User:Remi arnold


 * SPIR608 Political Simulations and Gaming/2011/Sex Slaves
 * Uploading files

Sex Slaves
The game is based on a book called Sex Slaves, and two films Angels of The Sun and Desert of Happiness, all tell stories of girls who are given away by their parents that belive they will have a better life away from their villages. These girls end up being abused and sold as prostitutes to strange men for drugs, money and survivor. All these girls fight for the freedom during the whole saga of the story, which is what the game is about.

The game consist of collecting cards, money and clients to complete the scenario card that tells you exactly what you have to achieve to win the game and win your freedom, die, marry a client or even become a madam. The players have to go around the board and figure out the best strategy to get the cards they need and to go to the right places where they can get more money, more clients, but they need to be careful to the risk level not to be too high, because if it is , even if they have all the cards they cannot win the game.

In the beginning we made the game based on the game monopoly, where they would have to go around the board and role the dice to get their cards, but it was much of a luck game than strategy. After reflecting we decided to make the game based on clue, where the players would have to go around the board to different locations such as nightclub, hotels, shops, brothels and even the streets to collect the cards and money necessary to complete the scenario that are given to the in the start of the game. Also was based on the war on terror game, as you have to go to as many places as possible and we have the ‘ handcuff card’ which prevents the player to play for a whole round, inspired on the evil mask from war on terror.

The games mechanics are Area Movement, Auction/Bidding, Simulation, Point to Point Movement and Role and Move. You have to whole the dice to make your movement from point to point, and it is a simulation of the reality of many young women and children.

The playing-test helped us on seeing that the game did not fill the purpose the teacher asked us, that would be strategy. We then changed the game to something similar to clue and war on terror, although our game for being based on a real situation such a child prostitution, could not be strictly strategic, because the game would have to be played by real personal decisions on how and what you would have to do to win the game. I believe with our changes, it fits for both purposes.

Reflective Analysis Log
Games are art, and treating them as such we have to consider that political games are an alternative form of media. They are as important as radical art was to the Bolsheviks or détournement was to the Guy Debord and the Situationists in educating an individual and influencing their political position. The four games that will be analysed in this essay all have different purposes because they are all political commentary on different events in history and different political models. Monopoly a fact unbeknownst to many is a socialist game, like Machiavelli's The Prince (2005), it is not often received as intended. The game is satirical but unfortunately it is believed to praise capitalism rather than critique the social system. Both the Red Guard and Vietnam 1955 are simulations of political conflict and want the player to empathise with the leaders at the time; to understand what happened, so that these mistakes cannot be made again. Games like these, that are historical reflections of political events, have often been devised to train military and political actors on how to act in real life scenarios. As Bracken and Shubik (2001) state, war games were used to train the American navy. Furthermore the gaming model has been developed to teach strategy and technique and a measure of how successful these games are will be: how strategic they require the player to be and whether the player learned anything. War on Terror is a contemporary game which reflects the controversy between the Western world and the Middle East; this differs greatly from the other games aforementioned because it is not supposed to be realistic and jovial. Nonetheless it is making two comments the first is on the importance of trade and what that trade funds, in some cases terrorism; the Al Qaeda raised funds from Middle Eastern states (Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011a). The second is on the relationship between security and insecurity, these two work together as antagonistic pairs. Countries that feel insecure based on a perceived threat will pay in order to feel secure. A country cannot feel secure without constantly searching for impending threats. The Cold War is a poignant example of the insecure, secure relationship that countries operate. The fear that both the USSR and the US felt that either country would attack made them one of the safest places to live because it was the fear that kept the finger above and not on the button. (Cuban Missile Crisis)

I have chosen to compare and contrast these four games because I wanted to compare the least popular games with the more popular games. Looking at the different elements of the games, the design, the mechanics, the political simulation and the reception from players on the Wikiverity Website (Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011a), will form the bases of the analysis of what makes a successful political simulation. The games ranked as follows: Vietnam 1955 was the most popular followed closely by the War on Terror; the Red Guard and Monopoly were at the other end of the spectrum. This analysis will discover why some games are better received than others, and also what improvements could have been made to game to improve the experience for the gamer.

Although, game rules often refer to the player as 'player' (monopoly rules, n.d), with all the games tested you had to take on a role, a new identity, in Monopoly for example you’re a property tycoon. The reason being is games are a transformation of oneself; therefore, the measure of a games success should be whether you remained in role for the duration. Baudrillard's opinion of games is that they are a tool, a mechanism in the hyperreality, similarly with his critique of society your conscious mind cannot differentiate between the fantasy and the reality; this is the objective of all of the games. Consequently, the purpose of the games tested were to simulate real life situations for the player to submerge themselves in and a game can be deemed poor quality if this process is stopped and the conscious can differentiate between the playing and being. Further theories on the hyperreality of games come from Salen, the objective of the ‘gamewright’ is to create a game which has the shortest time for the player to reach the ‘sweat spot’ (Salen, 2006). The ‘sweat spot’ is when the hyperreality is achieved: the player no longer is consciously playing the game and thinking about the mechanics; instead the player has absorbed the rules and is focused solely on playing the game. Monopoly has achieved this, within a short period of playing the game the ‘sweat spot’ has been reached (ibid).

With Baudrillard's understanding of games, it is no wonder that the role play scored the highest of all the games. The game makes you take on the role of a country in the Vietnam conflict in the mid-fifties, there are very little mechanics, just a piece of paper (with the countries victory objectives) a dice and a judicature. The advantage of having very little mechanics with this game is these external factors although essential to the games execution, they have no place in the fantasy and work to create disillusion. Additionally, the role play exercise is a form or escapism “I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious [....] Ignorance is bliss (Philosophical Films, n.d)”As with hyperreality, the simulation becomes so much a part of your reality that you do not want to see it as pretending you want to be someone else- you are someone else.

Another reason why the game was favoured by the class was because the players interacted and there was full class participation, no body felt left out. As the Situationists said the revolution should be a festival, not a spectacle (Debord, 1987). Rousseau too shared this opinion that participation is the method that people should use to govern themselves. This game is successful because it give the individual firsthand experience of this political position, but also it emphasises the importance of the socialist cultural movement that people are more power (and enjoy themselves more) as a collective than as a spectator, playing their own game with minimal interaction.

There are numerous comparisons between the Red Guard and Vietnam 1955, the most crucial is that they are historical simulations. When a game is a documentation of real events it adds to the realism, because there are legitimate events and testimonies that you as the player can draw on to form the hyperreality. One reason why Red Guard may not have been as successful as Vietnam 1955 is because this revolution is not as topical and as well known as the Vietnam War. Furthermore, many of the countries in the game are Western European; therefore the students in the class are more likely to have heard of them. The greater your understanding of the character you are adopting, the easier it is to assimilate and abandon reality.

There are two hundred and fifty-two pieces with this game and two hundred and sixteen of which are very small tiles made out of card, (BoardGamegeek, n.d a). Players found this game mechanism very problematic because the pieces were “fiddly” (Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011b), the consequence was players were distracted from the games because they had to concentrate on maintaining the number of pieces they had at the start of the game. Furthermore, the game was disrupted further because of the poor set up of the combat results table. These rules were the crux of the game and putting them on a card would have made them easier to refer to (ibid). Monopoly follows this logic and the game flows because it gives the perfect information to the player as and when it is required without having to refer back to the rules.

This game does not have full class participation like Vietnam 1955; however it does encourage interaction between players. Players are able to negotiate and make allies as a gaming strategy. These alliances are very fragile and add to the game, because they are easily made and easily broken. The alliances work in this way because each player has their own unique objective to win the game. This game structure that there can only be one winner appeals to people's passions, as Kant says human beings are driven by passion (Kant, 1784); so our morality is thin. This is true of the players of this game their desire to win out-weighted their loyalty to their alliance, because when players playing Red Guard did take pieces from their allies in order to win. This game structure of having a clear and decided winner appeals to the nature of humans according to Kant and games that didn't have this structure, and so Monopoly was the least enjoyed game (Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011c). Monopoly differed the most from the games analysed in the essay the reason being is the bases of this game is luck, dice throwing. That is not to say that you cannot have a strategy, many people often plan which properties they want to buy, nonetheless, the greatest strategy is flawed if lady luck is not on your side. The games should model reality, leaving so much of the game’s outcome to chance makes the game an unrealistic reflection of the property market.

Additionally, The same problem that plague the Red Guard plague Monopoly there are too many pieces, there are over one hundred components in Monopoly (BoardGameGeek, n.d b), which make it harder to get into character because you are constantly fiddling. In addition, these two games in comparison with the others have the greatest element of luck, Monopoly with the dice throwing and Red Guard with the random tiles being dealt out, which is one reason why the games have been voted for the least. Games that rely heavily on strategy are better received (Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011c) and allow the player to come into his own, use the brain and make choices, whereas games that rely on the luck of the draw do not make the game winner self-determined but pre-determined. The cards in Monopoly maintain the pace of the game because the cards have a lot of information on them; the benefit of not having to revisit the rule book is the focus is constantly on the board, and not on a paper which break the illusion. Also, as humans we experience the world through our sense so as well as sound and sight there are pieces in all of the games with the exception of Vietnam 1955 so that you can touch, so there is a constant reminder of the hyperreality to enable you to full in to it. One similarity between Monopoly and the war of terror is that you have to develop, and you exchange pieces to illustrate this progress. This progress is a successful feature because it appeals to our most primitive instincts, as Locke theorises about the state of nature, that man has the natural right to property, “every man has a property in his own right (Locke, n.d)”; so, man's natural instinct is to acquire land and develop it. The game designers have realistically simulated capitalism, and this natural instinct is what make the players play the game and believe in the realism of the simulation.

There are definitely benefits to the game pieces however, in Monopoly the game pieces which visual represent the player on the board tokens (boardgamegeek monopoly), are a good size for the board; they do not represent anything relevant to the game. More relevant pieces, perhaps going round the board as an Uncle Sam figure, would help players to understand the true meaning and objective of the game. In Red Guard the tiles represent military, so you are reminded that you’re launching an attack and there are also tiles with the image of the person you are playing.

The idea of representing the player visual is used in the War on Terror also, each player has a colour which represents their identity. Having an identity, in reality as in the game is imperative. Players need to be able to differentiate between themselves, know who their enemies are so that they can focus on the objective-winning the game.

The most unique game component is found in the War on Terror, the black balaclava, which was well received by the game players. Players had to wear this when their empire became evil; this component keeps the simulation going. Additionally, it makes it clear to the players who their enemy is this. This gives the players a common goal, to destroy the evil empire. Collectivism is the model that appears to be the most successful in political game simulation.

Although most of the games played in the module were enjoyed, the class did critique the games and came up with some possible improvements. The critiques of the War on Terror, was that the players had too much to do per turn: the players had to roll multiple dice per game. The complexity of the players turned mixed with the numerous made the game time consuming, and stopped the illusion.

Although, the game is not intended to be a serious reflection on the global community, it could be made more realistic. It was too easy to become a terrorist and the game placed too much importance on oil. This game reflects the post 9/11 American opinion of terrorism but when playing the game in the present day making oil the commodity that all of the player are hoping to trade is anachronistic. This game could be improved by varying the commodities to make them regional specific and by limiting the actions per turn. Additionally like Red Guard, this game should adopt the information structure of Monopoly because this would maintain the pace of the game.

Monopoly is the most popular game studied and consequently most of the players knew the rules before playing which adds to the pace and the hyperreality of the game. To add to the political simulation of the game, the luck element should be replaced with strategy. Making the players make choices in order to win will simulate political situations realistically. In the world people are faced with constructed choices (Thaler and Sunstein, 2009) because real life is not entirely dependent on luck. Another flaw is that players are easily able to ‘game the game’, because there are only 32 houses in the game (and there would need to be 112 houses to give each player an equal opportunity to develop (BoardGameGeek, n.d b) so players are reluctant to develop their properties in order to restrict the development of others. Therefore the capitalism paradigm that this game is based on is not explored in the game, so the simulation fails. The most enjoyed game Vietnam 1955 did not need many improvements; the criticism with this game is that players need some prior knowledge of historical events. Without this knowledge you cannot play the political leader accurately, you cannot simulate the events and spoil the illusion. This could be improved by giving the players more background information of their country and their leader, not just their political objectives in the simulation. One improvement suggested (Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011d.) would be to give the players badges so that they can visually identify with their country. Visual representation gives the player a sense of identity and further develops the role. Finally, the Red Guard like War on terror there are too many pieces which spoil the illusion. Also, there is no mechanism to randomly select tiles for players, the game players found that some of them were at a disadvantage when it came to selecting pieces. Therefore players could 'game the game' by strategically placing their pieces last so as to stand more chance of winning the game.

With the both the War on Terror and Monopoly the final improvement that could be made to the game experience is to allow the players to make their own town names in Monopoly or naming their empires in the War on Terror. This would have similarly results to the Situationist method derive, players would re-imagine their commitment to the game because the places that they are trying to conquer and develop are relevant and person to themselves.

In Conclusion, players are passion driven when in the hyperreality of the game and consequently rationality and morality are lost. The best games, War on Terror and Vietnam 1955 take this into consideration because the players have goal, which allows them to be cut-throat (make and break alliances); additionally, these games have a clear victory. Therefore in analysing these four games I have found that a successful political simulation maintains the hyperreality, a player should not be able to differentiate between the game and the real which is Baudrillard's theory of society. I also found that players preferred games that encouraged interaction and group participation the reason being is these games simulate the Situationist and the Rousseauian rationale that life should be a festival and not a spectacle. These games are the greatest simulations and the truest reflections of political situations because we exist in the world as groups and not individuals. Bibliography BoardGameGeek, n.d a. [online] Available at: [Accessed 01 April 2011]

BoardGameGeek, n.d b. [online] Available at: [Accessed 01 April 2011]

Bracken, P., and Shubik, M., 2001. War Gaming in the Information Age: Theory and Purpose. [online] Available at :< http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JIW/is_2_54/ai_77034455/> [Accessed 01April 2011]. Baudrillard, J.,1983. Simulations. New York: Semiotexte Cuban missile crises, n.d.[electronic image] Available at:  [Accessed 01 April 2011]

Debord, G., 1987. Society of the Spectacle. S.I: Rebel Press

Kant, I., 1784. Idea for a Universal History from a Cosmopolitan Point of View From 'on history' [online] Available at: [Accessed 01April 2011]

Locke, J., n.d. Two Treatises of Government. [online] Available at: http://www.efm.bris.ac.uk/het/locke/government.pdf [Accessed 01April 2011]

Machiavelli, N., 2005. The Prince. Bedford: Boston

Monopoly Rules, n.d, [online] Available at:  	[Accessed 01April 2011]

Philosophical Films, n.d.[online] Available at: [Accessed 01April 2011]

Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011a. SPIR608 Political Simulations and Gaming/2011/Week. Available at: http://en.wikiversity.org.wiki/SPIR608_Political_Simulation_and_Gaming/2011/Week_4 [Accessed 01April 2011]

Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011b. SPIR608 Political Simulations and Gaming/2011/Week. Available at: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/SPIR608_Political_Simulation_and_Gaming/2011/Week_7 [Accessed 01April 2011]

Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011c. SPIR608 Political Simulations and Gaming/2011/Week. Available at: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/SPIR608_Political_Simulation_and_Gaming/2011/Week_10 [Accessed 01April 2011]

Political Simulations and Gaming, 2011d. SPIR608 Political Simulations and Gaming/2011/Week. Available at: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/SPIR608_Political_Simulation_and_Gaming/2011/Week_6[Accessed 01April 2011]

Rousseau, J., 1973. The social contract; and, Discourses. London: Dent

Salen, K., and Zimmerman, E., 2006. The Game Design Reader: Rules of Playing Anthology. Massachusetts: MIT Press

Thaler, R., and Sunstein, C., 2009. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness. Penguin

Bibliography

‘Angels of the sun’- Brazil, 2006-Rudi Lagemann

‘Happy Desert’- Brazil/Germany, 2007-Paulo Caldas

BROWN,Louise;Sex Slaves: The Trafficking of Women in Asia.London.Vigaro Press.2000