I thought that was pretty super neat

Kinda confusing, but somehow I got to the end

Erm, ok. Went over my head.

okay, I managed to get both endings. once I figured out what was going on, it's easy

I'll drop a hint: certain combinations of movement and turning will produce a noticeable change.

this I really like.

meh.... buggy, I knew i had to press space next to 'humans' but half the time it wouldn't work

@mots: It isn't buggy at all, you're just not doing it right :)

I wonder what this is saying about Ayn Rand's philosophy. She championed "Objectivism", which I would say boiled down to "What I want to see is what is". She therefore hated Kant, who's transcendental idealism said that the senses were limited, and that reality was much more than what we could ever know. She then attempted to turn back millenia of philosophy to an impotent kind of capitalist Aristotleanism. But ignoring Kant is not a sensible start for anyone who wants to try to be a philosopher.

This game seems to be more about how reality is not what you normally see - which clearly goes against Rand's central point.

Thanks for the comments!

@Alsvid
Sounds like you've maybe read the paper that prompted this game. Not sure I agree with you that Kant is necessary, though I'm still trying to slog through his beliefs. I'll say this, nothing I've read of his so far has excited me enough to want to make a game about it!

Mike:

I don't think I've read the paper you're talking about, I am just a auto-didact when it comes to philosophy.

Regarding Kant - it is because his philosophy is the most exciting that he is viewed as the greatest philosopher since Socrates/Plato/Aristotle. However, you need to understand his thoughts in context to see how revolutionary they are. Could I recommend that you read Bryan Magee's "Confessions of a Philosopher"? I read it this month and it goes over his personal philosophical journey in a way that leaves you fascinated with, in particular, Kant's work.

From there introductory Kant books, and then Kant himself, will be far more accessible.

You are not appreciating Kant at the minute. When you write "I'm still trying to slog through his beliefs", you should actually say "I'm still trying to understand what he says about my own beliefs".

Now, Ayn Rand should be read in the way that "I'm trying to understand her beliefs" - she writes entirely about herself, and what she thinks. This is why she is more rarely viewed as a philosopher.

@Alsvid
When do you read anything where you aren't "still trying to understand what he/she says about my own beliefs"? Anyhow, that book seems great and I will read it (my academic background is in art, computer science and economics, I am just starting to foray into philosophy). I certainly am not blindly following Rand's criticism's of Kant and actually, I am reading him because I find her dismissal of this apparently important philosopher offputting.

However, I am finding philosophy to not be concerned or helpful to the everyday life of most individuals and, to me, this makes it hard to justify pursuing this discipline. This isn't really the place to have this discussion, but I'm still trying to understand what good philosophy does that economics (or non mainstream/academic/accepted-by-the-institutions philosophy) doesn't do better.