This may come as a surprise to you, but I am not an avid player of videogames. One might think in my professional work in simulation that I would be a natural “gamer” as they call it. However, for one reason or another, I’ve taken a rather dim view of these things, both as a professional and as a parent.

My wife finally convinced me to buy a Nintendo Wii for the kids. The games were moderately interesting , and I was impressed with the graphics processing capability of modern games. As a mathematician I can appreciate the massive processing power that is required to show two irregular objects bouncing off each other or even hair blowing naturally in the breeze – what game developers call programmable physics. That is some kind of horsepower.

“Cute”, I thought, “and mildly impressive”.

Then for Christmas along comes this game called Guitar Hero III. Whoa. This game finally crystallized all of the thoughts I had about the possibility of convergence of business simulation and gaming. It was like a lightning bolt out of the blue.

It wasn’t the graphics…frankly the graphics in GH3 are pretty lame. No, it was several important things:

Outlier Subject. GH3 simulates something that would seem completely foreign to simulation – playing music. The developers have figured out a way to abstract the playing of music into a simulation using visual and tactile proxies – no easy feat. It just goes to show, once again, that there are very few subjects that are not candidates for simulation.

Innovative Visualization. The object of the game is to hit the chords by clicking a series of buttons on the “game console” – which is shaped just like a guitar. The chords scroll toward you as the song plays. You must time the chords in line with the song playing in the background. These designers have figured out how to place this scrolling object in the center of the screen yet still make the rest of the scene, including scorecard elements, viewable without distraction. I found that I had no trouble keeping a pulse on my overall performance while playing the game.

Naturally Collaborative by Design. A quick check of the associated GH3 website shows multiplayer tournament schedules, blogs, cheat codes, hints and tips. No one told these people to collaborate…they just did it as a way to become better, more informed players. Here’s a sample:

Q from Robocop00: “im new to guitar hero and am wondering what finisher guitars do”

A from Aokiji: “ You mean finishes? They're like new faceplates for the guitars you buy. When you purchase them from the store, you can select the face plate you use on that guitar when you select it when choosing which guitar you want to use. All of the finishes only work for certain guitars though.”

Its an Ecosystem. I counted 16 companies that were part of this game’s creation, from Neversoft, the software developer, to Gibson who made the hardware, to Pontiac that advertises inside the game. I wonder how all these companies came together? My suspicion is that it was far less command-and-control from a central authority and more a set of “ant rules” where each player did its simple thing to add up to a complex (and beautiful) result.

So let’s imagine an equivalent of GH3 for business. How about “Ford Motor 2: Legends of the Highway” or “Exxon 5: Masters of the Hydrocarbon”, or even “Chick-Fil-A 3: Cows Rule”. It is conceivable that companies could create engaging simulations of themselves for use by their employees, partners, and suppliers as a way to become better at the game of business.

So forget about Google and Apple and all those other companies that are held up as shining stars of modern industry. I’m putting my money on a corner of the economy that really “gets it”. Let’s rock, people!

George Danner