Good good
Took me awhile to understand that there was no end... really surprised when the first change occured.
I may interprete it this way: don't try to make people acting or thinking like you, because they will always make you different. or somthing like that.
Very good
Simple, yet deep, this achieves the purpose of contemporary arts : to make the viewer genuinely think about something.
wow
i really enjoyed this.
It felt like wen you were on one side or the other people would listen to you but when you were compromising between the two no one would listen.
as a libertarian i am really familiar with the feeling.
Great game all around.
Great job.
Great psychological test. Ask 10 people what the message is supposed to be and you'll get 10 different answers.
You asked for interpretations, right? Here's mine:
I view it as a cautionary tale. There's no use in running around scream at idiots and trying to convince them they're wrong about something. It's not going to stop them from running around destroying things. In the end, you'll just lose yourself in the shuffle, and you'll wind up isolated from everyone around you.
That was my take on it.
Excellent Experiment
The best games of the indy-games circuit are the "experimental games", and I'd say your game definitely falls under "experimental gameplay".
As it stands alone, the best praise I can give it would be to call it "artistic expression of a scientific observation", though I would leave it up to the player to determine (based on their end result, nudge) what that observation entails.
It would make a great engine for any number of games that call for or play upon the elements involved. I don't think I've ever seen a crowd simulation that convincing in a game before. And the symbolic communication is really great, it avoids complexity where none is needed.
I think it will be remembered and played for a lot longer than people have been projecting, actually -- unless they read this and it convinces them to do otherwise? Hmm!