Implementation is simple. Give the video game player two buttons; one marked “shake”, the other “slap”. The player’s character walks around a maze or landscape, encountering recurring characters, partly at random. At encounter one must quickly push either “shake” or “slap” to continue play; meanwhile the computer does the same for the other character.
“Shake” = character offers to shake hands; “slap” = character slaps. Shake is nice, slap is mean. If two shake, then truce; slap defeats shake; and slaps draw.
Let lose, draw, truce, and win = -3,-1,1,3 points. After any number of rounds, the goal is 0; if both meet goal, then truce, etc. In the end it is possible to truce with the machine.
The shake-slap buttons can define other dilemma encounters, such as the first chapter’s orange-apple exchange. Many other dilemmas of social living can be thus video-dramatized.
The other video characters are recognizable by color, shape, dialog, etc. They play by differing strategies; All C, All D, TFT, Random; TFT with random noise; “angry” TFT; TF2T; 2TFT; TFT with “testing” behavior; TFT with “forgiveness factor”; reverse TFT; and “Pavlov”.
In any given encounter, your best strategy depends on the other character’s strategy. Playing this at video-game speed requires quick character recognition, social memory, moral reasoning, and judgement. Unlike other video games, dilemma video games appeal to higher than the base of the spinal cord.
In gambling states, a video game can “wager the price of the next game”; that is, it can offer a Price Parley bet on the outcome of the present game. Implement as follows:
The machine offers the wager; you put a quarter in the slot. Now either the machine will return the quarter or not, and either you get another game or not. What happens depends on the outcome of the first game.
Win = you get money back, and a new game: “free game”
Truce = you get no money back, and a new game: “sold game”
Draw = you get money back, and no game: “no sale”
Lose = you get no money back, and no game. “no return”
In nongambling states, we can finesse the question by using “refund incentives”. Implement as follows:
To start the game you must put in two quarters. Now you will either get back a quarter or not; and you will play one game or two. Outcome depends in the first game outcome.
As before, win = “free game”; money back, second game;
truce = “sold game”; no money back, second game;
draw = “no sale”; money back, no second game;
lose = “no return”; no money back, no second game.
The game’s dilemma structure keeps the player in the gaming cycle.