RPS Chapters 4-5
In chapter 4 I particularly enjoyed reading about the mathematical intricacies of rock, paper, scissors and the different factors that can alter the game. One such characteristic is the game’s identity as a “zero-sum game.” Fisher explains zero-sum games as: a win is worth one point, a loss is a negative point, and draw is worth nothing for both sides. Also, in a zero-sum game all of the possible outcomes add up to zero, hence the name, zero sum game. He goes on to say that the best way to play rock, paper, scissors is to implement the Minimax principle. In other words, the most logical way to win is not to maximize point increases, but instead to minimize your losses. However, it is extremely difficult if not impossible to purposefully minimize your losses without knowing your opponent’s play pattern/strategy, especially considering true randomization is rare in rock, paper, scissors. However, if some semblance of randomization was achieved with each possible play having a 1/3 chance of occurring, then a “balanced tension” occurs. Fisher notes that this is described as “intransitive” by mathematicians which simply means that “the fact that rock beats scissors and scissors beats paper does not imply that rock beats paper. These characteristics make rock, paper, scissors the decision-making, conflict-settling tool that it is.
As for chapter 5, I found the binary of threats and promises very applicable to current classwork. Fisher describes threats as being “cheaper than promises, because if a threat is effective, it will not need to be followed through.” I interpreted this in the context of our game development project. In the vast majority of games, the player is able to be penalized for failed actions. In the game, it is the threat of potentially being penalized that motivates the player to play the game properly. Promises also apply here, but in a less traditional way than we see in Fisher’s stories of parent-child dynamics. Because of the programmed and predetermined responses to actions by the player, the game promises to react a certain way whether that is to penalize, reward, or otherwise. But for the sake of Fisher’s stories, promises have a more positive, reward-oriented connotation. Compared to people, games are immensely more capable of enforcing their threats and keeping their promises.
Ahsan Ahmad 
Rachel Helbling 
Shanay Amin 
Hyewon Hong 
Josephine Bossidy
Another thing that can be taken into consideration is the balance between threats and rewards. If a person is only threatened and never rewarded, as well as the threats are carried out, life becomes miserable. On the other hand, if only rewards are provided and there is no punishment, people could lose incentive in doing things and not care because they would not suffer a consequence. So a fine balance seems to be the best, but hardest path to tread on.