1 00:00:15,410 --> 00:00:15,890 Speaker 1: Pushkin. 2 00:00:19,610 --> 00:00:23,090 Speaker 2: We get lots of emails dropping into the Cautionary Tales inbox, 3 00:00:23,410 --> 00:00:27,570 Speaker 2: ideas for shows, reflections on episodes, you know, honest feedback. 4 00:00:27,850 --> 00:00:30,210 Speaker 2: By the way, It's tales at Pushkin dot fm, and 5 00:00:30,330 --> 00:00:33,690 Speaker 2: do keep them coming. But a few months ago I 6 00:00:33,770 --> 00:00:38,210 Speaker 2: spotted an email from a name I recognized. Richard Garfield 7 00:00:38,410 --> 00:00:42,570 Speaker 2: is a mathematician, inventor and the game designer behind the 8 00:00:42,770 --> 00:00:46,610 Speaker 2: huge game Magic The Gathering and many more since, including 9 00:00:46,730 --> 00:00:52,450 Speaker 2: King of Tokyo, Robo Rally, and key Forge. But Richard 10 00:00:52,490 --> 00:00:54,570 Speaker 2: had a bone to pick with me about one of 11 00:00:54,570 --> 00:00:59,090 Speaker 2: my previous episodes of Cautionary Questions. So of course, of course, 12 00:00:59,850 --> 00:01:03,450 Speaker 2: rather than argue with him on email, I'd much rather 13 00:01:03,650 --> 00:01:06,250 Speaker 2: argue with him in person and maybe ask him a 14 00:01:06,250 --> 00:01:10,410 Speaker 2: few questions yours and mine about games and game design. 15 00:01:10,890 --> 00:01:14,810 Speaker 2: I'm very excited, Richard Garfield, Welcome to Cautionney Sales. 16 00:01:15,210 --> 00:01:18,530 Speaker 1: Hello, Tim. It's a pleasure to be here. The pleasure 17 00:01:18,610 --> 00:01:19,130 Speaker 1: is all mine. 18 00:01:19,170 --> 00:01:20,570 Speaker 2: I think this is going to be a lot of fun. 19 00:01:20,930 --> 00:01:24,210 Speaker 2: I'm very grateful that you have agreed to do this, 20 00:01:24,290 --> 00:01:26,970 Speaker 2: and thanks also for being a listener to the show. 21 00:01:27,210 --> 00:01:29,210 Speaker 2: Very very kind of you to know you're out there 22 00:01:29,250 --> 00:01:31,130 Speaker 2: listening to listening to Causne Sales. 23 00:01:31,570 --> 00:01:36,930 Speaker 1: I'm devoted, have listened to everything and easily my favorite podcast. 24 00:01:37,570 --> 00:01:42,770 Speaker 2: Wow, well that's I'm blushing now. Richard, you got in 25 00:01:42,970 --> 00:01:48,210 Speaker 2: touch following an episode of Cautionary Questions involving me and 26 00:01:48,370 --> 00:01:51,650 Speaker 2: Jacob Goldstein. This episode, in fact. 27 00:01:51,490 --> 00:01:54,730 Speaker 3: What are your thoughts on UBI universal basic income as 28 00:01:54,770 --> 00:01:58,290 Speaker 3: a solution to an AI crisis and the widespread philosophical 29 00:01:58,450 --> 00:02:00,650 Speaker 3: and economic implications of this. 30 00:02:01,130 --> 00:02:05,930 Speaker 2: If what Alex is thinking about comes true, and if 31 00:02:06,010 --> 00:02:08,930 Speaker 2: most people just have no economic value, they have value 32 00:02:08,930 --> 00:02:11,090 Speaker 2: as human beings, have value as members of society, but 33 00:02:11,090 --> 00:02:13,730 Speaker 2: there's nothing that they could actually sell their labor to do, 34 00:02:14,810 --> 00:02:19,330 Speaker 2: then that's completely uncharted territory. We've never been anywhere like 35 00:02:19,370 --> 00:02:22,330 Speaker 2: that before, so everything we do is kind of speculative. 36 00:02:22,650 --> 00:02:26,490 Speaker 3: The idea of more or less everybody losing their jobs 37 00:02:26,530 --> 00:02:28,850 Speaker 3: I'm skeptical of for the simple reason that it hasn't 38 00:02:28,850 --> 00:02:31,890 Speaker 3: happened in two hundred years of incredible technological progress. I 39 00:02:31,930 --> 00:02:34,530 Speaker 3: don't think we're going to have everybody losing their jobs 40 00:02:34,570 --> 00:02:36,450 Speaker 3: to AI. I definitely could be wrong, but that's what 41 00:02:36,490 --> 00:02:36,770 Speaker 3: I think. 42 00:02:36,890 --> 00:02:40,410 Speaker 2: No, I think that's a good working assumption. If you 43 00:02:40,490 --> 00:02:43,970 Speaker 2: think back a few centuries. Basically almost all the labor 44 00:02:44,010 --> 00:02:47,010 Speaker 2: that people did. They might wash their clothes occasionally, well 45 00:02:47,010 --> 00:02:49,850 Speaker 2: that's been outsourced to the washing machines. Almost everything we 46 00:02:50,010 --> 00:02:52,970 Speaker 2: used to do is now done by machines. But somehow 47 00:02:52,970 --> 00:02:55,970 Speaker 2: we still all have jobs. Tell me what you felt 48 00:02:55,970 --> 00:02:58,370 Speaker 2: when you heard the conversation between me and Jacob. 49 00:02:59,330 --> 00:03:03,490 Speaker 1: I've been interested in the effects of technology on our 50 00:03:03,530 --> 00:03:08,050 Speaker 1: economic system for a long time, and I'm particularly interested 51 00:03:08,050 --> 00:03:13,610 Speaker 1: in universe basic income as a possible solution. And the 52 00:03:13,650 --> 00:03:16,170 Speaker 1: core of my disappointment was that I did I didn't 53 00:03:16,170 --> 00:03:19,450 Speaker 1: feel like the universal basic income aspect of it was 54 00:03:19,490 --> 00:03:22,210 Speaker 1: being engaged with in the way I wanted to hear 55 00:03:22,530 --> 00:03:26,570 Speaker 1: it talked about. Often economists seem to write off some 56 00:03:26,690 --> 00:03:32,090 Speaker 1: of the concerns in a way which doesn't seem helpful. Yeah, 57 00:03:32,170 --> 00:03:34,370 Speaker 1: I was particularly interested in what you had to say 58 00:03:34,410 --> 00:03:36,570 Speaker 1: about it, and that wasn't really there. 59 00:03:36,690 --> 00:03:38,970 Speaker 2: Yeah, and we didn't do any of that. We mostly said, 60 00:03:39,130 --> 00:03:41,610 Speaker 2: don't worry, the robots are'm going to take our jobs, 61 00:03:41,610 --> 00:03:43,410 Speaker 2: which you know, we may be right or we may 62 00:03:43,450 --> 00:03:46,450 Speaker 2: be wrong, but it kind of left the universal basic 63 00:03:46,490 --> 00:03:50,170 Speaker 2: income question to one side. So thank you for raising that, Richard. 64 00:03:50,210 --> 00:03:55,410 Speaker 2: We will, we'll talk about universal basic income. Hopefully I'm 65 00:03:55,450 --> 00:03:57,050 Speaker 2: going to be able to talk to you a little 66 00:03:57,050 --> 00:03:58,890 Speaker 2: bit about games. But before we do any of that, 67 00:03:59,730 --> 00:04:26,610 Speaker 2: we are going to play the caution retiales theme. I 68 00:04:26,650 --> 00:04:30,690 Speaker 2: am talking to Richard Garfield. Richard, and you're a huge 69 00:04:30,690 --> 00:04:35,050 Speaker 2: star in the gaming world. Where when did your love 70 00:04:35,050 --> 00:04:36,170 Speaker 2: affair with games begin? 71 00:04:36,810 --> 00:04:41,090 Speaker 1: I was always attracted to games, but I don't think 72 00:04:41,130 --> 00:04:46,090 Speaker 1: I really became a gamer until Dungeons and Dragons. Dungeons 73 00:04:46,130 --> 00:04:49,730 Speaker 1: and Dragons blew my mind. It was just it was 74 00:04:49,970 --> 00:04:54,250 Speaker 1: just a complete revelation for me. I had no idea 75 00:04:54,690 --> 00:04:57,090 Speaker 1: the range of things that could be done with games. 76 00:04:57,330 --> 00:05:02,090 Speaker 1: It became really a lifelong obsession with Dungeons and Dragons. 77 00:05:02,730 --> 00:05:05,690 Speaker 2: What is it specifically about the tabletop roleplaying games there? 78 00:05:05,690 --> 00:05:07,170 Speaker 2: I mean, I'm a huge fan of them as well 79 00:05:07,970 --> 00:05:10,210 Speaker 2: that you love so much. Is it the sort of 80 00:05:10,250 --> 00:05:13,530 Speaker 2: just the endless possibility like that it doesn't even seem 81 00:05:13,610 --> 00:05:16,010 Speaker 2: to be a game in the normal sense. 82 00:05:16,250 --> 00:05:19,210 Speaker 1: What originally drew me to it was that it broke 83 00:05:19,290 --> 00:05:23,650 Speaker 1: all the rules I had understood about games. There was 84 00:05:23,730 --> 00:05:28,130 Speaker 1: no time limit on them, there was no explicit victory condition, 85 00:05:28,970 --> 00:05:33,970 Speaker 1: The responsibility for play was much more in a recognizable 86 00:05:33,970 --> 00:05:36,370 Speaker 1: way in the hands of the player rather than a 87 00:05:36,410 --> 00:05:40,130 Speaker 1: system of rules, and so its value to me was 88 00:05:40,170 --> 00:05:43,530 Speaker 1: really showing the range of what could be done with games. 89 00:05:44,050 --> 00:05:46,970 Speaker 1: I just think that role playing is in itself an 90 00:05:46,970 --> 00:05:51,330 Speaker 1: amazing pastime because of the endless possibilities. You know that 91 00:05:51,850 --> 00:05:53,130 Speaker 1: anything can be done with it. 92 00:05:53,210 --> 00:05:59,090 Speaker 2: Yeah, they are remarkable. I remember quite vividly being told 93 00:05:59,130 --> 00:06:01,370 Speaker 2: by a friend about this game, and I couldn't quite 94 00:06:01,410 --> 00:06:04,370 Speaker 2: get my head around what he was describing. So was 95 00:06:04,410 --> 00:06:06,890 Speaker 2: this a computer game? No, it's not a computer game. 96 00:06:07,050 --> 00:06:09,370 Speaker 2: Is there a board? No, not really, there's a app 97 00:06:10,210 --> 00:06:13,930 Speaker 2: And I think we should probably help people who don't 98 00:06:13,930 --> 00:06:16,810 Speaker 2: know how these games work to conceptualize them. And fundamentally, 99 00:06:16,810 --> 00:06:20,530 Speaker 2: you've got in your classic role playing game, you have 100 00:06:21,090 --> 00:06:24,130 Speaker 2: a game master or a dungeon master or who is 101 00:06:24,970 --> 00:06:30,610 Speaker 2: describing situations, and then the players are adopting roles. That's 102 00:06:30,650 --> 00:06:34,450 Speaker 2: why it's called role playing. So they might be a Astronauts, 103 00:06:34,490 --> 00:06:38,970 Speaker 2: space explorers, wizards, and they're describing how their characters respond 104 00:06:39,010 --> 00:06:39,850 Speaker 2: to the situations. 105 00:06:40,010 --> 00:06:43,250 Speaker 1: Yes, if you just if you play traditional games and 106 00:06:43,330 --> 00:06:47,290 Speaker 1: you first run into role playing games, it really challenges 107 00:06:47,330 --> 00:06:50,410 Speaker 1: all your preconceptions about what games are and what they 108 00:06:50,450 --> 00:06:50,930 Speaker 1: can be. 109 00:06:51,330 --> 00:06:53,530 Speaker 2: One of the things that interests me, though, is that 110 00:06:53,570 --> 00:06:56,010 Speaker 2: you're I mean, you're deep into Dungeon and Dragons. You were, 111 00:06:56,050 --> 00:06:58,730 Speaker 2: I think one of the primary play testers for the 112 00:06:59,370 --> 00:07:00,170 Speaker 2: third edition. 113 00:07:00,050 --> 00:07:01,490 Speaker 1: Is that right, that's cracked up. 114 00:07:01,770 --> 00:07:06,930 Speaker 2: But you're famous for your board games and your card games, 115 00:07:07,570 --> 00:07:11,370 Speaker 2: which are more structured, and the tabletop role playing games, 116 00:07:11,370 --> 00:07:13,290 Speaker 2: which is so can be so free form. They feel 117 00:07:13,370 --> 00:07:15,890 Speaker 2: quite different to board games, so I'm curious as to 118 00:07:15,970 --> 00:07:17,530 Speaker 2: why there is such a lot of overlap. I mean, 119 00:07:17,570 --> 00:07:20,170 Speaker 2: I love both, You obviously love both, A lot of 120 00:07:20,170 --> 00:07:23,610 Speaker 2: people love both, and yet that it seems a little 121 00:07:23,650 --> 00:07:27,330 Speaker 2: bit like saying, well, if you love cricket, then obviously 122 00:07:27,370 --> 00:07:30,290 Speaker 2: you should love no marathon running. But they're not really 123 00:07:30,290 --> 00:07:33,210 Speaker 2: the same thing at all. But why this affinity between 124 00:07:33,210 --> 00:07:33,730 Speaker 2: the two. 125 00:07:33,890 --> 00:07:36,930 Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a really good question. I've asked myself why 126 00:07:37,010 --> 00:07:43,130 Speaker 1: I ended up devoted to more traditionally structured games than 127 00:07:43,370 --> 00:07:47,170 Speaker 1: role playing, since role playing was my introduction to the hobby, 128 00:07:47,810 --> 00:07:50,850 Speaker 1: And I'm not sure what the answer is, but one 129 00:07:51,690 --> 00:07:55,650 Speaker 1: difference between the way I looked at games and a 130 00:07:55,690 --> 00:08:00,850 Speaker 1: lot of my peers was that my peers found a 131 00:08:00,890 --> 00:08:03,450 Speaker 1: game they loved and they became devoted to that game, 132 00:08:04,130 --> 00:08:06,690 Speaker 1: and I became devoted to games as a whole. So, 133 00:08:06,810 --> 00:08:11,330 Speaker 1: for example, I became interested in classic games like go 134 00:08:11,610 --> 00:08:15,330 Speaker 1: and chess and cards, but I also became interested in 135 00:08:15,370 --> 00:08:18,810 Speaker 1: sports and what the games were that were being played 136 00:08:18,850 --> 00:08:22,650 Speaker 1: within sports, and trying to see the connections between all 137 00:08:22,690 --> 00:08:25,370 Speaker 1: these different areas of games. So I'm not sure why 138 00:08:25,410 --> 00:08:27,730 Speaker 1: I ended up in that area and specific, but I 139 00:08:27,770 --> 00:08:30,210 Speaker 1: do know that there's been sort of a lifelong exercise 140 00:08:30,210 --> 00:08:34,690 Speaker 1: of mine to expand and unite games under one umbrella 141 00:08:35,130 --> 00:08:38,410 Speaker 1: rather than be a bunch of separate things. Like One 142 00:08:38,410 --> 00:08:40,850 Speaker 1: of the things that was very interesting to me when 143 00:08:40,890 --> 00:08:42,810 Speaker 1: I was beginning out is I would ask people what 144 00:08:42,930 --> 00:08:45,450 Speaker 1: games they played, and they say, often I don't play 145 00:08:45,450 --> 00:08:47,850 Speaker 1: any games. And then we'd talk a little further and 146 00:08:47,850 --> 00:08:49,970 Speaker 1: it would turn out they played poker they just didn't 147 00:08:50,090 --> 00:08:53,530 Speaker 1: consider it a game, or they played chess. Oh no, 148 00:08:53,570 --> 00:08:54,770 Speaker 1: that's not a game, that's a sport. 149 00:08:54,890 --> 00:08:56,370 Speaker 2: Yeah, I was gonna say, I mean, do we have 150 00:08:56,410 --> 00:08:58,770 Speaker 2: a definition of games that satisfies you? 151 00:08:59,290 --> 00:09:04,530 Speaker 1: No? No, I follow the fuzzy definition of games where 152 00:09:04,810 --> 00:09:07,370 Speaker 1: where there you know there are things that are more 153 00:09:07,690 --> 00:09:09,970 Speaker 1: or less game like, but that you're not going to 154 00:09:10,010 --> 00:09:12,730 Speaker 1: have a precise definition, there's always going to be fuzziness, 155 00:09:12,730 --> 00:09:16,010 Speaker 1: and often exploring that fuzzy boundary is quite interesting. 156 00:09:16,650 --> 00:09:19,890 Speaker 2: One game that is definitely a game, there's no fuzziness 157 00:09:19,890 --> 00:09:25,930 Speaker 2: about it, I think, is Magic the Gathering, which is 158 00:09:25,970 --> 00:09:29,650 Speaker 2: your game, and I mean, I think has got to 159 00:09:29,650 --> 00:09:32,290 Speaker 2: have a claim to be one of the most successful 160 00:09:32,690 --> 00:09:39,330 Speaker 2: tabletop games of all time. It's astonishingly popular game. Tell 161 00:09:39,410 --> 00:09:41,210 Speaker 2: us a little bit about that game and how you 162 00:09:41,250 --> 00:09:41,890 Speaker 2: developed it. 163 00:09:42,090 --> 00:09:46,730 Speaker 1: Magic began with a eureka moment, which is not common 164 00:09:46,770 --> 00:09:51,170 Speaker 1: with my game design. My game design is more evolutionary 165 00:09:51,370 --> 00:09:56,930 Speaker 1: than revolutionary typically. But I was hiking and had this 166 00:09:57,410 --> 00:10:00,970 Speaker 1: thought which overwhelmed me, which was that not all the 167 00:10:01,010 --> 00:10:03,930 Speaker 1: players had to have the same equipment in the game. 168 00:10:04,970 --> 00:10:08,370 Speaker 1: And I just felt like there was endless possibilities with 169 00:10:08,410 --> 00:10:12,490 Speaker 1: this idea that people would bring different cards or different 170 00:10:12,530 --> 00:10:16,410 Speaker 1: components of some sort to the game and compete with those. 171 00:10:17,290 --> 00:10:22,210 Speaker 1: And it took me a little while before that became 172 00:10:22,850 --> 00:10:25,530 Speaker 1: what it is now, which is a game where the 173 00:10:25,570 --> 00:10:29,610 Speaker 1: players have cards which represent magic spells and they have 174 00:10:29,650 --> 00:10:33,290 Speaker 1: a duel with these spells. And yeah, it was published 175 00:10:33,290 --> 00:10:38,090 Speaker 1: in ninety three and it was instantly very hard to 176 00:10:38,170 --> 00:10:43,890 Speaker 1: keep enough in print to satisfy the growing and ravenous 177 00:10:44,570 --> 00:10:45,210 Speaker 1: player base. 178 00:10:45,530 --> 00:10:48,650 Speaker 2: One of the things about it that I as an 179 00:10:48,650 --> 00:10:51,250 Speaker 2: economist and as a gamer, one of the things that 180 00:10:51,450 --> 00:10:53,410 Speaker 2: struck me as so clever was that it's kind of 181 00:10:53,930 --> 00:10:59,010 Speaker 2: It's got this kind of collectible baseball card quality to it, 182 00:10:59,370 --> 00:11:03,210 Speaker 2: this idea of that you would buy packs of cards 183 00:11:03,650 --> 00:11:05,610 Speaker 2: in the hope of maybe getting a rare one. I mean, 184 00:11:05,610 --> 00:11:08,610 Speaker 2: that's kind of genius, both in terms of gameplay and 185 00:11:08,650 --> 00:11:11,450 Speaker 2: of course of economics. I mean, suddenly people have a 186 00:11:11,490 --> 00:11:14,170 Speaker 2: reason to buy and buy and buy the game, so yes, 187 00:11:14,210 --> 00:11:14,730 Speaker 2: well then you. 188 00:11:15,210 --> 00:11:17,930 Speaker 1: It was a surprise to me as much as anyone 189 00:11:18,410 --> 00:11:21,210 Speaker 1: how the idea took off. I knew that it was 190 00:11:21,250 --> 00:11:25,450 Speaker 1: a good game because my playtesters were playing it devotedly, 191 00:11:25,650 --> 00:11:28,890 Speaker 1: even after two years with the same set of cards. 192 00:11:29,570 --> 00:11:34,010 Speaker 1: But I still expected people to buy maybe a deck 193 00:11:34,090 --> 00:11:36,370 Speaker 1: or two and then just trade after that. I did 194 00:11:36,370 --> 00:11:39,810 Speaker 1: not expect them to buy like they did, and it 195 00:11:39,850 --> 00:11:44,250 Speaker 1: has been an ongoing tension with the game. The industry 196 00:11:44,330 --> 00:11:47,970 Speaker 1: standard name for them is collectible card games, but I've 197 00:11:47,970 --> 00:11:53,370 Speaker 1: always fought that as the name because I don't like 198 00:11:53,410 --> 00:11:56,370 Speaker 1: the emphasis of collectible. I like calling the trading card 199 00:11:56,410 --> 00:11:59,930 Speaker 1: games because it emphasizes the original intent, which was that 200 00:12:00,130 --> 00:12:04,010 Speaker 1: players trade the cards between themselves, and history of the 201 00:12:04,050 --> 00:12:11,890 Speaker 1: game is filled with speculators interfering with gameplay because they 202 00:12:11,930 --> 00:12:15,290 Speaker 1: drive the prices up so high that people have trouble 203 00:12:15,410 --> 00:12:18,490 Speaker 1: getting the cards to play. The economics of the game 204 00:12:18,530 --> 00:12:23,050 Speaker 1: is fascinating. I have a friend who's thesis economic thesis 205 00:12:23,250 --> 00:12:25,650 Speaker 1: was entirely about magic. 206 00:12:26,050 --> 00:12:30,170 Speaker 2: I think this interaction between games and trading it's interesting 207 00:12:30,370 --> 00:12:34,090 Speaker 2: as an economist. When I occasionally play Monopoly, I'm always 208 00:12:34,090 --> 00:12:36,250 Speaker 2: trying to get people to trade, because there are games 209 00:12:36,290 --> 00:12:39,970 Speaker 2: from trade. If you're playing with five six people, any 210 00:12:39,970 --> 00:12:43,610 Speaker 2: two people who get together and trade, they're really stiffing 211 00:12:43,610 --> 00:12:46,250 Speaker 2: the other players, and they should do it. But in 212 00:12:46,290 --> 00:12:51,410 Speaker 2: my experience with kind of non gamey gamers, who are 213 00:12:51,450 --> 00:12:53,530 Speaker 2: the kind of people who you're likely to play Monopoly with, 214 00:12:53,970 --> 00:12:55,410 Speaker 2: they tend not to mont to trade. 215 00:12:55,730 --> 00:12:57,930 Speaker 1: One of the things i'm designing a game I have 216 00:12:58,050 --> 00:13:02,210 Speaker 1: found is that you do have to consider not what 217 00:13:02,250 --> 00:13:07,050 Speaker 1: the optimum play is, but how people actually do play. 218 00:13:07,530 --> 00:13:09,330 Speaker 1: So if they play in a way which is in 219 00:13:09,370 --> 00:13:12,290 Speaker 1: some theoretical sense not optimum and they end up having 220 00:13:12,330 --> 00:13:16,130 Speaker 1: a miserable time, that's a fault of the game, not 221 00:13:16,370 --> 00:13:20,410 Speaker 1: the players, and one has to take dad into account. 222 00:13:20,690 --> 00:13:23,170 Speaker 2: Yes, that feels like a lesson for economic policy as 223 00:13:23,210 --> 00:13:25,330 Speaker 2: well as for game design. You've got to deal with 224 00:13:25,370 --> 00:13:28,850 Speaker 2: how people actually behave rather than how they might behave 225 00:13:28,890 --> 00:13:32,170 Speaker 2: in some theoretical world, which I guess brings us onto 226 00:13:32,450 --> 00:13:36,290 Speaker 2: the question of universal basic income, so which I've promised 227 00:13:36,330 --> 00:13:38,490 Speaker 2: you I'm going to get to. So let's do it. 228 00:13:38,570 --> 00:13:42,210 Speaker 2: So the issue on the table was, let's say the 229 00:13:42,290 --> 00:13:44,970 Speaker 2: robots take all our jobs, or the robots take a 230 00:13:44,970 --> 00:13:47,970 Speaker 2: substantial number of jobs from a substantial number of people. 231 00:13:48,890 --> 00:13:51,650 Speaker 2: What would we do about that? And might a universal 232 00:13:52,210 --> 00:13:55,370 Speaker 2: basic income be a response? And the basic idea of 233 00:13:55,410 --> 00:13:59,570 Speaker 2: a universal basic income, it's pretty simple. It's universal, and 234 00:13:59,610 --> 00:14:02,490 Speaker 2: it's an income, and and it's basic. So everybody gets 235 00:14:02,490 --> 00:14:04,690 Speaker 2: some cash, maybe not loads and loads of cash, but 236 00:14:04,730 --> 00:14:08,450 Speaker 2: they get enough cash. So very happy to tell you 237 00:14:08,490 --> 00:14:11,370 Speaker 2: what I think about. But what's your take? You said 238 00:14:11,370 --> 00:14:13,450 Speaker 2: you've been thinking about this for an enormous amount of time. 239 00:14:14,650 --> 00:14:17,290 Speaker 1: Yeah, in fact, I would like to give you the 240 00:14:17,330 --> 00:14:21,170 Speaker 1: thought exercise which i'd had so much. I've had so 241 00:14:21,290 --> 00:14:25,370 Speaker 1: much trouble getting seriously considered, which I would ask my 242 00:14:25,610 --> 00:14:30,170 Speaker 1: economic friends as a thought experiment what would happen if 243 00:14:30,290 --> 00:14:35,330 Speaker 1: the jobs went away? It became almost pathological. How often 244 00:14:35,970 --> 00:14:39,330 Speaker 1: that wasn't taken as a thought experiment, that was taken 245 00:14:39,370 --> 00:14:42,050 Speaker 1: as an opportunity to talk about how that can't happen. 246 00:14:42,170 --> 00:14:44,370 Speaker 2: Yes, and Jacob and I just did exactly the same thing. 247 00:14:44,450 --> 00:14:47,410 Speaker 2: So I apologize for feeding your frustration. I mean, I 248 00:14:47,490 --> 00:14:51,490 Speaker 2: understand why that is a response, because I think there's 249 00:14:51,490 --> 00:14:55,810 Speaker 2: a long history of people overrating this possible scenario and 250 00:14:55,810 --> 00:14:59,330 Speaker 2: getting too worried about it. But sure, let's entertain it. 251 00:14:59,890 --> 00:15:03,650 Speaker 2: So I mean, what I'm imagining is we're living in 252 00:15:03,650 --> 00:15:09,090 Speaker 2: a world now where most people there's no real economic 253 00:15:09,650 --> 00:15:14,010 Speaker 2: value to their labor. It's all being done one way 254 00:15:14,050 --> 00:15:20,410 Speaker 2: or another by automation. That's super radical because our work 255 00:15:20,450 --> 00:15:24,010 Speaker 2: has always had value in the past, and therefore the 256 00:15:24,090 --> 00:15:28,370 Speaker 2: implicit bargain has always been, you know, if you want 257 00:15:28,370 --> 00:15:31,490 Speaker 2: to eat, then you've got to work. You trade your labor, 258 00:15:31,530 --> 00:15:34,690 Speaker 2: you get consumption, you get good stuff. So in this 259 00:15:34,770 --> 00:15:38,250 Speaker 2: hypothetical world, you can't trade your labor for consumption because 260 00:15:38,250 --> 00:15:40,570 Speaker 2: your labor doesn't have any value. You still have value 261 00:15:40,570 --> 00:15:43,170 Speaker 2: as a human being. So what are we going to do? 262 00:15:43,770 --> 00:15:46,890 Speaker 2: Technically speaking, it doesn't seem that hard. I mean, one 263 00:15:46,890 --> 00:15:50,410 Speaker 2: way of thinking about it that ties it to today's 264 00:15:50,410 --> 00:15:53,650 Speaker 2: economy is you just say, well, the government, which will 265 00:15:53,690 --> 00:15:57,530 Speaker 2: assume is still a democratic government representing the citizens. The 266 00:15:57,530 --> 00:16:02,170 Speaker 2: government just taxes capital, so levy a tax on companies. Well, 267 00:16:02,250 --> 00:16:05,970 Speaker 2: levy a tax on anyone who has a robot, and 268 00:16:06,330 --> 00:16:09,970 Speaker 2: we redistribute that income to all the citizens. Everybody gets 269 00:16:11,370 --> 00:16:13,810 Speaker 2: twenty thousand dollars a year or whatever it is, and 270 00:16:13,850 --> 00:16:16,290 Speaker 2: they just spend that money buying stuff from the robots. 271 00:16:17,410 --> 00:16:21,930 Speaker 2: Or if we're talking more Star Trek, more futuristic, maybe 272 00:16:21,930 --> 00:16:24,050 Speaker 2: the rule is it's not about income. You just have 273 00:16:24,130 --> 00:16:26,650 Speaker 2: a robot who works for you. Everyone's got a robot 274 00:16:26,690 --> 00:16:29,690 Speaker 2: who works for them. Everyone gets some kind of voucher 275 00:16:29,730 --> 00:16:33,170 Speaker 2: that entitles them to services from this kind of production 276 00:16:33,330 --> 00:16:38,330 Speaker 2: system that is all automated. In principle, it's possible because 277 00:16:38,730 --> 00:16:41,810 Speaker 2: you've got this tremendously productive economy and you've got a 278 00:16:41,810 --> 00:16:44,610 Speaker 2: bunch of people who want to consume stuff. So what 279 00:16:44,610 --> 00:16:46,650 Speaker 2: you're trying to do is bridge the gap, Like you're 280 00:16:46,690 --> 00:16:50,730 Speaker 2: trying to figure out who has the rights to consume 281 00:16:50,770 --> 00:16:53,810 Speaker 2: the output of all of this production, and how do 282 00:16:53,850 --> 00:16:56,930 Speaker 2: we assign those rights. So there are other possibilities, which is, 283 00:16:56,930 --> 00:17:02,130 Speaker 2: you know, you've got some dystopian state and Elon Musk 284 00:17:02,210 --> 00:17:04,850 Speaker 2: controls all the robots and they all have guns and 285 00:17:04,890 --> 00:17:07,530 Speaker 2: nobody else gets anything, and you know, then we're in 286 00:17:07,570 --> 00:17:11,210 Speaker 2: some nightmare future. But but assuming we still live in 287 00:17:11,250 --> 00:17:18,370 Speaker 2: a in a wealthy democracy, it's incredibly radical to say 288 00:17:18,370 --> 00:17:21,330 Speaker 2: to people your consumption is no longer tied to your 289 00:17:21,330 --> 00:17:26,330 Speaker 2: production at all. But it doesn't seem impossible to set 290 00:17:26,370 --> 00:17:27,250 Speaker 2: up that kind of system. 291 00:17:27,490 --> 00:17:31,090 Speaker 1: Yeah, that describes it very well, and it has engaged 292 00:17:31,130 --> 00:17:34,050 Speaker 1: in the thought experiment quite well. I would say that 293 00:17:34,050 --> 00:17:36,530 Speaker 1: that is one of the things which I find appealing 294 00:17:36,770 --> 00:17:41,370 Speaker 1: about universal basic income is that it seems like a 295 00:17:41,490 --> 00:17:46,130 Speaker 1: dial that you can spin it and get some result 296 00:17:46,610 --> 00:17:49,690 Speaker 1: which might smoothly bridge that gap rather than change everything. 297 00:17:50,090 --> 00:17:52,610 Speaker 1: And the thing is that if you don't, if that 298 00:17:52,730 --> 00:17:56,530 Speaker 1: really is a possibility, and we're really on the road there, 299 00:17:57,050 --> 00:18:00,490 Speaker 1: then at what point do you actually make a change? 300 00:18:00,930 --> 00:18:04,650 Speaker 1: Because I suspect if you don't make a plan for it, 301 00:18:04,690 --> 00:18:06,490 Speaker 1: that you're going to end up in a worse situation. 302 00:18:07,050 --> 00:18:09,370 Speaker 1: It won't be simply we're going to get to a 303 00:18:09,410 --> 00:18:11,570 Speaker 1: point where people say, oh, we need to do something now, 304 00:18:11,930 --> 00:18:16,450 Speaker 1: it will already be a dreadful state. Possibly you'll even 305 00:18:16,450 --> 00:18:20,090 Speaker 1: get to a place where you can no longer really 306 00:18:20,370 --> 00:18:23,450 Speaker 1: take the steps necessary to get a smooth transition. 307 00:18:23,930 --> 00:18:27,330 Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, we already have a universal basic income 308 00:18:27,490 --> 00:18:32,450 Speaker 2: in many rich countries. It's just universal subject to the 309 00:18:32,490 --> 00:18:35,650 Speaker 2: condition that you're over the age of sixty five. The 310 00:18:35,690 --> 00:18:41,970 Speaker 2: age varies. What worries me, Richard is the transition. And 311 00:18:42,010 --> 00:18:45,850 Speaker 2: I think one of the things that is worrying is 312 00:18:46,170 --> 00:18:51,010 Speaker 2: people are very concerned, maybe too concerned, but in any case, 313 00:18:51,050 --> 00:18:53,130 Speaker 2: it's a fact people are very concerned about the idea 314 00:18:53,170 --> 00:18:59,290 Speaker 2: of the undeserving poor, the idea that you're giving money 315 00:18:59,290 --> 00:19:02,370 Speaker 2: to people who are they're taking advantage of you. You're 316 00:19:02,450 --> 00:19:05,250 Speaker 2: working hard, you're paying your taxes, and then some other 317 00:19:05,290 --> 00:19:08,490 Speaker 2: guy is just laughing at you and collecting this money 318 00:19:08,490 --> 00:19:11,250 Speaker 2: on benefit and they're just a scrounger. It's a very 319 00:19:11,290 --> 00:19:15,850 Speaker 2: powerful rhetoric and very powerful concern. So at the moment, 320 00:19:15,970 --> 00:19:18,810 Speaker 2: in a society where most people can work, that concern 321 00:19:18,890 --> 00:19:21,530 Speaker 2: is it tends to be fought by people saying, well, 322 00:19:21,530 --> 00:19:25,010 Speaker 2: we're going to have type restrictions on who can get paid. 323 00:19:26,050 --> 00:19:29,090 Speaker 2: But the shift to a universal basic income in the end, 324 00:19:29,130 --> 00:19:31,730 Speaker 2: you're basically saying what everyone's going to get it. So 325 00:19:31,770 --> 00:19:33,970 Speaker 2: I imagine at a stage where the robots are doing 326 00:19:34,010 --> 00:19:36,810 Speaker 2: all the work and everybody gets this income. Again, it 327 00:19:36,850 --> 00:19:39,890 Speaker 2: won't be a problematic there. It's the getting from A 328 00:19:39,970 --> 00:19:43,450 Speaker 2: to B that's the problem. And I think it seems 329 00:19:43,730 --> 00:19:47,250 Speaker 2: in this hypothetical world where automation takes all the jobs 330 00:19:47,330 --> 00:19:48,890 Speaker 2: and they're not going to take all the jobs all 331 00:19:48,930 --> 00:19:51,850 Speaker 2: at once. They're going to take some people's jobs first 332 00:19:51,890 --> 00:19:55,130 Speaker 2: and other people's jobs later. And so you get you know, 333 00:19:55,170 --> 00:19:57,210 Speaker 2: twenty percent of the jobs are automated, and then forty 334 00:19:57,210 --> 00:19:59,250 Speaker 2: percent of the jobs are automated, you know, as sure 335 00:19:59,290 --> 00:20:01,290 Speaker 2: people are trying to retrain, they're trying to get new jobs, 336 00:20:01,290 --> 00:20:04,690 Speaker 2: but it's hard. Then it's sixty percent of people's jobs. 337 00:20:05,290 --> 00:20:08,450 Speaker 2: And then you've got the people who remain, who, no doubt, 338 00:20:08,490 --> 00:20:12,610 Speaker 2: we'll be telling themselves a story about how incredibly special 339 00:20:12,690 --> 00:20:15,090 Speaker 2: they are and how incredibly special less skills are, and 340 00:20:15,130 --> 00:20:18,250 Speaker 2: how they're working hard. But in fact it's just going 341 00:20:18,290 --> 00:20:20,690 Speaker 2: to be pure chance what stuff is automatable and what 342 00:20:20,730 --> 00:20:24,130 Speaker 2: stuff is not. And I can imagine that kind of 343 00:20:24,250 --> 00:20:27,050 Speaker 2: those questions as to who deserves to get this income 344 00:20:27,450 --> 00:20:29,770 Speaker 2: and who exactly is going to pay for it are 345 00:20:29,810 --> 00:20:32,010 Speaker 2: going to loom very large. 346 00:20:32,370 --> 00:20:36,610 Speaker 1: I agree. I think that has definitely been a big 347 00:20:36,690 --> 00:20:42,530 Speaker 1: part of the story around universal basic income. But one 348 00:20:42,570 --> 00:20:45,290 Speaker 1: way I like to look at it, because I view 349 00:20:45,450 --> 00:20:49,410 Speaker 1: everything through a lens of games, I like to look 350 00:20:49,450 --> 00:20:54,530 Speaker 1: at it as a catch up feature. In games, when 351 00:20:54,570 --> 00:20:57,730 Speaker 1: you fall too far behind, you can feel like you 352 00:20:57,810 --> 00:21:03,730 Speaker 1: can't contribute, can't participate in the game in a productive way, 353 00:21:04,050 --> 00:21:07,330 Speaker 1: And in game design you can make good catch up 354 00:21:07,370 --> 00:21:13,170 Speaker 1: features or bad ones. Catch up feature encourages people to 355 00:21:14,170 --> 00:21:16,170 Speaker 1: lean on it rather than do what they're supposed to 356 00:21:16,170 --> 00:21:19,130 Speaker 1: be doing, which is playing the game. So when we 357 00:21:19,170 --> 00:21:23,250 Speaker 1: start talking about these people get universal basic income, but 358 00:21:23,290 --> 00:21:27,450 Speaker 1: these don't, that really opens up this possibility for I 359 00:21:27,490 --> 00:21:30,210 Speaker 1: feel like these people are not playing the game. They're 360 00:21:30,250 --> 00:21:33,850 Speaker 1: just leaning on the catch up feature, and that feels bad. 361 00:21:34,290 --> 00:21:37,450 Speaker 1: But if it really is universal, if it's a citizen's dividend, 362 00:21:38,210 --> 00:21:41,490 Speaker 1: then it's something where it raises everybody, and the people 363 00:21:41,490 --> 00:21:44,130 Speaker 1: who do have work, they're going to have a better 364 00:21:44,210 --> 00:21:48,370 Speaker 1: lifestyle because they're getting paid above and beyond. They won't 365 00:21:48,410 --> 00:21:52,010 Speaker 1: feel like, oh, I shouldn't be participating because because I'm 366 00:21:52,010 --> 00:21:54,250 Speaker 1: denying myself this dividend. 367 00:21:54,610 --> 00:21:58,010 Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean there is an argument that the most 368 00:21:58,050 --> 00:22:02,930 Speaker 2: successful government programs are always the universal ones. So whether 369 00:22:02,970 --> 00:22:05,810 Speaker 2: it's the UK's National Health Service where everyone who lives 370 00:22:05,810 --> 00:22:09,050 Speaker 2: in the UK. Actually they're slightly tidening it, but basically 371 00:22:09,370 --> 00:22:13,370 Speaker 2: the National Health Services is for everybody, most rich people 372 00:22:14,090 --> 00:22:16,650 Speaker 2: for the most part using the National Health Service, And 373 00:22:16,690 --> 00:22:18,690 Speaker 2: the same is true for the state pension. I mean, 374 00:22:18,770 --> 00:22:22,450 Speaker 2: rich people have private pensions as well, but nevertheless everybody 375 00:22:22,530 --> 00:22:25,370 Speaker 2: gets the state pension. Nobody is told, well, you're a millionaire, 376 00:22:25,370 --> 00:22:27,330 Speaker 2: you don't get the state pension, and that I think 377 00:22:27,370 --> 00:22:31,570 Speaker 2: has been quite important in building support for this sort 378 00:22:31,610 --> 00:22:35,370 Speaker 2: of thing. So maybe universal basic income could potentially benefit 379 00:22:35,450 --> 00:22:36,050 Speaker 2: from that as well. 380 00:22:36,170 --> 00:22:40,130 Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that's almost a necessary ingredient of getting 381 00:22:40,170 --> 00:22:40,690 Speaker 1: it to work. 382 00:22:41,130 --> 00:22:44,570 Speaker 2: Richard, I have loads of questions from our listeners for 383 00:22:44,610 --> 00:22:47,610 Speaker 2: you before we do that. Are you happy? Have we 384 00:22:47,730 --> 00:22:49,050 Speaker 2: entertained the hypothetical enough? 385 00:22:49,850 --> 00:22:54,090 Speaker 1: Absolutely? Yes, thank you. It was very very engaging, very pleased. 386 00:22:54,970 --> 00:22:57,930 Speaker 2: I am here to serve, so it's good to hear. 387 00:22:58,010 --> 00:23:02,850 Speaker 2: It's good to hear. Right after the break, we will 388 00:23:02,850 --> 00:23:13,810 Speaker 2: be dipping into the virtual mail pack. We are back 389 00:23:14,250 --> 00:23:18,530 Speaker 2: and here with game designer extraordinary, Richard Garfield to answer 390 00:23:18,610 --> 00:23:23,930 Speaker 2: your questions about games. So, Richard, we have a question 391 00:23:24,050 --> 00:23:26,770 Speaker 2: from Ronan, who was a member of our Cautionary Club. 392 00:23:27,050 --> 00:23:30,930 Speaker 2: He got in touch via Patreon to say, I would 393 00:23:31,010 --> 00:23:34,650 Speaker 2: love to hear about the creative process of creating a game. 394 00:23:35,410 --> 00:23:38,570 Speaker 2: Is it often a flash of inspiration, refined and polished 395 00:23:38,570 --> 00:23:41,690 Speaker 2: and then released or is it much more iterative? Does 396 00:23:41,730 --> 00:23:45,970 Speaker 2: the theme arize first or the mechanics the mechanics basically 397 00:23:46,010 --> 00:23:48,330 Speaker 2: the rules of the game. You've told us a little 398 00:23:48,330 --> 00:23:51,970 Speaker 2: bit about the flash of inspiration behind magic the gathering, 399 00:23:52,090 --> 00:23:54,290 Speaker 2: but you said that was unusual. 400 00:23:55,250 --> 00:23:58,810 Speaker 1: Yeah. I engage in a very iterative game design process. 401 00:23:58,850 --> 00:24:00,730 Speaker 1: And part of the reason for that is the games 402 00:24:00,730 --> 00:24:05,090 Speaker 1: are often really complicated systems, and I've found that it 403 00:24:05,170 --> 00:24:09,250 Speaker 1: is not worth my time to try to analyze everything 404 00:24:09,330 --> 00:24:12,090 Speaker 1: up front, that it is much better use of time 405 00:24:12,130 --> 00:24:14,810 Speaker 1: to make a prototype and play it just because you can. 406 00:24:15,050 --> 00:24:19,090 Speaker 1: You can think about things forever and just misfundamental stuff. 407 00:24:19,770 --> 00:24:24,330 Speaker 1: So I design games, play them, iterate on them, and 408 00:24:24,370 --> 00:24:29,490 Speaker 1: then eventually sometimes often actually give up on them and 409 00:24:29,570 --> 00:24:33,370 Speaker 1: maybe return to them years later, or take pieces of 410 00:24:33,410 --> 00:24:36,850 Speaker 1: them and combine them with other things. There's occasionally a 411 00:24:36,930 --> 00:24:40,370 Speaker 1: Eureka moment like I had with magic, but usually it's 412 00:24:40,450 --> 00:24:41,330 Speaker 1: much more gradual. 413 00:24:41,490 --> 00:24:46,970 Speaker 2: Yeah, the theme of magic is your wizards dueling using spells. 414 00:24:46,970 --> 00:24:49,410 Speaker 2: But I didn't have to be that theme. It could 415 00:24:49,410 --> 00:24:51,570 Speaker 2: have been some other themes. So so how important is 416 00:24:51,570 --> 00:24:51,930 Speaker 2: the theme? 417 00:24:52,170 --> 00:24:56,890 Speaker 1: So Magic in particular was a mechanics first and then theme, 418 00:24:57,410 --> 00:24:59,690 Speaker 1: and I would say more often than not, I do 419 00:24:59,770 --> 00:25:01,810 Speaker 1: mechanics first, then theme, but I do it the other 420 00:25:01,810 --> 00:25:06,050 Speaker 1: way as well. One of the most extreme examples of 421 00:25:06,050 --> 00:25:10,650 Speaker 1: that was that I was playing a quiz game with 422 00:25:11,330 --> 00:25:16,410 Speaker 1: my wife Cony, and we were putting together these words 423 00:25:16,450 --> 00:25:20,170 Speaker 1: to try to find the answers to these questions, and 424 00:25:20,410 --> 00:25:23,490 Speaker 1: two of the words we put together were fat Dracula, 425 00:25:23,810 --> 00:25:27,290 Speaker 1: and we started laughing because it was such a immediately 426 00:25:27,330 --> 00:25:30,850 Speaker 1: against such a good image, and it's it has a 427 00:25:31,410 --> 00:25:33,050 Speaker 1: it has a rhythm to it, so it makes a 428 00:25:33,050 --> 00:25:35,450 Speaker 1: good game title. So I started making a game based 429 00:25:35,450 --> 00:25:39,650 Speaker 1: on that. The idea was basically that these vampires get 430 00:25:39,770 --> 00:25:42,130 Speaker 1: up at night and go out and eat a bunch 431 00:25:42,130 --> 00:25:44,330 Speaker 1: of people and try to waddle home before the sun 432 00:25:44,330 --> 00:25:45,930 Speaker 1: comes up, because the more people that they eat, the 433 00:25:46,970 --> 00:25:49,770 Speaker 1: slower they get. And it didn't actually end up being 434 00:25:49,850 --> 00:25:54,090 Speaker 1: even called fat Dracula. It's called The Hunger. The publisher 435 00:25:54,130 --> 00:25:56,450 Speaker 1: decided to go with The Hunger as a name, But 436 00:25:56,730 --> 00:26:00,450 Speaker 1: that is as close to the beginning with the theme 437 00:26:00,490 --> 00:26:03,370 Speaker 1: and ending up with and adding the mechanics as I've 438 00:26:03,450 --> 00:26:05,890 Speaker 1: run into. So for me it works both ways, and 439 00:26:05,930 --> 00:26:08,810 Speaker 1: for designers, I think it often works both ways. 440 00:26:09,250 --> 00:26:12,930 Speaker 2: On the subject of this iterative process, we had a 441 00:26:12,970 --> 00:26:17,330 Speaker 2: couple of listener questions about playtesting, so Andy's been in 442 00:26:17,370 --> 00:26:20,290 Speaker 2: touch to say, please tell Richard, I've played a lot 443 00:26:20,290 --> 00:26:22,810 Speaker 2: of Treasure Hunter with my son when he was younger. 444 00:26:23,090 --> 00:26:25,890 Speaker 2: He's now fourteen. It's a game I intend to keep 445 00:26:25,890 --> 00:26:28,050 Speaker 2: on the shelf for the day when I have grandkids. 446 00:26:28,250 --> 00:26:31,250 Speaker 2: So I think that's a rave review. But Andy wants 447 00:26:31,290 --> 00:26:33,890 Speaker 2: to know how you test your games, and Mike be 448 00:26:34,690 --> 00:26:37,970 Speaker 2: has another question similar question. He says, Richard, how much 449 00:26:38,050 --> 00:26:41,730 Speaker 2: playtesting goes into a game before it gets released? And 450 00:26:41,770 --> 00:26:44,930 Speaker 2: have you ever had a mechanic that you just couldn't 451 00:26:44,970 --> 00:26:46,890 Speaker 2: make work or if you solved it? 452 00:26:47,010 --> 00:26:52,170 Speaker 1: How ideally a lot of playtest it's hard to model 453 00:26:52,250 --> 00:26:53,970 Speaker 1: in your head what's going to happen with the game 454 00:26:54,010 --> 00:26:58,730 Speaker 1: play to begin with, So that's solved by playtest at first, 455 00:26:58,810 --> 00:27:03,090 Speaker 1: just playtest with the designer and friends. But then in 456 00:27:03,090 --> 00:27:05,770 Speaker 1: the long run you have this other issue, which we 457 00:27:06,130 --> 00:27:08,490 Speaker 1: talked about a little earlier, which was that if people 458 00:27:08,570 --> 00:27:12,970 Speaker 1: are playing in a way which isn't necessarily optimum, but 459 00:27:13,050 --> 00:27:15,410 Speaker 1: that's the way they want to play, then it should 460 00:27:15,450 --> 00:27:20,170 Speaker 1: still be a fun game. It should still work. I mean, 461 00:27:20,250 --> 00:27:23,610 Speaker 1: there can be some some situations where there's a line 462 00:27:23,650 --> 00:27:27,730 Speaker 1: of play which isn't fun and is discouraged, but in general, 463 00:27:28,450 --> 00:27:31,130 Speaker 1: you shouldn't design this game for the best players and 464 00:27:31,210 --> 00:27:33,050 Speaker 1: assume it's going to work out for everybody else. 465 00:27:33,330 --> 00:27:36,410 Speaker 2: Then that must be an issue with the playtesting because presumably, 466 00:27:36,730 --> 00:27:38,810 Speaker 2: well maybe maybe this is the wrong assumption. I was 467 00:27:38,810 --> 00:27:42,050 Speaker 2: assuming a lot of playtesters are very keen gamers and 468 00:27:42,090 --> 00:27:43,930 Speaker 2: are going to play very well. But but maybe you 469 00:27:44,730 --> 00:27:45,730 Speaker 2: maybe that's not true. 470 00:27:46,050 --> 00:27:49,570 Speaker 1: No, that's often an issue, and that is true. So 471 00:27:49,650 --> 00:27:53,570 Speaker 1: when I play test, I do keep around often the 472 00:27:53,650 --> 00:27:58,890 Speaker 1: same playtesters throughout the development, but at the same time 473 00:27:58,930 --> 00:28:02,530 Speaker 1: I try to mix in other playtesters, and I try 474 00:28:02,570 --> 00:28:05,890 Speaker 1: to mix in, depending on the game, more casual players 475 00:28:06,130 --> 00:28:10,170 Speaker 1: and people who you who have no idea what's going on, 476 00:28:10,450 --> 00:28:12,970 Speaker 1: and I look at how they play because I want 477 00:28:13,210 --> 00:28:16,930 Speaker 1: them to enjoy the game as well, or to have 478 00:28:17,010 --> 00:28:21,410 Speaker 1: something to work with. It's very easy to find yourself 479 00:28:22,290 --> 00:28:26,170 Speaker 1: designing and designing and designing and iterating until you have 480 00:28:26,210 --> 00:28:29,010 Speaker 1: a game which people who have played for three years 481 00:28:29,250 --> 00:28:32,650 Speaker 1: love but nobody else can really get their head around it. 482 00:28:32,850 --> 00:28:39,850 Speaker 2: Yeah, I can imagine, Barbara writes to say, please bless 483 00:28:39,970 --> 00:28:44,090 Speaker 2: Richard for the joy that is Bunny Kingdom. Smile. You've 484 00:28:44,090 --> 00:28:46,090 Speaker 2: got a lot of fans here, Richard. I've not even 485 00:28:46,170 --> 00:28:48,970 Speaker 2: heard of Buddy Kingdom. You've designed so many games that 486 00:28:48,970 --> 00:28:51,850 Speaker 2: I can't even keep up with them all. Anyway, Barbara 487 00:28:51,850 --> 00:28:55,130 Speaker 2: loves it, and in fact, her cautionary club profile photo 488 00:28:55,850 --> 00:28:59,530 Speaker 2: comes from the Ladies Gaming Weekend where she first played it. Anyway, 489 00:28:59,930 --> 00:29:03,410 Speaker 2: her question what is the process you like best for 490 00:29:03,490 --> 00:29:07,850 Speaker 2: collaboration with the artists that illustrate your board game designs 491 00:29:08,410 --> 00:29:11,170 Speaker 2: and is there visual artist in the gaming world or 492 00:29:11,250 --> 00:29:13,850 Speaker 2: not that you would really like to work with on 493 00:29:13,890 --> 00:29:14,290 Speaker 2: a game. 494 00:29:14,530 --> 00:29:18,090 Speaker 1: My favorite way to work with artists is to give 495 00:29:18,130 --> 00:29:23,290 Speaker 1: them as much room to work as possible, because they're 496 00:29:23,410 --> 00:29:28,170 Speaker 1: generally in art because they're creative. And so this went 497 00:29:28,210 --> 00:29:33,410 Speaker 1: back as to the original work I was doing with Magic. 498 00:29:33,130 --> 00:29:35,690 Speaker 2: Which as a whole I mean an amazing visual aesthetic. 499 00:29:35,730 --> 00:29:37,730 Speaker 2: I mean that the art is an incredibly important part 500 00:29:37,730 --> 00:29:38,290 Speaker 2: of that game. 501 00:29:38,570 --> 00:29:44,010 Speaker 1: Yes, the original three hundred cards that were maybe twenty artists, 502 00:29:44,050 --> 00:29:47,970 Speaker 1: maybe more, And in the early days there was this 503 00:29:48,090 --> 00:29:50,770 Speaker 1: idea of setting up a bible of how to do 504 00:29:50,810 --> 00:29:54,130 Speaker 1: the art and description of exactly what you wanted. And 505 00:29:54,250 --> 00:29:57,010 Speaker 1: my approach and the way we tried to keep it 506 00:29:57,050 --> 00:30:01,090 Speaker 1: for as long as I was around, was to instead 507 00:30:01,250 --> 00:30:03,930 Speaker 1: give them as little information as possible and see what 508 00:30:03,970 --> 00:30:06,530 Speaker 1: they did. And I liked the variety that would give. 509 00:30:06,730 --> 00:30:09,410 Speaker 1: I felt like you got more special things, and I've 510 00:30:09,450 --> 00:30:13,410 Speaker 1: tried to keep that in my games in general. In Magic, 511 00:30:13,890 --> 00:30:17,530 Speaker 1: at some point they had to really turn up the 512 00:30:17,570 --> 00:30:21,930 Speaker 1: prescription part of the art because it was becoming too crazy, 513 00:30:21,970 --> 00:30:25,170 Speaker 1: where one artist would draw goblins in one way and 514 00:30:25,210 --> 00:30:27,690 Speaker 1: the other one would draw them, you know, as a 515 00:30:27,690 --> 00:30:31,850 Speaker 1: completely different species. But still as a philosophy, I like 516 00:30:31,930 --> 00:30:34,930 Speaker 1: to give the artist as much room to work as possible. 517 00:30:35,210 --> 00:30:37,650 Speaker 2: That does feel very Jim Henson, though. If all the 518 00:30:37,690 --> 00:30:40,610 Speaker 2: goblins don't even look like they're the same species, everything's different. 519 00:30:40,690 --> 00:30:43,130 Speaker 1: But yes, that's true. I think you can make it work. 520 00:30:43,690 --> 00:30:46,610 Speaker 2: I think you probably could. I mean, what is a 521 00:30:46,610 --> 00:30:51,930 Speaker 2: fantasy universe for after all. And so to answer Barbara's question, 522 00:30:52,490 --> 00:30:55,970 Speaker 2: the second part of Barbara's question, any particular visual artist 523 00:30:56,010 --> 00:30:57,930 Speaker 2: you'd love to work with? I mean, let's broaden it. 524 00:30:58,010 --> 00:31:00,210 Speaker 2: Live or dead. You can have Rembrand, you can have 525 00:31:00,250 --> 00:31:02,970 Speaker 2: Free de Carlo, you can have anybody who would you 526 00:31:03,010 --> 00:31:04,130 Speaker 2: love to work with on a game? 527 00:31:04,450 --> 00:31:07,170 Speaker 1: Oh, Esher? Maybe? 528 00:31:07,890 --> 00:31:08,410 Speaker 2: Why is that? 529 00:31:08,730 --> 00:31:12,610 Speaker 1: I like the graphic sensibility of Esher. I like the 530 00:31:12,650 --> 00:31:16,450 Speaker 1: imaginative quality to the work that you know, like He's 531 00:31:16,730 --> 00:31:18,930 Speaker 1: was clearly somebody who liked to play with the rules 532 00:31:18,970 --> 00:31:21,650 Speaker 1: and sort of see where that took them. 533 00:31:21,490 --> 00:31:24,410 Speaker 2: And these kind of these visual illusions. 534 00:31:23,890 --> 00:31:28,090 Speaker 1: Almost a game designer personality that was expressed in the 535 00:31:27,930 --> 00:31:29,490 Speaker 1: in the art. Very good. 536 00:31:30,330 --> 00:31:34,290 Speaker 2: So I've got more questions a question from John who 537 00:31:34,370 --> 00:31:38,650 Speaker 2: asks Magic the Gathering is more popular than ever, but 538 00:31:38,810 --> 00:31:42,290 Speaker 2: digital collectible card games seem to be on the decline. 539 00:31:43,250 --> 00:31:46,050 Speaker 2: Do you think there's a necessary component of in person 540 00:31:46,170 --> 00:31:50,090 Speaker 2: play for games like this? So before you answer, Richard, 541 00:31:50,130 --> 00:31:52,530 Speaker 2: you should tell us what digital collectible card games are, 542 00:31:52,570 --> 00:31:55,130 Speaker 2: because this is kind of I think this is going 543 00:31:55,170 --> 00:31:56,170 Speaker 2: to be new to a lot of people. 544 00:31:56,730 --> 00:32:00,610 Speaker 1: Yeah. So, so the most popular digital collectible card game 545 00:32:00,690 --> 00:32:04,930 Speaker 1: was probably Hearthstone and so yeah, these these games exist 546 00:32:05,170 --> 00:32:10,770 Speaker 1: basically the same idea as as Man or Pokemon, where 547 00:32:11,210 --> 00:32:14,370 Speaker 1: players build a deck, they construct something, and they bring 548 00:32:14,410 --> 00:32:18,530 Speaker 1: it to a game and played against competitors who bring 549 00:32:18,570 --> 00:32:20,970 Speaker 1: their own decks. And so this is something which lends 550 00:32:21,050 --> 00:32:24,490 Speaker 1: itself very well to the digital world because it's so 551 00:32:24,530 --> 00:32:27,210 Speaker 1: easy to modify and add and change cards in your 552 00:32:27,210 --> 00:32:29,530 Speaker 1: deck and do all the shuffling and all that great stuff. 553 00:32:29,530 --> 00:32:30,730 Speaker 1: And there's a lot of things you can do that 554 00:32:30,770 --> 00:32:34,930 Speaker 1: you can't do in paper. So is it important to 555 00:32:34,930 --> 00:32:37,610 Speaker 1: be face to face? The face to face quality of 556 00:32:38,450 --> 00:32:42,890 Speaker 1: board games is very important, very valuable, and the community 557 00:32:42,970 --> 00:32:46,290 Speaker 1: which you develop with it is critical and is much 558 00:32:46,370 --> 00:32:52,970 Speaker 1: more critical with these massively networked games like Magic than 559 00:32:53,010 --> 00:32:55,850 Speaker 1: it might be for a game which is played more 560 00:32:55,890 --> 00:33:00,530 Speaker 1: with in a less networked way. But at the same time, 561 00:33:00,690 --> 00:33:03,090 Speaker 1: the digital world brings its own stuff and there is 562 00:33:03,250 --> 00:33:07,050 Speaker 1: a digital community as well which people get really real 563 00:33:07,130 --> 00:33:09,570 Speaker 1: value out of it. I think right now might be 564 00:33:09,610 --> 00:33:14,370 Speaker 1: in a collectible bubble where there's a lot of the 565 00:33:14,850 --> 00:33:20,210 Speaker 1: value of these games, these paper games are very high 566 00:33:20,610 --> 00:33:25,370 Speaker 1: because the cards are being seen as very valuable. 567 00:33:25,450 --> 00:33:28,290 Speaker 2: It's part of the idea that there's a bubble in everything, right, 568 00:33:28,330 --> 00:33:30,650 Speaker 2: So there's these bitcoins in a bubble, and you know, 569 00:33:30,650 --> 00:33:34,330 Speaker 2: maybe AI's in a bubble, and yeah, everything's in a 570 00:33:34,330 --> 00:33:37,170 Speaker 2: bubble at the same time. So these bad cards also 571 00:33:37,290 --> 00:33:38,130 Speaker 2: maybe in a bubble. 572 00:33:38,530 --> 00:33:41,090 Speaker 1: Yeah, And this has been an issue with Magic from 573 00:33:41,330 --> 00:33:44,330 Speaker 1: the very early days. In fact, very early on, we 574 00:33:44,370 --> 00:33:48,890 Speaker 1: had to intentionally crash the market because we were afraid 575 00:33:48,930 --> 00:33:52,170 Speaker 1: that the speculators were just going to drive out the 576 00:33:52,210 --> 00:33:55,010 Speaker 1: actual players, and people thought the game was going to 577 00:33:55,050 --> 00:33:59,850 Speaker 1: be dead because we printed so much of the Fallen 578 00:33:59,890 --> 00:34:02,810 Speaker 1: Empire's expansion and they they said it was the worst 579 00:34:02,850 --> 00:34:05,810 Speaker 1: expansion ever and so forth, because they were conflating whatever 580 00:34:05,850 --> 00:34:08,210 Speaker 1: the play value was with what the value of their 581 00:34:08,210 --> 00:34:12,210 Speaker 1: collection was. But it was very good for the game 582 00:34:12,210 --> 00:34:14,170 Speaker 1: to see that crash, and we got a lot more 583 00:34:14,170 --> 00:34:18,090 Speaker 1: players and people engaged with the game as they they 584 00:34:18,130 --> 00:34:18,850 Speaker 1: were intended to. 585 00:34:19,090 --> 00:34:22,530 Speaker 2: Yeah. Interesting, possibly this is all good practice for running 586 00:34:22,530 --> 00:34:26,930 Speaker 2: the Federal Reserve, learning, learning when when to pop the bubble. 587 00:34:27,850 --> 00:34:31,730 Speaker 2: I hope you're enjoying this games special with Richard Garfield. 588 00:34:32,010 --> 00:34:34,210 Speaker 2: I know I am, and Richard and I will be 589 00:34:34,410 --> 00:34:44,490 Speaker 2: answering more of your questions after the break. We're back. 590 00:34:44,810 --> 00:34:48,010 Speaker 2: Richard Garfield and I are answering your questions about everything 591 00:34:48,010 --> 00:34:53,250 Speaker 2: from universal basic income to games, and Garrav would like 592 00:34:53,290 --> 00:34:58,730 Speaker 2: to know what are your favorite stories about games, for example, movies, 593 00:34:58,810 --> 00:35:01,570 Speaker 2: TV shows, comic books featuring games. 594 00:35:01,730 --> 00:35:05,490 Speaker 1: There are a number of poker movies that I like, 595 00:35:05,970 --> 00:35:09,010 Speaker 1: Rounders and Cincinnati Kid. You know, I'm trying to think 596 00:35:09,130 --> 00:35:12,090 Speaker 1: of some which which deal with games in general. 597 00:35:12,370 --> 00:35:16,450 Speaker 2: There's Queen's Gambit, it's about chess. There's Tron of course, 598 00:35:16,570 --> 00:35:21,210 Speaker 2: and war Games. It's a classic eighties movies about computer games. 599 00:35:21,450 --> 00:35:25,050 Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, Queen's Gambit was excellent. I enjoyed that a lot. 600 00:35:25,210 --> 00:35:27,410 Speaker 2: And Ian Embanks the player of games. 601 00:35:27,690 --> 00:35:30,250 Speaker 1: Oh well, that's amazing. Yeah, that that that that is 602 00:35:30,810 --> 00:35:35,050 Speaker 1: that that I'm a big in Banks fan, and that 603 00:35:35,050 --> 00:35:37,210 Speaker 1: that is certainly a top draft for me. 604 00:35:37,650 --> 00:35:41,930 Speaker 2: You know, it's an incredible sci fi novel about a 605 00:35:41,970 --> 00:35:46,330 Speaker 2: culture where game playing is incredibly important, and and about 606 00:35:46,410 --> 00:35:51,370 Speaker 2: a person who's unbelievably good at playing games and becomes 607 00:35:51,410 --> 00:35:52,850 Speaker 2: of civilizational importance. 608 00:35:53,210 --> 00:35:56,770 Speaker 1: Something that that sort of qualifies. There is also Enders game. 609 00:35:58,130 --> 00:36:03,090 Speaker 1: Enders game had the protagonist being taken away and training 610 00:36:03,490 --> 00:36:07,010 Speaker 1: to fight aliens, but they were a kid, and so 611 00:36:07,410 --> 00:36:09,570 Speaker 1: they played these sort of arena games and it was 612 00:36:09,810 --> 00:36:13,410 Speaker 1: very It was very interesting how game like the evolution 613 00:36:13,650 --> 00:36:15,690 Speaker 1: was like, how they built up strategies and within the 614 00:36:15,730 --> 00:36:18,610 Speaker 1: game they gamed the system, they did meta games and 615 00:36:18,650 --> 00:36:22,290 Speaker 1: all that. So when you read it, it feels very 616 00:36:22,330 --> 00:36:23,490 Speaker 1: game oriented. 617 00:36:23,970 --> 00:36:25,530 Speaker 2: Yeah, they see the more I think about it. So 618 00:36:25,650 --> 00:36:28,850 Speaker 2: there's a Corey Doctro novel for The Win, which is 619 00:36:28,890 --> 00:36:33,490 Speaker 2: all about it's massively multiplayer online games and trading within 620 00:36:33,530 --> 00:36:37,010 Speaker 2: those games, and it's all about economics. There's lots Does 621 00:36:37,010 --> 00:36:38,090 Speaker 2: the Hunger Games count. 622 00:36:37,970 --> 00:36:40,370 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, no, no, absolutely it does, absolutely does, because 623 00:36:40,770 --> 00:36:45,050 Speaker 1: I would say what ends up being counting is I 624 00:36:45,090 --> 00:36:47,530 Speaker 1: don't know when they're making moves in it that feel 625 00:36:47,570 --> 00:36:49,490 Speaker 1: like they're playing a game, and that's kind of a 626 00:36:49,530 --> 00:36:52,290 Speaker 1: fuzzy thing. But they definitely do that in The Hunger Games. 627 00:36:52,090 --> 00:36:55,010 Speaker 2: Which, in any chance, Magic the Gathering will ever become 628 00:36:55,010 --> 00:36:55,970 Speaker 2: a movie. 629 00:36:55,650 --> 00:36:59,090 Speaker 1: There is a chance. I've seen heard noise and that 630 00:36:59,170 --> 00:37:02,530 Speaker 1: it was definitely going to happen many times over the 631 00:37:02,570 --> 00:37:06,850 Speaker 1: last twenty five years. So certainly not holding my breath, 632 00:37:06,890 --> 00:37:09,010 Speaker 1: but it's always possible. 633 00:37:09,130 --> 00:37:11,370 Speaker 2: And they made a movie of Angry Birds, they can 634 00:37:11,810 --> 00:37:14,170 Speaker 2: Magic the Gathering seems a lot more promising than Angry 635 00:37:14,170 --> 00:37:16,130 Speaker 2: Birds as a piece of material. 636 00:37:16,170 --> 00:37:18,690 Speaker 1: But there we go. We will see. I wouldn't have 637 00:37:18,850 --> 00:37:22,290 Speaker 1: bet on it back in the nineties, where games made 638 00:37:22,370 --> 00:37:26,650 Speaker 1: into movies were awful. These days, yeah, it's a die roll. 639 00:37:26,690 --> 00:37:27,250 Speaker 1: It might work. 640 00:37:27,850 --> 00:37:31,570 Speaker 2: Richard, we have a have a question about a classic 641 00:37:31,730 --> 00:37:33,370 Speaker 2: episode of course Metales. 642 00:37:33,730 --> 00:37:37,450 Speaker 1: Yeah, Susie writes. In the episode Do Not Pass Go, 643 00:37:37,890 --> 00:37:40,530 Speaker 1: you talked about how Monopoly doesn't really work as a 644 00:37:40,530 --> 00:37:43,730 Speaker 1: critique of capitalism, even though that was the original intent 645 00:37:43,810 --> 00:37:47,130 Speaker 1: behind the game. Instead, it ends up being more about 646 00:37:47,130 --> 00:37:49,810 Speaker 1: the fun of crushing your opponents and getting rich. So 647 00:37:49,930 --> 00:37:52,730 Speaker 1: here's my question. Why is it the games like the 648 00:37:52,730 --> 00:37:56,290 Speaker 1: Farming Game actually succeed in teaching how hard and unpredictable 649 00:37:56,330 --> 00:37:59,930 Speaker 1: farming is, while Monopoly totally misses the mark when it 650 00:37:59,930 --> 00:38:03,090 Speaker 1: comes to critique and capitalism. What is it about the 651 00:38:03,130 --> 00:38:06,410 Speaker 1: design or gameplay of the Farming game that helps its 652 00:38:06,410 --> 00:38:10,130 Speaker 1: message come through? And why does Monopoly lose its message 653 00:38:10,170 --> 00:38:11,210 Speaker 1: and the way people play it? 654 00:38:11,410 --> 00:38:14,570 Speaker 2: I love the question, so just to refresh people's memories 655 00:38:15,250 --> 00:38:19,130 Speaker 2: or to inform people who hadn't heard the episode about 656 00:38:19,250 --> 00:38:22,730 Speaker 2: the creation of Monopoly. So Lizzie McGee, who created the 657 00:38:22,730 --> 00:38:27,370 Speaker 2: immediate precursor to Monopoly and a game looks like Monopoly, 658 00:38:27,370 --> 00:38:30,930 Speaker 2: and it plays quite like Monopoly in its capitalist version, 659 00:38:31,050 --> 00:38:33,170 Speaker 2: but it was supposed to have two modes, and in 660 00:38:33,210 --> 00:38:37,810 Speaker 2: the other mode it was more cooperative. It embodied principles 661 00:38:37,810 --> 00:38:41,370 Speaker 2: of georgiast Land taxation and basically, if you played it 662 00:38:41,410 --> 00:38:44,890 Speaker 2: that way, everybody got rich together. And that did not 663 00:38:45,050 --> 00:38:47,370 Speaker 2: catch on. And I think when you describe it like that, 664 00:38:47,650 --> 00:38:50,090 Speaker 2: it's pretty obvious why it didn't catch on, because that 665 00:38:50,130 --> 00:38:52,810 Speaker 2: sounds like a really bad game. Everyone just gets rich together. 666 00:38:53,570 --> 00:38:56,170 Speaker 2: When people are playing a game, they want to challenge. 667 00:38:56,770 --> 00:38:58,650 Speaker 2: So feel free to disagree with me, Richard, but it 668 00:38:58,810 --> 00:39:00,770 Speaker 2: hit My theory is that it's not much of a 669 00:39:00,770 --> 00:39:04,970 Speaker 2: game unless there's a challenge. Cooperative games do exist, and 670 00:39:05,050 --> 00:39:07,850 Speaker 2: some of them are very good, but they are designed 671 00:39:08,370 --> 00:39:11,810 Speaker 2: to present the players with obstacles. Whether it's a game 672 00:39:11,850 --> 00:39:14,490 Speaker 2: in Dungeons and Dragons or it's a board game like Pandemic, 673 00:39:14,570 --> 00:39:18,450 Speaker 2: they're very carefully designed to be difficult, and so when 674 00:39:18,490 --> 00:39:22,090 Speaker 2: you succeed, you're cooperating with all the other players, but 675 00:39:22,130 --> 00:39:25,210 Speaker 2: you're trying to beat the game. Whereas this kind of 676 00:39:25,290 --> 00:39:28,530 Speaker 2: Landlord's game that Lizzie McGee designed seems to be a 677 00:39:28,570 --> 00:39:30,730 Speaker 2: game where there is no challenge. The whole point is 678 00:39:30,770 --> 00:39:34,770 Speaker 2: to say, hey, if you all kind of reformed capitalism, 679 00:39:35,290 --> 00:39:38,170 Speaker 2: then everything would be fine and no one would suffer, 680 00:39:38,930 --> 00:39:41,130 Speaker 2: which you know sounds great as a political message, but 681 00:39:41,170 --> 00:39:42,250 Speaker 2: sounds terrible as a game. 682 00:39:42,330 --> 00:39:45,050 Speaker 1: Am I Am I wrong? No? I think I think 683 00:39:45,370 --> 00:39:47,850 Speaker 1: that's correct. One of the reasons why it probably doesn't 684 00:39:47,890 --> 00:39:50,730 Speaker 1: work as the critique that you know that she was 685 00:39:50,770 --> 00:39:54,610 Speaker 1: intending for is you she did put the players in 686 00:39:54,650 --> 00:39:58,050 Speaker 1: the role of being the capitalist, and so I did 687 00:39:58,050 --> 00:40:01,530 Speaker 1: this game King of Tokyo. It's a great game by 688 00:40:01,530 --> 00:40:04,290 Speaker 1: the way. I put the players in the role of 689 00:40:05,050 --> 00:40:07,690 Speaker 1: being monsters tearing down Tokyo and beating each other up. 690 00:40:08,330 --> 00:40:12,250 Speaker 1: And if I was aiming to make people see how 691 00:40:12,290 --> 00:40:15,370 Speaker 1: bad it is to tear down cities, then I wouldn't 692 00:40:15,370 --> 00:40:18,970 Speaker 1: have chosen that approach. But it doesn't mean that they 693 00:40:18,970 --> 00:40:21,210 Speaker 1: come out of this thinking, oh, you know, tearing down 694 00:40:21,250 --> 00:40:25,410 Speaker 1: cities is great either. It's just people are able to 695 00:40:25,410 --> 00:40:28,250 Speaker 1: get into the game. They can watch a horror movie 696 00:40:28,250 --> 00:40:31,450 Speaker 1: and not end up thinking horror is a terrific thing. Also, 697 00:40:31,530 --> 00:40:35,850 Speaker 1: I actually wonder if it's as bad at showing the 698 00:40:35,890 --> 00:40:40,050 Speaker 1: evils of capitalism as she saw them as it's viewed 699 00:40:40,130 --> 00:40:44,530 Speaker 1: in the sense that Monopoly. There's a lot of people 700 00:40:44,530 --> 00:40:48,170 Speaker 1: who really dislike the game, and those people one of 701 00:40:48,170 --> 00:40:51,610 Speaker 1: the things they really dislike is because they fall up 702 00:40:51,650 --> 00:40:55,170 Speaker 1: behind and then they're slowly crushed and they don't feel 703 00:40:55,210 --> 00:40:56,930 Speaker 1: like they can get out of it. That's not the 704 00:40:56,970 --> 00:40:59,530 Speaker 1: only problem with the game, but that is what a 705 00:40:59,530 --> 00:41:02,930 Speaker 1: lot of people will take away from it. Yeah, that 706 00:41:03,050 --> 00:41:04,810 Speaker 1: kind of is a critique of capitalism. 707 00:41:05,170 --> 00:41:09,210 Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it probably is. Success breeds success. All 708 00:41:09,250 --> 00:41:13,050 Speaker 2: amount of capital early on is often decisive, which I 709 00:41:13,050 --> 00:41:15,130 Speaker 2: guess is a critique of capitalism. But it also makes 710 00:41:15,170 --> 00:41:17,930 Speaker 2: a terrible game. But there you go. People still play it. 711 00:41:19,730 --> 00:41:23,690 Speaker 2: Which on the subjects of Monopoly, I mean that is 712 00:41:23,690 --> 00:41:28,570 Speaker 2: a game that brings families together at Christmas, possibly because 713 00:41:28,570 --> 00:41:30,770 Speaker 2: it's just the game that everybody knows how to play. 714 00:41:31,090 --> 00:41:34,490 Speaker 2: Are there any games that you associate with Christmas that 715 00:41:34,730 --> 00:41:36,170 Speaker 2: people might play as an alternative? 716 00:41:36,490 --> 00:41:41,370 Speaker 1: Oh? Sure. One of my favorite games for big get 717 00:41:41,370 --> 00:41:46,450 Speaker 1: togethers is Hive Mind. The basic idea of HiveMind is 718 00:41:46,490 --> 00:41:50,370 Speaker 1: that you ask a question and everybody writes down the answer. 719 00:41:51,210 --> 00:41:53,490 Speaker 1: Then you tally up points based on how many people 720 00:41:53,530 --> 00:41:57,050 Speaker 1: answered the same way. So if your question was if, 721 00:41:57,290 --> 00:41:59,570 Speaker 1: then the question might be, you know, name three planets, 722 00:41:59,570 --> 00:42:01,810 Speaker 1: which I guess is properly a question, But that's the 723 00:42:01,890 --> 00:42:03,850 Speaker 1: sort of thing which you would do. So the three 724 00:42:04,810 --> 00:42:09,130 Speaker 1: planets I would name are Earth, Mars, in Jupiter, and 725 00:42:09,770 --> 00:42:16,050 Speaker 1: so I should have let you think of some planets also, 726 00:42:16,290 --> 00:42:21,450 Speaker 1: So in retrospect, what would you name? Is your planets? 727 00:42:21,490 --> 00:42:26,650 Speaker 2: Saturn officially the best planet, Uranus the most amusing planet, 728 00:42:27,210 --> 00:42:29,970 Speaker 2: and Venus got us of love. 729 00:42:30,450 --> 00:42:33,250 Speaker 1: So I should have said you are allowed to choose 730 00:42:33,250 --> 00:42:35,970 Speaker 1: the same. So let's say you said Saturn, which is 731 00:42:36,010 --> 00:42:39,330 Speaker 1: a very reasonable answer, and Earth in Mars. Then each 732 00:42:39,370 --> 00:42:42,090 Speaker 1: of us would get two points for Earth in Mars 733 00:42:42,130 --> 00:42:44,530 Speaker 1: because we both name those, and we would each get 734 00:42:44,530 --> 00:42:46,810 Speaker 1: one point one for You would get one for Saturn 735 00:42:46,810 --> 00:42:50,170 Speaker 1: and I would get one for Jupiter. And of course 736 00:42:50,730 --> 00:42:54,050 Speaker 1: you extend this to the whole group, and whoever scores 737 00:42:54,130 --> 00:42:56,650 Speaker 1: lowest gets a strike, and when you get three strikes, 738 00:42:56,690 --> 00:43:00,290 Speaker 1: you're out. And the questions can be very open ended, 739 00:43:00,410 --> 00:43:04,370 Speaker 1: like you know, name three things that are in the refrigerator, 740 00:43:04,490 --> 00:43:07,370 Speaker 1: or name three things that begin with the letter S, 741 00:43:08,010 --> 00:43:11,890 Speaker 1: and you just get you get crazy answers and people 742 00:43:11,930 --> 00:43:14,130 Speaker 1: trying to sort of get on the same wavelength Anyway, 743 00:43:14,530 --> 00:43:18,210 Speaker 1: it's a game which is very social, handles any number 744 00:43:18,250 --> 00:43:22,810 Speaker 1: of players, and we've sort of find it endlessly engaging 745 00:43:22,810 --> 00:43:23,530 Speaker 1: at holiday time. 746 00:43:24,010 --> 00:43:26,610 Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a good one. The thing I do every 747 00:43:26,690 --> 00:43:30,250 Speaker 2: Christmas is gathered together my tabletop role playing group, and 748 00:43:30,290 --> 00:43:34,290 Speaker 2: we always play a Christmas themed game. So in one 749 00:43:34,330 --> 00:43:37,930 Speaker 2: way or another, the characters have to save Christmas or 750 00:43:37,930 --> 00:43:41,210 Speaker 2: there's something Christmasy about it. The game that I'm running 751 00:43:41,210 --> 00:43:45,770 Speaker 2: this Christmas, it's based on a game someone else has 752 00:43:45,770 --> 00:43:49,610 Speaker 2: created called The Wastling at Klaus Manor or Clause Manner, 753 00:43:50,170 --> 00:43:54,570 Speaker 2: and it's basically a kind of social satire upstairs downstairs, 754 00:43:54,570 --> 00:43:58,130 Speaker 2: where all the players are playing the role of the 755 00:43:58,810 --> 00:44:01,930 Speaker 2: kind of the domestic staff. It's kind of Edwardian, So 756 00:44:02,210 --> 00:44:07,610 Speaker 2: the butler are made whatever at Santa Claus's manner, and 757 00:44:07,970 --> 00:44:10,970 Speaker 2: basically everything is fulling apart the night before Christmas in 758 00:44:11,050 --> 00:44:15,450 Speaker 2: various chaotic ways, and you're playing the domestic servants and 759 00:44:15,490 --> 00:44:18,890 Speaker 2: they can't they cannot afford to lose this job, so 760 00:44:18,970 --> 00:44:22,730 Speaker 2: no matter how unreasonable the requests from Santa Claus or 761 00:44:22,770 --> 00:44:24,730 Speaker 2: Lady Clause or whatever, they've just got to they've just 762 00:44:24,730 --> 00:44:28,610 Speaker 2: got to keep this show on the road and they're yeah, 763 00:44:28,610 --> 00:44:32,010 Speaker 2: I'm looking forward to It should be suitably ridiculous, but 764 00:44:32,090 --> 00:44:35,530 Speaker 2: we will see. Richard, it's been wonderful to talk to you. 765 00:44:35,610 --> 00:44:39,090 Speaker 2: Thank you so much for joining us. One more question, 766 00:44:39,210 --> 00:44:40,330 Speaker 2: what are you planning to do next? 767 00:44:40,570 --> 00:44:43,610 Speaker 1: I'm working on a couple of Auto Battlers. Auto Battling 768 00:44:43,730 --> 00:44:49,330 Speaker 1: is a fascinating digital game concept where they feel very 769 00:44:49,410 --> 00:44:52,970 Speaker 1: much like paper games, but but you're whatever it is, 770 00:44:52,970 --> 00:44:58,130 Speaker 1: You're building sort of fights by itself, and so it 771 00:44:58,370 --> 00:45:04,450 Speaker 1: unites this. I've been fascinated with games that are played 772 00:45:04,490 --> 00:45:07,050 Speaker 1: digitally but feel like they could be paper games for 773 00:45:07,090 --> 00:45:11,010 Speaker 1: a while, and this is in that that between space, 774 00:45:11,010 --> 00:45:14,450 Speaker 1: which is good. So one of them is Vanguard Exiles 775 00:45:14,650 --> 00:45:17,810 Speaker 1: and it's an early release on Steam, and the other 776 00:45:18,410 --> 00:45:20,770 Speaker 1: is Chaos Agents. 777 00:45:21,170 --> 00:45:23,050 Speaker 2: And one of the best games I ever played was 778 00:45:23,090 --> 00:45:25,650 Speaker 2: actually an Auto Battler, and this is in the nineteen 779 00:45:26,170 --> 00:45:30,370 Speaker 2: we've been about nineteen ninety one. I played it at school. 780 00:45:30,490 --> 00:45:33,610 Speaker 2: We had a game called Robot Arena where you had 781 00:45:33,610 --> 00:45:37,570 Speaker 2: to program your own robot and send it into an arena, 782 00:45:37,610 --> 00:45:40,010 Speaker 2: and it used a programming language a bit like logo 783 00:45:40,170 --> 00:45:42,930 Speaker 2: which used to be drawn. You know, you move a 784 00:45:42,970 --> 00:45:45,010 Speaker 2: turtle around. Great game. 785 00:45:45,130 --> 00:45:48,050 Speaker 1: Yeah, I played a game very much like that. Yeah, 786 00:45:48,930 --> 00:45:51,210 Speaker 1: I hadn't really thought of them as odd of battlers, 787 00:45:51,210 --> 00:45:55,450 Speaker 1: but you're right, they certainly do qualify and it was very, 788 00:45:55,730 --> 00:45:56,370 Speaker 1: very interesting. 789 00:45:58,570 --> 00:46:01,530 Speaker 2: Richard Garfield, thank you so much for joining me on 790 00:46:01,610 --> 00:46:05,410 Speaker 2: quartering questions. I hope being roped in hasn't put you 791 00:46:05,450 --> 00:46:06,410 Speaker 2: off listening to the show. 792 00:46:06,850 --> 00:46:11,570 Speaker 1: No, not at all. I'm completely caught up and intender 793 00:46:11,650 --> 00:46:15,650 Speaker 1: stay caught up. So yeah, please keep them coming. We will, 794 00:46:15,730 --> 00:46:16,210 Speaker 1: we will. 795 00:46:16,930 --> 00:46:26,410 Speaker 2: Merry Christmas, and thanks again, thank you. Cautionary Tales is 796 00:46:26,450 --> 00:46:30,130 Speaker 2: written by me Tim Harford with Andrew Wright, Dallis Fines, 797 00:46:30,330 --> 00:46:34,850 Speaker 2: and Ryan Dinner. It's produced by Georgia Mills and Marilyn Rust. 798 00:46:36,010 --> 00:46:38,330 Speaker 2: The sound design and original music and the work of 799 00:46:38,490 --> 00:46:43,410 Speaker 2: Pascal Wise. Additional sound design by Carlos San Juan at 800 00:46:43,410 --> 00:46:48,490 Speaker 2: Brain Audio and Dan Jackson. Bend ad Af Haffrey edited 801 00:46:48,490 --> 00:46:52,210 Speaker 2: the scripts. The show also wouldn't have been possible without 802 00:46:52,250 --> 00:46:57,090 Speaker 2: the work of Jacob Weisberg, Greta Cohne, Eric Sandler, Carrie Brody, 803 00:46:57,730 --> 00:47:03,650 Speaker 2: Christina Sullivan, Kira Posey, and Owen Miller. Cautionary Tales is 804 00:47:03,690 --> 00:47:07,130 Speaker 2: a production of Pushkin Industries. If you like the show, 805 00:47:07,490 --> 00:47:11,650 Speaker 2: please remember to share, rate, and review. It really does 806 00:47:11,690 --> 00:47:14,610 Speaker 2: make a difference to us. And if you want to 807 00:47:14,650 --> 00:47:18,770 Speaker 2: hear it, add free and receive a bonus audio episode, 808 00:47:19,050 --> 00:47:23,770 Speaker 2: video episode, and members only newsletter every month, why not 809 00:47:23,890 --> 00:47:28,330 Speaker 2: join the Cautionary Club. To sign up, head to patreon 810 00:47:28,530 --> 00:47:33,090 Speaker 2: dot com slash Cautionary Club. That's Patreon, p A, t R, 811 00:47:33,210 --> 00:47:37,730 Speaker 2: e o N dot com Slash Cautionary Club