Version 1.0 is available for iPhone and iPad. Start with the free prologue and complete first case, then continue with a one-time full-game purchase.
Availability checked on . Store availability and purchase details can vary by region.
A message arrives from Talma. Naya Rohen, your former classmate, is advising a government under pressure and asks what you would do. Read documents, choose whom to interview, and decide which evidence matters.
Your advice changes trust, memory, institutions, and the people who must live with the result. There is no single perfect policy: each route reveals something and leaves something unseen.
The prologue and complete first case are free. A single non-consumable purchase unlocks the remaining chapters and independent arcs as the story reaches them. No subscription, ads, or account is required. Owned content is playable offline after purchase verification. Current pricing is shown in the app and the App Store.
See the store listing for current availability, compatibility, and purchase details.
For enquiries, visit Studio Mamalys Support. Read our Privacy Policy for information about data handling.
Development economics, politics & sociology
Naya's advisers bring different ways of reading the same problem. The cases draw on academic theories, institutional concepts, and evidence-reading methods, then ask what each lens reveals or leaves outside the report.
This is a selected guide to concepts in the current game content, not a complete course in development economics or a policy manual. The countries, cases, and numerical examples are fictional; the descriptions below do not disclose route conditions or endings.
The illustrations below are original visual metaphors, not formal models, real-case diagrams, or game screenshots.
A state's ability to turn decisions into services depends on staff, information, workable procedures, and informal rules, not only on funding. Binding constraints limit what can be done next.
In the story: Naya weighs resources against the people and routines needed to keep a service working.
External aid can release domestic funds for other uses. An earmarked project does not automatically identify the net change in spending. Policy ownership concerns who shapes priorities, not simply who pays.
In the story: Funding decisions are also negotiations over domestic priorities and room to make the next decision.
Total benefits and costs, who actually gains or pays, and who qualifies for support are different questions. Targeting can miss eligible people or include people outside the intended group.
In the story: Travel, waiting, and transition costs sit beside budget totals when Naya considers where support should go.
Principal-agent problems and incomplete performance contracts arise when objectives, information, and observable work do not line up. Measured targets can leave important work outside the assessment.
In the story: Accountability to funders is weighed alongside frontline discretion, care, and promises to residents.
Associated with Amartya Sen, this approach examines people's real opportunities to do and be what they have reason to value, rather than assessing resources alone.
In the story: Inclusion cases ask what different households can actually do with the same entitlement.
Outputs do not fully capture legitimacy. Procedural fairness, trust, and opportunities to be heard can affect cooperation and collective action.
In the story: Service delivery, complaints, and waiting are read alongside people's expectations of fair treatment.
Earlier choices can shape later costs, interests, and expectations, making an arrangement easier to repeat and harder to change. Official accounts of success also influence whose knowledge counts.
In the story: Remembered delivery and shared accounts of the past shape what later decision-makers consider possible.
Being invited to a meeting is different from influencing its agenda or rules. Credible commitment concerns whether people have reason to rely on a promise being kept.
In the story: Deliberation asks who sets the questions, writes the rules, and can hold a decision accountable.
Recorded requests reflect who can reach or use a reporting system, not necessarily unmet need across the whole population. An administrative view may leave some communities out.
In the story: Naya checks who appears in a table and what may prevent others from being counted.
Changes in a supported group can be compared with changes in a comparison group. A causal interpretation needs a credible parallel-trends assumption and checks for competing events, changing composition, and spillovers.
In the story: Evidence reading separates an observed improvement from a defensible claim about what caused it.
An estimated effect and its precision are separate. Confidence intervals express estimation uncertainty under stated assumptions; they do not repair a poor comparison or settle policy choices by themselves.
In the story: Statistical evidence sits alongside distribution, cost, and implementation questions, without turning caution into an automatic answer.
Voices around the decision
Naya sends the files and field exchanges. Around her, advisers and economists disagree about what the evidence can support, what an institution can deliver, and whose experience remains outside the report.
Regional field coordinator
Based in Talma and working across Kesa and Selka, Naya asks you, her old classmate, where to look first. You offer advice from a distance; she hears the local voices, makes the call, and answers for it in the field.
Development sociology adviser
Imani looks at procedures and the quieter voices they can overlook. A budget constraint matters, but so does the person who goes unheard behind it.
Development economics scholar
Halden insists that listening must be followed by a workable judgment. He asks which constraints, power relations, and priorities an institution can actually carry into practice.
Heterodox development economist
Leila questions how an indicator was made before accepting what it claims to show. Her attention falls on definitions, mechanisms, and the people left outside a neat measure of improvement.
Competing operator
Kade argues from speed, implementation, and continuity. His alternative asks what can be done with the capacity already in place, rather than waiting for ideal conditions.
Meridian Development Facility economist
Mara considers how an ideal becomes a funded, deliverable programme. She draws practical boundaries around implementation, even when those boundaries leave difficult questions open.
Character artwork from Growth and Dust, framed for this site. These fictional characters represent differing perspectives, not a guide to a correct route or a promised outcome.
