I wouldn't say that I reached the flow completely, but I was very into the game. Like most games, there is immediate feedback. That is important for this game because as you go you accumulate points, which help you "buy" symptoms, transmission options, and resistance options. I will say that you must be patient to play this game, and you will not lose focus on what's happening around you, but it is still very engaging. There is no worry of failure because if your disease doesn't spread as you like then you can always try again. There are definitely clear goals to this game because from the beginning the player understands the goal is to wipe out the world population.
As I said before, this game really exercises your patients, and it also increases your awareness, and puts your strategy skills to work. This is a game of strategy and to win you must have the correct combinations of symptoms, transmission options, and resistance options. Luck also goes into it a little bit, too, because you don't get to choose your starting region. My roommate played a few rounds and one time she got Madagascar. Her disease didn't spread very quickly, but I got lucky and had Greenland as a starting region and almost wiped everyone out.
Well, this game shouldn't be fun, but it is. The concept of killing everyone in the world hardly sounds ethical. The reason it's fun is because you get to play God in a sense. You determine how to spread the disease and every detail of the disease is in your hands. I've learned that if a person is put in a position of power where they decide every detail then they are bound to be engaged. I think this is very similar to the way people learn. Learners want to help develop their own instruction. They want to have a say in how they learn as well as the guidelines to learning it. As a teacher this will definitely be something that is helpful to know because I know that learners want to be a part of the journey, and who says they shouldn't be?