Re: PBM design and formulae - a fresh start

From: rwallace@cs.tcd.ie (Russell Wallace)

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 14:54:28 +0000

gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews) writes:

>In an effort to take some heat out of this debate I am going to make
>a fresh start on this thread. I am going to spell everything out in
>detail and use some examples to get some specifics.

Good idea.

>My position: games, being simulations of something, should be as
>realistic as possible up to the level of the simulation. Players
>should be told the general rules of play, the scenario etc, but beyond
>that they should only be allowed to learn things about the game and
>how to play etc through the actions of the entity they represent in
>the game. As a corrolary therefore I do not think exact formulas
>should be published. The reasons I take this position are twofold :-

>a) it adds to the realism of the game. In the real world people
>don't know exact equations for things and yet seem to do ok.
>A simulation should therefore capture this imprecision - if it does
>not, then it is not a good simulation.(even the formulas themselves
>are only approximations to the reality!).

Yes, many games are an attempt to provide a partial (Note: partial)
simulation of some aspect of the real world.

Yes, other things equal, they should be made as realistic as possible.

Yes, people use judgement and intuition in the real world, usually,
rather than formulas.

BUT:  Because a game is not reality, you can't use judgement and
intuition from the real world, in the game.  The information is coming
in through different channels, its volume is much less, its format is
different than real world information, and most important, *the thing at
the other end is not the real world*, it's only a computer applying some
formulas.  Suspension of disbelief is all very well, but in my opinion
it is pointless to carry the pretense that one has when playing the game
(that one is dealing with real things, not just some computer code),
into game design.

Note that the case with human-moderated role-playing games is different,
because although you still aren't deailng with the real world, you are
at least dealing with an entity (a human) that has a genuine
understanding of the world, and is not just blindly applying an
algorithm.  There are still some problems with this type of game, but
they are nothing in comparison to what you get if you have an algorithm
instead of the human.  (Hence the widespread detestation of rules
lawyers in human-moderated RPGs, who attempt to replace the human with a
set of rules.)

(What if you could write a game that was based on the computer having a
genuine understanding of the world?  Unfortunately this seems to be an
AI-complete problem.  :-( )

See my reply to the tennis example below, for an illustration in that
case, of why intuition won't work, you have to use formulas, and the
only question is whether you are given a complete understanding of the
formulas, or you must struggle towards it by trial and error.

>b) it makes the "playing field" as level as possible. People who
>are not math or CS majors are not disadvantaged too badly by not
>understanding the formulas. Moreover everyone has the same basic
>learning mechanism, namely the actions of the entity in the game
>that they represent.

Ah, but this is not necessarily the case.  Math and CS majors can use a
different learning mechanism, i.e. the statistical analysis of the
results.  In fact, as David pointed out, the derivation of an
approximate formula from results, is often a much more mathematically
demanding problem than using the exact formula.  So hiding the formulas
in order to reduce the purported advantage of these people, will often
have the reverse effect.

>So if we are to write a good simulation of tennis we should not
>make it equation based, or rather we might have the ball obey
>equations, but the interface with the human would not be through
>equations. We would not ask tell the player - oh the ball is coming
>at you with the following parameters ... what parameters would you
>like to reply with. What we would do instead is say have a small
>picture of the racquet showing its tilt etc (no figures just the
>picture). Through practice the players would get to know how to
>position the picture to hit certain shots.

Ah, but: For a player to use intuition, requires that the information
come in the same form it would in real life, and the output be in the
same form, i.e. it would have to be a VR simulator.  If you can't have
that, and all you get is some numbers on a piece of paper, then the best
way to approach such a game is to attempt to derive the formulas that
the computer is using.

--
"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem"
Russell Wallace, Trinity College, Dublin
rwallace@cs.tcd.ie

References

Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 29 Jun 1993 11:55:07 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Tue, 29 Jun 1993 21:24:09 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Wed, 30 Jun 1993 10:33:28 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Thu, 01 Jul 1993 11:40:27 +0000
PBM design and formulae - a summary
rob@ccc.govt.nz (Rob McNeur)
Mon, 28 Jun 1993 09:53:02 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Mon, 28 Jun 1993 20:30:42 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
rwallace@cs.tcd.ie (Russell Wallace)
Wed, 30 Jun 1993 23:25:42 +0000
PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Fri, 02 Jul 1993 12:01:01 +0000

Referenced By

Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Tue, 29 Jun 1993 11:55:07 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Tue, 29 Jun 1993 21:24:09 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Wed, 30 Jun 1993 10:33:28 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Thu, 01 Jul 1993 11:40:27 +0000
PBM design and formulae - a summary
rob@ccc.govt.nz (Rob McNeur)
Mon, 28 Jun 1993 09:53:02 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Mon, 28 Jun 1993 20:30:42 +0000
Re: PBM design and formulae - a summary
rwallace@cs.tcd.ie (Russell Wallace)
Wed, 30 Jun 1993 23:25:42 +0000
PBM design and formulae - a fresh start
gym@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Graham Matthews)
Fri, 02 Jul 1993 12:01:01 +0000