In 1991, a post was made on coinop.com describing a videogame cabinet released to a few arcades and bars in Portland, Oregon, in 1981. The game was called Polybius. The game itself is poorly described, with people arguing over whether it was a puzzle, maze, or space-shooter game, as well as what it actually looked like. The game became wildly popular within a few days, with lineups forming around the game, and fights breaking out over who got to play next. People who had played the game frequently exhibited the symptoms of PTSD, such as night terrors, seizures, halucinations, nausea, headaches, and swearing off videogames forever. It was also stated that some players committed suicide. Every couple of days, a couple of well-dressed "Men in Black" would drop by and copy information from the game. (Though whether this information was copied in hard or soft copy format is not stated) After a month, all of the game cabinets disappeared. The original poster of the game claimed to be in possession of a ROM image of the game.
The implication is that the videogame was a covert public experiment in the same vein as, or part of, project MKUltra. (Keeping in mind that MKUltra had actually officially ceased operations before 1981.)
There is no evidence of the game's actual existence. There are no newspaper articles, nor magazine articles. There are no genuine photos of the cabinets. All "eyewitness" reports are conflicting, and frankly suspect. The reported ROM image of the game has never been seen or played. There is a supposedly genuine image of the game's title screen, where it is copyrighted in 1981 to a company named sinnesloschen. Sinnesloschen is improper German, and is not something an actual German person would say, because it actually doesn't make sense unless you translate it into English literally. It translates to "thought erasing", but to a German-speaking person, would be more like "thinking deleted". Additionally, "Polybius" is the name of an ancient Greek/Roman historian who is important as one of the first people to try and describe history as a series of causes and effects, rather than an abstract series of events. He criticized other historians for writing from tradition alone, and famously believed that one should only report what can be learned from interviews with first-hand witnesses. Polybius' name, in ancient Greek, translates literally to "many life" but its actual meaning is difficult to discern, as "many" is the only correct translation of poly, so the name may have actually had meaning more related to reincarnation than life itself.
All of the above combined makes it seem quite strongly that this is a very well played hoax. And it very likely is. (Though the actual MKUltra experiments would have never been known, had it not been for an error- the CIA is
very good at what they do.) Using a videogame for any type of research on a random unaware public sampling is fundamentally unreliable. It would not provide substantially meaningful information, especially if used on such a small sample group, unless the information they were seeking was very general.
But it got me thinking. What would it take to make a game that can actually do the above, and what function could it serve?
The first, and most important factor, is the purpose of the experiment. This will define all other aspects of the game's design. If it was a CIA experiment, we can basically be certain that it was weapon research. That was the basis of every single public experiment they did at the time. They were at war, and they wanted to win. These were experiments on how to covertly use chemical and biological weapons to achieve military objectives.
If that was the case, the question would likely have been, "Can we use a videogame as a lure to distribute [weapon]?" followed likely with "How effective can such a lure possibly be, and how effective is the [weapon] dispersal after delivery?" This essentially makes the videogame an experiment in vector-based chemical weapon use, treating the videogame somewhat like a flower attracting players like insects, applying a weaponized payload as though it were pollen, and then observing ultimate delivery and dispersal of the payload from the affected vectors.
If this was its actual intended function, then based on the reports, the experiment was essentially a failure, because either the game or the payload was too addictive. Instead of leaving the game to distribute the payload, vectors crowded around the lure, spreading the payload only to each other and returning it to the lure, resulting in a rapidly increasing concentration of the payload at the site of delivery and in the subjects. This would make the experimental weapon an immediate failure, as well as a liability, as excessive popularity would have resulted in a great deal of focused interest and attention; the opposite of what you want in a covert operation. Hence the sudden end to the project.
Alternatively, it may be an experiment in the impact of a weaponized payload on a single target, and the videogame as simply a lure to attract subjects into the experiment. In this case, the question would be in regards to the effectiveness of the delivery mechanism to apply the weaponized payload, and then measuring dosages based on time spent playing, number of times played, and frequency of play, for each subject, followed by monitoring the consequences indirectly, such as recording the arrival of patients with common symptoms at medical facilities and observing local news articles. In this case, data recorded from the game would likely simply be video footage or photographs of the faces of the subjects.
In this regard, the experiment would likely have been a resounding success. Within a month, the game or the payload was capable of creating localized hysteria, with massive attractiveness to subjects. If the game simply took the player's photo each time they played and each time they reached a timed point in the game, (each time a dose is delivered) a researcher could simply collect and count the photos of each face to determine dosage levels and frequency. Players played with increasing frequency and for increasing periods, resulting in rapidly increasing concentration in test subjects, while having next to no impact on surrounding unintended targets. In essence, if you want to deliver a weaponized payload to a given demographic, simply regularly deliver it in negligible dosages through an increasingly attractive lure to the target. The intended targets will rapidly build themselves up to an effective dose, while unintended targets will likely not reach that level, as they will not be attracted to the lure frequently enough. However, such a weapon has limited and unreliable use, as it is dependent on the personal tastes of the subject and coincidental exposure to the lure. If a person in the demographic just doesn't like the lure as much as the rest, or coincidentally never gets exposed to the lure, they will be unaffected by it. As with the other version of this theory, because the weapon developed such massive attractiveness, it still would have been at least a partial failure, as such attention is detrimental to its covert nature. A famous secret weapon is a disaster waiting to happen.
Finally, a lot of people seem to think that the videogame would have been an experiment in hypnosis and subliminal suggestion. Nevermind the fact that by 1981, the CIA would have been
very aware of the actual limitations of practical hypnosis. Still, it could be an experiment in hypnosis; hypnosis is real and functional, it is just very limited. Specifically, you cannot hypnotize someone who does not want, or is unable, to listen, and you cannot hypnotically suggest anyone to engage in a behavior or thought process that they do not specifically desire. So, if you genuinely want to quit smoking, hypnosis will effectively erase your
psychological dependency, making it far easier to overcome the
chemical dependency. Hypnosis is NOT reinforced by chemical influence or intoxication. The subject must have normal awareness; they cannot be distracted by excessive sensory stimuli, as this will impede message delivery and trance-like state, nor can they be numbed to normal stimuli, as this will equally impede message delivery, and likely turn a trance-like state into sleep. In order for the game to experiment with hypnosis, it must actually put players into a hypnotic state.
This is difficult, because videogames are actually hostile to a trance-like state. Videogames demand intense concentration and awareness in order to mitigate the penalties and failure from unpredictable elements. In order for the game to be challenging, and therefore "fun" or attractive, (the driving force behind psychological addictiveness) there must be elements of play which present a genuine risk of failure- meaning they must be capable of actually causing failure against a player who is giving a genuine effort. This means they must have some unpredictable element.
There is a certain degree of trance-like state in digital interfaces, colloquially referred to as "the zone" for television and "immersion" in videogames. When immersed in a virtual environment, the brain actively dismisses external stimuli as irrelevant; similar to how one slowly loses focus of driving a car while talking on a cell phone. The implication is that the brain somehow perceives the interface with the virtual environment to be similar to some form of socialization; gaming, even against a digital opponent, is social-like behavior. The more interesting and engaging social-like environment encourages us to dismiss the mundane genuine setting, regardless of whether reality is more dangerous to us or not. This is further reinforced by experience, where people less and less associate virtual environments with negative emotions, as they are less likely to have negative consequences with any lasting or meaningful impact. Those who grow up interacting with virtual environments feel safer and more comfortable there, because it is genuinely safer than reality, at least in a short-term, shallow, purely physical sort of way.
Unfortunately, in order to engage a virtual environment, and thus obtain immersion in it, the user must interact through some form of hardware interface. Kinesthetic interactions with such an interface disengage the user from the virtual environment, becoming aware of the physical reality of the controls, effectively causing them to "lose immersion", and therefore interrupting any sort of trance-like state which may have formed. Superior game design allows the controls to work as players expect, allowing them to grow accustomed to the interface rapidly. The more quickly players become accustomed to the interface, the more time can be spent developing muscle memory for the interface, transforming the hardware interface into a subconscious activity, like walking, using cutlery, or riding a bike. Once this occurs, the probability of the interface distracting the user decreases considerably, and continues to decrease exponentially with the amount of time the player has spent playing the game.
The crux of creating an immersive interface depends on the principle of KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid. Good programming allows a user to do more with fewer points of contact (controls) without losing accuracy or reliability. Thus, if a player fails, it is because of their own failure, not due to a failure of the game designer's interface, allowing the players to continue "forgetting" they are interacting with an object, maintaining immersion. Likewise, the gameplay itself must be exceedingly reliable, (glitch-free) consistent, (bereft of sudden jarring changes in aesthetic features) and engaging. If gameplay is unreliable, each time gameplay fails or malfunctions, the player will lose immersion as they become aware of the game itself. If the game is inconsistent, each time a sudden change occurs, players are given a brief moment to lose immersion and think in metagame terms, such as "Ok, next level!" or "Uh oh, now what is it doing?" which equally results in a loss of immersion. And finally, if a game is not engaging, it is simply unattractive, and nobody will play it, preventing immersion from ever happening in the first place. As with the controls, gameplay should follow the principle of KISS; the fewer components a machine has, the fewer points of failure it has. Gameplay can be engaging and immersive, provided it elegantly provides deep, complex play derived from as few simple rules and functions as possible.
True to these principles, it is believed that Polybius was a fast-paced space-shooter (often described as similar to Tempest) with maze-like elements and some sort of focus on puzzles or problem solving, and its panel is often depicted as having only one joystick and only one button. Simple game means fewer glitches, simple controls means shallow learning curb.
Now, because maintaining immersion is a fundamental element of good game design, this is really essential to the creation of any type of game in general. However, immersion is the fundamental basis in which a trance-like state may be generated in a videogame, so it is absolutely essential to any experiment in videogame-delivered hypnotic suggestion.
Now, on to the subject of hypnotic suggestion. Here are modes of hypnotic suggestion that everyone thinks work, but don't:
1. Backwards delivery. The brain does not work like a digital camera. Information is not stored as a matrix of data representing images. Our brain simplifies images into abstract ideas, and only expands them into images by reference when required to. It cannot remember a sound forward and backwards, because it only remembers the meaning of the sound. It does not know the meaning of a backwards word unless the person can read backwards.
2. Rapid delivery. Again, our brains are not like computers. When watching a video, our brains do not store a million individual copies of each frame displayed. When listening to a sound, our brains do not record every vibration that impacts our ears. Speeding up a sound does not deliver it to our brains faster, it renders the sound incomprehensible. Flashing a command, no matter how simple, does not deliver it without us noticing, it simply causes us to miss the message in the first place.
3. Peripheral delivery. Delivering a message in a form that is seen but not noticed is also ineffective, as we do not record things that we don't notice or care about.
In order for hypnotic suggestion to work, it must be clear, simple, and obvious. It must be clear and simple, so that the subject understands the suggestion without need for clarification, Not understanding a suggestion will often result in instant loss of trance-like state. The suggestion must be obvious to ensure that the subject receives it despite their trance-like state, which opposes normal information delivery, focusing attention through limited channels, allowing information to arrive only through those channels. It's a delicate sort of personal sensory deprivation. The above ineffective message delivery mechanisms actually disturb a trance-like state.
So, how do you deliver clear, simple, obvious hypnotic suggestions to a single subject in a public area without alerting anyone? The most effective method I can think of is as follows:
1. The game must be hypnotic. It must rely on players focusing on something small and simple without distractions for an extended period of time. Easiest way I can think of to do this, would be to have the "player" set in the center of the screen with the game revolving around that point. Gameplay should reward players for focusing on that point with their eyes, and using only their peripheral vision to view the rest of the game, but not penalize players for blinking. The game must be relaxing, and ergonomically comfortable, allowing players to get comfy and feel safe while playing. Play-wise, this means players should be able to get into what is called a "groove", a mode of play where they can play almost entirely by muscle memory, with very little input. Gamers often describe being in a groove as being highly meditative and calming. Gameplay should encourage and reward this kind of behavior. The game must also eliminate external distractions such that the subject does not need to exert effort in order to do so. Arcade cabinets already did this to an extent, with their overhead speakers and side blinders; they were supposed to create their own little acoustic environment, where you wouldn't hear the rest of the arcade much, but can hear the game clearly, as long as you were standing at the controls.
2. The messages must be delivered to only one subject at a time, and be imperceptible to unintended targets. This can be done by shaping the cabinet to make a second acoustic environment inside the general one made for the game. This second environment would need to be small, focused around the subject's head, and directed such that sound from it rapidly dissipates outside of that area. Messages would then be delivered at a volume just loud enough to be heard inside that second environment, but just quiet enough to be covered up by the noise of the first, surrounding environment. You would also need to take measures to exclude unintended subjects from entering the area unpredictably. This can be done by making the actual accessible play area very small, and difficult to extract someone who does not wish to be removed.
3. The game must be capable of rapidly assessing the player's skill level, then presenting a challenge which appears to be a match for them but is actually easy, engaging the player long enough to enter a trance-like state, and keeping the player engaged long enough to deliver the message before ramping up difficulty to end play.
The third item is the truly difficult part. In order for it to be done, the game would need to be EXTREMELY simple, simple enough that a computer can actually interpret this kind of information. It would also need to have a deceptively complex appearance, making it harder for players to notice how simple the game actually is. Keeping the players eyes focused in only one point makes this easier, but it would still be very difficult. Assessing when a player has entered a trance-like state without human input would be nearly impossible. You would basically need to have someone remotely viewing the subject and their gameplay in order to assess their state of mind. This is particularly the case with computer technology as it was in 1981.
Now, let's pretend we actually went and built this thing- a true hypnotic videogame. Now what? We can only suggest people do or think things they would want to do anyways! Well, let's go back to our original theory of chemical and biological weapons.
If you can hypnotize a subject with such a device, then deliver a weaponized payload to them- let's say, a chemical weapon applied to their hands via the joystick when it senses their palm is sweating- you could then give suggestions for them to do innocuous actions they would have no objection to, which would ultimately distribute the weaponized substance as you desire. You could also deliver suggestions which would optimize future applications of the lure to the subject, encourage the subject to attract additional subjects to the lure, and decrease potential future interference with the lure from the subject.
And that is how you build a real-life nightmare.
