Monetary Topics in Game Design: Intro & Choice of Currency

Intro

In this series I will be discussing how to include money/economics in games, how economics can serve the story and theme of a game, how economics can integrate with other aspects of the game such as leveling.  The topics may wander a bit from there as I can lost in tangents sometimes.  I'll try to bring it all back together though.  In most instances the games discussed will be RPG's or MMO's because I really like those.  Other types of games such as casual games will get some mention, but not as much.  As part of including money/economics in games currency choice is an important one and it can support the story!  So, let's get started...

Choice of Currency

When deciding which currency to use, such as USD (US Dollar $) it's important to consider the setting of your game.  For example, if you write a game set in ancient China no one should be exchanging US dollars.  However, if the game is set in the near future in America, then $US is a reasonable choice.  For games set in historical settings using historical currency can be a good choice. One thing to look out for though, it's only relatively recently that currencies have become standardized.  Older currency frequently included coins composed of precious metals (gold, silver, etc.) that would be minted with the face of whomever was ruling at the point of the minting.  Afterwards those coins could lose value due to wear and tear, shaving, or be called back because a new ruler ascended to power.  When I say wear and tear that includes being bitten or bent as a means of detecting counterfeit coinage or simple damage because gold is a soft metal.  When a coin set was recalled or set aside the value of the gold itself wouldn't decrease, but depending on the transition of power it could prove dangerous to try to spend it.  With all that being said you might want to assume currency of a standard value, or do so most of the time except when motivated by story.  Standard values meaning that one gold coin is worth as much as another, not necessarily that identical items in different locations can be purchased with the same number of coins.  That's a matter of supply and demand. For example, as part of a plot hook to involve the character(s) in shutting down, joining, etc. a counterfeiters ring.  More on that later.

Another option are currencies that double as something else or are not based on rare metals.
Example: the Aztecs used cocoa beans and cotton as currency to augment bartering.  They also had a standardized length of cotton called the Quachtli.  Cocoa beans were used for small purchases and Quachtli or cotton cloth for larger purchases.
If selecting this option, then choose something the locals would have access to, but still has noticeable worth and usefulness.

Either way best to coordinate currency choice to the setting of your game.  A fantasy setting where dragons are always the enemy might have dragon scales as it's currency with different currency values based on scale color or scale size.  In the very distant future the currency might be Xyntaxian crystals which are also used to power FTL vessels.  There are many possibilities.

Now, however, I am for bed.  Next time: currency choice cont. with a focus on genre, atmosphere, and the option of tiered currency.

Thoughts on Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn

Obviously I'm coming a little late to this particular party, but just got the opportunity to read this on a couple plane flights and such.

Gender played a pretty big part in the book so let's start there.  Gender, the obvious points, lots of uses of 'bitch' and Nick would never get a manicure because he's too masculine and so on.  The more interesting gender issues I thought were the following; Nick and Amy's shared dislike and at times hatred of women, Amy's methods of dominating, and the change after marriage done by the female.

For a lot of the book it seemed to me like Nick and Amy's marriage problems could have been solved if they'd just taken some time, had lunch, and talked about how much women suck.  Nick's got his father's "dumb bitch" mantra always running a little beneath the surface and Amy feels that women are colluding in their own repression particularly by trying to fit themselves into the Cool Girl mode.  But yes, all these stupid women out there trying to please men and being crazy and whatnot.  In the end it really does bring them together come to think on it.  The hook that Amy catches Nick with upon her return is that no other woman could ever compare to her.  That after being with Amy any other woman would just become dumb bitch over time.  Nick swoons a little bit and the rest is just pulling the line in.

That being said she uses just about every traditional womanly wile she can get her hands on.  She's a damsel in distress (a lot), she cries rape, she fakes a pregnancy, she engineers a pregnancy, she uses poison, and is a femme fatale ("Oh Desi I'm ready!"  *stab*).  All because she was scorned and as tradition will tell us, Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.  And then those methods plus careful planning win her the day.

The next point may just be me, curious to hear feedback.  From anecdotal experience and some movies etc, the after marriage stereotype that I'm familiar with is that the man woos the female ever so sweetly until the vows are said and then feels free to beat her for over cooking the pot roast.  Here though, it seems to be Amy who transforms from Cool Girl into emasculating neurotic bitch.  She keeps lists of everything, plans everything, remembers all slights, and is quick to point out perceived short comings.  It's a little difficult to know this for certain since Amy's fake diary is well...fake.  But from the 'real' her and Nick's memories it seems true.  Anyway, not sure if female transformation post nuptials is a thing, but I did find it interesting.  Also, her bewilderment that he didn't immediately love this rather different person is something I find confusing.  If I say I like apples every day for a year why on earth would I expect anyone to know plums are frequently my favorite?  If there are insights to this one, do let me know.

Mental illness and mental trauma were also pretty important.  Amy's a sociopath, obviously.  Nick is so against showing womanly sadness that he smiles in the press conference about his missing wife.  Go also has some pretty stunted emotional growth.  Nick's dad is basically an endless mantra of 'dumbbitch'.  It seemed like the story was going somewhere with him, the talk of how Amy was trying to brainwash him and his more frequent wanderings, but that thread never really came clear. Desi is very seriously obsessed.  Amy's parents I wonder about, they seem too perfect, there's only one time one snaps at the other that I can recall.  Marybeth doesn't need a damn cuddle sweater, she needs to hear from Nick that he didn't murder her daughter.  Oh and you know Stockholm Syndrome, loving your captor.  According to this paper, Love and Stockholm Syndrome: The Mystery of Loving an Abuser by Joseph M. Carver, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist  (http://drjoecarver.makeswebsites.com/clients/49355/File/love_and_stockholm_syndrome.html) the reason victims love their captors is as a survival mechanism, which certainly makes sense.  And we really see that with Nick who is semi-happy to do things Amy's way because it serves as a guarantee that he won't become his father.  He's also really appreciative that he can now play on her level.  So that's neat.  And in general: Hello there emotional abuse! How are you today?

Oh, I liked the book.  Now as a bit of poking fun and in reference to the idea that we in this age will never see anything for the first time:

This book seemed like a really dark version of Pinocchio, Amy wants to be a real girl, but instead turns Nick into a fake man!

It also reminds me a bit of the War of the Roses.  

Lastly, just for fun (I hope), 10 signs you're in an emotionally abusive relationship:

1. Are you frequently misunderstood, and your intentions deemed dishonorable or manipulative? Do you end up feeling perplexed and frustrated?
2. Do you feel as if there is something wrong with you, you feel bad and can't figure out why?
3. Does your partner almost always disagree with you, and the smallest of discussions evolve into a major fight?
4. Do you feel obligated to "give in" just to keep the peace in the relationship? Are you continually finding yourself fighting back what you'd like to say?
5. If you approach your partner to talk about an issue with him/her, do you feel made to believe that it's insignificant and not worth talking about?
6. Do you think that everything is your fault and that if you can somehow fix your flaws that everything would be okay in the relationship?
7. Do you often give into sex and your partner's sexual demands just to keep peace—even if  you don't want to?
8. Can your partner laugh at his own mistakes, or even admit his own weaknesses and shortcomings...or is he too busy focused on why you make his life miserable?
9. Does your partner have total control of all the finances in the relationship, and criticize you for spending anything?
10. Would your partner feel uneasy or criticize you for even reading this blog?

From http://www.yourtango.com/experts/jane-wilcox/expert-10-signs-youre-emotionally-abusive-relationship

  

What Counts as Success?

What Counts as Success?

This certainly isn't news, but a lot of people equate success with having a large bank account.  Is it, how large does it have to be before it counts as success?  According to a Princeton study that we went over in one of my MBA classes (see the abstract here) most people do gain happiness with more money, but!  Only up to ~$75,000 per year.  After that, while people evaluate themselves more positively, they don't actually get any happier.  Obviously mileage varies from person to person, but still.  Frankly this seems like a terrible set up to me.  The rich will try to become richer, but not actually enjoy it. And the poor won't be able to make much headway because all the money is being hoarded by the wealthy.  And you can see some of this in the increasing income gap between haves and have nots.

Changing this aspect of American culture would be challenging.  Americans are terrified of anything that even vaguely resembles socialism.  Also, capitalism has done many good things and is a primary reason for the high quality of living found in the US.  But maybe it's time we applied some tweaks. A good step in that direction is increasing the minimum wage, which some states and cities have done. In order for an economy to do well money must flow through it.  If the average American worker can't buy anything beyond necessities, then companies making things beyond necessities can't make any money.  If they can't make money they have to lay people off.  People who are laid off can't buy things and then the circle begins again only with a worse economy for every iteration.  We're a few rounds through the circle, and it sucks.  When saying we're a few rounds in I am including rounds of government stimulus meant to encourage business and spending (for example the $200 or so every person received several years ago, bailouts for businesses, government sponsored job programs such as in the energy sector (solar power for the win!), etc.  Some of the results?  A lower credit rating for the US, a large movement into the service sector (there are more jobs after stimulus etc, but at least the plurality of them are service positions making $15/hr or less), and a continually lagging housing market.  None of that is good.  So, more money needs to go from corporations to employees or eventually there won't employees, a company, or a country with a high standard of living.

What to like in movies

When thinking about favorite movies I consider movies I've watched over and over again as well as movies I've watched only a couple times, but had a deep impact.  Hard Candy for example.  I've only seen it two or three times and all times aside from the first it was to get other people to watch and to watch them watching it.  It's definitely worth watching.  But definitely not a family favorite or one I'd even watch again without cause.  I consider it a favor however, because the first time seeing it I couldn't believe what I was seeing, tackles some pretty serious stuff in an...unusual way.  I felt the thrill of the movie and frankly that's kind of rare, a lot of movies are fun, but not heart pounding.

On the flip side, speaking of fun, but not heart pounding I love the movie Clueless, it's been a favorite since high school, which was about a decade ago.  Still find it fun, think the humor is good, and that the writers approached LA high school with wit and charm.  I watch it whenever I need a pick me up.
Third category is nostalgia.  My family has been watching the Blues Brothers for as long as I can remember.  For a while we all had it basically memorized.  It's also one of the few, maybe only, movie(s) the whole family genuinely agreed on.  I guess that last part says something about the togetherness of my family.  Anyway, reminds me of childhood and how much I've grown up.  It's fun watching something from a later perspective.  Also, I think it still has my favorite chase scene ever, even though it's ludicrous.