Can players create a compelling experience by themselve?
by Kyrah Abattoir · in Game Design and Creative Issues · 09/20/2011 (4:54 pm) · 10 replies
Imagine that you create a game environment, with as little limiting rules as possible, think of it like a "system" more than an actual game, now drop a handful of players in this system and see what happens.
Do you think players are able to create a compelling adventure by themselve through conflicts, alliances and betrayals?
Do you think players are able to create a compelling adventure by themselve through conflicts, alliances and betrayals?
About the author
3D artist, programmer, game designer, jack of all trades, master of none.
#2
Peoples do use whatever cheap tactics they can to gain the upperhand (poor man's wall hacking by repetitive disconnect/reconnect. And in the end most peoples who get their ass handed (even if they where the ones starting the conflict) end up leaving.
Granted, minecraft isn't really ready for prime time unmonitored gaming, it's interesting to be able to see where the pitfalls are in this game.
As for godmodding , I'm not sure what you mean by that. You mean from a roleplay sense? From my experience it's not really possible to regulate roleplay through code...
If you mean about one player overpowering another, then yes i agree it's a delicate balance, it's even more complex if you have any sort of character improvement system in mind.
09/20/2011 (6:05 pm)
Yes, i run a small scale experience in this regard on a minecraft server, no rules, no restrictions, no admins to cry to. But so far it's not really working too well as an experiment.Peoples do use whatever cheap tactics they can to gain the upperhand (poor man's wall hacking by repetitive disconnect/reconnect. And in the end most peoples who get their ass handed (even if they where the ones starting the conflict) end up leaving.
Granted, minecraft isn't really ready for prime time unmonitored gaming, it's interesting to be able to see where the pitfalls are in this game.
As for godmodding , I'm not sure what you mean by that. You mean from a roleplay sense? From my experience it's not really possible to regulate roleplay through code...
If you mean about one player overpowering another, then yes i agree it's a delicate balance, it's even more complex if you have any sort of character improvement system in mind.
#3
The problem that this brings up, and I think it's clear in the data you presented via the Minecraft test, is that most of the time people know they are playing a game. They know that what they are playing isn't real, and so they have no investment in the world that they are playing in, and as such they really only care about having fun, not about creating compelling experiences through their connection to the world they play in.
I also think that while you could just leave players to their own devices, at some point your going to need some kind of a push from the game design. Something that is going to want the player to create these experiences. Yes you could have those players who simply want to do this out of instinct (take for example Oblivion), however I think a good portion of gamers will need to be, not so much shown, but rather advised about what the world is capable of (or even better, what only a portion of the world is capable of).
09/21/2011 (6:37 pm)
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the impression I got when you proposed such a 'system' where players would interact with one another in compelling ways, was that you wouldn't allow for any kind of outside manipulation or stimulus.The problem that this brings up, and I think it's clear in the data you presented via the Minecraft test, is that most of the time people know they are playing a game. They know that what they are playing isn't real, and so they have no investment in the world that they are playing in, and as such they really only care about having fun, not about creating compelling experiences through their connection to the world they play in.
I also think that while you could just leave players to their own devices, at some point your going to need some kind of a push from the game design. Something that is going to want the player to create these experiences. Yes you could have those players who simply want to do this out of instinct (take for example Oblivion), however I think a good portion of gamers will need to be, not so much shown, but rather advised about what the world is capable of (or even better, what only a portion of the world is capable of).
#4
For me the issue at hand is that the game must give the tools to every players that gives them a chance of not being victimized and have the opportunity of being the hero, for real this time not for pretend.
09/21/2011 (7:34 pm)
Yes of course i'm not saying to create something like minecraft that is devoid of any purpose by design (so far). But the way i see it, a lot of cases where players are whining against a player they label as "griefer" they are actually fleeing from a potentially vivid experience.For me the issue at hand is that the game must give the tools to every players that gives them a chance of not being victimized and have the opportunity of being the hero, for real this time not for pretend.
#5
09/21/2011 (9:38 pm)
It's definitely a tricky thing to balance, because in such a situation when one player is feeling powerful, another is feeling helpless which while definitely not a bad thing for a player to feel every now and then, can be a deal breaker in many situations, especially when your being put into that position again and again. 
#6
But that's not how most players see it. People don't go online to get griefed. It may be a game, but if you log on with a specific gameplay goal in mind, and someone consistently prevents you from achieving that goal for no reason known to you (or even if it is), then where's the fun in that? This is why RPGs have admins roaming around- because in the 40 years of virtual world gaming, griefing has not shown itself to be a positive thing.
Even in PvP scenarios, there are rules to prevent griefing in order to keep things fun. If you don't feel like you have a chance, you're going to give up. If you don't feel like you have a recourse, then you're not even going to try. And that usually translates to declining player populations.
09/22/2011 (6:41 am)
Quote:But the way i see it, a lot of cases where players are whining against a player they label as "griefer" they are actually fleeing from a potentially vivid experience.
But that's not how most players see it. People don't go online to get griefed. It may be a game, but if you log on with a specific gameplay goal in mind, and someone consistently prevents you from achieving that goal for no reason known to you (or even if it is), then where's the fun in that? This is why RPGs have admins roaming around- because in the 40 years of virtual world gaming, griefing has not shown itself to be a positive thing.
Even in PvP scenarios, there are rules to prevent griefing in order to keep things fun. If you don't feel like you have a chance, you're going to give up. If you don't feel like you have a recourse, then you're not even going to try. And that usually translates to declining player populations.
#7
Agreed. I think the key here is to involve the community in this as much as possible to avoid them blaming the game itself if justice is not done to their satisfaction.
So here, I would ask how? The main problem that I have with the whole "be the hero" thing is the Ice Wizard problem: Once you go up that tower and kill the Ice Wizard and save the town, someone else is going to go do the same thing, be that 15 minutes or 15 hours later. That repetitive style of event effectively destroys the persistence of a world (even if the world remains fun to play).
Sort of how many MMORPGs have the story-arc of every player being that of saving towns, moving on, saving the next one, finding lost heros, delivering important messages, etc, etc. Or even better, I'll quote the Invincibles, by Pixar: "Everyone's special, Dash.", "Which is another way of saying no one is."
I would love to see a game play down the "you're the only one who can save us all- until someone else comes to me in 5 seconds to get the same quest". Hell, I would love to see a game play down dying- why do I have to die if I just respawn? It's effort to create the content for that, and then it has to fit into the world in a spiritual (or scientific) way, and dying loses meaning because of that. I haven't seen an MMO ever leave me for dead and let me wake up and pick myself back up off the floor later on, which is both easier and more realistic.
The real challenge in making a player be a hero is not to push them to be, but rather present truly remarkable challenges that maybe none of the players present can handle. A hero means snatching victory from the jaws of defeat, and you can't properly get that across without having defeat be an actual threat. And you can't have a proper threat unless that threat has a realistic chance at actuality. And most game designers don't know how to present actual failure in a way that is positive to a player because, well...it's friggin' hard ;)
Figure that out, and you'll have your heroes.
09/22/2011 (6:54 am)
Clicked Post too soon, lol Quote:For me the issue at hand is that the game must give the tools to every players that gives them a chance of not being victimized
Agreed. I think the key here is to involve the community in this as much as possible to avoid them blaming the game itself if justice is not done to their satisfaction.
Quote: have the opportunity of being the hero, for real this time not for pretend
So here, I would ask how? The main problem that I have with the whole "be the hero" thing is the Ice Wizard problem: Once you go up that tower and kill the Ice Wizard and save the town, someone else is going to go do the same thing, be that 15 minutes or 15 hours later. That repetitive style of event effectively destroys the persistence of a world (even if the world remains fun to play).
Sort of how many MMORPGs have the story-arc of every player being that of saving towns, moving on, saving the next one, finding lost heros, delivering important messages, etc, etc. Or even better, I'll quote the Invincibles, by Pixar: "Everyone's special, Dash.", "Which is another way of saying no one is."
I would love to see a game play down the "you're the only one who can save us all- until someone else comes to me in 5 seconds to get the same quest". Hell, I would love to see a game play down dying- why do I have to die if I just respawn? It's effort to create the content for that, and then it has to fit into the world in a spiritual (or scientific) way, and dying loses meaning because of that. I haven't seen an MMO ever leave me for dead and let me wake up and pick myself back up off the floor later on, which is both easier and more realistic.
The real challenge in making a player be a hero is not to push them to be, but rather present truly remarkable challenges that maybe none of the players present can handle. A hero means snatching victory from the jaws of defeat, and you can't properly get that across without having defeat be an actual threat. And you can't have a proper threat unless that threat has a realistic chance at actuality. And most game designers don't know how to present actual failure in a way that is positive to a player because, well...it's friggin' hard ;)
Figure that out, and you'll have your heroes.
#8
-play on medium.
-permanent death.
-use the random skill button.
This has been a fairly interesting and entertaining experience so far, a friend of mine is currently dominating the leaderboard with a character that seemed to have all odds stacked against it.
In a normal RPG dying permanent death would be a terrible experience, but for some reasons in this game, after expelling a desperate "NOOOOO WHY!!" You are already rolling out a new character.
Maybe one of the keys to create real heros is to dedramatise the idea of dying, maybe with less long character buildup processes and/or with wider possibilities, so for a player, death isn't os much a punishment as it is an occasion to try something new/different.
To go back on the methods to allow players to leave the status of victim, in games where griefing is most rampant, you can see that the griefers always have the upper hand because there is no built in mechanics allowing the victim to take "actions" against the griefer.
In SecondLife for example the whole system is geared to ensure that one player cannot influence negatively another player's experience. As a result, there is basically no tools (short of filing an abuse) to deal with players with a toxic behavior.
Griefers will use whatever tactics they find, being inventory spam or crashing clients, but if a victim use the same tools the griefer uses to fight back, they risk to be banned for griefing just the same.
On minecraft on the other hand, you can just smack their face with a sword.
I feel that, in a way, by adding arbitrary protections to shield one player from another, we do more bad than good, because we remove the possibility of immediate retaliation, while not really defanging the griefer (a griefer always find a way to be a prick, if it isn't through the game mechanics, it's through bug exploits or abusive behavior).
I guess it mirrors pretty well the real world:
On one side, we have a country where peoples are allowed to defend themselve where law and order have a very low cost and occasional slippages and power grabs.
On the other, we have a country where civil protection is a state monopoly, where the justice is probably held to a higher standard, but where it's just impossible to protect everyone perfectly.
---EDIT---
I'm going to add a small paragraph about PVP and PVE servers in mmorpgs.
I believe this separation is what makes PVP servers the hellholes they tend to be. Separating PVP from PVE is actually killing PVP because it invalidates it's presence.
The population of actual PVP players in video games is very small compared to the PVE crowd. To me it would make sense to basically keep them together,
It's a bit of a sheep and wolf thing, a small wolf population in a large population of sheeps creates a semi chaotic coexistence:
-some of the wolves will protect the sheeps.
-some of the wolves will attack the sheeps.
-some players will alternate from sheep to wolf and vice versa.
If you park all the PVP players in defined servers, it's like having a pit full of wolves it's goin to be messy, bloody and in the end most will be fed up by it and leave.
I'm not saying that pvp players should be privileged compared to pve players, but dilluting your small pvp playerbase in the pve playerbase, (if the players are given the tools to not be victimized) can lead to a more vibrant and compelling environment.
09/22/2011 (7:50 am)
Maybe we should look into how roguelikes approach permanent death, i am competing with a few other friends at "dungeon of dredmor" our little game rules are the following:-play on medium.
-permanent death.
-use the random skill button.
This has been a fairly interesting and entertaining experience so far, a friend of mine is currently dominating the leaderboard with a character that seemed to have all odds stacked against it.
In a normal RPG dying permanent death would be a terrible experience, but for some reasons in this game, after expelling a desperate "NOOOOO WHY!!" You are already rolling out a new character.
Maybe one of the keys to create real heros is to dedramatise the idea of dying, maybe with less long character buildup processes and/or with wider possibilities, so for a player, death isn't os much a punishment as it is an occasion to try something new/different.
To go back on the methods to allow players to leave the status of victim, in games where griefing is most rampant, you can see that the griefers always have the upper hand because there is no built in mechanics allowing the victim to take "actions" against the griefer.
In SecondLife for example the whole system is geared to ensure that one player cannot influence negatively another player's experience. As a result, there is basically no tools (short of filing an abuse) to deal with players with a toxic behavior.
Griefers will use whatever tactics they find, being inventory spam or crashing clients, but if a victim use the same tools the griefer uses to fight back, they risk to be banned for griefing just the same.
On minecraft on the other hand, you can just smack their face with a sword.
I feel that, in a way, by adding arbitrary protections to shield one player from another, we do more bad than good, because we remove the possibility of immediate retaliation, while not really defanging the griefer (a griefer always find a way to be a prick, if it isn't through the game mechanics, it's through bug exploits or abusive behavior).
I guess it mirrors pretty well the real world:
On one side, we have a country where peoples are allowed to defend themselve where law and order have a very low cost and occasional slippages and power grabs.
On the other, we have a country where civil protection is a state monopoly, where the justice is probably held to a higher standard, but where it's just impossible to protect everyone perfectly.
---EDIT---
I'm going to add a small paragraph about PVP and PVE servers in mmorpgs.
I believe this separation is what makes PVP servers the hellholes they tend to be. Separating PVP from PVE is actually killing PVP because it invalidates it's presence.
The population of actual PVP players in video games is very small compared to the PVE crowd. To me it would make sense to basically keep them together,
It's a bit of a sheep and wolf thing, a small wolf population in a large population of sheeps creates a semi chaotic coexistence:
-some of the wolves will protect the sheeps.
-some of the wolves will attack the sheeps.
-some players will alternate from sheep to wolf and vice versa.
If you park all the PVP players in defined servers, it's like having a pit full of wolves it's goin to be messy, bloody and in the end most will be fed up by it and leave.
I'm not saying that pvp players should be privileged compared to pve players, but dilluting your small pvp playerbase in the pve playerbase, (if the players are given the tools to not be victimized) can lead to a more vibrant and compelling environment.
#9
Second Life (SL) is a good example of a very large, very open-ended sandbox. If you run around SL in the general public areas, you find it's mostly full of spam and griefers. Almost total chaos.
But I discovered that there are some private worlds/zones that are restricted to like minded people (normally people who know each other outside the game). Inside there are some amazing games going on. Sort of like LARPing, but with no physical restrictions.
09/23/2011 (12:45 pm)
I think the real trick to a successful multiplayer sandbox experience is collecting like minded people together.Second Life (SL) is a good example of a very large, very open-ended sandbox. If you run around SL in the general public areas, you find it's mostly full of spam and griefers. Almost total chaos.
But I discovered that there are some private worlds/zones that are restricted to like minded people (normally people who know each other outside the game). Inside there are some amazing games going on. Sort of like LARPing, but with no physical restrictions.
#10
10/07/2011 (12:27 pm)
I think this scenario was more common with early text gaming (MUDs) and where early low tech MMOs like Air Warrior. A lot of people had to use their imagination and create their adventure because the tech was low quality, so it was left to the player's imagination. I heard a stat that typically, the early AOL MMOs had a very high % of their players playing money just to chat and "role play". 
Torque Owner John Colgrove
I believe it's possible but you will have to have a strict set of rules so people don't godmod. Think of freeform textbased RPGs, which I used to develop. There is little to no dice rolling and the people just made everything up. It left a lot of room for godmodding. Also, every admin I ever saw made their character super powerful. Trust will be a major issue with games like these. If you can pull it off it will be big, rare, but big. When you make this game, develop the system and rules as perfect and godmod proof as you can because they will try to take advantage of any loophole they can find.
Good luck.