GamePolitics Interview with Brad Wardell about The Political Machine 2016

from PolMach Forums

GamePolitics.com has an interview with Stardock CEO Brad Wardell on The Political Machine 2016.

"How do you think the issues have changed since the last game – the important issues voters care about – are they the same or have they changed dramatically?

Wardell: They are quite a bit different this time. When you have don’t have an incumbent everything kind of goes up in the air. Last time tax cuts and Obamacare were the major issues; this time we’ve got ISIS going on in the Middle East, you’ve got the Ukraine issue, you have gun control (from a video game standpoint all this stuff is really good) the issue of equal pay for women in the workplace, etc. So all of this has kind of come to the forefront rather than the tame issues like social security reform, etc. From an entertainment or video game point of view, this election’s issues are a little bit more interesting."

Read the full interview here.

http://gamepolitics.com/2015/11/18/playing-politics-stardock-founder-brad-wardell-on-political-machine-2016/

 

14,397 views 2 replies
Reply #1 from PolMach Forums Top

 "One of the ratings on our candidates is intelligence and one of our designers had given Donald Trump a three out of ten. If we have Donald Trump rated as a three he is basically a moron. You’ll find plenty of people who will say “Donald Trump IS a moron” but do you really think Donald Trump is that mentally handicapped?"

In defense of low-intelligence characters, I thought Intelligence was mainly used for available interview questions. The fact is, there are certain candidates who appear more well-versed in the issues than others. This isn't really a matter of intelligence so much as the kind of answers they are likely to give in interviews based on how prepared or issue-familiar they are.

Should the stat "Intelligence" be re-named so as to reflect its actual purpose and not insinuate something about their intelligence? Donald Trump, as a great example, is no idiot. But if asked, in an interview, about illegal immigration or Syria, he is unlikely to give an overly-nuanced, political, or thorough answer. He is known to be blunt, but not very specific about policy. Maybe this could be better reflected with "Issue Familiarity" or "Political Acumen" or something so that low-intelligence characters aren't taken to be actually of low-intelligence.

That's part of the strategy anyway, right? Strengths and weaknesses. Trump has a lot of money and charisma, but he should have a low "intelligence" to reflect his blunt, simple answers on policy. That also means that he should go on shows like O'Malley where those kind of answers are the norm, but stay away from the other show which tends to favor longer, more knowledgeable answers.

Just a thought - I really enjoyed playing Bachman in TPM '12 because of the few and odd or offensive answers she had available to her. It gave her a lot of character and if you wanted to win, you either had to overcome that or just avoid certain shows all together! ^_^

Reply #2 from PolMach Forums Top

I'm really excited about the new features, though, and the outside and dropped out candidates!

Galactic Civilizations III