BROKEN
MIRRORS
PART ONE: WHO'S HERE, ANYWAY?
Lum the
Mad |
This is the
first in a five part discussion on current problems and proposed solutions
in massively
multiplayer online role-playing games (MMRPGs).
Let's begin our discussion with a few archetypes of
online game players.
You may fit in more than one; hell, I suspect I fit in all of them.
The Combatant: This player sees his preferred
game (almost always, UO) as a test of skill. He is, almost without exception, interested only in the
PvP aspect of the game; the AI of the monsters in UO are a joke and he sees
nothing "fun" about standing on a cliff and EV'ing demons all night. (He tried
EQ, but returned it three days later.) He doesn't
consider himself a PK, although there may be times when he has killed players in
dungeons who thought he was. He's a hunter; and the best hunters always seek the
most dangerous prey.
What does the Combatant think is
good about the game(s) he plays?
UO: The Combatant is almost always in a guild of other players,
people he considers friends and spends a good deal of time with, inside and
outside the game (IRC, ICQ, face-to-face get-togethers, etc.). By co-operating
with his guild mates, and acting as a coordinated team in battle, in a
persistent, constant test of skill against hundreds of other like-minded
individuals, he feels that UO offers a playing experience unlike any other on
the market today. The recent Siege Perilous shard (a special shard designed for
veteran players with especially difficult combat and economy aspects), the
Combatant feels, was tailor-made to what he looks for in an online game, and
despite the subsequent problems it is almost always the shard he plays on
exclusively, to the point of giving up well-established characters on other
shards.
EQ: The Combatant
found very little to like about EQ. It wasn't his game.
What concerns the Combatant about the game(s) he plays?
UO: The main concern of the Combatant right now is probably the reputation
system, which he feels unfairly victimizes those who engage in PvP. While the
guild and chaos/order systems attempt to repair the damage the rep system
inflicts, the guild combat interface is byzantine to the point of
ridiculousness, and chaos/order battles almost always devolve into who has the
most allied "uninvolved" healers. Many combatants exploit the rep system to
report murders whenever possible, so as to deny their opponents time in game.
With the new strictures against macroing, the Combatant is concerned that he is
being shunted towards the Red PK/stat loss door against his
will. EQ: The Combatant
was unhappy with EQ. The PvP system was generally poorly thought out, and the
level limits on who could attack who encouraged newbie killing while limiting
true guild to guild combat. Due to EQ's harsh restrictions on co-existing 3rd
party programs such as IRC and ICQ, the Combatant finds EQ's guild structures to
be sorely lacking. What information has been released about Tallon Zek
(the new "Race War" PvP server) does little to convince him that EQ
has a place for him.
The Lewter: This player wants
to win. The score is kept in many ways: number of houses/castles, the best
equipment possible, cash on
hand, reagents, whatever. She seeks to gain "lewt" with a minimum of effort and
fuss. Since players always carry more "lewt" then monsters, players are thus her
target.
What does the Lewter think is good
about the game(s) she plays?
UO/EQ: The Lewter doesn't think about the game that much. "It's Just A
Game" The Lewter may well be in a guild, but her ties to the guild usually
aren't as strong as other player types.
What concerns the Lewter about the game(s) she plays?
UO: The Lewter is quite unhappy with the rep system, since the penalties for
killing another player are now greater then the benefit of the lewt that he
carries. The Lewter feels that he is unfairly targeted by OSI; when the Lewter
was a thief, thieving was nerfed; then the ping-pong murder counts made Blue
PKing impossible. The Lewter talks quite often about quitting
UO. The Lewter was distinctly unimpressed by Siege Perilous' release, since
there is no way to rapidly build a character to mastery. EQ:
The Lewter is generally happy with EQ, although the recent Lore Item patch
put something of a dent in her spawn camping. Although the design of EQ means
that she is hunting monsters now exclusively instead of players, this hasn't
even registered with her - to her, that is just where the most lewt happens to
be.
The Roleplayer: This player
sees the game that he plays as a role-playing game. He is almost always in character and can be at
times indistinguishable from an NPC.
What does the Roleplayer think is
good about the game(s) he plays?
UO: The Roleplayer is almost always a fan of the Ultima game
series and enjoys the immersive factor of a persistent Britannia. He is also a
veteran of paper-and-pencil role-playing games and seeks to transfer that
experience to this new and experimental milieu, which almost always involves
participating in/running quests. The Roleplayer often seeks to become a member
of the UO support team so that he can facilitate these quests ("become the
dungeon master").
EQ: The Roleplayer on EQ is almost always a
disaffected UO Roleplayer. He moved to EQ because of the PK switch which
prevented random victimization.
What concerns the Roleplayer about the game(s) he
plays?
UO: The Roleplayer is angered by those who seek to interfere with his game,
be it by attacking them when they have no desire to engage in PvP or by simply
standing around during quests making smart-alecky OOC comments. The Roleplayer
feels that OSI spends entirely too much time catering to PvP players (spending
development efforts on combat systems, etc.) and not nearly enough time
developing the underlying plot structures behind the game and the mechanisms for
carrying these out. EQ: The Roleplayer is
concerned about the lack of drama and persistence within the EQ world. Although
Norrath has a rich background story, this is almost completely ignored by
everyone else within the game, a fact which vexes the Roleplayer to no end (some
have resorted to hectoring other players unmercifully in /shout channels to
"keep it in /ooc"). The Roleplayer is almost always interacting more
with the game system itself (especially as manifested in the Quest system) then
with other players.
The PK: This player sees the game as
an arena that she can dominate. She is strong, others are weak, and she has no
problem with showing the results of this equation in action.
What does the PK think is good
about the game(s) she plays?
UO: The PK is without fail in a guild of other players (solo PKs tend
to die quickly). The "brotherhood" of this guild relationship is similar to that
of the Combatant, albeit not as well organized usually, since PKs tend to target
those who don't fight back. Many PKs (although by no means all) take a perverse
enjoyment from causing pain and suffering to other players. The PK is attracted
to Siege Perilous because of the lack of stat loss, although the hunting grounds
aren't as rich since most on Siege Perilous are experienced Combatants.
EQ: The PK generally isn't that fond of EQ, since
the PvP switch protects most of those who are weaker than she. The pvp only
servers (Rallos Zek and Tallon Zek) are somewhat better, although the weak pvp
system within EQ serves as a deterrent here as well.
What concerns the PK about the game(s) she plays?
UO: Two words: rep system. The PK also feels that the Roleplayers in UO are unfairly
the "favorites" of the GMs and OSI. Because of this, many PKers target
Roleplayers whenever possible (it helps that many Roleplayers have little or no
PvP fighting skills) and the hatred Roleplayers feel towards those that PvP is
increased. Because of recent punitive measures towards PKs (including the mass
banning of a particularly antisocial PK guild) many PKers are discussing leaving
UO en masse or already have. EQ: The PK
dislikes most of EQ's pvp systems, especially level limits. The looser level
limits on Tallon Zek may be of help to her here. Overall, however, most PKers
who have left UO for EQ have eventually returned to UO.
The Hunter: This player enjoys
fighting monsters ("PvM"), usually as part of a group.
What does the Hunter think is good
about the game(s) he plays?
UO: The Hunter enjoys the cooperation involved in building characters
and taking on the strongest monsters. The introduction of T2A probably saved
thousands of Hunters from leaving UO out of boredom, as most Hunters now band
together to take on the strongest creatures there (Terathan Keep, Ice Dungeon,
etc.) Many Hunters are in guilds although quite a few Hunters operate
solo.
EQ: The Hunter thoroughly enjoys EQ. Everquest has a PK-switch in
place that prevents Hunter victimization and Everquest in general is optimized
for the Hunter style of play. By now he has a group of friends of approximately
his level with whom he hunts on a regular basis.
What concerns the Hunter about the game(s) he plays?
UO: The Hunter dislikes being attacked by PKs/Combatants while hunting; his
skills are usually not as finely tuned as the other two groups and thus takes a
beating at their hands, losing the valuable equipment he was using in the
process. (Lewters especially love to take down a group of Hunters for this
reason.) Many Hunters have left UO for Everquest. EQ:
The Hunter is in general happy with EQ, although the overcrowding at popular
spawn points ("camping") is an irritating problem. The Hunter
generally is familiar enough with the game to avoid the worst campgrounds,
however.
The Merchant: This player is a
vital part of the economic system of her preferred game (almost always UO), be it via operating vendors, working
trade skills, or (often) both.
What does the Merchant think is
good about the game(s) she plays?
UO: UO is without a doubt the only game in town for the Merchant.
No other online system offers such a comprehensive system of player-driven
economic supply and demand. The Merchant may have tried Everquest briefly,
attracted by the presence of a PK-switch, but quickly returned to UO as
Everquest's trade skills are in an extremely primitive state.
EQ: There is almost nothing to attract the Merchant
to EQ beyond the existance of a PK switch which prevents her victimization.
What concerns the Merchant about the game(s) she plays?
UO: The Merchant wishes PKs/Lewters would just LEAVE HIM ALONE while
she
mines/lumberjacks/whatever. She is tired of being virtual cattle. If Everquest
ever improves its economic/trade skill system there is a very real possibility
the Merchants will abandon UO en masse... EQ:
...however, there is very little chance of this ever happening. The Verant
dev team is openly hostile to Merchants. Profitable trade skills are viewed as
"loopholes" which are quickly closed. There is currently no trade
skill which does not heavily penalize the Merchant financially, and there is no
logical reason save roleplaying for any character to use any of them.
Interestingly, the Merchant is the only archetype actually warned away in the
game's advertising -- early print ads for Everquest began with "If you want
to bake bread, play Ultima Online...", with the unspoken assumption that
few would want to do so.
The Socialite: This player
plays to meet new people, make friends, and interact with them
online.
What does the Socialite think is
good about the game(s) he plays?
UO/EQ: Socialites are often Roleplayers as well, or associate with
them often. The Socialite enjoys meeting people in the popular in-game social
haunts (player taverns, etc.). Often the Socialite takes online friendship
offline, and there have been many real-life weddings facilitated by UO
What concerns the Socialite about the game(s) he plays?
UO/EQ: Not much (if he is
PKed, he can still talk as a ghost), although he
finds most of the other archetypes somewhat rude.
So we have seven completely different
player groups, all of whom have completely different reasons for playing, who
are often at cross purposes with each other. No wonder we can't stand each other
in game!
So the question would be - how do we
keep EVERYONE happy and peaceful. I think to look at the answer to this, we need
to look at the real world, since online games often act as a mirror - a broken mirror, but a
mirror - to our own world. Here's a long thought piece from a friend with some
experience in the matter on crime and socialization --
Here are my opinions on some of the
issues you have just brought up.
1) Online 'relationships': These can
remain in game (in character) or they can extend beyond that realm into reality.
I know people who have met online and are happily married. I also know some
terrible stories of online relationships. My belief is that it is much easier to
have the ability to turn off and on a 'relationship' when it is over a computer.
It is a lot less complicated to carry on these types of relationships and often
(despite how individuals feel) there is a lot that you cannot get to know about
the person on the other side (idiosyncrasies). I have several close online
friends who I know a lot about. Even so, online forums really only allow for a
limited degree of communication (For instance there is no 'online' body
language). In many cases these people enjoy the anonymity and convenience of
being online.
As one last comment in this regards: it is much easier to
do little nice things for people online then in real life (take sending a card
for example). A lot of little differences add up quickly :-)
2)
Socialization Online: It is easier to come to know others (and even grow
'close') because of several social differences between the environments. These
differences are:
a) Common interests: (we are all on computers :-P)
IRL: you may not find a common grounds as easily and thus it is harder to meet
people.
b) Anonymity: I can log on under a different name and behave
totally differently. My actions as 'another person' would not really reflect on
me due to the anonymity of being online. I can pretend to be anyone. In fact I
could be a female and nobody really knows it (except for my ToM friends who have
met me in real life). For instance my girlfriend prefers to play male characters
because she finds it is easier to be treated normally online.
c)
People are bolder: they are willing to often break the 'shell' of
uncomfortability that sometimes with holds them in real life. This in many
respects relates to the above point.
d) Smaller communities: Many of
us are used to existing in very large communities (cities and the like) where
you can go down town and not see anyone you know. An online community is not
like that in some respects. They are most often a lot smaller. Take a shard like
Great Lakes, there must be 30,000 different people (not characters) that play on
Great Lakes. Everyone knows someone that knows you *grin*. I cannot go anywhere
on Great Lakes without running into someone I know. Now these smaller
communities allow for greater socialization. For instance crime rates in smaller
communities are significantly reduced per capita to larger metropolitan
areas..
So my final comment in reply to your statements is an explanation
of 'crime' and why it is so much higher per capita in an online forum then in
real life. It really has very little to do with consequences or punishment and
crime. Detailed studies show that 10% of people are true 'honest' people who
would never (ever) commit a crime even if they could get away with it. 10% of
people are true criminals, they will commit an offence in hopes of getting away
with it because that is their mentality. 80% of people are opportunists: where
they normally would not commit a crime unless an opportunity presented itself
where they strongly felt they could get away with it. Many people are good
people in nature and not criminals by any means. Yet they still fit into this
80% opportunist category. It is a difficult thing to admit, but let me give you
an example here quickly:
Someone receives a dozen boxes of cookies for
their company. On the sheet it says "12 boxes of cookies" but when they make a
physical count there are 14 boxes of cookies. Its not a big deal, the cookie
company over shipped the boxes of cookies. 2 boxes of 'missing' cookies are not
worth tracking down in the system and it isn't your companies fault that your
supplier over shipped you. You open up one (or 2) of the boxes and share a few
cookies with your friends.
It is almost as if it is a socially acceptable
crime. Another example would be speeding. People will speed if they think they
can get away with it. If they believe they will be caught they will not
speed.
Now I have said all this to point out that in games like UO the
opportunity exists. In fact it exists so often that it has almost become the
social norm (this is where things become interesting, more on this in a bit). So
in reality, due to the nature of an online forum 90% of the people you come
across will have a certain degree of 'criminality' to them. If someone found the
front door to my house (in UO) unlocked, I bet you 9 out of 10 people would loot
the house. They don't know me, its my fault I left the door unlocked etc etc. So
while there are many advantages to an online forum, people seem (and often are)
more shallow towards each other. The mentality is dog eat dog and the
environment will always be like this as long as the 'opportunity'
exists.
Sorry if my rant went on for too long. 3 1/2 years of criminology
waiting to escape here. If I could offer 1 piece of advice to a company that is
considering creating an online environment. I would suggest that they hire a
criminologist to review this very situation and come up with some solutions that
address these issues: - Anonymity - Opportunity - Community - Online
Penalty
No truly successful society will ever exist (online or not) until
someone can address these issues and offer solutions in regards to them. I
suspect we could come up with a reasonable set of ideals and solutions for the
above listed issue's if that was something that we as a group were interested in
chasing (be forewarned this is a HUGE task).
As Raph Koster said in reply
to my essay on Anonymity and crime (back about this time last year) "I agree
with you, its a tough nut to
crack"
-Tal'Mah'Ra
And, from the other side, here's
another example, posted without judgement;
IDIOCY IN ROLEPLAYING - OVER
ABUSIVE GMS - TOO GODDAMN MANY ROLEPLAYING FANATICS
Lately there was a Quest involving
a GM played character who was killed by some kind of evil force and taken over
in a new form. On a sunny Tuesday afternoon, I was going to the YMCA of Sonoma
to pick a fight with a few of the local goers... {Hey I pk and I admit it, get
over it} When I got there I saw a few guys entering a gate I followed.. well I
was greeted by this ugly bastard {GM} who was playing this Dark One character...
well his roleplaying fanatics attacked me. 12 or so of them jumping me
constantly. Regardless of odds against me, I was having a ball. These idiots
were going gray attacking me, so he easy kills. They were all Mace fighters, and
I being a GM Fencer/Tactics/Master Hiding, made quick work of these idiots...
well after these pinheads all died.. I proceeded to kill the GM played
character, who is invincible. {lol yeah right} After I waxed him I proceeded to
collect my loot from the corpses. Well some of the more idiotic roleplayers got
mad saying I looted then, when a lovely thief managed to beat me to the punch. I
was then placed as a outcast to all of the RolePlayers of UO and pretty much
everyone on Sonoma. Yeah you know who I am now don't you? Darklight of the MBR
guild. So I go to the YMCA to explain what happened and these jerks kept
attacking me, and if you know the YMCA pretty well, you know guards aren't far
away. They just kept comming and so did the guards {and the loot} Then these
quote unquote fanatics called me immature, and a grief player, as well as
spineless, because I refused to leave guards when they all challenged me to a 1
on 1 fight.. and I mean all of them. Every single guy there. now momma didn't
raise no fool, there was no way in hell I was going to leave guards. Well after
several deaths and the death of my horse.. I eventually was killed.. awww pity
me. But out of it I got a ton of resist and parry from these idiots. After a
while the Owner of the YMCA comes out to talk to me.. I explain my story to them
that I was a guy who fell into a quest with a ton of idiots. {I didn't put it so
bluntly though} She apologized as did I. And we all kissed and made up. But
still I am being hounded by these morons who actually think they can beat me
with their expert mages and master swordsman.. *Sigh* Some people will never
ever ever learn.
- Darklight
Your challenge, should you choose to
accept it, is to integrate this player into any system that you come up with. Part
Two: 911's A Joke In Your Server
|