So the plan now for this blog is to become a storage space were I post things I find relating to my chosen dissertation topic, and approach what they say and how this is relevant. The first of these is an article from the economist, found here.
The article discusses game theory, and its use in software to attempt to predict the outcomes of many varied situations. The idea behind game theory is to assume that everyone acts in what they consider to be their own best interest, and to combine this information with intelligence on what resources are available to a 'player', to predict the actions they are likely to take, and what effect this will have on others.
Amongst the interesting points raised in this article is the general suggestion that this forecasting software already exists and is in use. It even suggests that "most decision-making advice is political, in the broadest sense of the word". This to me hints that there is an acceptance of a value to the sort of information I hope this game would produce. It also shows that this forecasting software is applicable in many different theaters, it is not limited strictly to the politics of international relations, but has value to a great many different areas. As mentioned in the article "PA Consulting, a British firm, designs bespoke models to helps its clients solve specific problems in areas as diverse as pharmaceuticals, fossil-fuel energy and the production of television shows.". One lesson I believe I can take from this is that in designing the game to be as close to real life as it can, I expect I will find it very easy to neglect certain areas in favour of others. For example, to design the game with as much freedom between players (or player states, one way to make the game more life-like is to organise the players into states, much more on this later) in the field of arms trading would make sense, given the huge preponderance of war games, and games based around conflict. This makes sense in that it is following what is known to be a successful recipe for previous games. However it would be easy to neglect trade in white goods, as I have never heard of a game, let alone a successful one, that revolves around the race to create the best washing machine. What this essentially means is that every compromise I make in making the game less true-to-life in exchange for making it better or more efficient in other ways, degrades the value of the information it will yield, to washing machine-making companies, for example.
One crucial difference between my proposed game, and the game theory software is summed up in the flaw highlighted by "Reinier Van Oosten of Decide... notes that forecasts go astray when people unexpectedly give in to "non-rational emotions" such as hatred, rather than pursuing what is apparently in their best interests.". This difference is the basic use of people to fill the role of people, rather than the game theory assumption that they will follow what they perceive to be in their best interests. This does not solve the problem entirely. There is no reason to believe that people in-game will genuinely feel "non-rational emotions" to the goblin that just shot them, as it is to be supposed (hoped?) that the majority of the user base will be able to differentiate between real life and the game. However the actions of real users in game, it can be argued, will still be more indicative of the actions of people in the real world, than the predictions put forth by the game theory software. This then would have an effect upon the market to which the information produced by the game is valid. It is mentioned in the article that the game theory is especially useful in matters concerning economics, as a person focusing on profit and the acquisition of money is less likely to be waylaid by non-rational emotions. This then suggests that a system based on the input of 'the crowd' will gain some validity through this, increasing its value in many areas, as a result of greater resistance to the difficulty of predicting emotions and their consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment