[ExI] simulation as an improvement over reality
msd001 at gmail.com
Fri Dec 24 00:01:08 UTC 2010
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
> As someone who's written and tested games, I can tell you that wouldn't
> be as awesome as that sounds.
> In the case of Pong, either there is a paddle in position to intercept or
> there is not. A crowd-controlled paddle would rarely be in a given, small
> range of position, if there is little time to get it into that position and any
> question about what that position is, even ignoring deliberate griefing.
As someone who's played and complained about games, I can agree with
you. I think the original point was spike's suggestion that gaming
will be the only real frontier after our physical world is
well-in-hand. I was trying to suggest (by simple analogy to
first-video game principles) that crowd-cooperative gaming would begin
to approximate a literal hive-mind. Obviously the payoff from Pong is
insufficient to drive the requisite brain chemistry for very long.
I'm not really sure what keeps millions of Facebook users clicking on
[pet|farm|etc]-ville games. My guess is that the herd mentality can
be understood and exploited in a way that both the players and played
both enjoy. If my Pong example was too basic, then suggest an
environment/design where the gaming concept I was describing could
work. Else perhaps I failed to convey my point at all.
More information about the extropy-chat