Forums » Role Playing
Roleplaying and Emotional value
@FM: I'm not sure wether this belongs in Role Playing or in suggestions/General. Please reassign as appropiate.
okay, Short background:
The recent thread in offtopic about violence and videogaming brought me to look up some more info from my psychology classes, Moral/Ethics and behaviour, and consequentially spawned some discussion IRL.
concept:
People in an online game are assholes because there is a low moral/ethical treshold. Its easy to say "its only a game, deal with it", there is no social pressure to "do the right thing" (Wether its the group, or the state).
There is also a low level of "personal attachment" to your own character and belongings in the game, as things are readily re-achieved.
Backing this up with the research which concluded that "distance" to events lowers the moral treshold about how "bad" things are, and we have a situation where there is virtually no moral "cost" associated with blasting off that annoying fellow in the bus, just because he's there. (and <nation>)
Combining this with an all-out generalization attitude inside the game (All <nation> are pirates / elitistic creeps / snobby / bothersome) that is regularly sprayed as an excuse to attack, insult or otherwise feed a negative emotional level.
Discussion:
What can be done to change this? Its clear that for a game (Almost any game like this) to have a "nice" attitude there has to be a moral "cost" to negative actions.
Adding the "state" is one idea, (policebots, regulations, reputations) but is all enforcing, which means its -only- negative feedback, which doesn't work well in the long run.
Another method is to force participants to actually partake in their character, That means spending "real" time and effort on creating their character, All from in-game modelling of the design and looks (without any pre-generated textures or "choices) to designing their homes and using only "unique" weapons and armor. This causes a stronger character bonding, which in turn makes for a higher moral "barrier". However, this also means that PK becomes far more costly and emotional. [1]
Can there be positive feedback by "good" (honourable, decent, just normal) behaviour? This would have to be a feedback that cannot be achieved otherwise (ie, not monetary/items )
Group sense:
As has been explored by others, to develop a "rich" group enjoyment there has to be downtime in a game, dull moments where people chat and do tedioous stuff that don't require much intervention. (Yep. transport is that here.) There also needs to be an improved way to "help" people out, but this mainly ties down with social interaction of the game and "sector chat" and others, so thats meager things.
Well, I'm tossing this in, together with this link to get some more input/discussion on this area. (Please note, don't let this fall down to another of the "petition" threads. Not stuff "we need" and so on. all things discussed might not work here, they don't have to, But ideas and commentary is always nice)
http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/
Edit:
[1]
http://secondlife.com/ uses this technique.
okay, Short background:
The recent thread in offtopic about violence and videogaming brought me to look up some more info from my psychology classes, Moral/Ethics and behaviour, and consequentially spawned some discussion IRL.
concept:
People in an online game are assholes because there is a low moral/ethical treshold. Its easy to say "its only a game, deal with it", there is no social pressure to "do the right thing" (Wether its the group, or the state).
There is also a low level of "personal attachment" to your own character and belongings in the game, as things are readily re-achieved.
Backing this up with the research which concluded that "distance" to events lowers the moral treshold about how "bad" things are, and we have a situation where there is virtually no moral "cost" associated with blasting off that annoying fellow in the bus, just because he's there. (and <nation>)
Combining this with an all-out generalization attitude inside the game (All <nation> are pirates / elitistic creeps / snobby / bothersome) that is regularly sprayed as an excuse to attack, insult or otherwise feed a negative emotional level.
Discussion:
What can be done to change this? Its clear that for a game (Almost any game like this) to have a "nice" attitude there has to be a moral "cost" to negative actions.
Adding the "state" is one idea, (policebots, regulations, reputations) but is all enforcing, which means its -only- negative feedback, which doesn't work well in the long run.
Another method is to force participants to actually partake in their character, That means spending "real" time and effort on creating their character, All from in-game modelling of the design and looks (without any pre-generated textures or "choices) to designing their homes and using only "unique" weapons and armor. This causes a stronger character bonding, which in turn makes for a higher moral "barrier". However, this also means that PK becomes far more costly and emotional. [1]
Can there be positive feedback by "good" (honourable, decent, just normal) behaviour? This would have to be a feedback that cannot be achieved otherwise (ie, not monetary/items )
Group sense:
As has been explored by others, to develop a "rich" group enjoyment there has to be downtime in a game, dull moments where people chat and do tedioous stuff that don't require much intervention. (Yep. transport is that here.) There also needs to be an improved way to "help" people out, but this mainly ties down with social interaction of the game and "sector chat" and others, so thats meager things.
Well, I'm tossing this in, together with this link to get some more input/discussion on this area. (Please note, don't let this fall down to another of the "petition" threads. Not stuff "we need" and so on. all things discussed might not work here, they don't have to, But ideas and commentary is always nice)
http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/
Edit:
[1]
http://secondlife.com/ uses this technique.
Well the problem I see in THIS test/game is that most of the factors have not been made. Factions - the major social pressure and interaction have not been made. Missions and Reputations- another major key has not been made. WHEN these things are made I believe a HUGE improvement will be seen.
However I think it will take months and 100's of new players to shake the Space Quakeness that is happening now.
However I think it will take months and 100's of new players to shake the Space Quakeness that is happening now.
Well true, but what other things can be done to change this? except those that have been listed? What possibilities are there?
I have a solution. Anyone who types the word "CounterStrike" unnacompanied with the words "sucks" or "hate" or "never" within their first week ingame automatically gets their account booted.
hehe
Well, something which could be done is that each and everyone has his own 'personal' sector, 500 m x 500 m large cube, it's closed, and the only way to enter is trough a wormhole in some sectors. The only way to get out is a wormhole in the middle of the cube.
People can't enter other people's cube unless they're invited.
You can buy stuff for your cube, like make it bigger, change the walls and stuff. But with some actions you can get 'unique' things (aka you can't buy it), for example if you get to s18 for the first time you could get a big silver ship model which you can ship to your cube.
Or if you complete a mission, you get a mirror or something like that.
You could also buy a dock, and build your own space station; but in some hidden sectors, or with special mission, you could get special stuff for your station (like a cool dome or something.)
Well, something which could be done is that each and everyone has his own 'personal' sector, 500 m x 500 m large cube, it's closed, and the only way to enter is trough a wormhole in some sectors. The only way to get out is a wormhole in the middle of the cube.
People can't enter other people's cube unless they're invited.
You can buy stuff for your cube, like make it bigger, change the walls and stuff. But with some actions you can get 'unique' things (aka you can't buy it), for example if you get to s18 for the first time you could get a big silver ship model which you can ship to your cube.
Or if you complete a mission, you get a mirror or something like that.
You could also buy a dock, and build your own space station; but in some hidden sectors, or with special mission, you could get special stuff for your station (like a cool dome or something.)
Cute idea, Home decoration for space use.... *grins*
The problem that online role-playing games face is that generally in order for video games to function, the player must have a low level of moral/ethical attachment to the events in-game or they would no longer be enjoyable. Let me explain.
First of all, how much fun would you have with video games if you felt guilty every time you killed something? Second of all, do you really want people to have a high moral/ethical attachment to a game in which violence is involved? For example, I have no problem playing Quake, which involves shooting people, but would most definitely have have a problem with shooting people in real life. Why? Because I have a low moral/ethical attachment to Quake, whereas I have a high moral/ethical attachment to real life. Imagine if someone forms a high moral/ethical attachment ot Quake and finds themself okay with shooting people? That seems like it would create a rather dangerous situation. To clarify, I'm not arguing that video games shouldn't make you sympathize or resonate with a character, but they generally don't any more so than you might sympathize with the hero in an action movie or want the prince to win the heart of the princess type of deal.
This, then, is the problem for MMORPGs: the fact that it is a video game means there must be a low moral/ethical attachment, yet the fact that it is an online RPG means that there must be a community. In order for a community to function, there must be a real sense of morality/ethics that is not dependent on fear of punishment. How then can a MMORPG instill a real sense of moral/ethical duty into a player when the player understands that it is only a game?
I guess the question, then, is how can a game designer get the player to react morally to other players? This doesn't mean to create a game in which people won't want to kill each other, but to create a game in which people must make choices in reaction to morality. For example, the pirate isn't just killing because it's fun to shoot things; he's killing because he has made a conscious (im)moral choice to value wealth over human life, or simply doesn't value life at all.
The answer is simple and complex at the same time: teach people how to role-play and make sure people can distinguish themselves from the character that they have chosen to role-play. How you can make people role-play, though, I don't know!
First of all, how much fun would you have with video games if you felt guilty every time you killed something? Second of all, do you really want people to have a high moral/ethical attachment to a game in which violence is involved? For example, I have no problem playing Quake, which involves shooting people, but would most definitely have have a problem with shooting people in real life. Why? Because I have a low moral/ethical attachment to Quake, whereas I have a high moral/ethical attachment to real life. Imagine if someone forms a high moral/ethical attachment ot Quake and finds themself okay with shooting people? That seems like it would create a rather dangerous situation. To clarify, I'm not arguing that video games shouldn't make you sympathize or resonate with a character, but they generally don't any more so than you might sympathize with the hero in an action movie or want the prince to win the heart of the princess type of deal.
This, then, is the problem for MMORPGs: the fact that it is a video game means there must be a low moral/ethical attachment, yet the fact that it is an online RPG means that there must be a community. In order for a community to function, there must be a real sense of morality/ethics that is not dependent on fear of punishment. How then can a MMORPG instill a real sense of moral/ethical duty into a player when the player understands that it is only a game?
I guess the question, then, is how can a game designer get the player to react morally to other players? This doesn't mean to create a game in which people won't want to kill each other, but to create a game in which people must make choices in reaction to morality. For example, the pirate isn't just killing because it's fun to shoot things; he's killing because he has made a conscious (im)moral choice to value wealth over human life, or simply doesn't value life at all.
The answer is simple and complex at the same time: teach people how to role-play and make sure people can distinguish themselves from the character that they have chosen to role-play. How you can make people role-play, though, I don't know!
Since an MMORPG is and RPG, and not just another shootemup game, it should be different. Tell me, honestly, how many of you think Vendetta would be fun if it is like the Test right now. If y'all want this game to be pretty empty and full of killers, then it ceases to become an RPG. But I guess we should wait and see how the real game turns out, huh?
[rude post deleted]
Shawn got the idea of the thread here :)
What makes people good role-players? How is the character portrayed? And, How can player-to-player (nonehostile) exchange increase?
What makes people good role-players? How is the character portrayed? And, How can player-to-player (nonehostile) exchange increase?
How's about adding a special 'frag' sector where you can die, but you won't lose your ship (it will 'respawn' after the die animation.) You could warp out any time by pressing 'enter' (so basically the sector is also one big worm hole.)
Or, instead of that, maybe a "simulator". The simulator could contain several systems... maybe it can be the test when the real game is out.
Hmm, this has some interesting aspects indeed. The "playground" for practice and experimenting.
My commentary to this would be : no kills inside the "playground" gives any score, bounty or otherwise, a death inside it would still zero your bounty. Weapons would have to be brought inside, as to keep it free of a station or other such things (since you still wouldn't be able to activate the station ;)
This does make the PvP practice and other such things easier, but what about nonhostile (completely) player interaction? can that be increased? Two-man missions are one idea.... Flight formation training? (Should probably be server-side overseen)
My commentary to this would be : no kills inside the "playground" gives any score, bounty or otherwise, a death inside it would still zero your bounty. Weapons would have to be brought inside, as to keep it free of a station or other such things (since you still wouldn't be able to activate the station ;)
This does make the PvP practice and other such things easier, but what about nonhostile (completely) player interaction? can that be increased? Two-man missions are one idea.... Flight formation training? (Should probably be server-side overseen)
A sector for practicing (and perhaps fooling around) would be great :D. This practice sector could be accessed from anywhere; I imagine it would be convenient to make entering the sector like the /logoff command... you can't escape to the practice sector in the middle of a fight. When you want to leave the sector, you will return to where you were before entering, in the same state you were in.
Why not have a station in the practice sector? In the sector, deaths will simply respawn you at the station. Having a station and a variety of weapons at hand will be more convenient for experimenting.
Why not have a station in the practice sector? In the sector, deaths will simply respawn you at the station. Having a station and a variety of weapons at hand will be more convenient for experimenting.
well, perhaps, but having it too easy takes out the pleasure of it. And lets not make this into yet another "suggestions" thread. : )