[MUD-Dev] Retention without Addiction?

[Paul Schwanz]

Matt Mihaly wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Acius wrote:

>> We're running into problems because people are starting to
>> contend that habitual MMORPG play is *not* harmless. Trying to
>> lay all the blame at the feet of game companies for making
>> addictive games is irresponsible -- but then, it is also
>> irresponsible if game companies categorically deny all
>> responsibility for the behavior of their players. Game companies
>> are very interested in shaping the behavior of their players --
>> they want their money, and that requires effective persuasion --
>> or are you trying to tell me that we have no influence over our
>> players at all? That'll really upset the marketing folks.

[snip]

> Well then, why not say exactly the same thing about the habitual
> player who does something naughty. He CHOSE to contribute to the
> problem and thus he shares blame. "What? Just shares it? Surely if
> he made a choice to do naughty thing X, he doesn't share the
> blame. It's all his." "No no!", argue those who prefer to let
> people abrogate personal responsibility. "It isn't entirely his
> fault, because other things, such as the game design, contributed
> to his making of that decision."

I'm *against* letting people abrogate personal responsibility.  I'm
against letting players abrogate personal responsibility for the
choices they make when playing the game, *and* I'm against letting
developers abrogate personal responsibility for the choices they
make when designing the game.  It makes no sense to me whatsoever to
claim that the player and the designer cannot both be held
responsible for their own choices, especially when you are talking
about contribution and not merely cause.

Suppose a pinto driver brakes suddenly at a green light, gets
rear-ended by a drunk driver, and the passenger in the pinto is
killed because the gas tank explodes.  Must I let Ford or the druk
driver abrogate personal responsibility in order to say the pinto
driver shouldn't have braked at a green light or that doing so
contributed to the accident?  Understand, I'm not saying that the
pinto driver should be held accountable for the passenger's death,
only that he should not have stopped at a green light.  Furthermore,
I see no logical fallacy in pointing to this accident as an example
of why people should not drink and drive while also using the same
accident to iterate that Ford shouldn't build cars that explode when
rear-ended.  I have no cognitive dissonance when I claim that all
did naughty things X, Y, and Z and each should be held accountable
for the naughty things they did.

I'm not saying that developers should be held accountable for the
actions or choices of addicted players, only that they should be
held accountable for their own choices in deciding to create an
addictive game, because I believe such choices can *contribute* to
the harmful results that addictive behavior can bring.

--Phin


_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev