Last week we have received the following inquiry from a player:
“Hey, I was wondering about the “Two-State Solution”. I beat the game today and the game said I had created the two state solution. I wanted you to know that, yes people are talking about a two state solution, but is it really going to work? I think Israel/Palestine is too small for there to be two states… If that doesn’t work, than what do you think will happen?”
A tough question! At first, we didn’t want to define the end-solution of PeaceMaker and thus avoid the controversy. We assumed that lowering the violence level will be enough as a positive outcome in the game. Already in early stages of our development we were proved wrong and players demanded “a more meaningful outcome”.
So why the two-state solution? We are neither politicians nor prophets. What I can say is that we’ve worked with many content experts from both sides of the conflict and from the American perspective. Following their educated advice we’ve chosen the two-state solution, mainly because it is supported by UN resolutions, by the US’ road map and by the Arab World initiative. In addition, frequent public polls in Israel and the Palestinian Authority show it is a widely popular and acceptable solution
As always, we welcome you to challenge our assumptions and comment on them in this blog. We are aware of other solutions, some of them gathered significant public support. After working on PeaceMaker for so long, we are also aware of the weaknesses and pitfalls of the two-state solution. At the end of the day, we focused our experience on the path and the process rather than on the solution. We believe that this is a good starting point- in the virtual world, and perhaps also in the real world.