The Curious Case Of The Poorly Behaved Professor

When someone talks smack to you in a PvP match, you might ragequit out of the game, or call your guildmates in for retribution, or make furious posts on your server message board, or something similarly dramatic.

When a “new media professor” gets talked smack to, he contacts the media.

The study’s results dismayed Myers, who in 1984 became one of the first university-level professors to study video games. He believes it proved that, even in a 21st century digital fantasyland, an ugly side of real-world human nature pervades, a side that oppresses strangers whose behavior strays from that of the mainstream.

Myers’ ‘straying from the mainstream’ involves using a seldom-used power called “Teleport Foe” in PvP by warping enemy players within range of insta-kill guards near his own side’s base. Note: this is a fairly standard design problem – the power probably should be disabled within a given range of said insta-kill guards to guard against this sort of griefing. In short, Myers was exploiting a poorly designed PvP mechanic (in a consensual PvP zone, mind you) and attracting the ire of PvPers for so doing, thus attracting the sort of rhetoric you’d expect – if you manually switched the game from its default preference of not being able to communicate with players on the other side.

So – let’s see if we have all of this straight:

  • He entered a PvP zone
  • He figured out a flaw in the game’s mechanics and how to use it to his own advantage
  • He manually activated the ability to receive tells from other players
  • ???
  • HIS HUMAN RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED

Game community leaders only intensified their efforts as Twixt became more entrenched. They turned to out-of-game venues such as message boards to punish him.

When Myers took a break from the virtual world and went on vacation for a couple of weeks with his wife and daughters, players noticed his absence. One player started a discussion thread that claimed Myers had been banned from the game because he had called a fellow player a “n—-r.”

Another posting claimed Twixt was a convicted pedophile.

Then members of those boards, in another threatening tactic, launched campaigns to discover and publish Myers’ real identity and address.

Myers reported the abuse to officials at NCSoft, the game’s publisher and moderating entity. They acted appropriately, he felt. Players delivering extreme messages tended to do so just once, and Myers assumed it was because the company punished them. Company officials didn’t respond to a request for comment.

“But the abuse was so widespread they couldn’t completely stop it,” Myers said. The company, he noted, had no right to police out-of-game forums.

The link in the story, to Myers’ blog, leads to the following cathartic cry:

While some might find heroic potential in their online play, I must confess, here at the end of my CoH/V journey, I do not. I find rather something closer to despair that the individual must eventually, inevitably, be forced to succumb to the great momentum of the zerg, the irresistible press of the mass. We may call that mass and that zerg consumers, or players, or simply people, but each of those in aggregate I now see as primarily and most fundamentally an important and perhaps insurmountable threat to individual freedom, creativity, and hope.

OH. THE. HUMANITY.

Oh, the lies.

The article makes it sound like “magically transporting other players to a robot firing squad” takes some kind of skill. It does not- even a non-PVP player like me could sit around and do that all day if I wanted to be as scorned as Twixt. In the game it is generally considered cowardly since there is not any actual fight or skill involved. Yes, it is technically within the “rules” but is not considered sportsmanlike or honorable. If what this article claims is true, it wasn’t Twixt’s “skill” that kept him alive, it was his ability to hide behind the robotic skirts of the zone drones.

His “experiment” seems to be to test the hypothesis that if you behave like a jerk in a video game, people will treat you like a jerk. Shocking, groundbreaking work there. GG Prof. Myers.

He was abusive to other players, and as was stated above, using Teleport Foe to port enemies in front of the zone drones (who make sure that the exits are “safe” for players still loading said zone.) He might have noticed that the game didn’t give him any credit for those “kills.”

Also, he had a tendency to “kill-steal,” that is, waiting for other people to get an enemy down to very few hit points, then porting said enemy away from the people fighting it, an into the drone’s range.

Neither of these methods is very fair. Sure, it’s *legal* to take credit for your coworker’s accomplishments, but is it ethical? No.

All he did was prove that if you act like a jerk, people will always treat you like one.

I’m actually a CoH player who PvPed both with and against Twixt (I am not any of the players named, and my verbal interactions with Twixt were quite limited). I’d like to clear up a few things that seem to be missing. Note that I am, in no way, discounting the seriousness of death threats, but maybe a little more understanding of what really took place will allow people to relate better to the frustration.

1) Twixt’s actions in PvP translated to an investment of time. By teleporting (the action described) villains into a row of firing squad computer-generated enemies, he would give the other character debt. This debt would impede the character’s ability to gain experience by cutting it in half for a certain period of time. Thus, anyone who suffered from what Twixt did would pay for it by having their progress cut in half the next time they got the opportunity to play. A full portion of debt could take upwards of 3 hours of nonstop play to be worked off.

Imagine you go play miniature golf. Directly in front of you is a group of 10 children who have no idea what they’re doing. You are unable to skip past them, and as is allowed, they refuse to let you pass. Due to this inconvenience, you only get to play 9 holes (or 4, if you’re only on a 9-hole course). Would you be frustrated? I sure would be. They didn’t break the rules, but they hurt the fun of my outing by specifically robbing me of the time that I had dedicated to accomplishing my goal. It’s not much different than traffic, bowling balls getting stuck in the lanes, people talking during a movie, or any other issue that would rob an individual of their free time. The individuals causing your frustration may not be breaking the rules, but they are affecting your enjoyment.

2) Twixt’s account of what took place in the PvP zones he visited just plain isn’t accurate.

People did chat because many of the players had played together prior to the release of City of Villains (CoH was released in May of 2004 while CoV in October of 2006). Most of us already knew each other. However, that didn’t result in a lack of fighting. Many times, Twixt would simply teleport people from battles already in place to his computer-generated death squads. He’s presenting the situation as if he was the only one using the zones correctly when, in actuality, he was just the only one manipulating loopholes to allow him to generally be mean to other players. That’s the biggest reason why he was despised.

3) Twixt commonly made fun of players he killed.

He did not simply say random hero-supporting things, he oftentimes bragged openly after using his computer-generated helpers to kill someone. Like any other competitive situation, bragging and talking trash will earn people talking back and becoming more upset. He worked to goad individuals into becoming angrier at what he did.

He mentions the forums as a place where people speculated about parts of his life, but he seems to have left out where he posted kill-logs from his time spent in PvP zones. He posted quite frequently on those boards, and he went out of his way to fuel the hate that developed for him. Professional athletes who do such a thing are widely derided by the media and fans. Twixt worked hard to generate hate, he was not simply an innocent victim.

4) Twixt died. A lot.

Twixt perfected his method of generating debt for other players by dying a whole lot along the way. Statements like, “But no one could stay alive long enough to defeat Twixt…” completely misrepresent what happened.

5) Twixt’s research plays a role by examining another realm of society, but his results are predictable.

It’s not surprising that people get upset when you’re mean to them without reason. On an unmarked curb, it’s legal for me to park 5 feet away from the cars in front of and behind me, but it’s simply rude to do so. If I did so directly in front of hundreds of different people who were looking for a parking spot, it’s not unreasonable to think that these individuals would be angry with me. I would say that’s completely predictable. It’s also not unheard of for such individuals to threaten others in such a situation. The fact that the anonymity of the internet allows such hotheads to go more extreme with their threats shouldn’t exactly come as a shock to anyone either. Thus, while I think research into the societies of online communities can be interesting, I don’t think Twixt’s can be classified as such.

It’s a shame that Twixt is the face of the CoH PvP and gaming community. He presents a very one-sided tale that some folks, such as the writer of this article, have apparently bought into entirely. A whole lot of good takes place in that community, but apparently, writing about that just wouldn’t sell a book.

Wow. Given all that, Myers’ quoting in his blog of the infinitely far more insightful study of PvP motivation, “Bow, Nigger“, seems more than a little ironic. Unless Myers intentionally set himself out to be the racist jerk in question as a “thought experiment”. Given the state of academia, it’s not out of the realm of possibility. Of course, given the defensive howling about how no one was talking about how he was WINNING THE DAY FOR THE SUPERHEROES in his Twitter feed, it seems he’s more worried that his incredible PvP skills are being maligned.

As a designer, I immediately saw this as a game design flaw. Myers was exploiting a flaw in City of Heroes’ PvP zones. Simply disabling Teleport Foe in a given range around insta-kill drones would solve the problem elegantly, and result in much less drama (and research papers). Leaving the exploit in results in drama. In this case, the drama happened to reach the mass media, because one of the participants had a particuarly loud megaphone.

Sadly, Myers has a way to go to meet the benchmark of mass media coverage of wounded academic pride. But give him time – he’s pretty hard core and willing to bend the rules to do what it takes. Just like a true superhero!

  • ScytheNoire

    I see a different type of social study here.

    Having assumed above average intelligence and scholarly education does not make someone above the behaviour of a child.

    He proves that it’s not age, but who a person really is, that is what we are in online games. It doesn’t matter their intelligence, age, position in the real world, they are just as likely to act like the custom comment “immature teenage jerk”. He proves that maturity is on the inside, not from accomplishments in life or time spent on this planet.

    Good job Myers, you prove that assholes are assholes.

  • rbtroj

    So, if the facts are as presented, not only does he seem to be a complete douche, but it also seems that he has no clue how to properly conduct scholarly research — a point that ought perhaps be conveyed to those who pay him to conduct such valuable research.

    But, of course, I’m just silly for thinking that he was actually conducting a bona fide study when, in fact, he was merely trying to feign authority to mask his magna cum douchery.

  • http://dsob.wordpress.com geldonyetich

    As a long time City of Heroes player of a ridiculous number of invested hours, I have to say that PvP is definitely the game’s weak point.

    The game was never intended to be a PvP game, no matter how many major rebalancings they’ve done to it, and consequently it never particularly caught on. You’ve got maybe 1% to 5% of the playerbase, tops, who obsesses over the perfect PvP build and every once in a great while wanders off in the direction of the PvP zones.

    So, for the most part, the PvP zones in City of Heroes are ghost towns, and those who participate in the PvP matches are generally over-belligerent social outcasts desperate to corner and gank somebody.

    On top of this, said PvP balance adjustments have alienated all but the most steadfast in their needs to torment another player.

    Normally, you don’t accrue experience debt from defeat in PvP, but you do if an NPC kills you. So, while it’s considered all very cheap but acceptable to use Teleport Foe to teleport somebody into a half-dozen waiting trip mines, using Teleport Foe to teleport somebody right into NPC guard range is quite cheap indeed.

    On the other hand, Teleport Foe only has a range only a little greater than the range of your average range attack, and it as a few second windup. If they’re so pissed off about him teleporting them into guard range, they could easily get around this by not hanging around the spawning point.

    To an extent, all he’s doing here with Teleport Foe is encouraging the vultures to back off. But then, given just how rare PvP is in City of Heroes, perhaps their repressed bloodlust has pushed them beyond being able to resist doing so anyway.

  • Gx1080

    The horrors. He was PvPing in a -gasp- PvP zone. That said, it is a design flaw, that PvP players -gasp- exploit.

    Ok enough laugh. Serioulsly:
    1) He was winning to his side, and his side just sit there. So much for heroism.

    2)The professor needs to realize a simple fact: Just like in High School, people that do the Tough Guy act ARE COMPLETELY FULL OF SHIT. Ask any PvPer how many of the death/real life threats actually happens. Hell, ask them how many fight back instead of acting like whiny bitches in the forums or the chat channel. Answer: To the former, NONE. To the latter: a little until they get tired because you are having fun and last longer.

    3)Its a interesting investigation about sociology. We need academics to testify with solid evidence how retard can people act in the Internet when they put the Anonymous costume. Maype people would believe me more when i tell them.

    4)If the professor its reading this, sorry but you just happened to cross paths with an old concept around here:

    http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/

    To the rest: You knew that somebody was going to link it.

  • Gx1080

    Oh, just finished reading the paper. It was well written and interesting. I wonder what the City of Heroes/Villains think about it.

    Oh, wait:

    http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=13718124&page=0&fpart=1&vc=1

    Thanks, Google.

  • http://dsob.wordpress.com geldonyetich

    What I was talking about earlier sounds off-topic, but I think it’s actually the heart of the issue. Much like other failed PvP attempts, the way City of Heroes goes about PvP conducts very bad vibes.

    Basically, players either reluctantly participate in PvP (because City of Heroes is a PvE game by nature) or participate because they’re Killers.

    Because defeating players just causes them to respawn no worse for wear and the rewards from PvP are generally quite insubstantial (temporary powers – recently added were some enhancements but they’re hardly irreplaceable) the only real way to “win” at PvP is to cause another player to lose.

    The only way you can cause another player to lose is to trick them into getting ganked by an NPC and losing experience points. The guards of spawn points (who are capable of landing instant kills) are on such means to do so, but are hardly the only means – you could also teleport them right into a batch of NPCs and Hold them there. It’s take a little more skill, but not much – the 4-8 seconds you’re held might well be enough to defeat you if you’re been teleported in the midst of enough of them.

    Nobody at the helm of CoH really understood that carrots and sticks need to be carefully balanced in PvP – instead, they seemed frightened to even introduce a reasoned distribution at all.

    So basically, here we have a PvP game where griefing is the only satisfying point of playing. Barely anyone bothers to play, and those who do are naturally belligerent people. The good professor’s findings are hardly surprising, as CoH PvP is little more than a hate machine.

    What they really need to do is remove experience loss completely from the PvP zones. Then players can go there to have fun and grind in complete safety with only the occasional interruption of another player. However, the predominantly PvE base of City of Heroes/Villains players is against this because then they might actually end up wanting to go to a PvP zone where they might be ganked.

  • http://samhaine.wordpress.com Stephen

    Based on other posts in the forums, it sounds like the fix to the drones wouldn’t have completely solved the problem. Apparently, he’d also frequently TP foe into groups of allied NPCs and mez them long enough to let the NPCs take out the target. He wouldn’t get kill credit, and the target would take debt because the death was to an NPC rather than a player.

    I do believe that a lot of these exploits were mitigated by the Issue 13 PVP patch that caused him to quit the game.

  • Gx1080

    Oh right. It was a buzz about making CC work less on the players a while ago by resistances or something. But when you cant talk to nobody because you arent like the rest of the tribe, it becomes unbereable being there.

    Just like high school.

  • http://notadiary.typepad.com/mysticworlds Saylah

    I’m with Sycthe – Myers proved an ass is an ass, regardless of eduction, background, etc. And it’s not just kids ruining the MMO space and Barren’s chat. It’s grown ass adults too.

  • dartwick

    “His “experiment” seems to be to test the hypothesis that if you behave like a jerk in a video game, people will treat you like a jerk. Shocking, groundbreaking work there. GG Prof. Myers.”

  • Vetarnias

    dartwick :
    “His “experiment” seems to be to test the hypothesis that if you behave like a jerk in a video game, people will treat you like a jerk. Shocking, groundbreaking work there. GG Prof. Myers.”

    Nonetheless, I’m sure there’s an agenda-driven “foundation” or “institute” somewhere perfectly willing to throw him the money to further his study.

  • Sullee

    The context of CoH does not matter at all. Nor is this about PvP.

    This is about people being douchebags as soon as they are allowed to be. This isn’t even gaming specific.

    A huge problem with internet gaming is that the ratio of punishment to bad behavior is absurdly weak. In the early days the designers seemed to want to continue the self-policing which functioned on some MUDs… but this never scaled and was a horrible flaw with early MMOs. This really set the stage for what we are now sufferring.

    These days designers seem to think plugging the loopholes is a good way.. like Lum saying players shouldn’t be able to exploit Teleport Foe this way. Reactionary fixes to players hell-bent on behaving poorly is clearly the wrong way to go though. For one thing, it is way too slow… by the time any loophole is fixed fifty more have been found. Remember, these aren’t simple pinball machines where you can adjust the tilt sensors… they are incredibly complex systems. Another reason is you cannot afford to fix them given regression rates and dev costs. If you dedicated the entirety of your resources to it you would still be behind and would not have new content, bug fixes, or expansions.

    Don’t get me wrong, there is value in designing things with an eye towards grief prevention. We’ve seen a lot of evolution there since the beginning (e.g. “tapping” mobs to determine ownership and prevent kill stealing) and those efforts pay dividends.

    At this point online gaming needs more real human mods who hand out SEVERE punishments. Not some offshore schlepp who is copy\pasting canned email replies to a report queue backlog.

    In the US we have referees for little league games. We have ambulances on site for high-school sporting events. Yet online we cannot have a real mod policing channels and zones?

    At some point you folks (game designers) will need to clean the messes you’ve made or outsiders will do it for you via negative publicity and legislation.

    Griefing is not tolerated in real life.. ever. I defy you to cut somebody off in traffic and then laugh at them so they clearly can see you are happy you did it. Do that on your way to work each day and see how long you get away with it. I’ll take bets on your life expectancy.

  • Freakazoid

    You’d think by now, someone would have developed a working method to weed out giant douchebags from being college professors.

  • Brad

    Maybe I’m just an overly optimistic proto-academic, but I thought that places with professors had IRB boards to prevent silliness such as “I propose to study how unsuspecting groups react to negative behavior.” It certainly appears that his institute has one, http://www.loyno.edu/ogr/humansubjects.html , I’d love to see what his research description was.

  • Gx1080

    You see, the issue its that, well we know perfectly well what the power of Anonymous does to people because, well this its our media.

    But the rest of the world kinda doesnt. The rest of the world cant possibly understand how a perfectly healthy 20-something can act like a 13-year old that didnt take his Ritalin just by logging in a game.

    Thats why investigations like this are important, because, well for us its obvious, but we are not the majority for a long shot. And for all the “this its in what the college money its expended”…. seriously, the guy payed his suscription with his own money like everybody else and published a report of it in Word. I dont see anybody else money in this.

    Oh BTW, the new layout looks awesome.

  • Toastrider

    Or for that matter, how a professor can act like a punk, eh?

    Just because it’s legal does not make it right, after all.

  • Iconic

    This is a nice article for people who assume the biggest douchebags in MMOs are 12 year old kids. In my experience, the real douchebags turn out to be professional adults, more often than not.

  • Iconic

    No edit post button? He also follows the trend I’ve noticed for people with PhDs in social science to be self important asswipes.

    I wonder if Loyola would pay me in order to conduct a rigorous study of the type that Myers likes to conduct.

  • Makaze

    Last time I checked the rules we as a collective agree to live by, both written and unwritten, are called society. Nothing new here. You have a social group, someone violates the loose social agreements they have in place that define them as a group, and that group then reacts unfavorably. I would have been more surprised if something else had happened.

    We’re not all free from the oppression of the masses here in the real world. The thought that it would be any different in an MMO, which is simply social interaction through an alternate medium, is naive in the extreme.

    I find it irrelevant whether he was performing an experiment or just acting like a jerk because he wanted to, my real disappointment is that he basically established that people act like people and then treated that like a ground breaking result. Worse the media bought it.

  • http://dsob.wordpress.com geldonyetich

    Funny enough, not everybody sees it that way. I’ve spoken to people before who pretty much figure that, within the context of a game, the other people are essentially non-people. The whole purpose is to entertain themselves and, if somebody else starts whining about the way they play the game, it’s a personal problem with the complainer.

    So, the question I have here, does this professor’s experiment convince anyone otherwise? After all, the general consensus here is that he’s an asshole. Play2Crush: Invalidated completely?

  • http://word-of-shadow.blogspot.com Melf_Himself

    Lol. With all the energy they spend QQing at some guy, they could have QQ’d at NCSoft to fix the actual exploit.

    Stop a man from fishing, and he doesn’t eat for a day.
    Drain the fucking lake, and all the fishermen go somewhere else.

  • Gx1080

    So, according to several opinions around here, nobody can step out of the “social rules” despite the fact that they have absolutely no basis because if you do you get shuuned from everybody.

    M,y question is, why the hell the COH/V

  • Gx1080

    (got cutted in the middle of the post)
    community keep going to a PvP zone if they didnt want to die a lot?
    Last time i checked, thats a nature of PvP. What they expected, being able to keep drinking their tea in the middle of a battlefield? Get a clue.

    It only wasnt Twixt, others also exploited the TP-foe issue a lot, he just was the most amazed of watching 20-something acting like dumb teenagers. I dont blame him, the energy that people can put in that its amazing itself.

    But maybe thats me, who thinks that the individual efforts to being “social” are the the business of said individuals and nobody else.

  • Makaze

    Obeying the rules of the group, and at times possibly even enforcing them, despite not agreeing with them is the price for acceptance in the group. Their level of arbitrariness is irrelevant so long as enough of the group agrees to obey and enforce them. Don’t like it? Find another group, though any group of sufficient size is likely to have enough rules that some are unappealing, thus compromises are made. Or you’re a hermit.

    This happens every day on scales small and large, it’s simply a fact of having a society. The level of punishment for stepping outside acceptable group behavior varies depending on the level of infraction and power of the group. Talking loudly on your cell phone in a restaurant will get you some dirty looks, killing someone will get you a life in jail. Same concept just differing degrees.

  • http://dsob.wordpress.com geldonyetich

    Was there really a clear cut rule being violated here?

    Sure, he’s teleporting people in range of guards where they can get ganked, or in the midst of NPCs which gank them, but he’s doing it completely within the realm of the game. There’s not even an abscure trick to how he’s doing it. If it was something the developers had a problem with, they’d have patched it out months ago.

    What’s more, if the people who didn’t like being teleported into range of guards didn’t like it, all they had to do is sit back far enough (250 or so range units) that he couldn’t do so. The sole reason they were vulnerable to the TP-foe exploit was because they hung around near the guards hoping to exploit newly spawned and disoriented players.

    So there was no rule being exploited here, and those who were so upset at him for playing in a disagreeable manner had to be playing in a disagreeable manner themselves in order to be vulnerable to it.

    This isn’t so clear cut as, “duh, you do something wrong you deserve to get chewed out.’ There was no good guy here. The the specific context did matter in this case. City of Heroes’ PvP is simply not designed well to promote good feelings.

  • Makaze

    I’m not talking about the rules of the game. I’m talking about the rules of a social group which can be capricious, illogical, contradictory, and in constant flux. All of which is irrelevant so long as the group, whether formally or informally, agrees to them. This particular social group collectively decided what he was doing broke their rules and so they responded.

    The context was arbitrary in that you can find something to do to piss people off in just about any game. And whether he deserved it or not is a subjective opinion. I don’t really care if what they did was “right” or not, the point is that their reaction was a forgone conclusion.

  • http://dsob.wordpress.com geldonyetich

    Well, if your point is that people will form social groups that will have varying mores, and consequently you can find someone that would be offended by just about anything, then I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you. Sure, that’s a fair enough observation.

    However, I’m just not sure what kind of point you could derive out of that assertion other than you think it futile to seek a point from this situation at all. While there might be some truth to that, if you’re attempting to seek any kind of scientific resolution, taking anything and saying “well, that’s just capricious, illogical, contradictory, and in constant flux, and therefore irrelevant” is guaranteed to make you the most useless scientist on the block. Scientists test hypotheses in hope of finding theory, and if you’re not willing to even take a guess, you’re going to get nowhere. This applies even something as convoluted as human behavior.

    Granted, Myers isn’t a social scientist. He’s a media professor – they tend to focus on technical means to convey information, not human behavior. I’m not exactly sure what his perspective has to do with griefing. Perhaps he’s just impressed with just how much easier it is to tick people off in a game than it would be, for example, through a newspaper article.

  • Gx1080

    So you need to obey “social rules” despite the fact that they are “capricious, illogical, contradictory, and in constant flux, and therefore irrelevant”. Yeah, i dont think so.

    They just needed to be 250 or so units away of the “computer generated death squads”? lol, I played CoH/V and i can tell you: Thats nothing.

    I think that this its a case of people hating PvP unless they can gank somebody without effort. When they are greeted with the same knife, they complain.

    Another thing that the good professor learned in this its that for many people:
    Internet its serious business.

    Oh well, maybe its talking the fact that the CoH/V guys wouldnt have lasted against a Falcon gank (EVE Online) or the Death-Knight spree in PvP 6 months ago(WoW).

  • Amaranthar

    Sullee said:

    The context of CoH does not matter at all. Nor is this about PvP.

    This is about people being douchebags as soon as they are allowed to be. This isn’t even gaming specific.

    A huge problem with internet gaming is that the ratio of punishment to bad behavior is absurdly weak. In the early days the designers seemed to want to continue the self-policing which functioned on some MUDs… but this never scaled and was a horrible flaw with early MMOs. This really set the stage for what we are now sufferring.

    These days designers seem to think plugging the loopholes is a good way.. like Lum saying players shouldn’t be able to exploit Teleport Foe this way. Reactionary fixes to players hell-bent on behaving poorly is clearly the wrong way to go though. For one thing, it is way too slow… by the time any loophole is fixed fifty more have been found. Remember, these aren’t simple pinball machines where you can adjust the tilt sensors… they are incredibly complex systems. Another reason is you cannot afford to fix them given regression rates and dev costs. If you dedicated the entirety of your resources to it you would still be behind and would not have new content, bug fixes, or expansions.

    Don’t get me wrong, there is value in designing things with an eye towards grief prevention. We’ve seen a lot of evolution there since the beginning (e.g. “tapping” mobs to determine ownership and prevent kill stealing) and those efforts pay dividends.

    At this point online gaming needs more real human mods who hand out SEVERE punishments. Not some offshore schlepp who is copy\pasting canned email replies to a report queue backlog.

    In the US we have referees for little league games. We have ambulances on site for high-school sporting events. Yet online we cannot have a real mod policing channels and zones?

    At some point you folks (game designers) will need to clean the messes you’ve made or outsiders will do it for you via negative publicity and legislation.

    Griefing is not tolerated in real life.. ever. I defy you to cut somebody off in traffic and then laugh at them so they clearly can see you are happy you did it. Do that on your way to work each day and see how long you get away with it. I’ll take bets on your life expectancy.

    I agree, and this is the main thing I take from all this.

    I read a god portion of Myers’ study, and I’m not really sure if the article did it justice, nor if the reactions are justified. Not sure, meaning that digesting the study is difficult. I think he has some good points in there, but I disagree with his conclusion “Given the adaptive value of individual play in exploring and revealing system characteristics, the social pressures against this sort of play in CoH/V seem drastically and overly harsh, even unnatural.” I don’t think that it’s unnatural at all.

    Then he goes on to say “If either natural or system laws governing social order in the real world are in any way analogous to the game rules of the CoH/V virtual world, we can conclude that social orders in general are more likely to deny than reveal these laws.”
    This is where he went wrong, and why he concludes the unnaturalness above. He’s assumed here that CoH/V has social laws analogous to the real world. And the game does not. No one can actually do anything about Twixt’s actions that go against the social order of those playing with him.

    And this is where you are spot on, Sullee. Social games such as MMOs need to allow the players to police their social environment. (Maybe that’s what Myers is getting at, that’s the main part I can’t digest.) But not without careful restrictions.

  • Guy

    Gx1080: Damn, I read “Falcon gank” as “Falcon grav tank” and was starting to get excited about an Epic Warhammer 40K game I’d apparently not yet heard about…

  • Vetarnias

    @Amaranthar

    But how to allow players to police their social environment? I can’t name a single game which successfully achieved that. To wit: No permadeath (and what a lousy idea that would be), no character getting locked up in prison for x weeks (who’d want to subscribe to that?), so what to do? In most cases, it’s still left to the publisher to start using the banstick whenever needed, but nothing more, and this is usually applied only in extreme cases anyway.

    Even when we hear of high consequences in game, it’s usually stuff that your griefers don’t even care about in the first place. Players policing themselves? Never worked — especially when the large guilds, those in the best place to do it, are your main source of griefing anyway.

  • http://www,damnedvulpine.com/ J.

    The answer is that playing social politics has never been and never will be fun for anyone but the most maladjusted of human beings, who usually end up becoming game system designers.

    Ridicule and shame, by contrast, has always been and always will be considered valid means within prevailing social constructs to guard against unwanted behavior, long before there was such things as asynchronous networks and virtual persistent worlds.

  • Makaze

    @geldoyetich
    I’m saying that the specific rules in question are irrelevant and so debating their relative merit is pointless. They may be good rules they may be bad I don’t care in this case. They were rules, they were agreed upon written or unwritten by the group, that’s all that matters as far as predicting that groups reaction to them being broken.

    And human behavior is not all that complex. Individuals are varied and difficult to predict, groups on the other hand tend to be fairly predictable.

    Bottom line is that while, yes, he performed an experiment here the results were so easily predictable from the outset that it had no contributory value.

    @Gx1080
    You don’t have to obey the rules, you just have to suffer the backlash from the group as a result. Removing yourself from the group will often remove you from their sphere of influence as well. Switching guilds or moving to a non-extradition country are two examples. I’m in no way saying what you should or shouldn’t do, merely stating that given how human social group dynamics work then those are your options. My point with stating them as illogical etc. was merely to imply that a groups reaction to breaking a rule is not connected to the objective merit of a rule so long as enough of the group agree to it. You could certainly argue and attempt to convince the group that such a rule is not worth having.

  • http://bdadv.blogspot.com Bonedead

    I think the whole “research” deal is just his cover story.

    /s

    Honestly I’m surprised that this guy was the first to do it so extensively. Usually little tricks like that are found quickly and abused until they’re fixed.

    If you put a fire field down, aggro a mob and then stone wall behind the fire field the mob wont walk around it. Fixed.

    If you group up with a high level player and he kills something his level then you get a ton of experience. Fixed.

    If you equip a high level weapon with super bonuses you can turn your attack power from that of a level 3 into a level 10. Fixed.

  • Brask Mumei

    We police our social environment by shunning those who act inappropriately. The social environment *was* actively policing itself, that is what all the rage & fury on the message boards is – an immune response to the unwanted behaviour.

    I think this sort of policing is a lot more effective than we give credit. We like to hyper-focus on punishment or threat of punishment as the tool for policing. This is despite all the psych research which suggests positive enforcement is considerably more effective. The difference is you don’t see any immediate results like you do with punishment. Heads on stakes make for better press headlines than the more subtle chains that actually control the majority of people.

    Look at this community of commenters on Scott’s blog. A large reason why we post in paragraphs and long winded punditry rather than youtube style single sentence spurts is the social context and rules that have been implicitly defined by fellow posters. I’m sure Scott has to axe the occasional overeager commenter, but I suspect most of the weeding involves automated spam…

    And, yes, Gx1080, you do have to obey the social rules if they are “capricious, illogical, contradictory, and in constant flux, and therefore irrelevant” if you wish to be a member of the group. To challenge the social rules will result on the group turning on you. Of course, being in flux, you may notice that the social rules can always be changed to suit your needs, but this likely requires you first become a member of the group.

    Now, some rules certainly should be challenged when you encounter them. I am in no way suggesting one should just blindly follow the rules of every group you encounter. But we shouldn’t be shocked when we receive resistance when we challenge the rules, instead take it as the cost we must pay to make the challenge. And we should certainly pause to think if the rule we are challenging is sufficiently offensive as to warrant this investment, both on the part of us challenging it, and on the part of the others who will be compelled to defend it.

    Of course, I highly doubt the professor cared at all about the “right to cast Teleport Other”. The professor was engaged in these exploits precisely *because* they caused outrage to the group. It wasn’t a case of the group’s rules not conforming to his ideas, it was a case of him probing the group’s rules until he found the ones that caused the greatest reaction and then flagrantly violating them. This isn’t the behaviour of a crusader trying to raise the group from misguided bigotry, this is the behaviour of a griefer.

  • Gx1080

    @Amaranthar
    The issue with “letting players police themselves” its that: Players have nothing to lose if your game becomes shit. They can just pick another game and the cannot be held responsible the same way that you can hold an employee.

    Let me remind you that the -according to you-, paragon of gaming Ultima Online proved that (Hint: UO Council sucked). A short version of that epic saga its in the freaking front of this blog:

    http://www.brokentoys.org/2000/09/22/broken-toys/

    Lets go to another example that does works:

    The EVE Online system, their voluntary work and their Council of Stellar Management works because they dont give to the players any “special powers”, they just give them different colored text and the chance of reporting to the higher authority, the GMs. To the latter, players just vote for the guys that want to represent them in front of CCP. They talk to the devs and are listened, but its the devs that make ALL THE DECISIONS. That means that voluntary workers dont have any power beyond a regular player and they are keep watched at all times.

    Unfortunately, we still need somebody to swing the BanHammer and attending the bugs. Players just cannot be trusted to do this.

    Twixt just did what any PvP player would do in a mainly PvE game and was amazed of the energy and effor of talking shit about him in a game.

    @Guy
    Falcon grav tanks suck, go for “everybody in a Wave Serpent”. Thats in regular 40k, havent played Epic.

  • Joho

    “Honestly I’m surprised that this guy was the first to do it so extensively. Usually little tricks like that are found quickly and abused until they’re fixed.”

    The reason this trick wasn’t urgently fixed was that there was no benefit to the user. He didn’t gain xp or money, didn’t level, didn’t gain items, didn’t really affect the outcome of the battle. It’s a pure griefing tactic, which isn’t actually all that common a behavior in online games. The vast majority of people exploit only when there’s some tangible personal reward.

    This professor is a sociopath, pure and simple. He’s got a very impressive self-justification, but his actions are profoundly unethical. There’s a lot of ways to get at this research question without personally going out and making people miserable. He chose this way because it spoke to him, it’s what he wanted to spend his time doing.

  • Outlawedprod
  • Outlawedprod

    http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=13718124&page=0

    LOL. People in that thread discussing if they can get him written up on ethics violations. Maybe his research will TRULY be vindicated.

    Prof seems to be arguing that because the games are so open their rules are not sacrosanct and individual freedom is repressed because the more important player-mob community rules which emerge dictate the real rules. The funny thing is that to those who play MMOs this behavior is known and a given. Enough cry nerf you get your nerf (except I guess enough didn’t cry to ncsoft about TP killing). Majority rules (because that’s where the most money is) and everyone else is marginalized. Sort of like real life!! MMOs truly are the next step to virtual reality. Of course real hardcore RP’ers know you handle business with death threats and no matter what ALWAYS stay in character. If only this blog was written in character for his twixt persona. Would make this even more ubar.

    P.S. I will applaud ncsoft for siding with the tp killing mechanic. Red = dead indeed?

  • Hatch

    I only feel bad he had to try and squeeze enjoyment from grief out of such a poor system. UO circa 1999 would have been MUCH MUCH better. In that system he would have been eaten alive by other griefers.

  • http://www,damnedvulpine.com/ J.

    The argument about game rules vs. social rules is irrelevant; CoH is not merely a game but a society, albeit one where the citizens choose to be there for no greater reason than recreation, but one with a history. The developers are not to be held any more responsible for the behavior of players than God is for mankind’s, though both could potentially wield the power to change behaviors and/or remove members from society, and in the meantime, any negative reaction to anti-social behavior is justifiable.

  • http://dsob.wordpress.com geldonyetich

    Who says I’m letting God off the hook, either?

  • http://www.brokentoys.org/ Scott Jennings

    Next chapter in the Curious Case is up!

  • ceolstan

    I find it interesting that people are looking at the issue from a social perspective. Yes, that’s interesting, but I tend to go along with Lum on this one: it’s a design issue. Fix the game, not the player.

    Players will steal kills, steal loot, kill other players using exploits, etc. If the game design allows a behavior, players will engage in that behavior. Twixt’s argument that he was playing within the rules of the game echoes the same kind of justification that many PKs in Diablo II used to justify their exploit of game mechanics (the teleport PK, wherein the PK lures monsters to the teleport site so as to kill players) or shooting arrows that will go into the safe zone. In both cases, players are being “fair” within the broad definition of doing what the game allows them to do.

    At the same time, those actions have an impact on the broader social interaction of the players. Now, in Diablo II, Blizzard’s Sirian argued that the Hostile button created an interesting dynamic. It did. It created a game culture founded on paranoia. Even though player communities evolved systems of passworded games, all player communities needed to be on the lookout for people who intentionally trespassed on that community in order to PK the players.

    Developers need to determine the kind of community they wish to have in their game. If they wish to allow certain types of gameplay to emerge, they also need to determine where they wish to draw the line. EULAs aren’t worth much, but a line or two about player behavior that depends upon exploiting game mechanics will allow for players to have their accounts banned. Thus, until the fix can be coded in, the only recourse that the majority of players have is to report the behavior to the GMs, who should investigate the situation.

    I do have to wonder, though, what Twixt would have thought if he’d pulled the same sort of behavior in a game like EVE. I’d also like to know if he would have considered it safe to do so, from a game perspective.

    And that leads to the more interesting question. It’s not a case of whether or not players in an online game go to extremes when presented with someone who violates the social norms of the game, but what resources do online gamers have to enforce social compliance. In real life, the penalty for being an unrepentant jerk is to become a social pariah. Yes, the jerk may not be breaking any laws, but at the same time, the victims have some social recourse. They can avoid contact. They can tell their friends, family, and co-workers about the jerk. There’s a heavy social penalty for going against social mores.

    In the online world, players have little they can do to curb antisocial behavior. From that kind of impotence, it’s not hard to see that publishing the home address of the player is a form of trying to tell the player that online anonymity is often illusory, and that there is indeed a consequence for violating social norms.

    Of course, such a response is equally anti-social, which brings us back to the issue of fixing the game, not the player. If players are allowed to be jerks in the game, then the game needs to allow other players to have some sort of recourse as a response.

  • AMIB

    Incidentally, Sirlin (who I normally respect) picked this up and kind of missed the point.

    http://www.sirlin.net/blog/2009/7/7/dr-house-and-the-professor-who-played-to-win.html

    Discussion thread: http://forums.sirlin.net/showthread.php?t=2218

  • Adrian

    I think the whole study would have been more interesting if it had been about how people with antisocial personality disorders can express their disfunction more easily behind the anonymity of an MMO. A person in real life cannot behave this way without the community taking some action. The annonimity provided by CoH allowed the professor to continue to behave badly due to the limited recourse the comminuty had. It would be interesting to know what the proff is like in real life. Does he have many friends, a wife, kids? Was he bullied at school. We’ve all ganked someone in an MMO at some stage, but unsually its a spur of the moment kill rather than a systematic process conducted over a period of months. Study or no study I think this says something about the person behind the “Hero”.

  • Zer0Vis

    Exploit? Cheating? How you long time players forgot this is beyond me. The Devs knew and said it was ok. So what it comes down to is the rules of the people or the rules of the game. Which the Devs state in the link what they are.

    http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=Champion&Number=5139510&Searchpage=4&Main=5134443&Words=CuppaJo&topic=&Search=true#Post5139510

    Face it COH is bad. Go try and farm in WoW on a PvP server. Die come to life hes there to kill you again. Come to life: him and his buddies are there to kill you now. Its PvP anything within the rules is fair game. So who really broke the rules? The players with threats or the guy that did what the devs said was ok. Twixt killed me 100′s of times. I got mad but I never threatened him plus I remember the devs saying his play style was fine.

  • Drakiis

    Hypocrite crack pot and a noob, the good Mr. Myers has no idea what he’s talking about concerning the social dynamics involved in online gaming. He should try logging a few years before he makes any observations, online communities are not something one can just jump into and learn all there is to know about them, they are complex and evolving social networks that are global. They are not a romper room of mindless deviants, well not everyone anyhow lol.

  • http://www.mylrs.com/members/jenniriverasextapesis.aspx jenni rivera sex tape

    Real, http://www.mylrs.com/members/jenniriverasextapesis.aspx jenni rivera sex tape free, eygi,

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/jenniriverasext jenni rivera sex tape for you

    Give somebody the to a site about the, jenni rivera sex tape [url=http://intensedebate.com/people/jenniriverasext#1]jenni rivera sex tape[/url], %]]],