Comments on: EP 8.2: Understanding Simulations

By: noah

noah — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 05:10:21 +0000

Nick, you’re right. There’s a difference between understanding that would let people precisely describe (or even reimplement) and “having a feel for” the workings of a complex system. I should tease those apart more in this chapter generally, and this note particularly.

By: nick

nick — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:11:31 +0000

I get the impression that the lasting impact of Forrester’s model from Urban Dynamics was largely based on it being open to scrutiny and described in detail in a 300-page book – which led to productive discussion, the development of other models, and so on. Yes, SimCity is playable, but it actually isn’t as well-documented and modifiable as Forrester’s model is, and the assumptions of the model aren’t directly expressed. It seems like much more of a black box to me. Maybe there’s some more to be teased out in terms of the difference between these two models and their contexts?

By: Ian Bogost

Ian Bogost — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:28:16 +0000

That would work too. I think the claim you’re making is a fairly important one, and I’d like to see it get more, erm, caressing.

By: noah

noah — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:29:10 +0000

Yes, I’ve been feeling like this paragraph is a bit muddied. I was actually thinking of shortening it — maybe moving the Manovich quote to a footnote, so I can use the whole thing without ellipses — but it might be better to cut the current paragraph in half, add more material, and generally spread out to make the steps in the argument clearer.

By: noah

noah — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:26:34 +0000

Good point. I should at least tease them out. For example, I could say something here that indicates both the status of The Sims as a landmark design and its status as a best-seller. The design issue is more important to my argument, but the best-selling nature of The Sims gives some indication of its cultural influence.

By: Ian Bogost

Ian Bogost — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:06:35 +0000

Very minor point: I wonder if you want to take a consistent position throughout on “success as influence” versus “success as commerce.” You discuss examples that will seem extremely arcane to many readers (Talespin, even Eliza), but which were undeniably “successful” from the perspective of influence, but not from the perspective of commerce, whereas The Sims is really both. I’m just thinking about your multiple readerships and how they’ll react to these value judgements.

By: Ian Bogost

Ian Bogost — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:04:00 +0000

Obviously I agree with your conclusion, but I’m not sure I’m convinced that you’ve made the case completely. Or perhaps more accurately, filled in the blanks between Starr’s daughter’s “that’s just how the game works” and this paragraph’s “helping millions of people understand the operations of complex software models.” I don’t think you need another study here, I just think a couple more sentences of connection would do it.