Monthly Archives: January 2006

Feedback Firestorm

Thanks to unexpected attention from digg.com, my brief news post on accusations of discrimination in World of Warcraft has drawn thousands of visitors to this site. Had I known that would happen, I would have spent more time on the post! I don’t normally bother to write about the same subject twice in one week, but this situation seems to merit some followup.

First: many visitors appear to have assumed that I was accusing all language-selective WoW players of racism. I would never make such a blanket accusation, news-based or otherwise. That would be as foolish as, oh… assuming that all foreign players are gold farmers. To anyone who felt unfairly accused, my apologies.

Second: It’s worth quickly glancing at the comments on my post, and on the digg entry leading to it. You can draw your own conclusions about them.

Third: My thoughts on encouraging diversity were idle speculation… intended to start a dialogue, not dictate hard and fast changes to MMORPGs. Multiplayer video games have tremendous potential to bring people together, no matter where they live or what they look like. For years, the video game industry has itself trumpeted this as one of the most promising aspects of games; a worthy rebuttal (among many others!) to the accusation that games offer nothing of social value. All the sadder, then, to see several people make comments like (and I’m paraphrasing, here): “foreigners should stick to their OWN servers!”

Fourth: the most common objection to my post was that players have legitimate reason to reject poor English speakers, since they might not understand directions, might ruin the raid, etc. I readily admit (as I did in an earlier comment) that I would not personally accept someone into my group if they spoke almost no English … it would unnecessarily complicate gameplay. But there’s a wide gulf between “perfect, unbroken English” and “almost no” English. I’ve got friends in Europe and South America who may not be able to spell perfectly, but they understand enough to avoid trouble, play their part, and generally contribute to the cause. It doesn’t take fluency to understand the less-than-Shakespearean instructions I generally hear being barked out during any given raid.

There are many ways to address legitimate player fear of potentially bad group members. One possible solution is an in-game reputation / feedback system (ala eBay), which could be used by players to ding other players who behave poorly or dishonerably while in a group. I’ll attempt to describe my idea of a functioning, relatively low-maintenance rep system in a future post.

*Update: there’s an interesting comment on this post that explains why Singaporeans (among other people) legitimately wind up in English-speaking servers, aside from immigration to the US. It’s 2nd from the top in the list.

*2nd Update: strangely, some people seem to be assuming that I “support” gold farming because I’m concerned about the cultural divide. Not that it should require clarification, but these two things are not automatically correlated…

Design Theory: A Game Play Notation System

Danc (of Lost Garden) has written a fascinating article describing a new notational system, modeled after sheet music, which can be used to guide and analyze video game design. The basic idea: by mapping and comparing key game design elements such as reward, action, etc, over a continuum, you will be able to develop a better understanding of what makes a game “good”, and be able to spot weak points in any given game’s design. A very interesting (and, I think, elegant) attempt to bring some science into the design process. My summary doesn’t really do it justice; check it out for yourself.

Having given all that praise, I do want to share a few concerns. For one: Danc’s choice of analogy. After all, musical notation has value in part because we can use it to repeatedly replay a song in the same (or similar) manner. Game developers clearly don’t need help duplicating and refining existing ideas… in fact, they’re constantly accused of doing little else. Ironically, I think a game design notational system could actually stifle innovation by encoding inflexible conventions into the development process and/or encouraging rigid adherence to “proven” patterns of design.

Let me explain my argument by digging into Danc’s post. He lists “rewards” as one of the five important notational devices in his proposed system. No arguments here; rewards are definitely a huge part of what makes most video games fun. But, as part of his definition, Danc writes: “The general goal of a reward is to make the player feel good.” This assumption becomes encoded into Danc’s mapping system by necessity. But is “feeling good” truly the only reward a game can deliver? Some games (and movies, and books) make you feel terrible, and the sadness (or terror, or disgust) is the highlight of the experience. These sensations can’t be measured and interpreted in the same way. And various forms of reward complement and negate each other in complex ways over time. These variables: type of reward, strength of reward, and proximity to other rewards, interrelate in such complex ways that mapping and analysis becomes exponentially more complicated. I suspect that a truly nuanced RPG would completely wreck a basic mapping system, and a more complex system might become too complicated for regular (or any) use.

Designing a game is like starting a new business. Any decent b-school will teach you useful frameworks for evaluating a startup venture. These frameworks have a tremendous amount of history and intelligence encoded into them. They help you to avoid common mistakes and facilitate strategic thinking. But at the end of the day, you learn that frameworks were made to be broken. The greatest businesses in the world have often turned conventional strategy on its head. Put another way: it would be literally impossible to start a business (much less succeed) if you held yourself religiously to all the best frameworks — there are simply too many rules encoded within them. And, of course, it’s no surprise that many of the world’s greatest businesses were started by people who never learned any of this. ;) All my long-winded way of saying: Danc’s notational system is really great, but I’m inclined to treat it as one of many useful tools, not as a system of paramount importance.

PS. Speaking of design tools; if you’re interested in this topic, you might find Doug Church’s historically-significant article on the subject to be of particular interest.

Google Video Resurrects the 80′s

Tomorrow, I intend to write something timely and professional. But today, I want to treat you to this fantastic old NES advertisement. Go on. Click it. You know you want to.

In the past, I’ve questioned the video game industry’s reluctance to embrace older consumers (casual games notwithstanding). But seeing this old TV ad forces me to admit that we’ve come a loooooooong way. On a tangent: the wikipedia entry for the NES is very nice.

Discrimination in World of Warcraft

Apparently, discrimination is becoming a problem in World of Warcraft. Some players are refusing to accept other players into their group unless they can chat in perfect, unbroken English. This phenomenon is being blamed on a widespread backlash against the practice of gold farming, which is unfairly associated with all non-English speakers in general.

There is nothing new to this. The particulars might be unique, but the basis for this behavior has always been there, lying just under the surface of all multiplayer video games. I will never forget the first time I logged onto a multiplayer server and saw one game session entitled “NO JEWS”. I joined the session, of course (in addition to all our other faults, we Jews can’t follow directions.) I thought I might learn something from the experience, but after 20 very sad minutes, all I’d discovered was a strong correlation between bigotry and the use of foul language.

Gold farming has simply become a handy excuse for some people to indulge in their darker impulses. So what can MMORPG developers do about it? 1) Don’t add fuel to the fire by publishing scathing remarks about the practice of gold farming. If you don’t like it, just deal with it quietly, fairly, and efficiently. 2) Reward diversity. Perhaps groups that are comprised of players from different countries could be rewarded with an experience point bonus? Or perhaps diverse guilds could be rewarded in some way? These are just idle thoughts, but I think the idea is at least worth considering. Bringing people together is one of the most socially-beneficial things an MMOG could ever do. And hey, you might even be able to get some decent PR out of it.

PS. If you haven’t read always_black’s famous short story, Bow Nigger, you really should.

*Update: in response to the unexpected controversy this has generated, I’ve posted a followup for clarification’s sake.

*Update 2: as promised, in response to all the controversy, I’ve written an article for Gamasutra about designing an MMORPG user feedback system, which is meant to address legitimate player concerns about bad teamwork, loot theft, etc.

Chinese Game Revenues Jump 52% in 2005

Via Next Gen, a report that 26M subscribers spent $470M on online video games in China. That’s 52% more revenue than in 2004.

It’s interesting that despite this increase, Chinese online game operators recently reported disappointing financial results. What explains the discrepancy?

I’ve heard whispers that piracy is beginning to hurt even the online game operators, but I’ve read nothing conclusive (in fact, I’ve read the contrary). The Chinese government recently ordered curbs on the number of hours consumers can play per day, but nevertheless, revenues rose. Furthermore, the government isn’t solely playing bad-cop; it is actively supporting the game industry all the while. And the Internet infrastructure is rapidly being improved in China, so the problem can’t be rooted in bottlenecks there.

So what’s up? Given the (known) facts, I think that there must simply be too many companies making too many of the same kind of game. As a whole, they make a ton of money, but individually, they are suffering from the competition. Perhaps the West cannot lay sole claim to the ever-prominent issue of “innovation scarcity”…

Some good stuff out there today: First annual Sex in Video Games Conference Newly published: the GDC proceedings archive, a wonderful repository of presentations-past Very funny video satirizing gamers and love Ian Bogost’s brief history of handheld game devices

Games For Health Take Another Step Forward

Via Joystiq, news that the University of Washington has received a grant to develop games that facilitate home-based care for chronically ill patients. For example, the act of monitoring one’s own health serves as a fundamental part of the gameplay experience. Relevant information could automatically be shared with physicians via console network connections.

I’m very interested in this kind of research, and for good reason. Thanks to advances in life-saving medical technology, chronic disease is becoming more common every year. The New York Times just reported that one in eight adult New Yorkers now have diabetes (a scary thing, given the long term complications caused by the disease.) But did you know that there’s a game for diabetics that encourages careful self-regulation? Assuming high quality and a reasonable price, I’d be very surprised if parents of diabetic children weren’t willing (and excited!) to buy this product.

Researchers at McGill University want to make games that increase self-esteem. Games are being used to combat paranoia. Games in general have even been shown to decrease the suffering of hospital patients, especially children. And don’t get me started about combatting obesity; the social and financial potential is mind-boggling (and easy to tap, now that Sony and Nintendo are both positioning themselves as enablers of physically-active gaming.)

The anti-gaming crowd just doesn’t know what it’s missing.

PS. For those interested in this topic, check out the Games for Health website, and especially Ian Bogost’s great coverage of the first ever Games for Health Conference (2005).

Second Life Loses a Customer

Thanks to a post on Clickable Culture, I’ve just discovered another user-generated-content-centric MMORPG called Active Worlds.

Apparently Wells Fargo is transitioning its private MMOG, Stagecoach Island, out of Second Life and into Active Worlds. Stagecoach Island attracted plenty of attention back when it was announced, just three months ago.

I’ve read a few rumors attempting to justify the move, but nothing that I think merits a reprint. I’d love to know more. Was Linden Lab (maker of SL) asking for “too much” money? Providing “too little” support? Did Second Life prove “too buggy” a platform? Questions, questions…

PS. My rant of the day: why are the interfaces on these otherwise fascinating user-centric MMORPGs so damned ugly and complicated? I realize that you need to empower gifted players with numerous interesting tools (so they can make interesting content), but a mass audience will never see that content if they get scared off by Frankenstein’s UI! If you can’t imagine a more streamlined and user-friendly system, then for goodness sake, make two — a simplified UI that’s enabled by default, and an advanced UI that scares the pants off of children (like we have now). You can expect advanced users to find the on/off switch; you can’t expect the average user to navigate a million options, nor learn the workings of a non-intuitive interface via miles and miles of ugly in game tutorial posters…

Xbox 360 Launch: Success, Failure, or Something In-Between?

Many have analyzed the Xbox 360 launch, but I’ve yet to see an article that defines Microsoft’s goals and rates the launch according to how much (or how little) it furthered those goals. What is Microsoft actually accomplishing? Here’s my take on the subject, early as it may be.

Regarding criteria for success: the 360 launch can’t be expected to cement any major victories, but Microsoft presumably hoped for a big splash that would set the stage for:

  1. Eventual market dominance among 15 – 35 year olds, preferably resulting in the implosion of either SOE and/or Nintendo. (Of course, Microsoft can hope for dominance outside that age range, but that would happen in spite of Xbox’s marketing campaign, not because of it.)
  2. Better penetration of the Japanese market, in which the original Xbox fared very poorly. (If you doubt that Microsoft cares about this, just read about everything the company has done to improve its chances in Japan this go-around.)
  3. Defense of Microsoft’s stranglehold on home computing. (It always interests me how little this is discussed in the media. Sure, Microsoft is excited about the revenue potential of the video game industry. But it cares much more about computing & digital communications in general. There are a few things keeping Bill Gates up at night; one of them is the thought of consumers neglecting their PC to enjoy email, instant messaging, and web browsing via a Playstation. I suspect that Microsoft would willingly lose money on Xbox for another five years just to prevent this from happening.)

So, has the 360 launch brought Microsoft one step closer to it’s goals? Let’s see:

Win over 15 – 35 year olds: Unclear how much headway Microsoft has made. The 360 was successfully hyped to the target market. Every 360 available in North America was sold the instant it hit the shelves. Unfortunately, not nearly enough 360s hit the shelves! Intentionally or not, Microsoft appears to have delivered too few units, allowing the initial launch hype to wane before a healthy number of gamers got their 360s. Now, some hardcore gamers with limited cash (not to mention avid but less-hardcore gamers) may simply wait for the Playstation 3 to come out. And Microsoft’s decision to offer differently-priced retail packages (core and premium) might have worked brilliantly with a healthy supply of consoles, but it simply managed to piss off the early hardcore crowd that was forced to choose between a core 360 or nothing. You can’t price discriminate with a handful of consoles, I’m afraid. The counterbalance to all this: a shortage is still way better than an over-supply.

Moving along… early-but-persistent defect rumors have not helped perception of the 360, fairly or otherwise. There are also no “must-have” games inciting consumers to drool over the next shipment of 360s, and game diversity remains low in general. A steady drumbeat of new titles is expected, but so far all I’ve heard are the anguished sobs of developers announcing revenue shortfalls for the fiscal year. All in all, I’m not impressed.

Penetrate the Japanese market: Yeaaaah… not so much. Early reports from Japan are disheartening. Just 39 percent of the consoles shipped to stores were sold on opening weekend, and Japanese consumers have, in general, expressed little enthusiasm for the 360. It can’t help that the 360 is nearly the same size as the original Xbox — an undeniable factor in its predecessor’s failure to please the space-conscious Japanese. Note to Microsoft: smooth curves and a paint job won’t turn a hog into a fox.

Defend home computing monopoly: Looking good! The 360 plays very nicely with Windows XP-based PCs and has a great interface. It’s a wireless dream that streams music, displays photos, etc. Xbox Live has been widely praised by fans and critics alike for its accessible interface and interesting early content. Developers are salivating over the possibility of using Live to digitally distribute (and charge for) new content. Communicating with friends via Live is convenient and enjoyable. Of course, Live’s usefulness is entirely dependent on the number of people who buy 360s, but let’s give credit where credit is due. Live rocks, and Microsoft can leverage that to control computing in the living room.

Overall, I give the Xbox 360 launch a C plus, or “slightly better than average”. My desire to bump the score higher (in recognition of the great effort required to launch a console) was tempered by my disappointment that Microsoft chose to shorten the console cycle by a full year, costing game developers millions of dollars in potential profit. Higher-quality games become easier to produce later in the console cycle, as developers gain experience and accumulate useful development tools. It’s a shame to see a cycle end early. I respect why Microsoft did it, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it.

So that’s that. Microsoft did a fair job, but the field remains wide open. Let’s see what Sony and Nintendo do next.

Update (1/22/06): Ever more speculation about likely PS3 delays and shortages. If the rumors prove true, Microsoft’s initial stumbles might mattter significantly less…

If you’ve read that Nintendo has sold 10M DS portables, you read wrong. The actual number is 13M, according to revised estimates announced a few hours ago. Not bad! 13M portable consoles with wi-fi, voice-recognition, and the ability to auto-detect … Continue reading