Some of the power and meaning of game theory can be illustrated by assessing the statement "If we were all better people the world would be a better place." This may seem to you to be self-evidentally true. Or you may recognize that as a matter of logic this involves the fallacy of composition: just because a statement applies to each individual person it need not apply to the group. Game theory can give precise meaning to the statement of both what it means to be better people and what it means for the world to be a better place, and so makes it possible to prove or disprove the statement. In fact the statement is false, and this can be shown by a variation of the Prisoner's Dilemma. David K. Levine of the UCLA Economics Department
How do these basic examples of game theory add dynamic conflict to a game?
In your groups, decide how these basic game theory concepts might be implemented to add interesting psychological conflict to your game. Is it possible to include these concepts in the game without hindering gameplay between certain age demographics? Will an older player always be able to control the outcome of the game because of the psychological factor? What will XYZ think?