Either or. you have some fabulous input. Do have any experience creating games? We must point this out to Scott.

You idea is good. The game could have Part IV!

Hi terrycan. Interesting idea. I am a heavy gamer, but I would not be interested in a Sim City-style AS game, nor do I think it would serve to communicate the message of AS. Sim is a "sandbox" type game, meaning it is open-ended with little to no plot-- very contrary to the philosophy of AS.
However... on the drive to work today I though about what kind of game I WOULD like to play. Here's what I came up with: --OH! and there are plot SPOILERS below. just saying.

*GENRE - Action/adventure decision-based role playing game (RPG), (decision structure similar to "Mass Effect", action/adventure modeled after "L.A. Noir")

*STORY - You create a custom character (male or female) who has just graduated college. You major was Engineering, Business, or Politics. You have a job interview set up at Taggart Transcontinental. You choose to work under Dagny (with Engineering or Business major) or Jim (with Business or Politics major). Work for Dagny includes building new branch lines, obtaining supplies, and keeping trains running. Work for Jim includes getting directives passed and eliminating competition.
At some point Dagny or Jim will assign you the job of investigating the disappearances of producers. Working for Dagny will lead you to Galt (I guess technically he will find you, as he found Quentin Daniels!) and if you're working for Jim your investigation will lead to a dead end, but you will be introduced to Dr. Stadler. You will either go to the Gulch or the State Science Institute (SSI), where you can interact with other characters from the book and have discussions on philosophy. Also you will get upgrades to your technology and increase your skills (still thinking about what exactly those might be).
From either the Gulch or the SSI you will be assigned missions.
Gulch missions - general disruption of government plans, planting the seeds of "going Galt" in remaining producers, and putting in place equipment for the broadcast of Galt's speech.
SSI missions - distribute propaganda, silence any media or remaining producers who speak/act out against the government.
GALT'S SPEECH - alright here's the part where all you die hard fans can go crazy. Include the entire speech. Why not? This is a decision-based game. At any point the player can choose to continue listening to the speech, or save and come back later, or bypass it. The game, just like the book, will already include examples of Objectivism, so the speech will just supplement that. Once unlocked, speech will be available in "bonus material" section of game. Player can read/listen to it at any time.
But wait- there's more! After the speech you either return to the Gulch to wait for the world to destroy itself, or (if you're working for Jim) you are assigned to tail Dagny which will eventually lead you to Galt. Final leg of the game involves either joining Hank, Dagny and Francisco in rescuing Galt, or interrogating him and fighting off H, D, and F (but you will lose, probably get knocked out by Hank or something. or punch to the face from Dagny. That could be fun.) Game ends with cinematic of H, D, F, and G flying over NYC, into the sunrise.

*EXPERIENCE SYSTEM - the player would have a "Philosophy Bar" that filled according to their in-game decisions. Decisions would add to either Objectivism or Collectivism side. Bonuses would be unlocked when you reach certain amounts of either philosophy (this is necessary for gameplay, can't just reward Objectivism). Player would essentially be punished if he/she straddles the fence. (same thing happens in Mass Effect - no bonus for being half good/ half evil)

*FINANCING: To be done right, should be produced as a game in itself, not just a supplement to the films. The Strike Productions could partner with independent game developers, plus crowd-funding (through kickstarter or some other site).

That's about it. I'd be interested to know your thoughts. Oh and for visual learners, here's a link to the plot structure in flowchart form:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zfgkzz4ay0mx8d...

Absolutely! I'm not really a gamer, but I could get on board with this. Maybe build a business from the ground up and if you've done things right, one of the recruiters comes to take you to the Gulch. Then you could work within the Gulch until the outside world collapses. The final stage could be to rebuild the world into a Capitalist system.

Okay, so at this point I think we need to clarify what the goal of this game is. If we want to expose many young people to the ideas of Objectivism then, as a young person and a gamer, I would suggest making a more interactive RPG where the player can feel that he or she is actively participating in the story, and learning from the decisions he/she makes. This approach teaches philosophy through narrative.
If you want to go the route of a turn-based strategy, like Civ, then what you're essentially creating is a board game for the pc. Still interesting, but won't have as much mass appeal and will only be good for teaching broad concepts (like capitalism). Also I'm not exactly clear on what gameplay would be like if you chose to be a Striker, since their motive is destruction of the government through passivity. Is this explained in the board game thread? (I only glanced through it.)
In my game model I didn't mention defections from collectivist to striker because I didn't think it would work with the storyline. Nonabsolute was the only collectivist defector in the book, right? And things didn't turn out too well for him.... but it would be fun to figure out how to make it work.

I do like strategy games, and a Civ type game could be offered as a supplement, just like Halo Wars was made during the popularity of the Halo series.

Finally, I am absolutely, certainly, most definitely not proposing anything whatsoever like WoW. It is a third-person sandbox-style thing (I won't even call it a game) created solely for the purpose of sucking money out of people and making them forget how much time they're wasting. I'm not fond of it, can you tell? ;)

I want to make a game worth playing, that offers real-world value for the person playing it.

I have a few thoughts, some of which come from the "AS-themed boardgame" discussion a few months ago:

I'm thinking more along the lines of something Civilization-esque than than (I guess) World-of-Warcraft-esque first person perspective. Getting the artwork for a WoW-type interface is probably unrealistic.

Have 3 "sides", each with their own victory conditions:
Strikers: collapse of the collectivist government, with minimal casualties.
Capitalists: Produce the collectivist government into irrelevancy (nanotech or AI singularity), or replace the collectivist government with a capitalist one from within.
Collectivists: Achieve a 1984 or Brave New World-style steady state.

Allow "defections" from one side to another. AS itself featured late-in-the-game defections from capitalist to striker, but the others should be possible.

Have a more free-form starting state where you can choose paths that mirror many AS heroes and villains. I suspect Francisco's start state isn't going to be possible from a game balance perspective, though.

Decisions you make earn you experience and resources of various types that you can use to expand your empire (different for the three sides)

Rearden: determination+financing->industry+idea->invention
Dagny: determination+job at existing company->rise through the ranks(operational)+idea->profits for self+company
Orren Boyle: government loan->industry->political influence
James: bootlicking->rise through the ranks(managment or lobbying)->political influence:
Mouch: like James, but ends in strategic betrayal->More political influence
Galt: idea+determination->recruitment,bootstrap the (initially non-existent) Gulch economy

In addition to the player (maybe allow multiplayer??), create a bunch of NPCs with their own aims for the player(s) to interact with. NPC's actions affect the game state which the player has to deal with.

Here's a couple reference links - for those who don't game much ;)

Example of decision wheel in Mass Effect (player's character giving speech):
http://youtu.be/auLSXw-h0M0

L.A. Noire trailer - shows character emotion achieved through actor motion capture:
http://youtu.be/tYNhs0roxT0

Example of L.A. Noire gameplay (action/ fight):
http://youtu.be/ptbkHu0lZVU

Interesting concept Mike. Would the game be during the book or the second renaissance? I think there is room for both. Many people who never read the book might be convinced to go Galt. They may refuse and try to fix the world. People can be unpredictable.

Maybe. I have a Wii so it would have to be either that platform or pc based.

So, in this game, would the Dagny character be able to beat John Galt in the race to Ken Danagger's office, or to Quentin Daniels?

Would John Galt ever fail to convince a producer to strike, say by not having enough experience points or whatever?

How would the gaming work? I am not a big gamer, but everyone knows D&D. When our daughter was a kid, we all used to play Moria and Rogue on the computers. Last year, to get to know people after moving here to Austin, my wife and I played "D&D Encounters" almost every week for almost six months. Just to say, I have some idea of what a "game" is. I am not sure that I see this for Atlas Shrugged, but you might perceive something that I do not.

You could make it a "Civilization" kind of game where you rebuild the world, after the Strike. Clearing away wreckage would be more costly but be more rewarding perhaps from scrap salvage and recovered machineries, etc. All the looters did not just up an evaporate, either, so some of them will still be around trying to organize trouble for you. That all might make an interesting game universe.

A SIM city like concept might work where you start a company and try to survive more and more government regulations, dodge union bosses, and try to collect gold coins and gulch cigarettes. of course in the end you would end up going Galt... but it would certainly be a learning experience for those playing.

I like the thinking.

But: it is hard to not win a game where the ultimate goal is to 'give up'.

All you would have to do is go on 'strike' on the first role.... ;-)