The big to do list. Part III: Extending the Universe of the game

Hi there, friends and enemies of democracy!

This is the third part of a game design series where I expose my thoughts on how I may improve Socratic Democracy in the near future. The current post is probably the most exciting of the series, as I discuss potential directions in which the game can expand. So far, I have sadly not got any comment, but this time I would really appreciate some!

Socratic Democracy is currently a prototype, a minimum viable project. There are several extensions to it that could make its universe more interesting and engaging, add more layers to the current game, or expand the game to other themes covered by book 8 of Plato's Republic. 

These are my thoughts:

Extensions/Improving Universe

The game could become more relevant by extending its scope. However, I must always remember that playing it for educational objectives must remain something that can be done in 5-10 minutes, otherwise it is burdensome for students.

Add an economic engine. B4.

Currently, the economy is just talk, there is no real meaning to “receiving a bribe”, “stealing money from oligarchs”, “raising taxes” etc. The latter, “raising taxes” could add real depth to the game, if for instance, the populist policies make the polis run on a deficit. There could also be ways in which the player lives at the expense of the state, or the temples, which is something mentioned by Socrates.

While this is in itself not too complicated, it requires a deep rethinking of other parts of the game, and its exact implementation depends on other decisions. For instance, if the “invest in education” policy is added, it will impact the economy. Or, if the player has its private finances, this could impact the public finances, for instance through stealing. The connection between player’s wealth and its happiness would then also be changed.

Thus, this is not at the highest priority. Should be done once other decisions are made.

Include Astugeiton on the map. C3 to C4.

It is hard to remember the neighboring city, Astugeiton, when it only shows up in policies and events. If the city were on the map (perhaps in a distant mountain), players would not forget its existence and feel (correctly) that it is an important element in the story.

The idea would be to add Astugeiton on the map, make it a button. The player can visit the city, which will provide some clues that it is no joke to defeat this city in a war.

Make Bion more interactive. C4

One strategy that occurred to me early on is that Bion---the philosopher who got Leonidas, the main character, into politics---could allow more interaction. For instance, the number of Bion’s disciples could depend on players’ actions. What if the player promoted parties in which Bion spoke? This is part of Socrates’ theory. The young politician is a fixture of parties.

This could be a way to make the player more popular at first, allowing it to be elected. Currently, I need to tweak the popularity of the first policies a bit, and it makes the game feel a bit broke because some policies are much more popular than others.

Of course, Bion must eventually be sacked, and so it backfires. Then again, this is totally compatible with Socratic theory and could make the game more fun.

Create population stats and voting preferences. C5.

Currently, the population and its behavior is completely unexplained and, at times, absurd. Given my knowledge of statistics and simulation, it would not be too hard to create a database of citizens, with their characteristics, such that the player could study the microphysics of why voters vote the way they vote.

This could, of course, require some changes in the math of votes, but it would essentially be a nice little exercise. Right now, the effect of a policy is linear, it gives you the same number of votes no matter what. But what if there is an interaction? What if some voters like you for one thing but dislike you for other things? The real challenge here is not making this overly complex.

This could lead to some clever way to actually create a different victory path. Maybe being an actual good politician will be sustainable if players play like amazing genius, checking that they get just enough votes to survive the next voting cycle. In other words, I could implement here the path to aristocracy as an alternative way of wining the game.

This could also better fundament why voters get upset. For instance, when the war is lost, voters who lost a family member may enter the opposition. Maybe the player can know, in advance, who these people are.

The population stats would be accessed through the governmental building, I guess.

Add an oligarchic period. D5.

The idea here is not to make the game longer, but rather to offer a separate game, but without having to create an entire new universe.

This offers several advantages for publishing. Perhaps the democratic period is free, but the oligarchic period is paid. Or maybe students will want to just try it out because they liked the democratic period so much. I can be an optimist.

The theory of oligarchic transition to democracy is just as interesting as the transition to tyranny, and only slightly less important for political scientists. It talks clearly about inequality and the role of international wars in shaping national politics.

The problem is that it requires an entire new visualization of how the game is played. Instead of an abstract and controllable people, the oligarchic method of government asks for a few families (perhaps the same ones that appear on the democratic period, plus a few extras) that are smart and real challengers to the player.

Moreover, the role of the player in such a period is less clear. Maybe the player can be an oligarch and win by staying oligarch for as long as possible. Or maybe the player is from the people and must decide the right time to make the revolution.

Add the other 3: Aristocratic period, Timocratic period, tyranny. D5 x 3.

Ok, this would be a huge task that I should probably never perform.

But just to write down what I can see in this path:

• Aristocracy. In this game, the player must be a philosopher king, the perfect governor that Socrates’ describes. The main issue is making perfectly balanced choices, while knowing that young and ambitious men want to take the power away from you.
• Timocracy. In this game, the player could be from a non-governing family who must administer its property while contributing to wars and the finances of the government. This is the best system to have a multiplayer game version, as the problem of timocracy is of a collective action nature: every timocrat wants to keep his property intact and invest little in the war, but if everyone does so, the timocracy loses its ability to function.
• Tyranny. Not sure if this can become a fun and ethical game.