Posted by c_hargrave on February 01, 1998 at 12:41:56
Good afternoon gamers,
I hope this finds you well. It's been a bit quiet on this front, so I thought I would give a brief update as I have two things I think which are worth sharing. I have replayed the game several times now. Knowing what is coming has made it significantly quicker to navigate the problems. I believe, even without reading the research that this resulted in, I have a reasonable idea of what they were investigating. As Ms Patel pointed out, it appears to be "what people feel comfortable with." More specifically it feels like a test of what you are comfortable giving up, sacrificing, in return for a better life. With the first problem, this was trading human life for the good of the community, and one of the later ones, you have to choose whether it is better to fire your friend, their coworker, or leave yourself. In each of these cases, there is a cost, but also a benefit. It seems like each of these cases seems to be designed to see what you would choose, and maybe get a glimse into why.
The second thing is, I have had a breakthrough on the Wakefield Group front. I have managed to get in contact with one of the researchers, albeit one that left before the creation of this game. They have not only practically confirmed the above theory, but given a little more insight into its creation. The Group was started as a think tank, initially part of the university, but later as an independant entity when it got funding from the Church of England, and they were investigating the relationship between belief and perceived quality of life. It sounded like the focus changed a little after they left, but this suggests that our assumptions were on the right track. I was also given a name, Dr Rowntree, possibly either Robert or Richard. I haven't found anything about them yet.
I feel like I've got as much information as I can from the game itself, but I'm still curious to read the research.
c_hargave.