Broken
Toys
Random comments about
games and tractors
It’s The Dancing, Stupid
From Cnet’s Dan Terdiman, an interview with the PARC PlayOn team, plaintively /auctioning their wares…
“When faced with the decision, ‘Do I put in another dungeon or do I improve the experience for (groups of players)?’” said Ducheneaut, publishers often say “‘I’ll put in another dungeon.’ I think that’s incredibly shortsighted.”
That’s because the PARC team–whose project and blog are called PlayOn–firmly believes there’s real money to be made in designing MMOs so that they make it substantially easier for players to not only slay beasts together, but also communicate and socialize.
The group acknowledges that it may be hard to convince publishers to change fundamental design principles of existing games in order to improve socialization. But should publishers do so, it may well make worthwhile the countless hours the team has spent collecting and analyzing data about the ways people play MMOs.
I suspect a more fundamental problem is that MMO publishers tend to keep people on staff inhouse who also spend countless hours collecting and analyzing data, which is then ignored and another expansion involving 15 dungeons is released into the wild, because that is what distributors look for when printing shiny boxes on store shelves.
Expansions == more content. That’s a given. Occasionally they have other things (Camelot traditionally introduced newer engine versions, for example, as NDL/Gamebryo became less and less bugridden) but publishing a CD or 4 and cramming a gig worth of models and textures on it is the most cost-effective way to (a) get those models and textures and thus an extended gameplay experience into the customer’s hands and (b) not incidentally, keep an ongoing development team paid.
Social experiences are important. Vitally important. Game-destroying if you don’t get them right. But they’re not the demesne of the expansion. They’re what you should have included in the first place, and if you didn’t get them right, your live team is working on pushing them to everyone, not just whomever paid for Expansion X.
“I think we can make a dollars-and-cents argument,” Ducheneaut said. “They can look at a new dungeon and how many extra players it’ll get them, and we can counter very easily, because now we have the numbers (showing the value of improved socialization tools) and you can translate that into money.”
This seems more like self-justification than an actual argument. If a game needs improved socialization tools, that is a core function of the game that is missing. Upselling it is a hideously bad idea. Socialization is, at the core, what these games are. If, for example, your game is missing a decent Looking for Group interface (using a purely hypothetical example) then trying to use “NEW LFG SYSTEM!” as an expansion bullet point is not only something that will spread ill will among your players, who rightfully expect that such a thing is what they originally paid for in the first place, but also won’t work when deployed because by limiting it to the subset of users who paid for the expansion, you’ve hard-capped the adoption of a social system. Which will kill it.
So why is this a problem?
And to Ducheneaut, it’s not all that surprising that MMO publishers would fall short on some of the socialization elements that could make their games and the environments in them seem more lifelike.
“It’s incredible the palette of skills you need to design these spaces in the right way,” he said.
Among the skills that would be helpful would be urban planning, sociology and politics, fields of expertise game companies are not brimming with.
Oh, that’s right. We’re dumb. Yep, I’ll cut em a check right now.
| Print article |
about 4 years ago
Personally the reason that I play MMORPG’s is that they are like a graphical chatroom that also has a enviroment attached that is fun to be in and can promote teamwork between players. Most MMORPG games are hurting in trying to find random groups to group with as alot of the /find groupmates are either hard to use or broken (I am looking at you Mythic). I think that Cryptic Studio’s with CoH/CoV have done the best so far in this area that I have seen. One game that almost has it right IMO is DDO but the game itself is terrable.
about 4 years ago
Going to have to go with ‘basic communication enhancements are a live game addition’, not ‘basic communication enhancements are an expansion feature’.
It’s one of those reasons why stuff like video phones didn’t catch on (you remember those awesome AT&T phones back in the 90s, don’t you?). If you’re trying to communicate with someone who doesn’t have the cool new thing, then both are hobbled by the inability to communicate through gadgetX.
I find it funny that “more lifelike” in that last paragraph is considered a benefit. If we made games “more lifelike”, what is the point of making games? We have life. There may be features we want to borrow, but we also have to consider how even very basic changes affect the world.
How does a prominent feature like teleportation destroy “more lifelike” gameplay? Quite simply, with teleportation, every area needs to become a destination, and not just a travel space. That’s a huge difference. ‘Travel space’ is easy to populate, either dynamically or by hand. ‘Destinations’ are not. So by adding one simple feature that takes tedium out of gameplay, we can instantly change how the game is designed from the ground up.
For a good example of how teleportion changes things, think about UO in the very beginning, before people had runes everywhere. Now imagine it nine months after launch, when buying teleportation runes to the bottom of Covetous was cheap and easy. Big difference in play style. Before widely available runes, half the adventure is getting to the place you were going (whee, naked runs between cities!). After, travel spaces weren’t useful, there was only the destination.
There’s a lot more, obviously, but on a very basic level, features that involve communication need to be a part of the live game, available to everyone. Content is what can be added for a fee. Mind you, telecommunication companies not only disagree with this, they make a handy profit off of people paying for communication features. Good thing we’re not making real life though, because I’m pretty sure no one would pay us for it.
-N
about 4 years ago
My favorite bit was at the end:
“But what is it that makes an MMO an MMO? The socialization. And we have yet to meet a company that (gets that).”
You could talk to me. Then again, I wouldn’t be all that interested in their services.
It was particularly ironic because I just wrote up a brief description for some potential investors about why online games are popular and I said, “In a word: community.” Hard to have an online community without socialization, really.
Unfortunate, because the PlayOn guys seem pretty clued in otherwise.
about 4 years ago
Categories of articles that make my eye twitch:
* “Game Developers are boys and that’s why girls don’t play games which is a shame because over 50% of gamers are girls lol!”-articles.
* “Finally, a developer that gets it!”-articles (always about a game that aint out yet, talking about a bullshit feature that isn’t going to do whatever magical nonsense they say it’s gonna do, even if the game ever is released).
* “Game Devs should do A but they don’t, because they fail to realize A is important”-articles (when in fact we do realize that A is important, along with B, C, D and most especially the big R – reality).
* “Game Devs should do B, which would revolutionize the gaming industry and indeed, the entire world”-articles (…and which incidentally is my own personal area of expertise. See diagram 1-a.; with a diagram).
* “Such-n-such feature was PROVEN to be a terrible idea when so-n-so game implemented it”-articles (in some hideously broken half-assed bastardization that would have failed to work due to a million other confounding factors regardless).
* “Videogames make more money than movies!”-articles.
* Pretty much anything on Terra Nova with the words “future of Virtual World” innit.
about 4 years ago
With regard to the cantina in SWG – I will forever wonder why the devs didn’t put in little games there. Gambling would have been popular, I’m sure, as would little mini-games or card games.
Just having a space to socialize without anything else to do there got old fast.
about 4 years ago
I don’t think there are any MMO companies that do the amount of datamining that the PARC guys do (in whom I include Nick Yee) and they don’t even have access to the code.
about 4 years ago
Noel writes: Going to have to go with \’e2\’80\’98basic communication enhancements are a live game addition\’e2\’80\’99, not \’e2\’80\’98basic communication enhancements are an expansion feature\’e2\’80\’99.
It\’e2\’80\’99s one of those reasons why stuff like video phones didn\’e2\’80\’99t catch on (you remember those awesome AT&T phones back in the 90s, don\’e2\’80\’99t you?). If you\’e2\’80\’99re trying to communicate with someone who doesn\’e2\’80\’99t have the cool new thing, then both are hobbled by the inability to communicate through gadgetX.…
Mind you, telecommunication companies not only disagree with this, they make a handy profit off of people paying for communication features. Good thing we\’e2\’80\’99re not making real life though, because I\’e2\’80\’99m pretty sure no one would pay us for it.
Noel,
It seems to me you’ve identified a key difference. People pay for premium services like caller-id, call waiting, and voice mail because they only require one side to participate. The value proposition required where it requires both parties to participate in the purchase is much higher such as in the case of the video phone, which would have probably been a huge success if the telephone didn’t exist at the time, but since the telephone already existed, the value proposition just wasn’t there.
Similarly I imagine the same thing is true in game. Let’s consider the mailbox in WoW. You know, if WoW didn’t have the mailbox, I don’t think it would be a dealbreaker. If the mailbox was later added to WoW as a paid upgrade (say $0.10 a month) you know, I think they’d probably sell me on it (especially if anyone could send mail, and the only restriction was being on the recieving end required a fee.) Am I glad WoW doesn’t do this? I think so (though I wonder how much server lag could be eliminated if the mail system had an economic disincentive.) Similarly I’d consider transferring between servers a social service that I’d pay for (where different friends are on different servers and we all really wish we could just move our characters to unify on a single server, since no one wants to reroll.)
My point is, I can imagine that some types of social services probably could be tacked on for a fee, but not at the expense of cannibalizing your core social services.
about 4 years ago
Sure, Raph, and I’ll grant them that (especially Nick Yee… his site is required reading for anyone working on MMO design), but the overall feeling from the article was what Brian nailed far more succinctly than I did: “Hey, guys, you know MMOs are about community and socialization? You should pay us for more on this fascinating discovery!”
Then again as Themis discovered there isn’t a great market for contractors in the MMO space. The people who don’t need their services know they don’t, and the people who DO need their services think they don’t. This may change as MMOs move more into the mainstream, mind you. But for now publishers/developers tend to try to hire their knowledge base, not rent it by the hour.
about 4 years ago
Jeff:
> Categories of articles that make my eye twitch:
So, the entire internet, then?
about 4 years ago
They definitely are looking for clients, don’t get me wrong. I just tend to think that they actually are worth hiring, if you can afford them. Hell, getting them to revamp your datamining capabilities alone would pay for itself, probably.
Xanthippe, we did do a variety of games (not, alas, Sabaac). The UIs for all of them sucked, however, because we weren’t able to make custom UIs for them.
about 4 years ago
As with most management consultants, you pay them top dollars for their brain trust to learn from you and then give you advice (and use what they learn to help the competition).
If you don’t know your strategic direction nor your tactics then they may work the price, but if the team already have a strategic direction (such as providing an venue for player to “have fun together with their friends and friendly strangers”) then you can get the datamining expertise cheaper elsewhere
I like what PlayOn is doing, and also think they are worth hiring for specific areas of expertise. And in the area of socialization I think they have some insight and hard data on the underlying social behaviors that could be use in online game designs.
about 4 years ago
Then again as Themis discovered there isn\’e2\’80\’99t a great market for contractors in the MMO space.
Roughly half of my (admittedly meager) income came from contracting, consulting, and legal expert work last year. Looks to be the same this year if things go as planned. The work exists, but it’s sometimes a matter of luck finding it.
You’re right, the people that need it the most realize it the least. I did some document reviews for a project and the developers were rather defensive. As the project wore on, they realized how right I was, especially now that the investor has called me in once again.
But, yeah, making semi-insulting statements about potential clients isn’t the best business model. The PlayOn group should hire someone like me to pitch their services to developers.
about 4 years ago
Actually I have to say that I’m finding the contracting market in MMOs is WAY up over the past year. Rich and Gordon had plenty of work until they landed at BioWare. I’m getting phone calls every day. I might actually be able to afford to do this full-time now!
But I also agree that just saying, “Hey, you have to support socialization!” is hardly a new insight worthy of big bucks. Actually what bothers me more (other than Jeff Freeman’s list — I’m guilty of #5 myself) is the rather simplistic conclusion that socialization == grouping, so MMOGs need more forced grouping and raids to get people to socialize and remain sticky to the game. I just think that’s wrong, or at the very least, not necessary.
about 4 years ago
Oh, and I’m not looking for PlayOn to hire me, although I would like to know who is sponsoring their research so I can solicit their sponsors for my own work…
about 4 years ago
Raph, wrt SWG, If the minigames were in at launch, somehow I missed it. But UI is vital (as you know), so a minigame with a shitty UI won’t get much play.
SirBruce’s comment, “Actually what bothers me more [...] is the rather simplistic conclusion that socialization == grouping, so MMOGs need more forced grouping and raids to get people to socialize and remain sticky to the game. I just think that\’e2\’80\’99s wrong…” is spot-on. That’s the wrong direction to head with MMOs.
I like to play multi-player games, but that doesn’t mean I want to be forced into playing with large groups of people. Sometimes I just want to be able to talk to other people while I solo.
about 4 years ago
PlayOn is sponsored by PARC as an incubation project, I believe. That means that they had funding to try stuff out to see if they could build a viable business out of it. Now they are at the stage where they need to do so.
Having spent quite a lot of time looking at what they accomplished and what they have researched, I can tell you that the “grouping = socialization” summary is pretty far off from what they actually say and believe. Bob Moore, for example, can talk at length about ways to make avatars more compelling using fairly simple tricks — he presented on this at AGC. The work they did examining socialization patterns goes a lot deeper too. I’d link to the papers except it’s 6:58am on a Sunday at a hotel with my family and we’re going down to breakfast now.
PS, the companies could easily do what PlayOn is doing, if they just committed to it. Sometimes it takes an external group doing something for the value to be recognized.
about 4 years ago
Oh no, I didn’t mean to suggest the PlayOn guys thought it was that simple. It’s just something I see a lot.
about 4 years ago
> Oh no, I didn\’e2\’80\’99t mean to suggest the PlayOn guys thought it was that simple.
> It\’e2\’80\’99s just something I see a lot.
Likewise, I don’t mean to bag on the PlayOn folks – that stuff they do is pretty neat.
But I do betcha every article written about them forever gives me drama, as it hits something on that list…
about 4 years ago
I still think you should look past the MMO = community/socialisation mantra.
Most of the market, the elusive casual players, doesn’t care about socialisation. Im tempted to say: “At all”…
Stop following the “socialisation” sirens call and face the fact: Most MMO player want and do play solo.
about 4 years ago
A truly solo MMO is a single player game.
What you are referring to are folks that want and do play solo within a multiplayer environment. That multiplayer environment still has socialization/community elements, such as a player economy, arbitration of disputes between players, etc.
about 4 years ago
Also, people (like me) who enjoy sharing, in realtime, a mutual immersive experience. Like watching a TV show with friends, or going to a sports exhibition. I just don’t want my enjoyment of that experience DEPENDENT on what the other people I’m with do. I can enjoy a movie even if my date does not. If my date starts hitting me, I can move to another seat and still enjoy the movie; the theatre owner doesn’t make us leave because the movie requires at least a 2 people to watch.
Imagine how annoying Monopoly would be if, in order to play, you actually had to have 4 people per “player”, and only one could roll the dice and move the piece, only one could buy properties, only one could build houses, and only one could collect rent. And if one of those people kept screwing up or left, you couldn’t do that particular function anymore.
about 4 years ago
Then we all understand each other.
Now, stop worrying about socialisation and start worrying more about gameplay. Casual player, the time-restricted kind, have time for very minimal social interaction but they do want to make sure their scarce time are rewarded with good gameplay.
The social side of MMO is a bonus to most people, nothing more, they come and stick in a MMO for the gameplay.
about 4 years ago
\’e2\’80\’9cBut what is it that makes an MMO an MMO? The socialization. And we have yet to meet a company that (gets that).\’e2\’80\’9d
Brian, don’t believe everything you read. (We’re not THAT arrogant.) Daniel did a nice job on the article overall, but unfortunately he misquoted Eric in that last line. What Eric actually said was “despite the fact that game companies have masses of data on what their customers actually do together, we have yet to meet a company that really mines it.”
But that might not make as exciting reading as Daniel’s version.
PS, if you would like a copy of the paper on avatar interaction design that Raph mentions, please drop me a line (thanks, Raph!).
about 4 years ago
(Commenting late. Just back from a week hiking through Point Reyes National Seashore.)
Brian> To further Bob’s comments, I winced when I read the article, and I winced again when you called me out on it. Afaik, it’s the one place in the piece where Dan misquoted or misunderstood us. And to spin Bob’s comment a bit, my point was that while the social nature of the games is what makes an MMO distinct from a single-player game, and while we know game companies are mining and analyzing their MMO data, we have yet to meet a game company that is doing social analysis qua social analysis on the data they have in hand. Such a company might well exist — but we haven’t seen it yet. I hope that in this context, the comment is not considered semi-insulting to anyone, let alone potential clients.
Grinless> scottj is dead on saying people “want and do play solo in a multiplayer environment”. People do seem to want socialization — they aren’t playing a single player game — but it doesn’t mean they want to group. This is a main theme of Nic’s paper, “Alone Together” (available on the PlayOn blog, or directly from http://www.parc.xerox.com/research/publications/files/5599.pdf). People enjoy the audience and spectacle and the aliveness of a shared social space, even though they spend much of their time playing solo. I also suspect there’s a spectrum thing going on — some people would prefer a crummy group to soloing, and others would prefer soloing to even the best group. Being on the grouping end myself, I was surprised that most players are at the soloing end. Go figure.
about 4 years ago
As a final follow-up, because of the significance of the comments in this thread, I have contacted Daniel Terdiman, and he has graciously amended that (condensed) quote to reflect my intended point. I might not have bothered, except that Google has a way of permanentizing things.