Login to vote in this poll.
Players should not be required to set aside their own beliefs. I feel as if doing so goes against what the game is trying to achieve. When rules attempt to regulate what a person should or should not believe it acts as a constraint which is essentially the reason for conflicts and mayhem when people attempt to break free of such constraints. However even though players should not be required to set aside their beliefs, I believe regulations should be placed on how such beliefs are displayed so as to not constrict other players' beliefs, for example if one player's belief was to destroy the world and used any means to do so.
Players should not have to set aside their own beliefs while playing this game, because then what would this game become but a place where you are told how to think and what to believe? It would just turn into the government and society of today where you must conform to popular belief. The allowance of free thought and personal beliefs will make the community that much more dynamic in its interactions as well as possibly enlightening others in not only others forms of thought, but also tolerance for others beliefs, which should be a mian concern for other players when interacting in this world.
If everyone were to set aside their beliefs in order to participate in the game, I believe the inherent basis of the game would essentially be lost. People's free will is an important factor to be considered when talking about widespread global change, and the scale of change when referring to the imposed decrees is massive. Upon reviewing the decrees, there are some that I could see potentially being difficult for some people to get behind. Decree #3 in particular, I feel, could produce a kneejerk negative reaction in some people, especially those who are already married or plan to be. In a realistic situation, forcing individuals to set aside their personal beliefs would lead only to conflict and a lack of trust between people. Rather, a method of sorting out conflicts of interest and coming to resolutions would be more important than simply asking people to completely disregard their own personal beliefs. Although I do believe that at times it is important to consider the interests of the many rather than the few, I think it is simply not reasonable or fair to expect people to ignore their own thoughts.
Players should allowed to bring their beliefs into the game because it allows for the perspectives of all players to be applied into the game. Thus having a diverse group of players in the game. By taking away the ability to bring their beliefs the players would rely solely on the beliefs that have already been implemented on the game, if there are any, in my opinion this would lead to less interaction between the players. Also including the beliefs of the player, while it may bring conflict due to opposing views on certain topics, would open a channel for players to have discussions with other players. Therefore there would be a lot more interaction between the players in the game.
I think that what makes each player in a game unique is what they can bring to the gameplay environment. If we set aside our beliefs then we aren't being the person who we are. Our beliefs reflect our society and cultures. I find it important to have your own beliefs in the game if we are asking for each others opinions. We should learn to tolerate others if our goal is create equality, not just ignore our beliefs that make us unique. I'm also not sure how we would go about setting aside our beliefs since all decisions we make were influenced by someone or something, whether it is societal rules or what our parents taught us as we grew up.
I personally don't think games would be quite as fun if people were to set aside their beliefs specially for a game. This ruins the personal aspect of the gamer and their methodology on how to approach the game. Players probably wouldn't be able to experience all the features and see the potential these games have in stored in their did. Sure we have conflicts when personal feelings arise as a player progresses through the game, but if the player is open minded enough, surely they can hold themselves back for a bit longer and continue with the game, and maybe even learn something new at the end of it all. Otherwise, if their beliefs overshadow the ideals brought out from the game, they can simply stop playing. If players would like to share what they personally believe is true as opposed to what was shown in the game, there are forums and message-boards for them to do so. This will neither discourage potential players from trying the game, nor will it keep a player from sticking with their personal beliefs.
While I agree that this ruins the personal aspect of the gamer, I also see this as an opportunity to roleplay. Bringing your personal beliefs into the game and making up new ones for the game would have exactly the same result: seeing new developments in the game that other decisions would not have effected. I'm confused about your post though-- you start out saying that players shouldn't have to set aside their beliefs, but then say that they should share their beliefs not in the game, but on message boards. But I like that as well. Why not allow players to act however they want to in-game, but also have an out-of-character forums system so that players can express how they really feel-- regardless of whether or not those feelings impact how they play the game? This way everybody gets to have fun.
Of course there's also the trolls to worry about, but this is addressed in another question: just derank them. No eliminations, but perhaps there can be a way to hide their presence.
Players should not be required to set aside their own personal beliefs in order to participate. The purpose of this game is to discuss and explore how gaming reflects to our daily lives and how it serve as powerful tools in terms of engaging people with both culture and society as a whole. Since each one of us came from different sociocultural backgrounds and might participate in gaming activities in different ways. It is essential to look closely into how people interact with the "game" and other players, as well as their gaming habits. On the other hand, players should actively engage their own personal beliefs in order to participate which would expand the diversity of this gaming community and make possible changes for gaming industry and the society in the future.
This gaming experience might be different for each one of us in terms of the setting, content, playing methods, and participants of the game. Since we all came from different sociocultural backgrounds, and surely not all of us participate in gaming activity in the daily bases. Therefore it would be important to see how experienced gamers interact with new gamers, and how they participate in this game as a whole. Last but not least, since it requires personal beliefs in terms of participating in this game, it would be interesting to see how people "act" or "live" in the virtual world that have "actual" association with academic studies and practices.
If one of the goals of the game is learn about various political practices, people should bring in their own personal beliefs. If everyone is objective all the time, no one will know how other people feel about a suggestion or policy. People should be able to express themselves honestly. Everyone may not agree most of the time, but there is a possibility that some idea will appeal to everyone. If people cannot say what they think, and are treated as if their opinions are not worthwhile, they will still feel the same and be disinclined to accept what is allowed.
I agree with what smyers has to say. Setting aside all personal beliefs when participating in this game seems a bit ridiculous. The personal beliefs we possess make us who we are. If we do not allow these than how are we to learn about others? How can we learn to tolerate other points of view and be more open minded? It seems to me that being open minded is an objective of this game. We can't begin to try to change something before hearing others out and this means hearing personal beliefs because the decision we make stem from these. More importantly, the very foundation in determining what the final product of this game will look like is based off of allowing others to bring in their personal beliefs by allowing for an open forum to discuss them. I would hope that this open forum would still be available as part of the game.
People should be able to express themselves honestly as smeyers points out. If this is not allowed than I definetly think a strong argument is people may end up feeling disclined to accept what is allowed. People should never be prohibitied from expressing themselves freely.
i agree. i believe that all personal beliefs should be allowed and hopefully this game will be able to change those beliefs to ones that will benefit us in the real world.
I agree with (McLovin) in that this is a very complicated subject matter with various pros and cons to each side. However, I believe that because it appears as though the object of the game revolves around the subject of equality, it is essential that all personal beliefs be set aside. In doing so we are essentially eliminating the possibility of allowing external factors such as cultures, religion, and education to shape politics and turn into a complicated subject matter. By allowing more external factors to come into play when shaping politics we are creating a much complicated and sensitive subject matter. We must deviate from conflict and differences and focus on common interests or goals.
This is a perplexing question because there are pros and cons to each side. However, because this is a global politics game, I think the necessity for a pluralistic model that accomodates vast differences is essential. This requires particpant's personal beliefs to be incorporated. This underlies more complicated political relations that can see intersections of cultures, religions, and educations.