My current plan is to develop a game based around signs. Signs and symbols dictate and heavily influence our lives, and I believe that they do the same in games - and I'm curious how players, often having little way in the realm of tangible fear for ignoring signs, react to them.
I plan to use the newly-made-free Unreal Development Kit to develop a small, lightweight game designed around player interaction with buttons and a small series of levels. The buttons will have instructions; press, do not press, although these will be written differently and there may be other options. The intent is to develop the game in such a fashion that allows me, the developer, to be able to see what choices were made by previous players - how many intentionally pressed "Do Not" buttons, etc. I am also curious what happens to players when systems established in the context of the game (ie, "Do Not Press" buttons suddenly becoming the right choice, and punishing the player with the wrong choice by forcing a restart) become changed and violated; will the continue to play, will they restart, will they quit in frustration?
A heavy aspect of this project will be the tracking of progress; from sketches to final product, I plan to document the process entirely and to make it available online. Part of my interest in this project is in the ease of access of doing so; recently, on RPS, some of the writers recently spoke of how this would revolutionize indie game development - and I want to see how this works, albeit on an anecdotal level.
I would also like to work, on a research-oriented level, on previous sign usage inside of video games. These can be audio as well as visual clues. With any luck, I would be able to actually speak with developers that placed these inside of their games, so that I could ask them how they felt they functioned. A recent, notable example of interesting sign usage is found in Borderlands; in many places, two paths diverge from one another. Rather than inserting directions for the player, often, "EITHER" and "OR" are the two choices, with the most specific being "TROUBLE." I have no idea if EITHER is something similar on each path, or something radically different.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
Internet Asshole
Although I've read not only the nola.com article and a decent-sized portion of Myers' paper on the character and his interactions, I grow more surprised every time by, well, his reactions to, er, reactions to his character. Myers made it fairly clear that he understood the conventions of City of Heroes, specifically that of the PvP zone:
follow by ..
And somehow - inexplicably, to my mind - Myers was surprised that in his research, which required him to grossly violate the social structures in place in City of Heroes, made him enemies. Alright, so that mischaracterizes his confusion;
What's stunning to me is that Myers didn't understand the repercussions that his actions would have. By merely noticing that the lack of player versus player action in the player versus player area and realizing that it would make for a worthwhile research concept, he had to have been aware of the way that online games, particularly MMOs like City of Heroes, function. People that play by the rules are celebrated and permitted to hold status in the community, and those that do not are ostracized. This, really, is common in any MMO that I've ever played. While I realize that this is entirely anecdotal evidence, this behavior is mirrored in such a fashion from server to server and game to game that I am inclined to believe that it is simply the norm.
Another example of the sort of action that Myers was engaging in is affectionately known in many online games as "ninjaing," which is the name given when one player attempts to take items that he either did not earn or cannot use. In World of Warcraft, this occurs when a player presses the dice-shaped button after an item drop regardless of whether or not he can use it; in Everquest, this was the name given to groups of players that quickly swooped in and stole a monster kill without waiting in line - which may have been several hours long. Whether in WoW, EQ, or any other online game, ninjas, once publically known, are typically ejected from social situations and openly mocked in public areas.
While ninjas typically get the worst treatment, this sort of social device is used on pretty much anybody that violated the social codes of a given game; gold farmers, drama queens, assholes, and gankers like Twixt are often placed here. Given that Myers has been studying games for some time, and had presumably played other online games in the past, could it really have been that surprising to him to have his life threatened because he was ruining an aspect of the game for some people?
I don't think so - even I, who merely troll public channels and enjoy picking fights with random people and making my name notorious, have received multiple "death threats." That last phrase is in quotations for a reason; to my knowledge, nobody in America, or even the world, has actually been slain as a result of an MMO dispute. I believe nobody has been killed because, well, it's mostly people getting caught up in the heat of the moment and they don't generally have the capacity (or, really, the drive) to hunt someone down and kill them just for being an asshole on the Internet.
The Internet is filled with assholes. Believe me, I know - because I am one of them, particularly while playing games. To me, being an asshole on the Internet is just part of the game. In real life, I'm usually a pretty nice guy. I like to argue and disagree with people, but I'm generally rather civil and not terribly antagonistic about it. Being an asshole inside of games allows me to move through my day to day life without feeling the need to be an asshole there, too.
As an Internet asshole, I fully accept that I may become a social pariah, an outcast from the popular and the norm. I'm pretty okay with this. It strikes me that anybody that assumes any sort of mantle other than their own personality should be prepared for the consequences that such a mantle may bring - and being an Internet asshole, like myself and Twixt, means that you're going to piss people off.
And when you piss off the wrong person, you just might get a death threat.
It's sort of like getting onto the subway on a hot summer day in a busy car, squeezing in between people to get into a seat, and then defecating in your pants. I'm reasonably sure that this is legal, but I'm also reasonably sure that this will get you punched in the face - and at the very best, you'll be asked, likely with fists, to leave the train. I can't imagine anybody would be surprised by the reactions of the people on the subway, so why should anybody be surprised by reactions of people in online games?
They revolve around violence, even if it's cartoon violence. People lust after swords, scream for bloodshed, and spend their afternoons smashing villains with fists and sticks and eye-laser-beams. So, I ask again: is it any surprise that some people find an appropriate response to in-game provocation to be .. violence?
Eventually, according to the game's design, the players -- who can choose to play as either heroes or villains -- gain access into an area where they should battle each other. The battles are designed to distinguish the most skilled players.
follow by ..
Myers ... quickly learned that players ignored the area's stated purpose. Heroes chatted peacefully with villains in the combat zone. Instead of fighting each other, members of the two factions sparred with computer-controlled enemies..
And somehow - inexplicably, to my mind - Myers was surprised that in his research, which required him to grossly violate the social structures in place in City of Heroes, made him enemies. Alright, so that mischaracterizes his confusion;
Another player added, "I hope your mother gets cancer." Yet another wrote, "EVERYONE HATES YOU."
Myers was stunned by the reaction, since he obeyed the game's rules.
What's stunning to me is that Myers didn't understand the repercussions that his actions would have. By merely noticing that the lack of player versus player action in the player versus player area and realizing that it would make for a worthwhile research concept, he had to have been aware of the way that online games, particularly MMOs like City of Heroes, function. People that play by the rules are celebrated and permitted to hold status in the community, and those that do not are ostracized. This, really, is common in any MMO that I've ever played. While I realize that this is entirely anecdotal evidence, this behavior is mirrored in such a fashion from server to server and game to game that I am inclined to believe that it is simply the norm.
Another example of the sort of action that Myers was engaging in is affectionately known in many online games as "ninjaing," which is the name given when one player attempts to take items that he either did not earn or cannot use. In World of Warcraft, this occurs when a player presses the dice-shaped button after an item drop regardless of whether or not he can use it; in Everquest, this was the name given to groups of players that quickly swooped in and stole a monster kill without waiting in line - which may have been several hours long. Whether in WoW, EQ, or any other online game, ninjas, once publically known, are typically ejected from social situations and openly mocked in public areas.
While ninjas typically get the worst treatment, this sort of social device is used on pretty much anybody that violated the social codes of a given game; gold farmers, drama queens, assholes, and gankers like Twixt are often placed here. Given that Myers has been studying games for some time, and had presumably played other online games in the past, could it really have been that surprising to him to have his life threatened because he was ruining an aspect of the game for some people?
I don't think so - even I, who merely troll public channels and enjoy picking fights with random people and making my name notorious, have received multiple "death threats." That last phrase is in quotations for a reason; to my knowledge, nobody in America, or even the world, has actually been slain as a result of an MMO dispute. I believe nobody has been killed because, well, it's mostly people getting caught up in the heat of the moment and they don't generally have the capacity (or, really, the drive) to hunt someone down and kill them just for being an asshole on the Internet.
The Internet is filled with assholes. Believe me, I know - because I am one of them, particularly while playing games. To me, being an asshole on the Internet is just part of the game. In real life, I'm usually a pretty nice guy. I like to argue and disagree with people, but I'm generally rather civil and not terribly antagonistic about it. Being an asshole inside of games allows me to move through my day to day life without feeling the need to be an asshole there, too.
As an Internet asshole, I fully accept that I may become a social pariah, an outcast from the popular and the norm. I'm pretty okay with this. It strikes me that anybody that assumes any sort of mantle other than their own personality should be prepared for the consequences that such a mantle may bring - and being an Internet asshole, like myself and Twixt, means that you're going to piss people off.
And when you piss off the wrong person, you just might get a death threat.
It's sort of like getting onto the subway on a hot summer day in a busy car, squeezing in between people to get into a seat, and then defecating in your pants. I'm reasonably sure that this is legal, but I'm also reasonably sure that this will get you punched in the face - and at the very best, you'll be asked, likely with fists, to leave the train. I can't imagine anybody would be surprised by the reactions of the people on the subway, so why should anybody be surprised by reactions of people in online games?
They revolve around violence, even if it's cartoon violence. People lust after swords, scream for bloodshed, and spend their afternoons smashing villains with fists and sticks and eye-laser-beams. So, I ask again: is it any surprise that some people find an appropriate response to in-game provocation to be .. violence?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
