Changing the Classic Game Prisoner's Dilemma

605 Words2 Pages
Prisoner's Dilemma Changing the classic Prisoner's Dilemma to include more than two players and multiple rounds does not really affect the best individual strategy, though it does change the odds somewhat. Instead of making the choice more complex, though, these changes actually make the most rational individual strategy even more clearly rational and strongly reasoned. Though a situation where all players defect yields the worst possible overall outcome, an individual situation where one has cooperated but others have defected yields the worst possible individual outcome. Multiple players entering the game with the same reward structure actually increases the odds that a choice to cooperate will result in a score of 0 rather than a score of 3, as any single choice to defect by any of the other players would trigger a 0 score and the more players there are the more chances there are the one will choose to defect. Multiple rounds would also not alter the decision regardless of the specific rules of the game. If the game continued round after successive round with all of the same players, it would likely only take a few rounds before everyone followed the lead of any initial defectors and defected themselves as a way to minimize losses. If the game ends as soon as someone defects (which makes the most sense given the original situation, because as soon as one prisoner defects all others would be turned in for harsh punishment), the incentive to defect in the first round

More about Changing the Classic Game Prisoner's Dilemma

Open Document