This article aims to problematize two major paradigms of positive biopolitics in digital games. The study uses biopolitical analysis tools developed within and without game studies, to explore the positive pole of biopolitics, often neglected by critically oriented game studies. The article presents short case studies of simulation strategy games Terra Nil and The Wandering Village that thematically reference positive forms of governance: rebuilding the community, mending the world after catastrophes, and achieving a social, economic, or ecological utopia. Within these games, I searched for representations of positive biopolitics, understood as good community-oriented governance over life. The analyses broaden the understanding of the biopolitical aspects of environmental governmentality in digital games and provide explanations of two modes of realizing the philosophy of care in ecogames.
Abstraction Games. (2021). Surviving Mars [Computer software]. PC: Paradox Interactive.
3.
ApperleyT.ClemensJ. (2016). The biopolitics of gaming: Avatar-player self-reflexivity in assassin’s creed II. In KapellM. W. (Ed.), The play versus story divide in game studies: Critical essays (pp. 110–124). McFarland.
4.
BianchiM. (2017). Inklings and tentacled things: Grasping at kinship through video games. Ecozon@: European Journal of Literature, Culture and Environment, 8(2), 136–150. https://doi.org/10.37536/ECOZONA.2017.8.2.1354
5.
BianchiM. (2020). Ecoplay: The rhetorics of games about nature. In DobrinS. I.MoreyS. (Eds.), Mediating nature. The role of technology in ecological literacy (pp. 15–29). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
6.
ChangA. Y. (2019). Playing nature: Ecology in video games. University of Minnesota Press.
7.
ChristiansenP. (2014). Thanatogaming: Death, videogames, and the biopolitical state. Proceedings of DiGRA 2014: <Verb That Ends in ‘Ing’> the of Game <Plural Noun>, 1–17.
8.
ClarkJ. (2016). Selling with Gaia. Advertising and the natural world. In RustS.MonaniS.CubittS. (Eds.), Ecomedia. Key issues (pp. 176–195). Routledge Earthscan.
9.
CorwinJ. E.GidwaniV. (2021). Repair work as care: On maintaining the planet in the Capitalocene. Antipode. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12791
10.
de WildtL.ApperleyT. H.ClemensJ.FordyceR.MukherjeeS. (2020). (Re-)orienting the video game avatar. Games and Culture, 15(8), 962–981. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412019858890
11.
DorS. (2016). Strategy. In WolfM. J. P.PerronB. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to video game studies (pp. 275–281). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
12.
Dyer-WithefordN.de PeuterG. (2009). Games of empire: Global capitalism and video games. University of Minnesota Press.
13.
EspositoR. (2008). Bios. Biopolitics and philosophy. (Timothy Campbell, Trans). University of Minnesota Press.
14.
EspositoR. (2012). Terms of the political: Community, immunity, biopolitics. (Rhiannon Noel Welch, Trans). Fordham University Press.
15.
EspositoR. (2017). Immunitas: The protection and negation of life. (Zakiya Hanafi, Trans). Polity.
16.
FarcaG. (2019). The concept of utopia in digital games. In BeilB.FreyermuthG. S.SchmidtH. C. (Eds.), Playing utopia: Futures in digital games (pp. 99–148). transcript Verlag.
17.
FarcaG. (2024). Ecology in the postapocalypse: Regenerative play in the metro series and the critical dystopia. In RaessensJ.WerningS.FarcaG.op de BekeL. (Eds.), Ecogames: Playful perspectives on the climate crisis (pp. 241–258). Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.10819591.13
18.
FlanaganM.JakobssonM. (2023). Playing oppression: The legacy of conquest and empire in colonialist board games. The MIT Press.
19.
FlanaganM.NissenbaumH. (2014). Groundwork for values in games. In FlanaganM.NissenbaumH. (Eds.), Values at play in digital games (pp. 3–14). The MIT Press.
20.
FoucaultM. (2011). The courage of truth. (The government of self and others II). Lectures at the College de France 1983–1984. (Graham Burchell, Trans). Palgrave Macmillan.
21.
Free Lives. (2023). Terra Nil [Computer software]. PC: Devolver Digital.
22.
GiddingsS. (2016). Simulation. In WolfM. J. P.PerronB. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to video game studies (pp. 259–266). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
23.
GroysB. (2022). Philosophy of care. Verso.
24.
GualeniS.VellaD. (2020). Virtual existentialism. Meaning and subjectivity in virtual worlds. Springer International Publishing.
25.
HarawayD. (2016). Staying with the trouble. Making kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press.
LassilaE. M. (2022). “Free”-to-play game: Governing the everyday life of digital popular culture. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 87, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2022.102434
31.
LenkevichA. S. (2021). “Are you in your body?!”. The study of biopolitical interface design. Galactica Media: Journal of Media Studies, 3(2), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.46539/gmd.v3i2.160
MedralaK. (2020). By your powers combined: Heroic solutions to climate catastrophes in The Fifth Season, Avengers: Infinity War, And Horizon: Zero Dawn [Theses and Dissertations]. Illinois State University, Illinois, USA. https://doi.org/10.30707/ETD2020.1606247535.292018as
37.
MillsC. (2011). Futures of reproduction: Bioethics and biopolitics. Springer.
MöringS.SchneiderB. (2024). Climate–game–worlds: A media-aesthetic Look at the depiction and function of climate in computer games. In RaessensJ.WerningS.FarcaG.op de BekeL. (Eds.), Ecogames: Playful perspectives on the climate crisis (pp. 201–222). Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.10819591.11
40.
NakamuraL. (2013). Cybertypes: Race, ethnicity, and identity on the Internet. Taylor and Francis.
41.
Navarro-RemesalV. (2019). Pixelated nature: Ecocriticism, animals, moral consideration, and degrowth in videogames. Logos, 26(02), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.12957/logos.2019.46108
42.
op de BekeL.RaessensJ.WerningS. (2024). Ecogames: An introduction. In RaessensJ.WerningS.FarcaG.op de BekeL. (Eds.), Ecogames: Playful perspectives on the climate crisis (pp. 9–70). Amsterdam University Press.
43.
PieroM. (2020). Gaming under biopolitical sovereign power: The chronotope of the abject in the Binding of Isaac. Eludamos. Journal for Computer Game Culture, 11(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.7557/23.6431
44.
ProzorovS. (2019). Democratic biopolitics: Popular sovereignty and the power of life. Edinburgh University Press.
45.
ProzorovS. (2021). Biopolitics after truth: Knowledge, power and democratic life. Edinburgh University Press.
46.
RaessensJ. (2024). Symbiosis, or how to make kin in the Chthulucene. In RaessensJ.WerningS.FarcaG.op de BekeL. (Eds.), Ecogames: Playful perspectives on the climate crisis (pp. 373–394). Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.10819591.20
47.
RubergB.Scully-BlakerR. (2021). Making players care: The ambivalent cultural politics of care and video games. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 24(4), 655–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877920950323
48.
RustS.MonaniS.CubittS. (2016). Introduction: Ecologies of media. In RustS.MonaniS.CubittS. (Eds.), Ecomedia. Key issues (pp. 1–14). Routledge Earthscan.
49.
RutherfordS.BoseP. S. (2013). Biopower and play: Bodies, spaces, and nature in digital games. Aether: The Journal of Media Geography, 12(10), 1–29.
50.
SavaşS. (2022). An analysis of survival games in terms of biopolitics: Frostpunk. 4. BOYUT Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, (20), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.26650/4boyut.2022.001
51.
SchmittC. (2008). Political theology: Four chapters on the concept of sovereignty. (George Schwab, Trans). University of Chicago Press.
52.
ShukinN. (2009). Animal capital: Rendering life in biopolitical times. University of Minnesota Press.
53.
Stray Fawn Studio. (2022). The Wandering Village [Computer software]. PC: Stray Fawn Studio; WhisperGames.
54.
VäliahoP. (2014). Biopolitical screens: Image, power, and the neoliberal brain. The MIT Press.
55.
VineyW. (2014). Waste: A philosophy of things. Bloomsbury Academic.
56.
WoolbrightL.OliveiraT. (2016). Where the wild games are. Ecologies in Latin American video games. In RustS.MonaniS.CubittS. (Eds.), Ecomedia. Key issues (pp. 196–212). Routledge Earthscan.
57.
WuJ. S.LeeJ. J. (2015). Climate change games as tools for education and engagement. Nature Climate Change, 5(5), 413–418. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2566
58.
ZhuF. (2018). Computer gameplay and the aesthetic practices of the self: Game studies and the late work of Michel Foucault. Transactions of the Digital Games Research Association, 3(3), 75–104. https://doi.org/10.26503/todigra.v3i3.79
