I came across this article on
buzzflash via
bluesnews. I think that the idea is a brilliant one.
Someone should make a video game of The Inconvenient Truth. The generation of most game-players will inherit global warming's escalating march, and many won't see any documentary, even an excellent one.
Given that we need to reach more people, how about an Inconvenient Video Game, a Sim World where players learn about the issues surrounding global warming, choose paths of action to address it, and link to real-world external websites? The goal would be to navigate America (and help navigate the planet) through what it will take to emerge without disaster. Players could research the facts, make good or bad choices, and see the consequences of various actions taken. The game could even include some modeling of political advocacy, so players could take the role of ordinary citizens, since our efforts will ultimately decide whether America ever does really addresses one of the most complex and urgent crises in human history.
The youngest generation is going to most fully feel the effects of Global Warming. What better way to reach them than through one of their most preferred entertainment mediums? Already, this movie is the fourth highest revenue generating documentary in history. Perhaps some of that money could be used to help fund the game development? The article discusses giving the game away for free. The US Army has does this with it's game, America's Army, although the actual effect on recruiting is dubious, it's raised enough awareness that the other branches of the military are beginning their own game projects.
What I'm imagining here is a kind of turn based strategy game like Civilization where you build up your economy over time and energy management and infrastructure is part of the game. In Civ games, the main map is of the whole world, and individual cities are manageable.
In the IT game, the cities would be preset, so that players can't avoid global warming by simply placing all of their cities inland. Improper energy management leads to global warming, which at some point becomes almost irreversible. Cities are inundated, weather patterns change turning farmland to desert, global temperatures rise, and the economy suffers the results. The player's political popularity plummets, both domestically and internationally. On the other side of the coin, too much conservation stagnates the economy, so the player must find the right balance.
A research module would force players to invest in various energy technologies to develop them. There would be an extra cost (political or financial or both?) for alternatives to account for start up costs and the cost of countering entrenched interests.
The game could also force the player to understand the real costs of oil, by forcing him or her to deploy military forces to protect sea lanes and engage in espionage in unfriendly countries that have oil and gas assets.
The game could have different starting times. What if we had started researching alternative energies more aggressively in 1980, per Jimmy Carter's energy initiatives? What happens if we don't start until 2020 (extrapolating from current trends)? How much more difficult is it? Is global warming even avoidable at that point?
A diplomacy module would let players make treaties with other countries per energy management, and energy technologies could be bought, sold, or stolen. Wars might break out over energy resources (a la Iraq) not only initiated by the player, but among A.I. countries as well.
I'm a software quality assurance engineer, but I have no experience in the game industry. I've played a lot of games, though, and would gladly offer my skills in testing such a piece of software in order to increase the awareness of global warming.