|
|
|
In further evidence that I am way behind the gaming times, I just started playing The Sims a few weeks ago.
No, that is NOT why I haven't updated the blog in the last week. THAT is because of impending deadlines for submissions to the AoIR conference in Toronto and a chapter I'm preparing for the International Handbook of Virtual Learning Environments. And wedding planning. And a stack of student essays. And little to no progress in the ongoing Compaq laptop "repair" saga. (Latest update: The screen backlight was finally repaired on the third try, but the technicians managed to break one of the screen's hinges during the repair. So I've waited for the last week for a "manager" to call me in order to "resolve the issue". (For those keeping score at home, here's the tally: 8 months of ownership, 6 times sending it in for repairs and 98 days of inoperation and counting.)
ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Ah, that feels better.
At any rate, I'm particularly impressed that the creators of The Sims were able to reduce the human condition to a relatively small number of algorithmically related values: 8 short-term "urge" values, 6 longer term "skill" values, and interpersonal relationship values ranging from negative values to 100. The funny thing is that generally it all works quite well: the game's dynamics are surprisingly engaging. Of course, Maxis has an audience that has been primed to see algorithmic relations as valid determiners of value. And it's not just RPGs that prepare an audience for Sims-style value determinations. Look at Google, which organizes knowledge and culture with algorithms. Look at polling and focus groups, where related numbers affect everything from policymaking to media programming. We're an algorithmic culture.
Maybe that's why The Sims Online hasn't been the success it was hyped up to be. Maybe given the choice, players prefer algorithmic relationships to real ones.
Posted by brandon barr at February 24, 2003 12:40 PM | TrackBack