MMOs, Addiction, And That Silly Thing I Keep Referring To Called “Morality”.
Raph made a post about Call of Duty 4, its integration of many MMO-like features, and the reason for those integrations. Specifically, this quote:
Player retention and the science of addiction is being expanded upon in innovative, groundbreaking ways
I’ve been harping on this for a while. How to “addict” players has been too much of a development focus lately, whether that’d be admitted to or not.
Of course, addictions = profit when we’re talking about subscription games. So it’s obvious that things would turn this way. It’s just probably not a good idea for the long term.. in quite a few ways.
MMOs should be about more than “how can we design a game/system to keep players hooked for as long as possible”. Provide a quality experience and let players stay because they enjoy it.. not because you’ve yanked the carpet out from under them again and are forcing another race regrind, or because you purposely designed a system with a neverending need for fresh poopsocks. Then sell poopsocks on your webpage for 14.99, complete with a murloc logo and a quote reading “MRgrlgrlglrlrlgrlglrlgr - That KFC was a poor choice! Buy our new double-sock for 24.99! Mrgrlglrlgrlgrl!”.
People need to understand that while society sees the 39 year old guy wearing a plastic viking helmet in his basement and smelling of a cat’s ass as a writeoff, they’re much less likely to shrug their shoulders when you start exploiting fourteen year olds. That age group is a pretty large piece of the MMO subscriber pie.
Although, times have changed. Fourty years ago they’d probably be decrying online games as demonic and such. Especially considering people actually HAVE killed themselves over them, or been killed over them. These days, even Second Life doesn’t really get anyones feathers ruffled all THAT much, so… maybe people really are free to do whatever the hell they want.
Next up:
Play Our Game Or Your Teddy Bear Dies Online
Would anyone like to help me flesh out the “Robotic teddy bear keels over, crying when you cancel your subscription” system?
May 25th, 2008 at 1:16 am
you get props just for typing out the sound murlocs make
July 9th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
The science of addiction is.. horrible in my subjective opinion. But I’m not in charge of a games corporation, only work for one.
What are your thoughts on defining the difference between “fun” and “addictive fun”. If a game accidentally addicts its players, is that wrong? Is the most moral game one that takes steps to AVOID addiction, so that players only play if they *really want to*?
July 10th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Depends on what level you’re talking.
Ultimately, anything that wastes someones time is bad. Especially if it also takes their money. Mostly because, well, a lot of the time that person should really have been doing or thinking of something FAR more important than how to defeat Gannondorf the evil kidnapper of the Princess. Like world hunger, or their hungry two year old. Who was probably pawned off on the TV-sitter so you could play the game. Pretty unhealthy mentally and physically for all involved.
On a more tangible and immediate level, a game is wrong the minute that it’s decided the main design philosophy will be addiction of the player. I think that’s fairly simple.