Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-07-04 08:44:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:3rd world farmer, games for change, serious games, university of copenhagen

3rd World Farmer Game Explores Poverty in Africa

If you think the Harvest Moon series could benefit from a bit more death, misery, and an all-encompassing sense of hopelessness, then this 2005 student project from the IT University of Copenhagen is right up your alley.

3rd World Farmer challenges players to keep themselves and their families alive while managing a farm in poverty and conflict-stricken Africa. Make every dollar count as you plant your crops for the year and hope for a good harvest. If fortune smiles upon you, maybe you'll have earned enough money to buy a shovel but don't get too cocky, since the word "stability" isn't even in the dictionary where you live. Droughts can destroy your crops, disease can kill your livestock, civil wars can expose your farm to plundering from both sides, and falling market prices can render your goods worthless.

Monetary opportunities do occasionally present themselves. For instance, a Western chemical company may offer you a nice sum to lease a few of your acres to store a couple of their 'harmless" barrels. Take the offer and a family member might die from exposure to toxic materials. Refuse and they might die from starvation because you couldn't afford food that year.

Your choice.

So, how do you win at 3rd World Farmer?

You don't. Eventually, the yearly hardships and frequent agricultural, economic, and civil disasters will wipe out your entire family. It's not fair and it's not fun but perhaps that is the point. "We aim at making the player 'experience' the injustices, rather than being told about them, so as to stimulate a deeper and more personal reflection on the topics," say the game's creators.

"We think the game has the potential to be an eye-opener to people who have become accustomed to the ordinary means of communicating Third World desperation. Our aim is to have everybody play the game, reflect, discuss and act on it. The game is well suited to start off discussions about Third World issues, so we also encourage teachers to use it in their classes."

While the current version of the game is finished and playable, development continues and future updates are expected. For more info, check out 3rd World Farmer's forums where "discussions arise and solutions to real-world problems are suggested."

Many thanks to Cynthia Tidball for bringing our attention to this game.

-Reporting from San Diego, GP Correspondent Andrew Eisen has a renewed appreciation for his overpriced, 400-square foot studio apartment

Want to talk about it? You can discuss this story via the "comments" feature (click below), or in the new GamePolitics Forums...




(24 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]chenry
2006-07-04 01:33 pm UTC (link)
Eeeh.. I think i much prefer Harvest Moon.

(Reply to this)

Hmmm...
[info]scazza
2006-07-04 01:57 pm UTC (link)
I wonder if Natsume (harvest moon developers) will "remake" the gamecube harvest moon for the 4th time, only steal this concept... how much fun it would be to have my lil boy milk the cows, sell the grain and die off in the third season from starvation and famine! Then maybe the game wouldn't take like 2000hours of play from my life!!! damn you!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Hmmm...
[info]moon81goddess
2006-07-05 10:15 pm UTC (link)
I hope if Natsume starts thinking about stealing the 3rd World Farmer concept, they at least get a hold of the game's creators. Perhaps if Natsume and the 3WF creators worked together, this concept could get out to more people...a wider audience.

(And thanks to GP for posting 'bout this...I was starting to wonder if you all were going to cover it or not. :))

-CT

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Video games, not just for gamers anymore.
[info]nightwng2000
2006-07-04 02:17 pm UTC (link)
Flash games, shareware, freeware, the list goes on.
And a lot of games these days aren't being created for entertainment.

They're being created to be the new voice. Pamplets, TV paid programming, magazine articles, internet sites, etc have been used for a very long time to express opinions on a variety of issues. Poverty in 3rd world countries, controversial issues of the day, political statements and so on.

Now, people are beginning to realize that interactive media (and not just point and click) can be used to get a point across. Some have been seen as outright offensive (Border Patrol and Ethnic Cleansing for example). Others deal, or will deal, in some pretty harsh subjects (abortion for example). And others deal in opening eyes regarding the plight of others (such as this game). Whether there is a winning goal or not, they aren't used to strictly entertain. And perhaps, in such cases as these, a new term other than video games really does apply. After all, "game" implies a winning goal that is reachable. But the media we are describing is something else.

"Socio-Political Interactive Video Media"? Hmmmm....

nightwng2000

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Video games, not just for gamers anymore.
[info]kharne83
2006-07-04 05:48 pm UTC (link)
After all, "game" implies a winning goal that is reachable

What about the "endless" mode or open-ended setup that's part of some games? Tetris, GTA, The Sims, etc. Granted, you can "win" games like GTA if they have some sort of main quest. But what about after that? If you can still play after you've "won" has the program morphed into some sort of non-game?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Video games, not just for gamers anymore.
[info]residentlune
2006-07-04 11:10 pm UTC (link)
"What about the "endless" mode or open-ended setup that's part of some games? Tetris, GTA, The Sims, etc."

Don't forget classic games that had no ending whatsoever, too. Donkey Kong 2 (the one where you sprayed DK with bug spray), Gyromite, Ice Climber, and I think even Joust ... you beat the game? Congratulations! It's back to level one without any sort of ending! =D

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Video games, not just for gamers anymore.
[info]kharne83
2006-07-05 01:53 am UTC (link)
Ah, you're right there. There's all those old arcade games!

Although they do sort of have a reachable winning goal in getting the high score. *However* that's pretty arguable for a winning goal as you can only reach it by eventually loosing the game.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Curse you lack of editing! Curse yooooou~
[info]kharne83
2006-07-04 05:55 pm UTC (link)
On a small side note: it also now occures to me that this example might actually be better off being labled as a game for the message that lable implies: This is the game you can't win.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Curse you lack of editing! Curse yooooou~
[info]nightwng2000
2006-07-05 12:17 pm UTC (link)
I can concede the "No-Win scenario" game exists already.

But still, most of those, even The Sims aren't making use of the "social/political" messages that the games we're describing in this article do. And I think it's the "No-Win scenario" that is being used as part of the message to gain sympathy for the message.

In all honesty, I think large scale "socio-Political Interactive Media" would have more of an effect if they were sold commercially. But they would have to actually span a large number issues. And the message should contain a "ray of hope". While that may push the media back towards "entertainment", it could still focus on the social/political messages that they intend to spread.

nightwng2000

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]rformer
2006-07-04 03:29 pm UTC (link)
If you follow a few tips, you can last indefinitely. Check the forum. LoL. :)

(Reply to this)

Too easy
[info]gamereviewgod
2006-07-04 03:34 pm UTC (link)
I figured I jump in and be dead in a few years, but I was at year 50 with no signs of slowing down. Not that it was a pleasent life, but with six kids (maybe if they stopped having more kids...), it wasn't that bad. The developers should have made it harder. I eventually lost interest.

(Reply to this)


[info]brown_wolf
2006-07-04 04:48 pm UTC (link)
I wonder if most African countries should have more economic freedom so they can move out of agriculture and into manufacturing like India and China did. Not that it would be easy, just a far better option than dying before you're 36 with 5 out of 6 kids dying.

(Reply to this)


[info]theshroomguy
2006-07-04 06:04 pm UTC (link)
Meh, dosen't sound like the kind of game id want to play. I see the point of it is to help you experience what it's like over there and all that. Ijust don't have any desire to play a game where your family starves to death.




Theshroomguy

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]i_love_catgirls
2006-07-04 09:58 pm UTC (link)
Why don't you head on over to the site and play it for 5 minutes and see for yourself?

I enjoyed it. Although, after 67 years of getting continuously pissed on by Fate, I got a little tired of the hopelessness of it all. But maybe that was the point. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]sleepchamber
2006-07-04 10:07 pm UTC (link)
Oregon Trail, anyone? I must have starved my family to death by hunting squirrels until December a hundred times.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]terminator44
2006-07-05 01:13 am UTC (link)
Bah. I totally OWNED on the PC version. All you have to do is give out maximum rations and rest when someoe gets sick.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]kharne83
2006-07-05 12:47 pm UTC (link)
I played the mac version in school when I was little.

I'd set out in the middle of winter, set the pace to grueling and blindly charge towards my goal! Suprisingly, aside from breakdowns and the ocasional dead ox I always finished the game in good shape.

I think I have a copy of Oregon Trail II somewhere, but I never played it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]slayemin
2006-07-04 10:17 pm UTC (link)
Every possible path leads to losing and death, then its an entirely hopeless situation with no possible solutions. Fine, whats the point in worrying about something which has no solution?
Thats the message I get from that game.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]i_love_catgirls
2006-07-04 11:16 pm UTC (link)
This is supposed to be the situation without interference from forces capable of helping (e.g., the UN, the US, whatever).

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]slayemin
2006-07-05 10:20 am UTC (link)
interesting that you mention that...
In George Orwells book, 1984, it was indirectly mentioned that the only way to break a perfect dystopia is for a foriegn country to intervene.
In Ray Bradbury's book, Fahrenheit 451, he also indirectly believed that the only way to truely fix a dystopic nightmare was foriegn intervention.
Now, you propose the same solution: a foreign intervention.
Just out of personal curiousity, what is your feeling on the foriegn intervention in Iraq? Is Iraq a template for future liberations? Also, its costing the USA $400 billion dollars to be in Iraq.
Should the USA go to African countries? What if a member of the UN decides to veto a decision to take action in Africa? Does having military might in the world mean that we have a responsibility to be world police officers?
hehehe, the point I was trying to make is the game seems to paint a hopeless picture. The game could be a powerful message to illustrate via simulation, how to fix the problems in african countries.
Now, I'd rather see our world's programmers putting their efforts towards the UN Millenium Development Goals. THAT would really be good. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]terminator44
2006-07-05 01:08 pm UTC (link)
Well, I think that we should do SOMETHING to help impoverished people in the world. Also, the War in Iraq has nothing to do with poverty, even though it did overthrow a dictactorship. I just don't think that oppression and poverty across the world should be ignored, nor do I believe that only the U.S. can and should help. The U.N. and other countries also need to step up and help those who can't help themselves, and not just with aid and food packages, but by activly working to rebuild these broken nations. Sure, it would cost resources to do so, but if we made these people more productive and kept them from joining violent rebel militias, then the world would be a better place for it. Simply turning our backs is not the answer.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]slayemin
2006-07-06 05:40 am UTC (link)
I also have reservations for being in Iraq. I think its a complete waste of money which could have been spent elsewhere to the benefit of americans instead of Iraqis.
So you say that the UN and other countries should step up and help those who can't help themselves...Are you talking about humanitarian relief or "liberation"? Would the more well off countries be obligated to help those less fortunate? Do you feel rich people should be obligated to give money to the poor people?

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]i_love_catgirls
2006-07-05 03:47 pm UTC (link)
I didn't necessarily mean "military intervention/liberation." I included humanitarian efforts and political pressure in my statement.

Personally I disagreed with the invasion of Iraq. I didn't think the situation was bad enough that we would be justified in invading even if the rationale had originally been "let's liberate some opressed people."

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]slayemin
2006-07-06 05:54 am UTC (link)
Hmm...What do you think the world should have done for Germany after World War I? What would you say the UN should do if a group in a country gets away with genocide and mass executions? Lets pretend that post-WW1 germany decided to kill off all "undesirables" in thier society instead of going to war. Would political pressure make a difference? With that question in mind, what about the Khemer Rouge in Cambodia...every country on earth condemed the millions who were slaughtered by Pol Pot and did all the political pressure stuff.
Saddam has directly and indirectly killed millions in his country through wars and oppression, and people would have continued dying for many decades if not for foriegn military intervention.
Next question: How many people need to die until the "situation is bad enough" to require foriegn millitary intervention? Do we draw the line at 1 person? 20 people? 100 people? 1,000? 100,000? How much is human life worth? And, is human life in western countries worth more then human life in impoverished countries? Is man really created equal?

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(24 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…