Every once in a while, I've considered and discussed the possibilities of creating a web-based version of my infamous White House Race series of computer games. (For those of you not in the know, they're mock political simulations about the presidential race in a fictional country. You are paired with a "celebrity" vice president like Ozzy
(
Read more... )
Comments 8
The Risk-type element is interesting, but I think that to make it more reflective of reality, states should start with their current leanings (e.g., CA = Democrat) and that winning them over means beating the opponent by a sufficient margin relative to the degree to which the state is Dem/Rep.
The Vortex
Reply
I'm not so sure about starting each state with the current party alignment. For one thing, many states (Florida, Ohio, etc.) don't have a well-determined party alignment. For another thing, that would limit the game to two parties, and I'd prefer to have it handle lots of parties. Winning a debate against a well-loved candidate in a strongly party-aligned state would also be next to impossible. Besides, "make it more reflective of reality?" I think you're forgetting who you're talking to here. :)
Keep the suggestions coming!
Reply
For your game, I think that can be helpful. Some states might have a "base" party alignment (as many parties as you want), while others are going to be more contentious.
Winning a debate against a well-loved candidate in a strongly party-aligned state would also be next to impossible.
Isn't it *usually* impossible without lying? That's part of why politicians are so good at it! =P
I'm worried that some candidates will never be able to beat other candidates in a given state
You're talking to someone whose presidential vote never counted because he always lives/d in a Democratic state.
Also, what about creating primaries?
The Vortex
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment