Game Communities

Berglund Authority Level 4

by Chris Pruett <c_pruett@efn.org>
author bio

My coworkers and I often take breaks from our daily routine to play games together. We play a networked video game called Soldat [1] about three times a week. Though all of us are video game developers and play a wide variety of video games on our own, Soldat is special because it allows us to participate in a game as a group. We laugh when somebody pulls of a particularly spectacular move, curse when we lose by a tiny margin, and congratulate each other on skillful plays. For the half hour we typically play, Soldat offers a focused and enjoyable group experience.

Group interaction is the theme of a lot of video games today. Networked games in particular have been growing in popularity ever since broadband began to become readily available across the country. Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (often clumsily abbreviated to "MMORPGs") like Sony's Everquest [2] offer game worlds that can be shared among thousands of players simultaneously. Multiplayer games are appealing to many game designers because they facilitate group interaction much like traditional board games. Instead of providing the player with linear, storybook-like adventures, games that revolve around multiple players are often open-ended playgrounds.

Group interaction in games is not a new idea. Most early electronic games were developed for arcade machines, stand-alone pay-per-play game systems that were stationed in bars, restaurants, and other public places. Arcade games that capitalized on multiple players became quite popular in the early 1980s, and many people who grew up during the arcade era still have fond memories of playing games like Williams' 1982 hit Joust [3] with their friends.

But in 1986, the Nintendo of America Corporation released the Nintendo Entertainment System (often referred to as the NES) and changed the face of the game industry. The NES was a game system for the home that plugged into a television set, and though it came with two controllers, most NES games were designed for a single player. While many arcade games gave the player goals such as "conquer all the other players," or "attain the highest score," games of the NES era commonly required the player to "solve the puzzle," "unravel the mystery," or "beat the computer."

As a result, the video game experience became much more solitary. Rather than facilitate interaction between people, many game designers strove to create linear, single-player adventures. Nintendo's 1986 hit Super Mario Bros. is prototypical of the era; rather than providing a single, unchanging playground like Joust, Super Mario Bros. is comprised of 36 stages that must be completed in sequence, each with its own visual and contextual motifs. The result, while compelling, was unapologetically designed with a single player in mind; the goal of Super Mario Bros. is not to beat an opponent, but to successfully maneuver the protagonist to the end of the game. If early video games filled the role of a referee between human opponents, games in NES era became opponents themselves.

The focus on single player experiences continues to this day. The trend has been so strong that public arcades have all but vanished. But with the rise of the Internet, many game developers are again turning to games that focus on group interaction, this time utilizing computer networks rather than public places to connect players. The computer game industry in particular has embraced multiplayer games, and network-only games like Soldat are quickly becoming the norm.

However, the anonymity of the Internet poses new problems for game developers. Since network games are typically played using pseudonyms, the true identity of each player is usually hidden from the other participants. Many players see anonymity as freedom from reprisal and responsibility, and thus behave in ways that ruin the game experience for others. It is quite difficult to play an online game for any length of time without being verbally attacked by malicious players. Cheating is a constant problem, as are con artists who scam other players out of virtual money in games that support a simulated economy.

There are other, more fundamental problems with network-based multiplayer games. In his article Not Yet, you Fools!, Richard A. Bartle attacks the notion that voice communication, a technology that is beginning to take root in the network game industry, might be applicable to MMORPGs.

"Adding reality to a virtual world robs it of what makes it compelling - it takes away that which is different between virtual worlds and the real world: the fact that [the participants of the game] are not the real world. Voice is reality." [4]

Bartle's point is that voice communication technology might ultimately damage an online game's suspension of disbelief, and that without immersion, an online game is reduced to a medium rather than an experience. Developers of networked games are still trying to strike a balance between unrestricted group interaction and immersion while attempting to keep their players civil. So far there seems to be no easy solution.

However, some innovative game developers have found a way out of the network multiplayer quagmire. Rather than try to facilitate communities through game technology, some designers are choosing to instead invent their communities from scratch. Games like Maxis' The Sims play much like any multiplayer game, except that all the other "players" are controlled by software. Rather than share a playground with a human participant, The Sims provides the player with a playground populated by human-like virtual participants called "agents." Each agent looks like a person and attempts to conform to human emotions and needs; if you force your agents to work too hard, for example, they will complain about their lack of social life. When an agent's bladder becomes full, he or she will try to make it to visit the nearest restroom as quickly as they can. The more convincing the agents manage to be, the more the player feels like he is interacting with other real people. However, agents in The Sims do not simulate the flaws common to real world gamers: they never talk out of character, try to con you out of virtual dough, or call your momma fat. Maxis has attempted to create a game that fools the player into believing that he is participating with other well-behaved humans.

Nintendo's Animal Crossing takes this concept a step further. Like The Sims, Animal Crossing attempts to build a community of convincing, human-like characters. While the inhabitants of The Sims are convincing because they have a wide range of human behaviors, the agents in Animal Crossing succeed because they are highly articulate. If you strike up a conversation with an animal, you can learn their opinions, influence their mood, and even affect the way they speak. Individual animals have distinct personalities, and these traits influence how they respond to the presence of the protagonist. Animal Crossing allows the player to write letters to specific animal agents, and the agents are able to write responses. The developers have tried very hard to create the illusion of a living, breathing animal community to participate with the player. They are trying to build into their virtual world the feeling that playing Animal Crossing is akin to interacting with a group of real human beings.

For my coworkers and I, a few rounds of Soldat is an excellent way to blow off some steam and relax. Since we keep our games restricted to our office network, the group experience is untainted by malicious players hiding behind anonymity. Multiplayer games that focus on the interaction between a group of people are a special form of entertainment, a wholly different experience from games that follow the linear Super Mario Bros. format. But I often do not feel that I have the strength to ignore the inevitable onslaught of misspelled slurs and "yo momma" jokes that come with most games that are accessible by anyone with an Internet connection. I am increasingly likely to look for my group entertainment among fake people--software facsimiles of humans that will not boast about the obvious virtues of one computer operating system versus another. Though the games that provide such virtual communities are still quite primitive, I am often more willing to play with companions that have brain-dead software routines than with offensive and deceitful humans.

As technology improves, game developers who attempt to duplicate the experience of multiplayer games in single-player worlds may strike gold. Unless games that rely on anonymous participants over a network are able to improve the experience of dealing with other players, many more may turn to games that provide communities that are not hampered by real people.

Footnotes:

[1] Soldat is available for Windows computers at
http://www.soldat.pl/

[2] For a fascinating study of the social mechanics of Everquest, check out The Norrathian Scrolls, a thesis project by Nick Yee.
http://www.nickyee.com/eqt/home.html

[3] For more information on Joust, visit the Killer List of Video Games:
http://www.klov.com/game_detail.php?letter=P&game_id=8243

[4] Bartle's article is available here:
http://www.gamegirladvance.com/archives/
2003/07/28/not_yet_you_fools.html.
He is the author of Designing Virtual Worlds.