What Big Brother Teaches Us About Game Design

Posted by simoniker on Monday September 29, 2003 @11:56PM from the act-like-chicken-george dept.

Thanks to Skotos.net for their article discussing why the TV show Big Brother 4 is an example of good game design, and what we can learn from it. It's pointed out that "a group of n/2 (rounded down) + 1 people can dominate the game", if well-organized, but "the producers of Big Brother have made changes which dramatically reduce the power of a majority", including the ability to veto potential evictees. But it's argued the jury of previously evicted players voting on the final two contestants means "...if you backstab someone or betray them, even if it gets you further in the game, it could prevent you from winning." Is there a perfect strategy for winning Big Brother, and if not, is the concept of "unworthy winners" dissatisfying?

1 of 34 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:Mod me down, but.... by thinlineofsanity · 2003-09-30 02:06 · Score: 3, Insightful

....the fact that these stories about obscure game design theories usually end up with less than a dozen posts ought to tell the editors something. Nobody cares but the editors. There are far better things to cover. Do so, please.
Actually, I'm a lot more interested in this type of story, than those dealing with 'fantastic news about New Game X, or Evil Company Y'. The number of responses may not be overly high, because it's not considered "sensational", but that really doesn't bother me. It's a useful bit of info to me, anyway, and that's why I read games./. Post numbers don't necessarily determine the quality of an entry.
-T