Skip navigation

Ok, yeah, it’s unbalanced.  Some might even say one sided.  But that’s part of the point.  I think it went pretty well.  Some points balancing needs to be done, but I think the message is reasonably clear.  Some of the players were a little put-off by the fact that the game only focuses on the crazy religious zealots, but again, that’s the point.  The focus was to show how blind faith and the abandonment of reason don’t help anyone.  It went well, and I think I will be building on this concept more as I move through the course.



  1. Kyle,

    Great use of symbolism! I like how you’ve been paying attention to how your different play elements support the logic of the game. I’d like to see you continue working on this game.

    I like also how your players can change affiliations throughout the game. A longer, more dynamic game can take advantage of these shifting faiths and loyalties.

    For further revisions, you may want to think about how to make the game more engaging. When you say it is one-sided, how easy is it for, say, the Faith side to win?

    You might also want to consider implementing more of a dialogue between the two sides rather than explicitly going for one or the other. If it’s a dialogue, then the players can decide their interpretation of the piece. Then, you are talking more about how the system functions rather than which side is superior to the other. And systems can sometimes be more interesting than one-sided outcomes.

    Think as well about how the conflict is actually constructed. Religious conservatives take science as an attack on their religion. Why might they be frightened by science if they are firm in their faith? We can also view the evolution vs creationism debate as not a comparison of apples and oranges (two kinds of fruit), but as paleontologist Jack Horner says, apples and washing machines – they’re really two completely different systems of thought.

    -Devin Monnens

    • Roucis Kyle
    • Posted March 18, 2009 at 04:49
    • Permalink

    Those are some great ideas! To be honest, I went for the utterly ridiculous one-sided format to start with, not only to grab the attention of the player, but also to allow for expansion in many of the ways that you described.

    I couldn’t think of an easy way to highlight creationism vs. evolution easily in the game, other than straightforward and unremarkable effects on some of the cards. I would like to emphasize their differences a lot more and actually bring that to bear as the real center-piece for this game. I’ll have to sit down and think it out.

    Thanks for the comment, deserthat! Those are some really good ideas and I’m glad to see that someone appreciates the amount of effort I put in to get the message across (as apposed to just seeing the message). Thanks again!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: