4 ms·
One thing that always sticks out to me watching The Traitors, and which this article finally clarified for me, is that many players treat it as an iterated game
by danpalmer 2y ago
One thing that always sticks out to me watching The Traitors, and which this article finally clarified for me, is that many players treat it as an iterated game, and it's not.
It's so common to hear things like "I'll take one for the team", but that's only ever a good move to make in an iterated game, assuming you're not entirely altruistic. There are "sub games" within this and it can apply there certainly, but that's not the only context where you hear players saying things like this (or often, encouraging others to take one for the team).
I think it's that these concepts are memes, embedded in our language and behaviour, but that many people don't think through their application to the situation they're actually in. I see this a lot in life, people doing things or advocating for things that "come next in the sequence", without thinking about their context and whether it makes sense in the moment.
- MichaelDickens 2y agoIt is an iterated game, though. It's socially beneficial for you to be seen behaving altruistically on national television. I think in most cases this is more valuable than whatever prize the TV show offers.
- danpalmer 2y agoIn that way it is an iterated game, true, but I'd strongly disagree that it's worth much being seen to be altruistic, and certainly less than the prize of ~£10-20k. Being altruistic might mean something for those who know you, but will be drowned out by how you actually interact with them. Being on the show in any capacity is most of the benefit, and being memorable within that, most likely by being ruthless and not altruistic, is going to achieve the biggest impact.