Ed Webb

Notes on the Civilization V exercise for S401-01, Fall 2011

was favorably impressed by much of what read in student responses to this exercise. A
couple of themes emerged from them that thought it worth recording and commenting on here.
invite seminar participants to add their own comments below.

Teamwork effects:
Working in teams where at least one member had experience of the game seems in
most cases to have had the desired effect, i.e. removing anxiety about/distraction by the
interface and allowing all to concentrate on the process, freeing up time and cognitive
space for discussion and decision-making.
Little dissension is reported. s this due to an actual lack of dissension or to politeness in
reporting?
Completing the assignment in teams seems to have promoted more attention to
deploying a consciously-chosen strategy (slaughter, conversion) than has been the case
when students have played the scenario alone.

Strengths and weaknesses of the game as simulation:
Many participants commented on the absences in the game 'account' of the story of
Spanish encounters with Mesoamerica. Histories of the conquest usually mention
disease, which is not simulated in Civ V. As readers of Todorov, most commented
on the absence of a system of signs to be manipulated. More specifically, several
participants noted the inability to use deception. The game imposes unrealistic
transparency not only on what is happening within the farthest reaches of one's own
territories, but also on the connections, transactions, and attitudes of all other known
rulers. Players' inability to terrorize or otherwise change the morale of enemy fighting
units and populations was another lack. And, of course, the mechanical predictability of
algorithm-driven decision-making by rival rulers is a poor simulation of the complexities
of real human decision-making.
Several players noted their ability to understand immediately and precisely the effects of
their actions, reflected by changing scores in rival leaders' attitudes or similar measures,
was a significant contrast to the actual opacity of the Mesoamerican environment to the
conquistadors, or indeed to any real-world decision-making. The relationship between
action and consequence(s) is far more complex and far less transparent than Civ V can
suggest.
Some aspects that students found the game conveyed well included:
the complexity of managing extensive domains
the sheer scale and logistic challenges of an Atlantic empire
the difficult decisions necessitated by a world of limited resources, with time a
particularly precious resource
the importance of balancing domestic and foreign commitments and resources
Above all, everyone noted that what Cortes et al achieved was enormously difficult. The
Aztecs were far from being a push-over.

Affective aspects:
A minority of participants reflected on emotional responses to the game, and these
varied. Given that games are generally taken to be stimulating in some sense, this
might be surprising. On the other hand, students may be less comfortable reporting on
affective rather than intellectual responses.
Some noted that the game environment or rules provoked a will to conquer and a delight
in violent victories. The tone of some responses suggested feelings of disappointment
over lack of success. The game seems to have elicited at least some degree of
competitiveness in most participants.
t was not clear whether simulated deaths elicited indifference or guilt, or both at different
times for the same players.
Few players reported frustration or other negative responses to the game itself. But not
everyone loved doing this.


welcome comments below on any of the above.