this was a touchy issue from the start even before this argument began.

EDIT: To clarify, we’re not saying slavery will not be a game mechanic, but we’re not happy with where this thread is going, even from a discussion standpoint.