Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile Previous Previous Next Next
A little less than a happy high
World domination may not be in the cards
8 comments or Leave a comment
komos From: komos Date: December 12th, 2003 06:58 pm (UTC) (Link)
I think the game has a lot of flaws, least of which being its basis around a model of geographic determinism. Trade is incredibly weak. Computer players' conduct of war is fairly haphazard thanks to an erratic AI.


I think it's interesting that it's possible to be forced to war over strategic resources, but I still find it difficult negotiating what it means to me.
cris From: cris Date: December 12th, 2003 07:32 pm (UTC) (Link)
It's really helpful to separate game theory from morals. It doesn't have to "mean" anything to you aside from a reflection of your ability to recognize the game's ruleset and your ability to formulate a winning strategy based upon that ruleset. I'm guilty of committing a dozen crimes that I would ordinarily find morally reprehensible, but usually so long as I can think of it as a competitive reaction to a game rather than an ethical decision, I'm fine.

(it's, of course, when you start applying one moral outlook to the other context that you get in trouble)
komos From: komos Date: December 12th, 2003 08:25 pm (UTC) (Link)
Oh, most often I can make the distinction. But even with that in mind, I still approach most empire builders with the aim of creating societies of which I would be proud to be a part.

Herein lies my escapism. ^_^
8 comments or Leave a comment