Although we don't want to trivialize the hardships that so many people endure in developing countries, the 3rd World Farmer game does help bring to the forefront some of the issues that people deal with. The goal of the game is to go through demographic transition and create sustainable affluence.
Simply put, what were the most difficult aspects in this game? Why was it so hard to get out of poverty? If you could change one thing about the game (variables that effected your success), what would you change? How does this apply to real world situations?
You must comment your responses t the above questions no later than Monday Oct 17th 11:59 p
First to comment AKA give me extra credit
ReplyDeleteHowever, the hardest part of the game was the randomness and unreliability of it. No matter what you did, you still had a chance of something going horribly wrong that you had no control over. Something like a drought or a theft. It's hard to get out of poverty because when you start with next to nothing, you have to do things that you otherwise wouldn't do if you were well off; EX letting those military dudes use your farm as a base. I don't think I'd change anything about the game I think it displays a very clear example of what farming is like in a 3rd world country.
PS I don't know why my name is "Bubba Chump" pls help me
This is Jake L by the way
DeleteThe hardest part of the game was figuring out what we needed to get more money. We also didn't know the actual point of the game off the bat. However, once we figured out what we were doing we were fine. We were still in poverty the whole time, but less so than other groups. It was hard to get out of poverty because technological advancements and other areas of concern were hard to pay for. Also the unpredictability of situations yearly made it hard to make money. I wouldn't change anything in the game except for making it easier for the people to get married because that was annoying. I thought it was pretty realistic overall though.
ReplyDeleteThe hardest part of the game was figuring out what we needed to get more money. We also didn't know the actual point of the game off the bat. However, once we figured out what we were doing we were fine. We were still in poverty the whole time, but less so than other groups. It was hard to get out of poverty because technological advancements and other areas of concern were hard to pay for. Also the unpredictability of situations yearly made it hard to make money. I wouldn't change anything in the game except for making it easier for the people to get married because that was annoying. I thought it was pretty realistic overall though.
ReplyDeleteI think the hardest part of the game was not only the unreliability of the game that Jake spoke about but also the low margins of crop yield. This made it extremely hard to get ahead when things inevitably went wrong. It was also hard to find a good medium between taking risks and staying safe. If you took only risks you might get ahead at first but then something would happen that would cause you to loose a lot. If you kept it too safe you wouldn't be able to get ahead very well.
ReplyDeleteIf I could change one thing I would change the unreliability of the bad things. In real life, you can sometimes foresee negative things coming but in this game you had absolutely no foresight which made it nearly impossible to plan against disasters. Possibly by giving sometimes giving little warnings it could make it better.
It applies pretty well to real world, like the changing of pricing and yield, unexpected events both good and bad. In a basic sense it is similar to the real world but in a more complex sense there are certainly important aspects missing from the game.
I think the hardest part of this game was figuring out what works to gain income while also maintaining and continuing to build your foundation, finding the correct amount of risk and safety. to put into every move.It applys to real world situation because its a farm and thats a real situation you see in this world. If i could make a change i would put more add ons for further growth.
ReplyDeleteI think the hardest part of the game was not knowing what to buy. In the beginning I only bought the inexpensive crops but this led to little to no money. Then I switched to the more expensive crops that gained a higher revenue. However these crops often failed and I stayed in poverty. If I could change one thing about the game I would give information about the upcoming year regarding weather and economy so people could make a more educated guess on what to buy. I believe this was a very accurate portrayal of what arming is like in the 3rd world and applies to the real world because this is the lifestyle of many people. They must choose each year what to plant to make their income and hope that at the end of the year, it was a good harvest/income. Also it was an accurate portrayal of how it is hard to get out of poverty once you are in it.
ReplyDeleteI think that the most difficult part of the game was the inability to keep a steady budget and there were multiple issues that made the game unpredictable. It was difficult to get out of poverty because of that reason. It was somewhat relevant to real life farming because the crop seasons can be very unsteady which can result in a large amount of income. I would change the information about the weather for the upcoming years so it would be a more educated decision when planting the crops.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly to real life, this simulation forced us to do the impossible-prepare for the unexpected. It did not matter what we bought, sold, or grew, we did not have enough resources to maintain what we would eventually lose. Each year we had to deem something more important than something else, and pray that we made the right choice. However, within this game, that could not be done. In order to get out of poverty, people would need their demands to consistently meet what may be supplied. But human nature does not allow for such equilibrium. For example, if a family member were to get sick, medicine would be required to revive them. Unfortunately though, in order to save the family member we needed to sacrifice potential crops or tools. Therefore, the reason it is so difficult to escape such hardship, is the fact each time they dig themselves out of the whole they find themselves in...someone or something pushes them back in.
ReplyDeleteThe hardest part of this game was the unreliability if what was going to happen next. In playing this game, Garrett and I simply relied on luck to get ourselves through to the next day. We found that all of our successes were solely based off of chance, and if we didn't get lucky, then the next day we would either have to cut back on planting crops and buying animals or taking care of our people. Personally, I feel as though the game was a fairly realistic representation of what it is like to manage life in a third world country. It did a good job of being unpredictable, such as real life would be. It was also a good addition to the game to have the adults be able to work less when they have a child, because realistically they would have to focus on keeping the child alive more than they would focus on their crops and livestock. If I had to change something about the game though, I would suggest that there should be other farms around your area, and to have the ability to view what they are growing. It would be unrealistic if there was only one farm selling all these goods, and multiple farms would also allow you the ability to conspire with them on what crops to grow.
ReplyDeleteThe hardest part of the 3rd world farmer simulation was the randomness. You could make good decisions and then the market would crash or there would be a war and your farm would get destroyed. It was hard to build up anything because even when you had a lot, something would happen that makes you lose everything. If I could change one thing, I would make the yearly events have less of an impact on your profits. This game is a decent representation of the hardships of trying to live in a 3rd world country. It would be hard enough having to farm all the time without worrying whether you'll even have enough money to live from one year to the next. I also felt that it was a cruel tease having the option to build roads or support non-corrupt politicians because you never had enough money and I feel like this was done intentionally to show that the poverty loop is difficult to escape.
ReplyDeleteThe hardest part of this game was not being able to prepare for the unexpected. Hanna and I planted crops based on how much money we had and how much money the crops were expected to make our family. However, there was no way to plan for things like the crops failing, drought, or livestock being stolen. Another difficult part of the game was keeping each member of the family healthy. Even if we entered a good spot financially, there was no telling what would happen next. It was so hard to get out of poverty because we often spent a lot of our money on expensive crops, and then when they failed, we didn't make any profit, so we wasted the money. If we didn't take the risk and we bought less expensive crops, we barely made enough to break even with what we spent. If I could change one thing about the game I would make it easier for our crops to be successful. It seemed as though every time we planted a new crop, something would happen to make it fail. Third World Farmer applies to real world situations because it gives us an idea of what families in less developed countries have to deal with every day. It gives a good simulation of prices rising and dropping for crops. I thought an interesting aspect of the game was when our family dropped too low on money we go offers to marry of family members for money or to store toxic waste on some of our farm land.
ReplyDeleteThe most difficult part of the game was the yearly setbacks we would experience whether it be a drop in crop prices or a famine that would kill all of our livestock. It was very hard to prepare for the problem each year, because we didn't know what it was going to be so we and to prepare for all of them or take a risk. For example a risk we took many times was to put all our money into livestock and only protect livestock and hope that it would survive each year. The unexpected was the hardest part of the game due to its randomness and the severity of its consequences. Cade and I didn't have any problems getting out of poverty we were quickly able to move ourselves to a more stable financial position where we were able to deal with a bad year or two. If I could change one thing I would not allow bandits to be able to steal our assets like the tractor or columbine,because they cost a lot of money.
ReplyDeleteThe most difficult aspect of the game was working past setbacks early on. At the beginning, you are very vulnerable, due to your lack of resources. One bad crop yield or the loss of livestock early in the game can make things very difficult. Although these obstacles made things difficult and slowed our progress, we were still able to advance toward a more stable situation. It was difficult to get out of poverty because you have little power over your situation and limited options. At that point, you can only make conservative decisions, due to the lack of money and development. If I could change any aspect, it would be the marriage dynamic. I found it difficult to get married until after I have advanced through a significant amount of time. If the requirements for marriage were looser, that would allow me to advance quicker through the simulation.
ReplyDeleteThis simulation applies to real world situations because of the way it includes various variables and scenarios. The potential for a crop or type of livestock to fail emulates how you should not base your crop decisions on yield and profit alone. It also includes interactions with other groups that may threaten your progress or family members. Overall, I thought that it did a good job of showing all the different factors and their impacts on a community.
The most difficult part of the simulation was the uncertainty year to year. Picking which crops would do well and which ones wouldn't was basically a guessing game. The yearly set back were impossible to predict to, it seemed that each year Gena and I choose to buy a chicken would be the year that all the chickens were killed for one reason or another. It was hard to get out of poverty because the profit margins were generally very low and each year had new expenses to pay for. Many aspects of the game felt like a gamble that had the potential to pay out but often didn't. Even if the family earned money from one of the "bad" options to make money, this profit usually ran dry in only a few years. If I were to change one thing about the game I would make the some of the crops renewable. I think this would make it slightly more realistic as the families could replant seeds from the crops they grew last year. The game really shows how much of a cycle poverty is and how hard it is to get out of poverty. Often time there are no "good" options and the family is left to decide how to spend the little money they have and what can give them the best luck.
ReplyDeleteAt the beginning of the game, money didn't seem like an issue at first. I could just spam crops every year and end up with a decent amount of money. It was just that when the "events" happen in the game they tend to screw everything up. This is because they're unpredictable. Sometimes these events can help but sometimes they don't. For example I was just robbed by some people just because they heard that my farm was doing well. Other events like war always kept me in poverty, and there was not much I could do. I would add ways to find against the thieves that try to steal my crops. Like a battle system. A farmers gotta defend his crops, am I right?
ReplyDeleteThe hardest part of the game was the uncertainty from year to year. Kyle and I spent all of our money early and then there was like a war or something and we lost everything. The game seemed like it was all up to chance, either you picked a crop that reaped benefits or you lost everything. Also, we didn't realize that our people would die if we didn't feed them. so that was an issue the first time we played because we realized it to late and couldn't save them because we were out of money. It was so hard to get out of poverty because either we got some money or our crops failed and when they failed it was hard to make that money back. We either had to cut back our crops or rely on our livestock to pull through. I think that this game was pretty realistic at representing the hardships faced in a third world country. But I would add a way to like catch the thieves that stole my crops but also make it so I could steal other peoples livestock and such but with the chance I could get caught and lose everything. I think that would make the game even more realistic. It applies pretty well to the real world except it is a mellowed down version without lots of the complexity people face in the real world.
ReplyDeleteI don’t believe this game depicted very many of the hardships farmer’s in LDCs face in the right light, which makes sense because first and foremost it is a game. Some of the difficulties with it were the inability to predict the bank crashes and failure of crops, as well as the years of animal diseases. Too make it more realistic many more aspects would have to be incorporated such as even more fluctuating crop prices, much higher rates of famine, less workload capacity, and much much higher costs of improvements such as medical clinics, communications, schools, and better farming equipments.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest challenge in the game was the unpredictable aspects which forced the player back into poverty. If you didn't prepare for multiple situations, then you had a chance at poverty the next year. When me and Bubba Chump attempted the game, we would consistently fill our field with the same crop, and didn't buy many animals. This made it very hard to get out of poverty, and the highest we made it was to the 21st round. When I attempted the game, I always planted a variation of crops and would work my way up with animals. When I had extra cash I would spend it on improvements for my crops and animals, and this got me out of poverty. If I could take anything out of the game, I wouldn't. I would change how inventions (communications, infrastructure) work. Instead of providing obvious immediate benefits, I would rather that they provide new fresh drawbacks to the harsh world of 3rd world farmer. Once I obtained one of the inventions, then the rest came easy and I was able to win the game. This game applies to the real world with it's harsh unpredictability. Much like the real world, we can never predict the next step and often find ourselves at a disadvantage.
ReplyDeleteThe hardest aspect of the game for Anne and I was the fact that we were unable to prepare for unforeseen disasters such as crop failure, famine, and disease. Also, starting out with a limited amount of resources was hard because all we could really do was budget out our money for the crops that we planted and hope that they didn't fail. It was kind of a 50/50 situation, it could either go really well, or really terribly. Sometimes a successful year of planting inexpensive crops would leave us with large profit margins and allow us to purchase animals, build a well, or plant higher end crops such as cotton the next year, however this wasn't always the case and our success always inevitably crumbled after a few years. Maintaining the health of all of our family members was also very difficult because medicine was expensive and we could only afford to give a member a few units at a time, which didn't really help that much. Starting with virtually nothing made it very difficult to rise above poverty because we had to budget so severely and the only things we could make money off of were very unreliable. The crop yields were so unpredictable, some years our crops would fail, causing us to not break even and the next year we would literally only have a few dollars to live off of. Investing in tools and other resources was also very expensive. Once we had finally saved up enough to purchase something to advance our farm, we were left with next to nothing and had to work our way back up all over again. If I could change one thing I would make it so that there would be other farming families that you could interact and trade with to get a leg up and help each other out. The simulation relates to real world situations in that it provides pretty realistic situations and gives us a good idea of what life would be like as a member of a farming family in a third world country.
ReplyDeleteAlong with most everyone else, the most difficult aspect of the game for Maggie and I was the unpredictability of each year. We couldn't foresee which crops would be successful, and we couldn't protect ourselves from unexpected setbacks such as theft or disease and still had to pay living expenses and medical expenses from year to year. We weren't able to rise out of poverty because we were already set at a disadvantage from the start, which I think models many real world situations. People experiencing poverty are at an economic disadvantage, and this game models some of the hardships these people face: diseases, droughts, wars, and unreliable markets. It’s a continuous cycle that makes it very difficult for individuals and families to be able to get out of poverty. Because of the yearly expenses and low income, there is little or no ability to save up enough money to break the cycle. I’m not sure if I would change anything about the game because it does manage to show the difficulty of being stuck in the poverty cycle (although oversimplified). I think this game does show a little bit of what reality can be like in some parts of the world. However, if I did change one thing about the game that could help with finding success, it would be to add property insurance, similar to the crop insurance. For those that can afford it, it would protect against theft or damage of tools and buildings, because there was no way to control that aspect of the game.
ReplyDeleteAlong with most people, I believe the biggest challenge in this simulation was undoubtedly the unpredictability of the circumstances the farmers were given as well as maintaining the health of our farmers. At times it seemed as if the whole world was against Maddy and I. If one year we decided to only use all of our money to purchase and plant wheat plants, the next year there would be a giant wheat disease and decimate our entire crop. This closely shows the real life situations of farmers in third world countries because they cannot determine what will be thrown at them. It shows the unpredictability of life in less developed countries.
ReplyDeleteIt was extremely difficult for our family to rise above poverty because they were born into a cycle that traps people in. The first time we played the game, already, all of our chances were stacked against us. It would take extreme luck and fortune to escape the never ending cycle. In many less developed countries this is everyday life. Therefore, this game closely follows the same patterns of inescapable poverty cycles found in the real world.
If I could change anything about the game to benefit me personally, I would increase accessibility to education for all my children. In every scenario, the most educated farmer would bring in the highest sum of revenue. This educating of the entire family could potentially pull the family out of the poverty cycle they are trapped in. Closely mirroring real life, it was extremely difficult to educate even one family member, let alone all of them. The farm would first loose labor as well as money if we sent a farmer off to become educated. This is a problem in real situations because most families do not have enough money to put in a large investment into what would be a lifelong investment to both them and their children. In all cases, education is the most effective method to escaping the poverty cycle trap.