Slashdot Mirror
What Big Brother Teaches Us About Game Design
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?
Humm... if NSA really DID put some backdoors in the win source, then it would require them to utilise my ultra supersecret method I call *DELETING THOSE LINES BEFORE INSPECTION* method !
A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
the author concludes that the best player never wins, but someone playing second place does if he does not backstab too much...this is exactly the same in real life ! We slashdotters know many underachievers from high school who ended up richer and happier than us ! Life is unfair, maybe because of that social element which makes people dislike and eventually disadvantage you if you are too good and/or too ruthless. The catch is then that one has to be a very good hypocrite in order to hide that.
Google passes Turing test : see my journal
We've just started seeing Big Brother (US) in the UK for the first time, and the differences are startling.
In the UK game (which is becoming increasingly 'gimmicked'), the housemates are nominated by the other housemates, and the three with the most votes go to a public vote. Generally it's about public perceptions from the outside, and the press (mostly tabloids) tend to pick someone to support. There have been some interesting accusations of 'vote stuffing' in the past.
In the American version, it's closed voting and alliances are encouraged to provide voting blocks. This is a complete change to the UK version, and partially turned me off because of the constant bitching, but it's essentially a high-pressure political environment compared with the slightly more cooperative model of Big Brother UK.
Oddly Draconis
Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
All those pathetic people who'd die for Big Brother belong to modern concentration camps.. like that where the US put those stupid Terrorists..
....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.
Don't believe me? Go back and see what the average number of posts for gaming stories is...
And yes, I know I can prevent game stories from appearing on my page. But I don't want to completely ignore it. There are some topics on games that I might find interesting. Slashdot just hasn't been posting any. Again, usually it's about some obscure design theory that no one but the editors gives a shit about.
Too many game stories. Post response numbers don't lie....
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
:0 wow....
this sig has been discontinued.
Maybe I'm not seeing something, but isn't this already obvious to anyone that graduated the 3rd grade?
Next they'll be telling us that game designers are learning that the more powerful the weapon you have, the better your chances of a frag.
I watched the first "Survivor" with great interest. Thought it was fascinating. Great concept. Lots of fun. Waited with great anticipation for the finale.
And then that psycho Machievellian POS won.
I haven't watched any of the cut-throat reality shows since. I think they're downright evil.
*Morons can go with their ordinary lives watching actors pretending to be morons going with their ordinary lives (paradox abound)
*It is possible to create a show with the lowest production values and still make millions with it just by adding the motto: its entertaining because its real!
*A lot of people can't recognize bad acting and writting when they see it. (bad acting sensing impaired?)
*A significant part of the popullation in the US(and just about everywhere this show is a "hit") is in fact, lets be honest: not very smart.
*The "Big Brother house kit" shall simply contain a set of small cameras easy to hid in your neighbors house. Of course your neighbor should be warned he will be taped, and giving a poor written script (contained in the package) so he can at least try to be entertaining. You also should be prepared when your neighbor gets his "Big Brother house kit." maybe its time to get some lingerie
*You should prepare to be tortured by this show, its millions of clones and iterations which contain such important, thrilling and breath taking scenes such as "people having breakfast", "people using the bathroom", "people sleeping", "people sitting in their asses talking nonsense" and most specially "people you couldnt give a damn about storming about who should be out of your tv set (hint: all of them!)".
Entertainment at its best!
Go ahead MOD my day!
More opinions here
What part of "News for Nerds, stuff that matters." do you not understand? I would think that game design is more nerdier and matters much more than coverage on the latest game titles or the market shares of Nintendo vs Xbox vs PS2, or even console mods.
/. is more than just a forum, it also has "bulletin board" value. Most people cannot possibly scour the net everyday searching for /.-stories, so thats why they come here and dont really care to comment on anything or care about anyone else's comments.
Without game theory, we'd still be playing variations of pong today. And no, the only thing different would be the graphics. (same AI, same rules).
And you can't judge the quality of a story by the number of posts. Maybe a lot of people actually read and understood the material but had nothing to say about it. Certainly, this does not decrease its importance.
Occasionally I'll play a FFA game in Warcraft III... it seems to work something like this. Basically, one player tends to get the biggest army, but loses most of it running over a few players. So when those nearly-dead players say "hey, stab this person in the back", it usually happens. That's why the best way to win at FFA is just to get a big army and sit there until the aforementioned powerful player dies.
Likewise, if you get aggressive in Big Brother/Survivor/any other game, people will perceive you as a threat and take you out before you can dominate the rest of the game.
Or maybe I just need more sleep.
This is my sig. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.
Isn't this what the board game Diplomacy is all about?
Have you ever played Halo? The shotgun is arguably more powerful than the pistol. However, in all but the most confining maps, I'd put my money on the guy with the pistol. You know why? Because a pistol can zoom in and rain down bullets while you're too far away to do shit about it with the shotgun. This is subject too some constraints, ie you can't make one thing too strong or the other too weak, but other than that... Now applying it to Big Brother, it's not about having a majority, merely about fragmenting the opposition. EX: 3 groups of two voting against each other and your group of 3 or 4 (there's always a swing voter) can muster the most votes.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Too bad porn isnt like this. Some of us would be ubbeeeeer elite game programmers O.o
"Fear teh chickens.. do not use teh window, use teh curtain." ~ChickenKillr
I had seen Big Brother the title and I thought "What does network monitoring have to do with game design?" /me goes back to work...