Talk:Non-zero-sum
|
|
Is there a term for negative-sum, where everybody loses? Global thermonuclear war comes to mind, as the WOPR discovered. If so, it should be noted that negatives are no non-zero for these article's purpose.
I just edited out the "Popular non-zero-sum games" section. First, I question whether the games listed are actually non-zero-sum. Bridge definitely has winners and losers, and every score by your opponents is something you try to prevent. Monopoly is more ambiguous but I'm still not comfortable listing it, because it depends on what you define as the payoff. If it's simply the order in which the players are eliminated, the game is clearly zero-sum. I can't think of many popular games that are clearly, obviously non-zero-sum. Charades was possibly a good example, but it still depends on how you score it - you could concievably play Charades competitively.
More importantly, though, I just don't think the section adds anything to the understanding of the concept. It should probably be covered at non-zero-sum game, but here it's just going to add complication. I don't think games played for entertainment provide nearly as much insight into the idea of non-zero-sum as do economic and every-day life examples. Isomorphic 19:26, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)