[MUD-Dev] Retention without Addiction?

[rayzam]

From: "Sasha Hart" <hart.s at attbi.com>
> [rayzam]

>> I enjoy the entire day of skiing. A session in an online rpg
>> should be the same.

> I think we'd all agree any game is going to involve some time
> doing stuff that isn't pure fun. That's just realism on our
> part. But, to be clear, what's more at issue is whether we should
> be actually thinning out the enjoyable parts in a contrived effort
> to keep players on longer. I really don't think so. I am even
> suggesting that this practice (and not simply players enjoying the
> game a lot, or being on for a while) is a lot of the problem we're
> having with 'addiction.' You can get people to play it, but it is
> frustrating, not conducive to a pleasant life, etc.

I see your point. I always think of the reward/risk ratio, but tied
to individual encounters, and thus discontinuous and discrete. If we
integrate it over time, that becomes your point of thinning out the
enjoyable parts.

What is the reason to thin out the enjoyable parts? Is it to
slow/retard player progress and player consumption of content? It
may seem counterintuitive, but keeping a good reward/risk ratio in
fact leads to less time required to play, greater enjoyment of time
spent, and a better ability to step away from the computer. Why?

  - Players will be attempting things near their level, making it
  challenging. I consider challenging ~= enjoyable.

  - Sessions are shorter because the player doesn't need to farm
  hours of low level creatures to advance. In fact, the reward/risk
  ratio should not be linear in relation to player level vs monster
  level. Thus, as the monsters approach safe and easy to kill, the
  reward should approach zero.

  - Farming tends to be killing lots of peons/minions in an area,
  not the boss. But killing the boss[es]/finishing an area, is the
  chapter effect in a book. It's a good stopping point, and allowing
  temporary withdrawal from the fictional universe, but the ability
  to pick it back up.

  - More feeling of accomplishment in general. If you feel like
  you're accomplishing things, and not just mindless slaughter, then
  the game is worth your time.

Of course, all this is with the assumption you mean thinning by
farming/camping/killing easy things. If you mean by other game
mechanics, that's a different issue. But I feel someone showld be
able to log in and start really playing within 20 minutes, and the
same amount of time to clear up when ending a session. More than
that is putting too great a time burden into a single session, and
as you point out just thinning out time to reward.

>> A death is like a wipeout. If the game balances the risk/reward
>> ratios appropriately, i.e. doesn't reward for always skiing the
>> bunny slope, and doesn't penalize so much for dying that noone
>> wants to risk wiping out, then don't you think all 200 minutes
>> can be enjoyable?

> I think so, assuming (quite reasonably) that A) the rewards will
> dictate the activity of taking the appropriate difficulty 'slopes'
> and B) that this activity is enjoyable.

Very true and good points.

>   A) is just a matter of engineering.

>   B) is what I find questionable in most cases - recognizing
>   colors and hitting a button is not at all fulfilling. I might do
>   it (usually because I am after the prospects that come with
>   accumulation of dungeon trash), but I can still recognize that
>   it's junk time, it's not really worthwhile, it may even be
>   getting me down.

So in this case, the part that matters is the loot? What would it
take to make the color recognition and button pressing fulfilling? 
Is there a way to generate an internal motivation in you that would
result in the feeling of accomplishment that would make the whole
effort worthwhile?

I've also worked with behavioral training. And I've see something
interesting: give the rat a simple task and it gets bored and
doesn't work as long for the same reward as if you give it a
complicated task. In essence, the more
interesting/engaging/cognitive the task, the longer they'll play at
it. Now, I'm anthropomorphizing in that I say bored and interesting
and yet have no clue what the critter is actually thinking. But that
point aside, the parallel can still be drawn to players. If a player
is button pressing for a reward, but doesn't enjoy the button
pressing, she won't work as long at it. Easy and Simple doesn't
equal willingness to spend time for the reward. Well it does, but it
degrades quickly. And with other competing sources of button
pressing and pretty colors, another source will gain attention, just
by virtue of novelty [new things are more interesting, inherently].

As for getting you down, that sounds like learned helplessness. If
learned helplessness is a product of our games, that's a scary
concept.  Players coming back just to keeep hitting the buttons
because they feel that they can't do any better, what's the point,
this is all that's available.  *shiver*

>> The reward doesn't need to be the food pellet, drop of juice, or
>> safety from being shocked. The reward could be running the maze
>> itself.

> Clearly it has to be in most of these games. This can be a pretty
> difficult thing to get your head around - often we assume that if
> people are playing the game, it's worthwhile to them. With so many
> people recognizing colors and pressing buttons, it seems hard to
> imagine that this isn't just what everyone is enjoying.

> The addiction flap causes me to wonder.

Do you think it could be instances of learned helplessness?

> I would be interested to see even anecdotal comparisons of
> 'addiction' across different kinds of games. Single player, non
> persistent multiplayer, teamplay, with clans, with rankings or
> ladders, IRC, small MUD, big MUD, etc.

What metric would you suggest? Offhand, I think time spent per week
might be a fair quantitative measure...

>> That said, I don't think anything I've seen or played has hit
>> this ideal I'm portraying. Some have for exploring. I'm hoping
>> SWG does for crafting.  But for killing/running the treadmill,
>> not yet.

> Doing this may involve grasping a nettle: even if the fun stuff is
> a finite resource, it may still not be appropriate to stretch it
> out across time as much as possible.

Very true, and slightly depressing.

rayzam
www.travellingbard.com


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