A Quote by Tim Harford

Synthetic Worlds is a surprisingly profound book about the social, political, and economic issues arising from the emergence of vast multiplayer games on the Internet. What Castronova has realized is that these games, where players contribute considerable labor in exchange for things they value, are not merely like real economies, they are real economies, displaying inflation, fraud, Chinese sweatshops, and some surprising in-game innovations.
Games are work. There are economies popping up in games now because people value them.
I want gaming to be something that everybody does, because they understand that games can be a real solution to problems and a real source of happiness. I want games to be something everybody learns how to design and develop, because they understand that games are a real platform for change and getting things done. And I want families, schools, companies, industries, cities, countries, and the whole world to come together to play them, because we’re finally making games that tackle real dilemmas and improve real lives.
Keep playing games. Make time to play games with your friends and family, because it's surprisingly heartbreaking to wipe a thin layer of dust off a game you love, before you put it back on the shelf because the real world is calling you.
Games are quite shy at talking about different things. Most are about facing hordes of monsters or saving the world or whatever; few games actually talk about the real world, about real people, about their relationship, their emotions, their feelings.
Not only do you have 16 regular-season games, you also have four preseason games. Then if you make the playoffs, you can have four more games before you get to the Super Bowl. So you can already have 24 games without the 18-game season. And 24 games takes a real toll on somebody's body.
Growing economies are critical; we will never be able to end poverty unless economies are growing. We also need to find ways of growing economies so that the growth creates good jobs, especially for young people, especially for women, especially for the poorest who have been excluded from the economic system.
People talk about games and loneliness - it's a lonely activity. I didn't understand that. 'Gears of War' was the first multiplayer game for me that I enjoyed. But I wasn't sad. I liked being alone. I liked playing games by myself. I had lots of companionship at the house.
When gamers can play a game together with all of their friends, regardless of the devices they own, you have a much more compelling social experience. That applies to all multiplayer games.
Some players thrive in the open-style, AAU games - the all-star games. But when it comes to playing in an actual system and having to 'think' the game, you see where some guys separated themselves.
I really like arcade games and like the '80s and early '90s kind of games, just because there's a real kind of naivete to them, but there's like a real inventiveness to it as well.
I think the reason why video games are more popular as entertainment in difficult economies is that the cost per hour of video games is lower than any other form of entertainment.
The poor don't live in functional market economies as the rest of us do, but in political economies where corruption and broken systems extend from local government to moneylenders.
Both multiplayer games and online forums have this property of virtual anonymity. Other people can't really see you; they don't really know who you are. And so the sort of social moderating mechanisms in real life, and your desire not to offend people around you, don't really adjust.
Inside the first 20 to 25 games of the season, we were losing these games, getting beat by two and three points. Over the last 10 games, it seems like we're starting to win these games and putting some good things together.
I am most challenged by playing cash games against the world's top players. These games force me to think several moves in advance, like in a game of chess. And though I also find tournaments fun to play, they just don't provide the constant brain buzz that cash game players crave.
It's clear that there has to be some play between the vitality of invention in economic life and some regulation of it, and in some ways the great ideological wars of the 20th century that cost so many lives had to do with whether to have managed economies directed by government or economies directed by the free movement of capital, which is only partially subject to government regulation.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!