| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Iain" |
| Date: |
04 Apr 2005 11:01:03 AM |
| Object: |
Sid Meier |
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion and
the likes?
~Iain
.
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
04 Apr 2005 02:09:18 PM |
|
|
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1112612463.277361.152990
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion and
the likes?
"Black and White" is sorta kinda like that.
And there was another, older one, it's been discussed here but I can't
remember the title...
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
04 Apr 2005 03:45:47 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1112612463.277361.152990
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy
game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion
and
the likes?
"Black and White" is sorta kinda like that.
And there was another, older one, it's been discussed here but I
can't
remember the title...
"Emperor of the Fading Suns" (SegaSoft, 1997) did some
things with religion, but I never played it long enough
to figure those bits out all that well. It's a game of
a future dominated by a dark-ages style nobility/mother
church power structure, and gaining the imperial
throne will probably involve some pandering to the mother
church - but give them too much power and they'll take
over. Some of the technology research I saw in the game
involved religious rites and fanatacism.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
04 Apr 2005 04:03:36 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1112629547.307943.137470@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1112612463.277361.152990
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy
game based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of
religion and the likes?
"Black and White" is sorta kinda like that.
And there was another, older one, it's been discussed here but I
can't remember the title...
"Emperor of the Fading Suns" (SegaSoft, 1997) did some
things with religion, but I never played it long enough
to figure those bits out all that well. It's a game of
a future dominated by a dark-ages style nobility/mother
church power structure, and gaining the imperial
throne will probably involve some pandering to the mother
church - but give them too much power and they'll take
over. Some of the technology research I saw in the game
involved religious rites and fanatacism.
There's a little of that in Medieval: Total War too. It's mostly a war
game with medieval armies. You can build churches and shrines and train
priests and Inquisitors, and the Pope can call for Crusades against
infidels and heretics. You can get excommunicated too if you attack the
Pope or don't obey his commands.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeremy Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
05 Apr 2005 11:45:49 PM |
|
|
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
--
Jeremy Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 09:11:46 AM |
|
|
Jeremy Martin wrote:
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy
game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion
and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
Any sources?
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeremy Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 01:08:19 PM |
|
|
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
Jeremy Martin wrote:
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy
game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion
and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
Any sources?
Any preview for the game will mention it. Check out the entry on
GameRankings for a good list.
--
Jeremy Martin
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 09:01:43 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:45:49 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and said:
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
*Gasp!*
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 17 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, Krzysztof Penderecki, and Geirr Tveitt are my Gods.
Head of EAC Denial Department and Madly Insane Scientist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeremy Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 11:12:02 PM |
|
|
(Daniel Kolle <Daniel.Kolle@gmail.com>):
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:45:49 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and said:
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
*Gasp!*
I'm actually liking the idea, from what I've heard of it.
--
Jeremy Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
07 Apr 2005 01:18:56 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:12:02 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and wrote:
(Daniel Kolle <Daniel.Kolle@gmail.com>):
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:45:49 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and said:
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
*Gasp!*
I'm actually liking the idea, from what I've heard of it.
No, I meant *gasp!* as in, "Holy hell (if it were to exist, which it
does not), he is back!"
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 17 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, Krzysztof Penderecki, and Geirr Tveitt are my Gods.
Head of EAC Denial Department and Madly Insane Scientist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeremy Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
07 Apr 2005 03:18:33 AM |
|
|
(Daniel Kolle <Daniel.Kolle@gmail.com>):
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:12:02 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and wrote:
(Daniel Kolle <Daniel.Kolle@gmail.com>):
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:45:49 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and said:
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
*Gasp!*
I'm actually liking the idea, from what I've heard of it.
No, I meant *gasp!* as in, "Holy hell (if it were to exist, which it
does not), he is back!"
Oh, that. ;)
--
Jeremy Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
07 Apr 2005 02:31:11 PM |
|
|
Jeremy Martin wrote:
(Daniel Kolle <Daniel.Kolle@gmail.com>):
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:12:02 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and wrote:
(Daniel Kolle <Daniel.Kolle@gmail.com>):
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:45:49 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and said:
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing
strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of
religion and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
*Gasp!*
I'm actually liking the idea, from what I've heard of it.
No, I meant *gasp!* as in, "Holy hell (if it were to exist, which it
does not), he is back!"
Oh, that. ;)
Where have you been m'laddo? Your dinner's been on the table for ages.
You've been seeing HER again!
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeremy Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
07 Apr 2005 05:44:34 PM |
|
|
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
Where have you been m'laddo? Your dinner's been on the table for ages.
It was an elaborate plot to cool my food down, actually.
You've been seeing HER again!
Well, that ended when I found out she was the Pope.
--
Jeremy Martin
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
07 Apr 2005 08:20:06 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:12:02 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> wrote:
(Daniel Kolle <Daniel.Kolle@gmail.com>):
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:45:49 -0500, Jeremy Martin
<harhar@pirates-ahoy.com> thought hard and said:
("Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com>):
When are we going to get a civ-style memetic brainwashing strategy game
based on the dynamics of the sociology and psychology of religion and
the likes?
The next Civilization game will incorporate religion, actually.
*Gasp!*
I'm actually liking the idea, from what I've heard of it.
Nothing to say regarding the subject of the thread, actually. Just
wanted to say welcome back, Jeremy. :-)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeremy Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
07 Apr 2005 05:44:57 PM |
|
|
(John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net>):
Nothing to say regarding the subject of the thread, actually. Just
wanted to say welcome back, Jeremy. :-)
Hey, and thanks! :)
--
Jeremy Martin
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 01:17:22 PM |
|
|
I would like to see a game with a dynamic system based on all kinds of
sociology and psychology (basically culture in general) including
religion. The probem with a lot of the games mentioned in this thread
is that the 'cultures' in them are preset and unchangable.
A game where you get to mold the details of a culture and see how it
develops and how it interacts with other cultures would be fantatic.
Something definitely worth my money.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 03:03:16 PM |
|
|
Conspiracy of Doves wrote:
I would like to see a game with a dynamic system based on all kinds of
sociology and psychology (basically culture in general) including
religion. The probem with a lot of the games mentioned in this thread
is that the 'cultures' in them are preset and unchangable.
I would like to see a game where I don't get slaughtered by all the
other on-line players !!
:)
(Fat chance, I know !)
--
Jez, MBA.,
Country Dancing and Advanced Astrology,UBS.
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 03:32:26 PM |
|
|
You know the story about the guy who kept getting killed in online
games because of the lag from his dial-up connection? He finally got
broadband and realized that he just sucked at the game. :P
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 04:55:11 PM |
|
|
Conspiracy of Doves wrote:
You know the story about the guy who kept getting killed in online
games because of the lag from his dial-up connection? He finally got
broadband and realized that he just sucked at the game. :P
Hehe ! That could well have been me !
--
Jez, MBA.,
Country Dancing and Advanced Astrology,UBS.
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Secular Fundamentalist" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
06 Apr 2005 02:24:20 PM |
|
|
The gates of alt.atheism slowly swung open, and there stood
"Conspiracy of Doves" <mark_dp73@yahoo.com>,who intoned thus:
I would like to see a game with a dynamic system based on all kinds of
sociology and psychology (basically culture in general) including
religion. The probem with a lot of the games mentioned in this thread
is that the 'cultures' in them are preset and unchangable.
A game where you get to mold the details of a culture and see how it
develops and how it interacts with other cultures would be fantatic.
Something definitely worth my money.
What's needed is a set of values and a means of quantifying them
(designing the engine is another issue).
To truly reflect how these things work in practice an understanding is
needed of what the factors are, what affects them and how they play
against, or in favour of, each other. To design such a game so that it
fully and accurately reflected real life, you would have to have
enough of an understanding of how society worked to be able to solve
all of its problems! Nobody does, so straight off you need to cut
corners.
Let's identify some social factors that affect belief systems:
Class structure (including the overall discrepancy between wealth and
poverty).
Economic insecurity (personal, not national)
States of war
Recency of conflict
Robustness of cultural identity
Nature of cultural identity
Resource dependency
These are a few of the things that comprise the soil on which ideas
flourish or wither away. The problems are these: how do you render
these characteristics into a set of metrics, and how would a game
player be able to affect these things?
David Silverman F.L.A.H.N.
aa #2208
Mistabit doesn't work in mysterious ways, people just don't pay attention.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
07 Apr 2005 03:14:00 PM |
|
|
Secular Fundamentalist wrote:
The gates of alt.atheism slowly swung open, and there stood
"Conspiracy of Doves" <mark_dp73@yahoo.com>,who intoned thus:
I would like to see a game with a dynamic system based on all kinds
of
sociology and psychology (basically culture in general) including
religion. The probem with a lot of the games mentioned in this
thread
is that the 'cultures' in them are preset and unchangable.
A game where you get to mold the details of a culture and see how it
develops and how it interacts with other cultures would be fantatic.
Something definitely worth my money.
What's needed is a set of values and a means of quantifying them
(designing the engine is another issue).
To truly reflect how these things work in practice an understanding
is
needed of what the factors are, what affects them and how they play
against, or in favour of, each other. To design such a game so that
it
fully and accurately reflected real life, you would have to have
enough of an understanding of how society worked to be able to solve
all of its problems! Nobody does, so straight off you need to cut
corners.
Let's identify some social factors that affect belief systems:
Class structure (including the overall discrepancy between wealth and
poverty).
Economic insecurity (personal, not national)
States of war
Recency of conflict
Robustness of cultural identity
Nature of cultural identity
Resource dependency
These are a few of the things that comprise the soil on which ideas
flourish or wither away. The problems are these: how do you render
these characteristics into a set of metrics, and how would a game
player be able to affect these things?
UUen in historie uuould the Game start?
To help realise such a Game, One must also consider uuhat Sort of
routine Actions are requir'd fro the Player. Must he moue Units around
a Map? UUhat are the main game Uariables?
I and a feuu others once tri'd to make a multiplayer Version of Ciu. It
uuas easier than thou thinketh for there uuas no A.I. to deal with, and
the rest of the programming is just for a feuu formulae and chess-like
engine.
I'd loue to adapt it to a different Notion.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
07 Apr 2005 07:12:39 PM |
|
|
I was actually thinking about something closer to the style of SimCity
than Civilization.
Go here
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi
and you will get a decent idea of what I am talking about. That is sort
of a primitive version of what I am thinking of. Sorry, I should have
posted that link in my first post.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
08 Apr 2005 11:56:12 AM |
|
|
Conspiracy of Doves wrote:
I was actually thinking about something closer to the style of
SimCity
than Civilization.
Go here
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi
and you will get a decent idea of what I am talking about. That is
sort
of a primitive version of what I am thinking of. Sorry, I should have
posted that link in my first post.
I had a quick shot of that. I suppose I might need to play for a while
to understand the dynamics involved.
I never saw a graphical interface, so cannot ken whether it is turn
based or real-time. Do you know?
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
08 Apr 2005 01:49:43 PM |
|
|
Like I said, it's just a primitive version of what I was thinking. With
that, you just set up a style of government, and you deal with issues
that it sends you every day. I was thinking more along the lines of
something realtime where you not only delt with issues that it gives
you, but also initiated events yourself, actively influencing the
culture.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
08 Apr 2005 04:08:52 PM |
|
|
Conspiracy of Doves wrote:
Like I said, it's just a primitive version of what I was thinking.
With
that, you just set up a style of government, and you deal with issues
that it sends you every day. I was thinking more along the lines of
something realtime where you not only delt with issues that it gives
you, but also initiated events yourself, actively influencing the
culture.
Because it's a game, and not merely a simulation, the way it involves
the player is important, therefore I'm already turning my mind to an
interface, and not too soon. A computer simulation alone would merely
have as much value as a single philosophical paragraph in a book.
For the idea to have wings, an interface must be imagined that would
clarify the idea to be built upon. Your idea deals with very abstract
notions but we have not yet an idea about what clear physical bases
those abtractions have. In Simcity you have, I.I.R.C., a budget,
incomes produced by taxation and various designated estates
(residential, business, shopping, etc), all of which can be mapped out
clearly on a screen as the respective buildings, etc.
If our idea involves varying states of war, must the user be able to
play a war game? Don't the intricasies of war distract the user from
your main theme?
None of this is criticism -- just the questions needed to flesh out
your idea.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
08 Apr 2005 06:24:04 PM |
|
|
I am thinking that the culture would be divided into various
subcultures: liberal, conservative, religious, militant, intellectual,
freedom-loving, pacifist, apathetic, ect.. There would also be a
counterculture element. If the culture starts moving in one direction,
a certain low percentage of the populous would move in the opposite
direction.
You would raise, or deal with automatically raised, issues concerning
the social problems, economy, education, sensorship, foreign relations,
how the government works, what rights citizens have, the government's
attitude toward those rights, and other things of that nature. The very
structure of the government would have an effect too. The player could
choose a democracy, a dictatorship, a theocracy, or any of a number of
others, possibly even a combination of two or more, maybe even changing
them mid-game. A good idea would be to not select a predefined
government system, but to break all the systems down into thier
individual elements, what defines them, and let the player modify these
elements at will.
If wars would exist in the game, I think they would be fought
automatically. The player would be more concerned with how the war
effects the populous, although it would be possible to give more
resources to the military. Even this would have an effect on the
people, along with how those extra resources are obtained.
I'm not sure of what kind of interface it would have. If nothing
graphically representational can be thought of, it might just be a
series of menus, charts, diagrams, and dialog boxes, along the lines of
the game Uplink. http://www.uplink.co.uk/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
11 Apr 2005 03:03:33 PM |
|
|
Ok, the response I posted last friday never showed up, so lets see if I
can remember what I said.
The culture would have various subcultures in it: religious,
intellectual, militant, pacifist, apathetic, civil-rights-loving, and
others groups of that nature. There would also be a counterculture
element, if the culture moves in one direction, a certain low
percentage of the population would move in the opposite direction.
The player would decide what kind of government the country would have:
democratic, totalitatian, theocratic, etc. I am thinking that a good
way to do this is instead of selecting a pre-defined type of
government, all the various types could be broken down into thier
defining elements, and the player could modify those elements at will,
perhaps even mid-game.
The user would deal with issues that are raised (or that he raises
himself) involving economy, education, censorship, foreign policy, how
the government works, civil rights, the government's attitude toward
those rights, and other things of that nature. How the player deals
with the issues would define how the culture changes and develops.
I think that if there are going to be wars in the game, then they
should be fought automatically. The player would be more concerned with
the affect of the war on the populous. Although the player would be
able to divert resources to the military; this would also have an
affect on the culture, as would where the resources came from.
I am not sure what kind of interface the game would have. If nothing
graphically representational can be though of, it might just be a
series of menus, charts, and dialog boxes, kind of like the game Uplink
http://www.uplink.co.uk/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
13 Apr 2005 11:26:00 AM |
|
|
Conspiracy of Doves wrote:
Ok, the response I posted last friday never showed up, so lets see if
I
can remember what I said.
Thanks for that -- It did show up on the old Google interface(not the
new beta version). You seemed to have remembered to the letter!
The culture would have various subcultures in it: religious,
intellectual, militant, pacifist, apathetic, civil-rights-loving, and
others groups of that nature. There would also be a counterculture
element, if the culture moves in one direction, a certain low
percentage of the population would move in the opposite direction.
So a population harbours several distinct, mutually exclusive
subcultures.
Moreover, there is polarisation of culture.
I like that. I was thinking along those terms recently. My core idea,
however, was to cast the player in the role of the head of some
identity-based power unit such as a church, but that the dynamics you
mention would nonetheless feature. The biggest merit of this idea is
that it is virgin territory in gaming, and also philosophically
insightful, possibly educational. The controversial bit is that one has
to find oneself behaving villainously to succeed.
I was reading the following essay by George Orwell, and I noticed that
halfway down, there is a list of what could be variables in some sort
of game. ( http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/nationalism.html ) --
"Obession, insability, etc". I also contains what could be a list of
"players".
Imagine, for example, you are playing as the Catholic church, and you
have to take hold of Britain(the culture I understand most for obvious
reasons). You'd be faced with a sort of unconfrontational, private,
unenthiusiastic people who don't get openly passionate about religion
and therefore don't spread it easily. The way in for the player would
be to exploit a scatterbrained lack of intellectual rigour and lack of
the sort of clear social principles that is apparent on the island.
How vague ideas like this would be quantified remains a design
challenge. The subject matter is more ethereal than in SimCity and Civ.
Your idea of various subcultures could provide a nice context for
gameplay. You could, for example, malign various cultures against one
another, like the arbitrary connection in America betwix atheism and
communism.
Your idea in its entirety has the appeal of a questionairre format of
gameplay, but I feel that may make the game too scripted and linear. If
you could combine that notion with a random element, it could merit
implementation.
The player would decide what kind of government the country would
have:
democratic, totalitatian, theocratic, etc. I am thinking that a good
way to do this is instead of selecting a pre-defined type of
government, all the various types could be broken down into thier
defining elements, and the player could modify those elements at
will,
perhaps even mid-game.
The idea at the start of the paragraph is a bit Civ-ish. I like the
latter idea of micro-managing the structure of the government
itself(whether we are playing as a government, as you suggest, or the
likes of a church, as I do)
The user would deal with issues that are raised (or that he raises
himself) involving economy, education, censorship, foreign policy,
how
the government works, civil rights, the government's attitude toward
those rights, and other things of that nature. How the player deals
with the issues would define how the culture changes and develops.
I think that if there are going to be wars in the game, then they
should be fought automatically. The player would be more concerned
with
the affect of the war on the populous. Although the player would be
able to divert resources to the military; this would also have an
affect on the culture, as would where the resources came from.
I am not sure what kind of interface the game would have. If nothing
graphically representational can be though of, it might just be a
series of menus, charts, and dialog boxes, kind of like the game
Uplink
http://www.uplink.co.uk/
I'll take a look at it.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
13 Apr 2005 12:50:19 PM |
|
|
Iain wrote:
So a population harbours several distinct, mutually exclusive
subcultures.
Moreover, there is polarisation of culture.
I wasn't thinking that they would be mutually exclusive. In the real
world, naturally an individual person can belong to more than one
subculture. But of course in the game we are looking at the cumulative
effect, not at individuals.
Some subcultures might work well together and a person could easily be
a member of both, like intellectual and freedom-loving, while others
are almost entirely incompatible in the same person, like pacifist and
militant.
There would be two numbers attached to each of the subcultures, one
would be the number of people in that subculture (the sum of all of
these could very well be greater than the population, since an
individual can be in more than one subculture). The other would be how
strong that subculture is, perhaps what percentage of the 'Ideosphere'
(for lack of a better term) the ideals of that culture take up. For
instance, if two subcultures have approximatly the same number of
people, but the people in one are more vehement in their beliefs, then
that subculture would have a higher percentage.
The biggest merit of this idea is
that it is virgin territory in gaming
Don't they always make the best games? ;)
The controversial bit is that one has
to find oneself behaving villainously to succeed.
Didn't seem to be a problem in KOTOR :)
Imagine, for example, you are playing as the Catholic church, and you
have to take hold of Britain(the culture I understand most for
obvious
reasons). You'd be faced with a sort of unconfrontational, private,
unenthiusiastic people who don't get openly passionate about religion
and therefore don't spread it easily. The way in for the player would
be to exploit a scatterbrained lack of intellectual rigour and lack
of
the sort of clear social principles that is apparent on the island.
I don't see anything wrong with including preset 'scenarios' like that
which the player can select to play through. Games do that all the
time.
Your idea of various subcultures could provide a nice context for
gameplay. You could, for example, malign various cultures against one
another, like the arbitrary connection in America betwix atheism and
communism.
That is a very good and interesting idea that I hadn't even considered.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
13 Apr 2005 03:31:50 PM |
|
|
Conspiracy of Doves wrote:
Iain wrote:
So a population harbours several distinct, mutually exclusive
subcultures.
Moreover, there is polarisation of culture.
I wasn't thinking that they would be mutually exclusive. In the real
world, naturally an individual person can belong to more than one
subculture. But of course in the game we are looking at the
cumulative
effect, not at individuals.
Some subcultures might work well together and a person could easily
be
a member of both, like intellectual and freedom-loving, while others
are almost entirely incompatible in the same person, like pacifist
and
militant.
There would be two numbers attached to each of the subcultures, one
would be the number of people in that subculture (the sum of all of
these could very well be greater than the population, since an
individual can be in more than one subculture). The other would be
how
strong that subculture is, perhaps what percentage of the
'Ideosphere'
(for lack of a better term) the ideals of that culture take up. For
instance, if two subcultures have approximatly the same number of
people, but the people in one are more vehement in their beliefs,
then
that subculture would have a higher percentage.
The best way to implement the above would be to have units representing
people -- in fictional terms, thousands of people, but symbolised as a
single unit, like your population of "a hundred" in Civ -- and each of
them can have a points sytem like in The Sims indicating qualities that
might sometimes be mutually exclusive, and sometimes not. As units they
might then migrate.
People relate to the game better when the most tangible elements of the
game are those that present themselves and form a part of the
interface, so having "people objects" rather than "culture objects"
might be a better idea.
Although cultural identities and mass movements will nonetheless take
on a collective effective emergent role even though not defined
directly by programming.
The biggest merit of this idea is
that it is virgin territory in gaming
Don't they always make the best games? ;)
The controversial bit is that one has
to find oneself behaving villainously to succeed.
Didn't seem to be a problem in KOTOR :)
Imagine, for example, you are playing as the Catholic church, and
you
have to take hold of Britain(the culture I understand most for
obvious
reasons). You'd be faced with a sort of unconfrontational, private,
unenthiusiastic people who don't get openly passionate about
religion
and therefore don't spread it easily. The way in for the player
would
be to exploit a scatterbrained lack of intellectual rigour and lack
of
the sort of clear social principles that is apparent on the island.
I don't see anything wrong with including preset 'scenarios' like
that
which the player can select to play through. Games do that all the
time.
It needn't be scenarios, just different types of culture available to
play with.
Your idea of various subcultures could provide a nice context for
gameplay. You could, for example, malign various cultures against
one
another, like the arbitrary connection in America betwix atheism
and
communism.
That is a very good and interesting idea that I hadn't even
considered.
I like the idea of simulating the Orwellian dynamics I provided the
link for. Actually, talking of Orwellian stuff, here's a really great
idea -- Imagine an editor that allows you to edit doctrine. Imagine you
have a celibacy rating that must be low enough to keep your identity's
population up, but high enough to allow the following notion: "When you
make love you're using up energy ; and afterwards you feel happy and
don't give a damn for anything. They can't bear you to feel like that.
They want you to be bursting with energy all the time. All this
marching up and down and cheering and waving flags is simply sex gone
sour. If you're happy inside yourself, why should you get excited about
Big Brother and the Three-Year Plans and the Two Minutes Hate and all
the rest of their bloody rot?" This is not to say there is such a
concious conspiracy in the minds of modern clergy, but remember that
power units revolving around an identity tend to be moulded in a
Darwinian fashion to the beliefs that prolong them most. The player
could be the adaptor, adapting doctrine to fit the situation. Imagine
another variable that allows the player to keep the people insane
enough to believe 2 + 2 = 5 but intelligent enough to produce military
technology. The thing that would allow the overlap would be Orwell's
"doublethink".
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Sid Meier |
13 Apr 2005 05:19:49 PM |
|
|
Creating an Orwellian society should be an option that is open to the
player, but it shouldn't be the goal of the game. It would be better if
it were open ended, so the player could create anything he wanted; an
orwellian nightmare, a democratic utopia, a corperate dictatorship, a
theocracy, or anything else he can imagine.
I'm almost afraid that a game like this couldn't be done well without
some serious sociology study.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
