The behavior of the anonymous

((This is the first quest post in this blog, written by my old friend and former 'guild master' of sorts, Azariel, whose opinion I have come to respect very much over the years I've known him. He wrote this 'post' as a proposition for a post of my own, but I think it has it's own merit in the form he sent it to me. After reading this I found out that there are some issues which I can -and will- comment in a separate post myself. 

Without any further ado, I present to you, Azariell, Undead Destruction Warlock, Thunderhorn EU)

I would like to start by posing a question, the same (well, somewhat the same atleast) as the one I asked last night in Guild chat which sparked a rather ferocious barrage of comments by several (loudmouth) guildies.

The question is this, well more of a hypothetical situation then a question: You are the raid/party/group leader and one of the members of said group is not performing according to the requirements. The ‘logical’ (yeah, that’s debatable, I know) next step would be to remove that player from the group in order to find a suitable player to try and advance.

The question now is: Would you find it acceptable to kick that player without further communication with him about possible reasons or solutions? In other words, would you have the courtesy to tell him face to face that it isn’t enough, or just press the kick button and be done with it?

Now that I’ve given you something to think on, I’ll explain the situation. It was my first TOC-10 man run last night. I’m not a raider as you might know and only do occasional raids (ow and before you think that I was the kicked player, I wasn’t). So I have no real raiding experience or anything of that order.

So, first TOC-10 man run, group was complete, we all moved there and after a brief tactics explanation by our tank (I’m a Lock btw) we started the encounter. The first DK tank died pretty quickly causing a wipe. Second attempt ended in the same manner: wipe. Next healer assignments were switched, and guess what, another wipe. Between the second and third wipe, there had already been some murmurs on Vent that one healers HPS was low. And within seconds of the third wipe, the healer was kicked, and a new healer was brought onboard.

The question that formed in my mind immediately was, did he kick him without saying a word? Or would he have taken the time to whisper him saying that it just wouldn’t work. I posed that question in the Guild chat, and was greeted with statements like “Of course he just kicked him, he didn’t perform, hence kick” and “toughen up Az, that’s the way it goes”. I responded to it that it was just plain rude and that we are playing a game afterall, which should be fun for all. That statement was counter by the responses “Then go play a Dora game” (children’s animation for those who don’t know Dora) By that time the fourth attempt was already started so I couldn’t respond anymore, which was a shame. But is it true? Did we let this kind of behavior become the standard in games?

Now don’t get me wrong, I know that if you want to advance, you need to know what you’re capable of, and when one person does not achieve, they need to be replaced to make the group stronger. If I would have been the player that was kicked because of that, I would have been fine with it, but just as long as they had taken the time to tell me politely what the problem was. Otherwise I would just have been offended by their rude behavior. I think not all guildies understood what I meant with my question. Luckily others did understand as one response was “yeah that was too blunt, but the healer really did have to go…”

Now, I’ve noticed this in more games I’ve played over the past. The internet brings out the worst in some people. Some people apparently believe that they can act any way they want as long as its online. Behavior they would never resort to in real life, all of a sudden becomes completely ‘normal’ online where they can hide behind their toon/account. I’ve been in games where leaders were back-stabbing each other at every turn, thinking up the most devious plans to ‘win’ the game, no matter the consequences.

So, what is it that makes ‘us’ change our behavior when we transcend our mortal existence and step into the digitized anonymous world? What makes ‘us’ go into a flaming frenzy where in the real world we might have just said “I do not agree with your statement”

I consider myself to be old enough to no longer be influenced by the behavior of people online. But what will it do to the minds of the young game-players, who are still learning what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’? Will they copy this behavior from the online world to the real world? Making the behavior of the anonymous the behavior of the individual?

Will the behavior of the anonymous one day be elevated to the behavior of the masses?

Random thought: Game in MMORPG

Why do we insist calling MMO's -especially this thing we dubiously call MMORPG- a game? There is nothing game-like in the whole concept. Well, as much as there is game-likeness in normal pen and paper RPG, which is neigh, too.

So, why on Earth do we call MMO a game? It has no winning condition, it has no game like rule sets and it's -well- endless, ever continuing.

MMO is not a game in the traditional sense for lacking the specific win condition/end of game. Role-Playing, yes, if we take into account the fact that we are basing our decisions in game on the possibilities our character has. But game, no.

But what is it then?

Chain of successes (yawp)

What a weekend in WoW for me. And I survived and feel pretty good about it.

First of all, I missed yet another daily on Friday. As it happens, there was something very strange about my computer during that day, and the darn machine decided to lock up about 25 minutes before the 10 man Onyxia raid was about to start. Panic, desperation and restarting the computer I logged back into the game 15 minutes before the due time, only to find myself again at the wrong swamp... I should have taken the other turn right there, I know.

Thankfully the invites came and summons as well, all the while I was panicking over my UI which was being cranky in addition to the rest of the computer. WTF is going on with my machine?!

Onyxia. Like I responded to Scarybooster in Twitter (as he asked how the Ony10 went), it was fast, furious but that the best part of the run was that I wasn't being carried along. I actually think I carried my weight in the over geared group pretty well, even managed to do over 1.3k dps as protection specced warrior in there. Granted, majority of that came from the AoE damage of Thunderclap and Shockwave, only to be followed by Devastates and Shield Slams. But yes, I enjoyed the run so much I signed in for the one next week (even though I didn't get anything from the broodmother for myself, except the Emblems of Heroism, which I was lacking from my Clutch of Fortification. Which I got right after the run!).

After that run we did a fast guild run, but being what I am and after stressing and anticipating that Ony run (and being relaxed and relieved after it went well) I forget completely what we did. All in all, it was great, I had one fun Friday night with the guildies and got my Holy Grail of a ring.

Saturday went more or less slacking due to rl commitments (my father's birthday, so wasn't really able to login except late). But still I got myself to spend several, curious hours in the game doing this and that. But Sunday of all... We did a guild run hc daily (UK) which went in a breeze and took one hc ToC with the same momentum. The funny thing was the fact that as I was tanking, I thought I was making a mess of the UK: for some reason that totally eluded my mind I just couldn't keep the mobs in me and there were more strays than normally (but yes, my worst fear of that place is gone, and I fully agree with Kadomi: the entry corridor is furious and funny chain pull excercise, provided the rest of the group is up to it!). The reason was simply that our retribution pally had unbelievable dps and he took what mobs he liked, just for the sport! So, because I thought I wasn't performing well, I was kind of amazed to see that the group wanted to go on directly to ToC, and took that as a compliment. Really, it felt great to be part of that team. So I guess I'm the social which Gevlon curses, as I like to belong and feel I'm contributing to the whole instead of basking in my own awesomeness.

Then again, I think that it's not the tank way to bring one's greatness forward. Either you do your job as a tank, or you don't. There is nothing to brag about in being the one taking the blows, anyhow. It's the humble superiority aspect which I've seen in the tanks everywhere: thank you sir, may I have another so I can learn to do it better.

And that's what I like about in our guild: this mentality goes far beyond the tanks and healers. It's all pervasive. Everyone I've been running the instances with have this way of thinking, more or less. I'm doing my job, but if there is anything I can do to do it better, I will try at least.

What I learned this weekend? Running with guildies is a blast, but it's starting to be my comfort zone. But as long as I learn to do my job better, I will do my best to run with them.

Immersion and quests, again

In last post I touched the topic of MMO quests being impersonal and not involving. I stated that the quest system and level of involvement are not working in MMO's. In single player games you are immersed to the game's overall plot and quests by involving you -the player- through the direct contact with your character, and the quests in a way come to you unnoticed and tie you as a player in personal level to them. In MMO's the quests hubs have NPC's with exclamation marks just waiting for you to collect the quests and there is nothing that would involve you to do those quests except the rewards. MMO quests are impersonal.

Several bloggers have written numerous postings about how absurd and stupid the quest giver mark is, and how it simplifies the questing process immensely. At the same time in single player games you get into conversations with the NPC's who may -or may not- invite you to do a chore for them. And more often this simple task leads on to another en route, so you really do not even have to come back to the same NPC before you have unlocked the whole chain, which is in fact a story within the game. In WoW there are few excellent quest chains, like the Missing Diplomat, in which you are being led from one quest giver to another and piece by piece you unravel the mystery of the missing king... Who has returned now, but still, the questline is a longer story, spanning across the two continents.

Why and how the quests have become so stupid in WoW? And why do we want to see those incredible absurd exclamation marks and question marks in our game?

I was a very happy camper while playing Oblivion, without the marks denoting the quest givers. And without having any kind of quest help besides the discussions with the NPC's in the game. The real question is, how viable such a questing system is within a MMO.

The other thing completely involving the immersion part is the fact that when you come to a quest hub in WoW (or any other MMO after WoW's launch), you go on and collect them all and start working through the list of quests. The rewards do not matter, nor the stories in them, just as long as you get the experience. But how different would the game experience be if the quest system was such that by choosing this quest over that other, the other quest would become inaccessible to you? So that every choice you made in selecting the quests would close some doors and open others? The choice of quests would become more a multiple choice thing rather than quests being the mandatory advancement route in the game.

I'd even like to see this go one bit further: the reputation you have within the faction would also open or close quests. The faction could be as small as the village (or quest hub if you like), making the re playability of an MMO even bigger due to the fact that each alt would have completely different set of possibilities at hand. Sure, this would mean that there would be a huge amount of content which would be used more than the rest, but then again the tweaking of such content would be pretty easy by balancing the returns (rewards) of the quest chains over time, making them all more or less equal.

What would this mean in grouping? Of course, the grouping would be an issue, if the quests wouldn't have common ends in the group content. The objectives wouldn't have to be the same: one chain could require collecting something from an instance, the other killing some mobs in there and the boss would still have the loot table to satisfy the participants.

The current quest system in WoW is more or less the lazy interpretation of the whole questing system. It works but it's dull and outlived by the possibilities presented in the single player games. Wouldn't it be fair towards us players, that the quest system was as interesting and intriguing as the graphical content of the game?

Especially now as the tools like phasing are making the unique player experience possible?

Alt or not?

Alt, or alternative character, in MMO is something that most of the players will create at one point or another. Be it a bank mule or a seriously played toon of another class or race, it's all the same: it's not the main character the player is playing, or planning to play, for the imminent future. Some stick to one character, some get a case of altitis, requiring them to create several alts to accommodate their moods for

Jason from Channel Massive blurted out in episode #109, that he had a hiatus from MMO's during which he played only single player games. Now that he's returned to his favourite addiction, MMO's (Champions Online to be precise), he has found out that he is concentrating on one character instead of his earlier (severe case of) altitis. He also states that this has somehow slowed down the urge to clear all content from all angles in the game. And that he's enjoying the game.

This commentary in the podcast got me thinking the issue with alts and the possibility to play several toons in a game. It's quite clear that in strongly PvP based games it would be kind of cheating to have a toon on both sides of the PvP factions, and the new and coming sandbox sci-fi game Earthrise has already asked the members of their forum about the possibility to have more than one toon on a server, clearly concerned about ruining one element of the game (in game spying of another faction) by allowing toons on both sides.

I also connected this with my recent spree of Oblivion: somehow it didn't even cross my mind to start a new toon in the game. I guess it's the same in Fallout3 and other Bethesda games, and hopefully in the forthcoming Star Wars: Old Republic MMO, in which the questing is supposed to be reminiscent to the one in the Fallout/Elder Scrolls games.

I myself am playing three toons at the moment: warrior Laiskajaakko, priest Pupunen and banker. The time spent on Laiskajaakko is easily three or four times the time spent on the others, so I can easily say that I have only one toon in the game. Then again I have several toons of my own on other servers, too, and three on Horde side on the same server as these three.

The question is, is it necessary to have more than one toon in a game? And how much does a crew of alts affect the overall immersion in the game?

My answer to the first question is that no, it's not. Really, in the 'old days' of the computer gaming you plunged through the games with one toon till they died. You still play single player games with only one character, even the games where you create the character yourself, and you are completely happy with it! So why would an MMO be any different from those games?

Like I stated, I have several toons, but I enjoy the game most when I can jump into the shoes of one character only and follow his advancement through the game. I've already seen how hard it's to take on the lower levelled priest and remember the quests which my warrior has done... only to notice that the priest has completely different quests on the area. The immersion is broken in a way for the second toon, and I cannot imagine how little of the RPG part you really can put into the nth alt you're levelling.

And there I gave my answer to the second question. I don't think that running around with several alts can be immersive: it's bound to be more a game of finding out how this or that class works and functions, not like writing the story for the character at all.

Big part of this problem comes from the fact that the quest system and the level of involvement in the game are not working. (But that's another story.) In single player games you are immersed to the game's overall plot and quests by involving you -the player- through the direct contact with your character, and the quests in a way come to you unnoticed and tie you as a player in personal level to them. In MMO's the quests hubs have NPC's with exclamation marks just waiting for you to collect the quests and there is nothing that would involve you to do those quests except the rewards. MMO quests are impersonal.

Anyhow, what do you think? Do you really need the option to create several alts from the beginning or should this possibility be 'unlocked' by playing your 'main' to certain level first?